As I mentioned on Wednesday, the race for Comptroller is being overshadowed by the Ehrlich-O’Malley rematch. That’s unfortunate, since the Comptroller is an important post in our state government, especially for those of us who are focused on fiscal responsibility. Two men are running for the post: William Campbell and incumbent Peter Franchot. On Wednesday I looked at Campbell’s platform regarding fiscal issues. Today, we delve into what Franchot has done.

As the Daily Record notes, “Franchot’s most visible role has been his post on the Board of Public Works. He is the most vocal member of the board, frequently the toughest questioner and is often the dissenting vote outweighed by the governor and state treasurer.”

On the issue of the state’s purchase of slot machines, Franchot has consistently stood up for taxpayers by opposing. When the state spent $50 million to purchase slot machines for Cecil County’s casino, Franchot voted against it and said at the time that it was “an incredible windfall for the industry.”

Franchot sounds positively conservative on taxes and spending. The Daily Record notes that “… Franchot said job creation needs to come from the private sector, the state’s top tax collector,” he said. “Maryland needs to spend less, lower its debt load and avoid raising taxes on businesses and individuals in coming lean years.” In Franchot’s words: “Business should not be looked at by Annapolis as a bottomless pit of tax revenue.”

One area where Franchot could show more leadership is in addressing the state’s pension crisis. He has made some good steps as the vice-chairman of the Board of Trustees of the State Retirement and Pension System, but more needs to be done.

Overall, though, Franchot’s tenure as State Comptroller has often seen him standing up to the spending plans of Governor O’Malley and sounding a lonely voice for fiscal common sense. That stands somewhat in contrast to his time in the House of Delegates. As the Southern Maryland News notes, during his tenure as a delegate “he co-authored a Constitutional amendment to protect Maryland's public parks and fought to raise the state's minimum wage, to increase access to health care and passed legislation that returned over $500 million to Maryland homeowners.

Franchot may be taking on O’Malley on the Board of Public Works, but his motivation differs from that of many fiscal conservatives: “We can’t make social progress without fiscal discipline and with a large structural deficit.”

I also find it troubling when he describes government spending as “investments.” “In order to stimulate Maryland’s economy, we are working to make sure that the State of Maryland has the resources to invest in our economic growth. That means aggressively enforcing compliance with the tax laws of our State. The better we enforce our tax laws, the more revenue the State of Maryland will have to reinvest in our economy.”

Franchot has certainly stood up for taxpayers during his time as Comptroller. He deserves our thanks for that. But I’m a little uneasy with his reasons for doing so. How would he have acted if the state had been flush with revenue during this time? Would he have been as serious a fiscal watchdog as he was during the recession? It’s hard to say, but Franchot doesn’t shy away from the “progressive” label and is happy to have the state spend money on corporate welfare and expand social programs as long as it has the money to pay for it. In that regard, he’s a better steward of taxpayer money than Governor O’Malley, but I doubt we’ll be hearing Franchot quoting Milton Friedman or Friedrich Hayek any time soon.