Glendening's article "Smart Politics" deserves attention not because of any new information, at least for those of us who have heard him speak, but because it documents a view of smart growth which ultimately could doom the smart growth movement. Read the long article carefully and you will discover that the fundamental view is that smart growth is an "environmental" movement, as in: "Smart Growth is the next significant step in environmental protection. ...In many ways, the Smart Growth Program in Maryland, the growth management program in Oregon, and other efforts are significant next steps in the creation of the third wave of modern environmentalism based on land use." If you also search the article for "housing" you will discover no significant discussion; and if you search for "design" as in community design, this too is absent. The only way for smart growth to truly succeed and displace suburban sprawl in a really significant way is to have massive consumer demand for alternatives to sprawl and to have very broad public support for smart growth (and new urbanism) to impact the political system that is incredibly corrupted by the sprawl industry and the sprawl lobby. Housing and community design should be the prime issues for the smart growth movement; nor can smart growth truly succeed if it overemphasizes shifting growth and population just into urban areas; there must be major new communities in suburbia, but based on smart growth/new urbanism principles. Of course the Glendening article also pays little attention to the incredible evidence that the sprawl industry and its "sprawl shills" are far from giving up their fight against smart growth/new urbanism. It would also be nice some day to see some actual data on how well Maryland's smart growth policies have actually curbed sprawl; I say this as a long time Maryland resident watching the continued march of sprawl development.