Legum’s New Line

Today, our campaign received the endorsement of The Capital. Here’s what the paper had to say:

Among the four Democrats, we support the two incumbents – House Speaker Michael E. Busch and Del. Virginia Clagett – and political newcomer Judd Legum… Legum, an attorney, is committed to restoring the environment and serves on the Severn River Commission.

You can read more about my views on the environment here.

If you’d like to get involved in the campaign email volunteer@juddlegum.com.

Comments Off

This article in The Capital tells you everything you need to know:

COLLEGE PARK – Swimming in the rivers that feed the Chesapeake Bay after a hard rain could be as hazardous to your health as hopping into an unflushed toilet.

At least that is the key finding of a water quality experiment conducted last month by reporters at the University of Maryland working for News21, a national consortium of journalism schools.

The team took water samples before and after significant rainfall at seven beaches and recreation spots along five rivers that feed the Chesapeake Bay, including two in Anne Arundel County.

Their goal was to gauge the impact of stormwater – one of the fastest-growing pollution sources in the Chesapeake Bay – on bacteria levels in the water

You can find more information about stormwater, including steps you can take to limit stormwater runoff from your property, here.

Comments Off

Yesterday, I expressed my opposition to a resolution recently co-sponsored by Ron George, the incumbent Republican Delegate in District 30. The resolution states that climate change is a “conspiracy” and urged the Environmental Protection Agency to “immediately halt” all efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. I noted that, setting climate science aside, this action would have disastrous consequences for the Chesapeake Bay.

This morning, Ron George responded. You can read his full response here.

First, George claims that I “misrepresent” his views on climate change because “The term ‘climate change conspiracy’ did not come from us and does not refer to climate change itself but to falsehoods that have been uncovered.” He states he actually believes that “Climate Change is a true concern.”

The best way to respond is to simply quote from the resolution George co-sponsored. The stated purpose of the bill is to investigate the “climate change conspiracy.” More from the body of the resolution itself:

[T]here is a well–organized and ongoing effort to manipulate global temperature data and incorporate tricks to substantiate the theory of climate change.

The Earth’s climate is constantly changing, and recent warming indicates a return to more normal temperatures

Second, George claims that “The resolution asks the EPA to separate facts from fiction so we can deal with the science. That is all it does.” Actually, the bill urges the EPA to “immediately halt its carbon dioxide reduction policies and programs.”

This is the real problem for District 30 and Maryland as a whole, because of severe damage such action would cause to the Chesapeake Bay. Of course, the co-sponsors of this resolution did not take that into account. They simply copied the language verbatim from a contentious resolution in the Utah legislature.

Cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay is a huge challenge. To succeed, we need to set aside the kind of partisan ideology that is embodied in George’s resolution and work together toward our shared goals.

Comments Off

There’s a major new effort underway to ramp up the use of solar energy in Maryland. The ambitious goal of the program is to create 100,000 solar rooftops in 10 years. If successful, the initiative could reduce air and water pollution, create jobs and save consumers money.

A coalition of legislators and business owners promoted the plan at a press conference held yesterday in Annapolis. Environment Maryland provides the details:

First, Governor O’Malley has introduced legislation that would require a quicker ramp-up of the solar portion of the state’s renewable portfolio standard (RPS). This would mean that utilities would have to get a greater percentage of their energy portfolio from solar power sooner, which would jumpstart job creation and cut down on our emission of greenhouse gases.

Second, Delegate Hecht and Senator Middleton are leading an effort to introduce legislation that would give municipalities the means by which to loan people money for solar and other clean energy projects at very low interest rates, resulting in more homeowners taking advantage of the clean, reliable electricity that solar energy generation provides.

Finally, Delegates Pinsky and Hecht are working on “net-metering” legislation, which would require utilities to pay customers back for surplus energy they create with the solar panels on their roofs.

In a related development, Constellation Energy – the state’s largest electricity producer – announced “said Tuesday it would invest $90 million to support the development of solar power systems for commercial customers…for customers that begin construction before mid-2010.”

Comments Off

When considering a new public policy, we frequently (and correctly) consider the costs. Less frequently, however, do we consider the costs of maintaining the status quo.

Environment Maryland has recently produced a report examining the costs of maintaining Maryland’s reliance on fossil fuels. From the release:

Between 2010 and 2030, Maryland will spend as much as $432.2 billion on oil, coal, and other fossil fuels. That’s 2.6 times the total earnings of all Maryland workers in 2007. At the same time, pollution from fossil fuels is the number one source of air and global warming pollution and a leading source of water pollution.

High spending on fossil fuels is largely driven by our dependence on oil, according to the analysis. Maryland is on track to spend as much as $18.7 billion on oil alone in 2030, 82 percent of the state’s total spending on fossil fuels.

You can read the full report here.

Comments Off

The Maryland League of Conservation Voters just released their annual legislative scorecard for 2009. Executive Director Cindy Schwartz writes, “Ultimately, this scorecard is about YOU — the conservation voter. It is a tool to see how well your representatives performed when it really mattered.”

In my home, District 30, Speaker Mike Busch (D) and Del. Virginia Clagett (D) both scored 100%. Del. Ron George (R) scored 50%, losing points for voting against: a bill that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by 2020, a bill requiring new septic systems to use nitrogen removing technology, and a bill that allows citizens to challenge in court permit decisions that affect our environment.

You can see how your representatives voted below:

Full disclosure: I am a candidate for Delegate in District 30.

Comments Off

If you want to know why we need to reduce the influence of lobbyists in Annapolis, read Bruce Bereano’s letter to the Capital over the weekend:

The political cartoon (Sunday Capital, April 26) about the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s D report card on the Chesapeake Bay is so deceiving.

Does anyone with any sense of reality believe the Chesapeake Bay Foundation will ever come out publicly with a report card or report saying that the Chesapeake Bay is doing well or fine or really improving – of course not. If the organization ever did so, financial contributions to the foundation and membership would be affected and reduced. The organization, like other organizations, has an agenda and, despite the facts, has to keep it going.

…I am just tired of all the hypocrisy and spin jobs going on in the public area hoping the general public will buy it. I don’t.

There is no spin involved and no support for the suggestion that the Bay is “doing well or fine or really improving.” The Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s report card is grounded in the scientific, verifiable facts about the health of the Bay: severe nutrient pollution, an expanding “dead zone,” and extremely low populations of many species of fish and shellfish.

Mr. Bereano cites “reports” that “the bay is abundant with crabs” this season, so “something must be going right.” But this year’s crab population is less than half of what it was in the early 90s and the increase is attributable to restrictions on the harvesting of female crabs in Maryland and Virginia, not an improvement in water quality.

There is no genuine dispute: The 25 year effort to restore the Bay has failed. If we want to do better over the next 25 years, we have to make sure the terms of the debate is defined by science and interests of the people of the Chesapeake Bay watershed, not special interest lobbyists.

That’s why, as I prepare to run for Delegate in Maryland, I’m not accepting any contributions from Maryland lobbyists. If we clean up our government, we can clean up our Bay.

[H/T: Paul Foer]

Comments Off

The American Lung Association has published a new report on the state of Maryland’s air. The news isn’t good. Here’s the chart for high ozone days in the state:

During orange days, the air is unhealthy for sensitive populations, such as asthmatics or diabetics. (In Maryland there are about about 400,000 people with asthma and almost 300,000 diabetics.) During the red days the air is unhealthy for everyone. This is more than an environmental problem, it’s an economic problem. When people get sick, health care costs go up which ends up costing everyone money through taxes and insurance premiums.

Clearing the air in Maryland does not only involve reducing pollution in the state but supporting federal efforts to reduce air pollution nationwide. Much of the air pollution in Maryland comes in from nearby industrial states.

You can go to the American Lung Association website and check out the air quality in your zip code.

You can read more on the report at the Baltimore Sun’s Bay & Environment blog.

1 Comment »

The EPA released their yearly report on the health of the Chesapeake Bay and it’s not pretty. The bottom line of the report, which some advocates still content is overly optimistic, is that the Bay is very unhealthy and not getting any better. From the report:

The Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries are unhealthy primarily because of pollution from excessnitrogen, phosphorus and sediment entering the water. The main sources of these pollutants are agriculture, urban and suburban runoff, wastewater, and airborne contaminants.

Despite small successes in certain parts of the ecosystem and specific geographic areas, the overall health of the Chesapeake Bay did not improve in 2008. The Bay continues to have poor water quality, degraded habitats and low populations of many species of fish and shellfish. Based on these three areas, the overall health averaged 38 percent, with 100 percent representing a fully restored ecosystem.

In terms of water quality, the primary measurement of the Bay’s health, things are even worse:

Water quality is the most important measure of the Chesapeake Bay’s health. In 2008, water quality was again very poor, meeting only 21 percent of the goals, the same as 2007. Pollution led to murky water and algae blooms, which blocked sunlight from reaching bay grasses and created low levels of oxygen for aquatic life. Chemical contaminants impaired more water in 2008, resulting in a 6 percent decrease in that goal area.

In light of the fact that the 25 year effort to save the Bay is failing, what are we doing to change our approach? Clearly, merely continuing or tweaking the current programs, many of which rely on voluntary compliance, will not restore the Bay.

The entire report is available here and is essential reading for anyone concerned about the health of the Bay.

1 Comment »

Michael Steele, former Lt. Governor of Maryland and now chair of the Republican Party, recently guest hosted Bill Bennett’s radio show. During the show, he announced his belief that the earth is cooling. HuffPost has the transcript:

We are cooling. We are not warming. The warming you see out there, the supposed warming, and I am using my finger quotation marks here, is part of the cooling process. Greenland, which is now covered in ice, it was once called Greenland for a reason, right? Iceland, which is now green. Oh I love this. Like we know what this planet is all about. How long have we been here? How long? No very long.

It’s worth noting that, among the scientific community, the fact that the earth is warming is not the subject of any debate. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of hundreds of distinguished scientists, concluded in 2007 that “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level.” The panel concluded that it was “very likely” that most of the warming since the mid-20th century was due to human activity.

The head of Republican party, apparently, does not have much use for science.

Also, as Huffington Post notes, Greenland’s “name was derived…from Erik the Red, who wanted to trick people into going to that island as opposed to the more hospitable Iceland.”

1 Comment »