Does The Baltimore Sun Hate Baltimore City?

The Baltimore Sun Editorial Board continues to show that it cares little about Baltimore City by continuing to prop up the status quo.

It’s a story as old as time—the Baltimore Sun Editorial Board endorses against the interests of Baltimore City residents.

This time, the Sun encourages voters to vote against Baltimore City Question K, the term limits amendment. The Duckpin of course encourages Baltimore voters to vote for this amendment.

The Ivory Tower Liberals on the Editorial Board wrote:

Question K: Against

The final proposed charter amendment on the city ballot, Question K, is a classic example of a solution in search of a problem. The proposal, if approved, would limit to two terms those elected as Baltimore’s mayor, comptroller, City Council president and City Council members, beginning in 2024. Term limits might sound smart to outsiders looking for turmoil and turnover, but Baltimore’s history suggests many of its best leaders served longer than eight years — from William Donald Schaefer to Kurt Schmoke. How long these offices are filled by an individual should be left up to voters, who deserve the final say on whether an elected official has earned another term. Another reason to reject the amendment is that those who promoted this folly through voter signatures did so with the financial backing of David Smith, chairman of Sinclair Broadcast Group, which is not exactly a big fan of city governance or the city.

Now I will concede that some of Baltimore’s great leaders, particularly in the Mayor’s office, served more than two terms. William Donald Schaefer did great things for the city, and I’m pretty convinced he would have rather stayed Mayor for life than run for Governor in 1986. Kurt Schmoke’s record is a little more mixed, though certainly an improvement over the parade of clowns that have followed him.

But for every Schaefer and Schmoke you get a Mary Pat Clarke, a Jack Young, a Nick D'Adamo, or a Rikki Spector who don’t know when it’s time to leave the party.

Baltimore City Council positions, in particular, have become virtual sinecures for politicians who don’t have to suffer from the decisions of their leadership in the same way their constituents do. City Council members are paid $76,660 in a city where 20% of city residents live in poverty.

City Council members don’t have to live with the same concerns about being victims of crime as other city residents do.

City Council members don’t have to suffer with the same failing schools that other city residents do.

City Council members don’t have to worry about finding a job in the same way that other city residents do in Baltimore’s failing economy.

Baltimore City is a failure that, through corruption and incompetence, often does not show that it is capable of self-governance. And yet, The Baltimore Sun Editorial Board is perfectly fine with the same group of incompetents being re-elected to the City Council year after year after year.

But the even worse reason for the Sun to oppose the amendment is because David Smith is financially backing it. The Board writes that Smith and Sinclair Broadcasting “is not exactly a big fan of city governance or the city.” Of course, Smith spending over half-a-million to pass a term limits amendment belies the idea that he is “not a fan of the city” because Smith is working harder for the city than the Sun’s Editorial Board ever has.

And you know who else “is not exactly a big fan of city governance?” Baltimore City residents who have to suffer because of it.

What’s more important is the fact that term limits will make government more accessible to the people. As Dylan Diggs writes for the Maryland Public Policy Institute:

The longer-run aspect of the problem is that when career politicians are left unchallenged it opens the way for special interests to freeze and protect their access to government. Special interests over time make considerable investments in politicians who serve multiple terms. Lobbyists gain access through building relationships and applying resources to pressure points. When a new officeholder comes on the scene,, the investment is dramatically reduced. Special interests cannot be summarily branded as bad merely because they seek to extract from government a benefit for whatever is their constituency, but forcing them to restart their efforts and make their case to different officials is a good stress test for that access

If any place needs term limits and a reset as to how governance is conducted, it is Baltimore City. That the Baltimore Sun does not understand that makes me wonder if the Editorial Board is just that beholden to the entrenched city politicians or does The Baltimore Sun just truly hate Baltimore City?