The Good List and the Bad List

I suppose it was inevitable that the Clintons are keeping an enemies list. After all, someone has to show Richard Nixon’s fans how this is really done. Well, I’ve got two lists: the people who make me happy and the ones who don’t.

The Good List

Mike Miller
Big Daddy’s decision to conquer, err, run again is the best news of the month. He is a blogger’s dream and has given us a lot of great material over the years. I am so pleased that he is coming back that I am even willing to forgive him for proposing that dreadful blogger tax.

Dana Beyer
Another politician that just keeps on giving back to bloggers. Whether it’s chasing away shower nuts, taunting right-wing zealots with campaign announcements or running amok on Teach the Facts Vigilance blog, Dana just can’t stop herself from raising Hell regardless of whether it’s good for her politically. If Robin Ficker had joined the County Council staff, I would be sitting in the council lobby with a video-camera every day to watch him go at it with Dana.

Rich Madaleno
He is my State Senator and will one day build us a new Forest Glen Metro entrance, so he has to be on this list. Hmmm… I guess that came across the wrong way. No Rich, you are here because we really, really like you!

Marc Korman, Bob Fustero, Sharon Dooley, Alan Banov, Eric Luedtke, Joe Davidson, Dana and the Rest of You
We really appreciate everyone who regularly reads and comments on this blog. It is both encouraging and necessary that we get feedback, good and bad, on our posts.

The Bad List

Planning Department Transportation Managers
Knowingly relying on a congestion measurement system that their own research proves is flawed is really intolerable. The new Planning Board members, whoever they are, must deal with this issue.

Montgomery County Council Member Marc Elrich
I like Marc and he should not be on this list. But Marc is not happy unless someone is mad at him, so here he is. I’ll come up with a reason for his inclusion later.

MCDCC
They haven’t done anything lately and that’s the point. They used to give us tons of great stuff in the good old days. But recently they have been so quiet and even constructive that I have been reduced to the sad fate of actually praising them. Come on, Central Committee Members, go back to your old ways and help a blogger in need!

And the Worst of the Worst…

My Blog Brothers
David has re-appeared, but what about the rest of you? Why are you making me do all the work?

MCDCC to the Rescue

Folks, this is why we need a strong Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee. In addition to mailing out a sample ballot for Don Praisner in the County Council District 4 special election, MCDCC is putting out this call for volunteers on poll coverage.

May 8, 2008

MCDCC Members:

We are approaching the Special General Election on Tuesday, May 13, 2008. It is vital that we have coverage for all precincts in this election.

I am asking the MCDCC members to support this effort by volunteering their time to help with poll coverage.

Please let us know the duration of time that you will be available. I understand that we all have a busy schedule, but we can give a portion of our time when the stakes are so high and the Republicans are running a very aggressive Get-Out-the-Vote operation.

The staff at the MCDCC office will be maintaining a precinct coverage spreadsheet that will have information regarding which precincts require coverage and the time frame for coverage needed.

By responding quickly, we can effectively make timely decisions to fill those precincts that are pending coverage.

You can help make this election run smoothly and demonstrate your support for the Council District 4 Democratic candidate, Don Praisner.

Please forward this email to your local Democratic District Clubs and ask them to send it to their databases.

Your continued commitment to supporting our Democratic Candidates is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Vivian

If you want to prevent Robin Ficker from joining the County Council staff, call MCDCC at 301-946-1000.

Unmasked: the MCDCC Member Who Voted for Jennings Over Edwards

Relying on our extensive spy network inside the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee (MCDCC), we have uncovered the identity of the MCDCC member who voted to send Jason Jennings and not Donna Edwards to Congress. But first some background.

Back in February, Donna Edwards defeated incumbent 4th District Congressman Al Wynn in the Democratic primary. Shortly afterwards, Wynn announced he was resigning early to accept a lobbying job. The Governor declared that there would be a special general election held on June 17th to determine who would fill the rest of Wynn’s term. There would be no special primary; instead, the party central committees in both Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties would nominate a candidate to stand in the special general election. If the two central committees failed to agree, the state central committee would make the choice.

Donna Edwards, who steamrolled the eight-term incumbent, was widely expected to be MCDCC’s choice. But Jason Jennings, another Democratic challenger who lost badly to Edwards in the primary, submitted his resume to the committee as an alternative. MCDCC voted to nominate Edwards by a margin of 22 to 1. But it’s the one vote in favor of Jennings that has really made tongues wag. “Who was it?” cried out the county’s political junkies.

We gave the top-secret mission to our hardened spy corps inside MCDCC. These are the people who scale the castle walls, pick the locks, steal the bon bons and penetrate the hidden vaults of the Baroness. After numerous brushes with guards, attack dogs and angry peasants from Georgia Avenue, our spies brought back the name of the Jennings voter: Vilma P. White.

Ms. White is a Silver Spring resident who lives in Congressional District 8. She was elected as part of MCDCC’s at-large slate in 2006. The slate had no opposition apart from eternal school board candidate and MPW favorite Tommy Le. We emailed Ms. White asking for comment and she has not responded.

Let’s keep in mind the scope of Edwards’ election victory over Jennings. In the Congressional District 4 primary, Edwards finished first in the district with 78,008 votes. Jennings tied for fourth of seven candidates with 1,429 votes. In Montgomery County, the jurisdiction represented by Ms. White, Edwards received 28,781 votes compared to Jennings’ total of 609. And yet Ms. White, who does not live in Congressional District 4, was convinced that Jennings deserved to be the Democratic nominee despite the overwhelming disagreement of her constituents.

[Sigh…] I guess this is our fault. We have been overly harsh with MCDCC over the last few months. Perhaps the pressure of fending off our constant troublemaking is getting to some of them. I had dismissed the rumor that MCDCC Vice Chairman Alan Banov was seen walking down the center of Connecticut Avenue in full scuba gear, but maybe that was true after all.

So perhaps MCDCC should be given a break. We at MPW are going to start a holiday fund for them so that they can take a well-deserved vacation at Wheaton’s beautiful Brookside Gardens. In the meantime, we will recruit Kevin Gillogly, Robin Ficker, Itchy and Scratchy and Muffitt to hold down the fort.

We can only hope that none of them would vote for Jason Jennings!

MPW Banned by Federal Agency

One of our long-time readers has reported that a federal agency, the reader's employer, has blocked Maryland Politics Watch blog. The reader has asked us not to publicly name the agency for fear of potential waterboarding.

When the reader attempted to access our site, the following message came up:

SITE BLOCKED
This site has been blocked by the security team because it is listed by the vendor of our Web-blocking software as having one or more of the following among its content:

Web Chat Service
Web-Based E-mail Service
Pornography / Sexual Content
Gambling or Games
Illegal Activity / Drugs / Hate Propaganda / Violence
RealAudio or RealVideo Services

Hmmm... pornography, sexual content, gambling, hate propaganda, violence... Now Mr. Gillogly, have you been posting and deleting things in the middle of the night for your degenerate friends?

Which post got MPW banned? Was it our account of Itchy and Scratchy's appearance at a recent fundraiser? Those two are definitely violent enough to get banned. Was it our lampoon of Mike Miller's blogger tax? The Senate President is certainly powerful, but maybe not powerful enough to control a federal agency's Internet security team. The same goes for County Executive Ike Leggett, who probably can't wait for people to stop discussing his new bathroom. Or perhaps the feds saw Dana Beyer's hell-raising escapades outside the Bethesda Giant and judged us to be a national security threat.

I can't shake the feeling that MCDCC had something to do with this. Any comment from Alan Banov or Marc Korman?

Senator King, Delegate Barkley Propose Changing MCDCC Membership

Senator Nancy King and Delegate Charles Barkley, both of District 39, are proposing legislation that would change the membership composition of the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee (MCDCC).

Currently, MCDCC has 23 members: two elected from each of the county's eight legislative districts and seven elected at-large. Senator King and Delegate Barkley's bill, MC-802-08, would expand the committee's membership to 27, with three elected from each legislative district and three elected at-large. Senator King told the Gazette, "It’s a fairness thing more than anything. It’s to even out the playing field... With the upcounty growing like it is we need three members to help build the upcounty part of the membership."

MCDCC spokesman Milton Minneman (who has spoken on reform issues before) had this reaction:

Although the Central Committee has taken no official position on the bill, they believe the discussion would be better if tabled and taken up during a summer county legislative session, committee spokesman Milton Minneman said.

"We don’t think there is any reason to make the change. We know this is all a kickback because various people are concerned with the filling of the delegate and senate seats," Minneman said. "The system we’ve been under has worked for years and only in the last year or so has the issue popped up."

Hmmm, Mr. Minneman. Now who would those "various people" be? You surely are not referring to any blog authors in this county, are you?

Of MCDCC's current at-large membership, five members are from down-county legislative districts (one from 16, one from 18, one from 19 and two from 20) and two are from up-county districts (one each from 14 and 15). Districts 17 and 39, the latter represented by King and Barkley, have no at-large members. This is the likely prompt for King and Barkley's bill.

There is another side to this issue. It is not the easiest thing in the world to find active, dedicated Democrats willing to volunteer for MCDCC. The position has no pay. Its occupants achieve little fame and fortune. The committee is constantly dogged by fanatical bloggers. And remember House Majority Leader Kumar Barve's famous joke that if committee members could not appoint themselves to be delegates, they would have to be paid to serve? Perhaps Mr. Barve was not kidding. While I understand Senator King and Delegate Barkley's position, it's important to have a way to attract the most talented, well intentioned Democrats to serve on MCDCC regardless of where they live.

But the issue addressed by this bill is a small matter relative to MCDCC's other issues. Far more important is that MCDCC members can and do appoint themselves to state office, do not adhere to formal standards in deciding vacancy selections (with Alan Banov being a prominent exception) and are not required to consider any measure of actual voter sentiment within the district in which a vacancy occurs. These are the matters that should be addressed by MCDCC itself, or failing that, state legislation.

District 2A Delegate Appointment Proceeding in Secrecy

The resignation of District 2A (Washington County) Delegate Robert A. McKee promises scandal in the newspapers for some time to come. But the appointment process to replace him may also be scandalous.

As readers of this blog know, when a state legislator steps down, the county central committee of his or her party selects the replacement. This process has been used seven times over the last year (Senate 35, 39 and 47; Delegate 16, 18, 35A and 39). Voters have no role until the next regular election, which can often be several years away.

Yesterday, the Gazette reported the following about the District 2A appointment process now underway:

Meanwhile, Washington County Republican Central Committee leaders are tight-lipped on the process to replace McKee.

Interested candidates had until Thursday to apply, but committee chairwoman Penny Pittman declined to say how many people have submitted applications or expressed interest in the vacancy. She also did not say when the committee would interview candidates.

‘‘We are not leaking anything to the press,” she said Thursday. ‘‘We are not [releasing the interview date] either so that we won’t have the members of the media waiting outside to question candidates. We are choosing to convey information through press releases so that information is conveyed accurately.”

Contrast this with the appointment process used by the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee for the District 18 Delegate vacancy. MCDCC posted all applications on its website. They posted as many recommendation letters as they could. (Ultimately, there were too many letters for Al Carr for the committee to keep up with.) The District 18 Caucus hosted an open candidates forum and moderator Charles Duffy accepted written questions from the audience. Multiple MCDCC members posted their reasoning for their votes on this site. And on the night of selection, MCDCC allowed Kevin Gillogly to cover the process on this blog and voted by open ballot.

Is MCDCC's appointment process perfect? No, and we will continue to discuss it. Did they make a real effort to increase the transparency of their process? Absolutely, and they deserve credit for it. The Washington County Republican Central Committee would do well to adopt the reforms used by MCDCC.

More on the Politburos

Today's Post contains a few tidbits about the Montgomery and Prince George's County Politburos... err, excuse me, Democratic Central Committees.

First, the Post reports that PGCDCC used an open roll call vote in selecting District 47 Senator Gwendolyn Britt's replacement. Hmmm, very interesting. Does anyone know how long PGCDCC has been using open votes for appointments? Delegate Saqib Ali had to threaten MCDCC with state legislation before they agreed to open voting.

Second, the same article supplies even more details about County Executive Jack Johnson's maneuvers to thwart his enemy, former Delegate Rushern Baker, from getting the appointment. Apparently, Johnson employed an eyeball-to-eyeball staredown (probably in addition to other tactics) to reverse a vote that was previously pledged to Baker. Now do you think Johnson could have personally stared down the thousands of voters who would have participated in a special election to fill the vacancy? I think not.

Third, in an article chronicling County Council Member Marilyn Praisner's long and distinguished career, the Post notes her support for special elections:

In an ironic twist, Praisner and former council member Betty Ann Krahnke, who died in 2002, were the driving forces behind a measure that in 1999 created the mandatory special election for replacing council members. They didn't want to leave those decisions to the political activists on the Democratic and Republican committees.

Actually, I believe the County Council appointed its own replacements prior to 1999 and MCDCC had no role. But Mrs. Praisner favored special elections for vacancies and worked to pass them at the county level. And unlike MCDCC spokesman Milton Minneman, Mrs. Praisner believed in the capacity of voters to choose their own leaders. Remember Minneman's infamous quote in the Examiner?

...The county’s Democratic Central Committee spokesman Milton Minneman believes his team is best equipped to make the selections. Because the group’s purpose is to get Democrats in office, and because it spends time interviewing potential replacements and hosting public forums, it is far more knowledgeable than average voters of each candidate’s suitability.

“Special elections are often held rapidly, and voters don’t have time to get to know the candidates,” Minneman said. “We think we’re more representative.”

That's right, I thought you remembered that.

Thank God for MCDCC (Updated)

Now I know you're shocked to read that statement from me. But I mean it, I really do!

Yes, we didn't know who the Frick was Bill. Yes, we got a bit ticked at them. Yes, we think they eat too many bon-bons in that castle of theirs. Yes, the House Majority Leader made fun of them in a roomful of bloggers. And now MCDCC Member Marc Korman wants to jack up my gas tax. But things could be worse. We could have the Prince George's County Democratic Central Committee.

Consider the silky-smooth job they did in selecting Senator Gwendolyn Britt's successor. Their pick, County Council Member David Harrington, endorsed Michael Steele for Senate in 2006. The runner-up, former Delegate Rushern Baker, refused to rule out running for County Executive. (The reigning County Executive, whom Baker ran against last time, cheered his defeat.) The only female candidate, Delegate Jolene Ivey, received no votes. Another losing candidate, Delegate Victor Ramirez, immediately vowed to run against the winner for Senate. (He told the crowd, "I’m going to ask for this seat the way I should. I’m going to come to you for your vote." So why was he running for appointment?)

But the line of the night belonged to the former Senator's husband, Travis Britt, who was also running for the seat. According to the Gazette:

Britt, [county substitute teacher Kenniss Odetta] Henry and Ramirez withdrew their names from consideration early in the meeting, with Britt citing the vicious politics – he claimed backroom deals and mudslinging were rampant – for the succession race.

"These demons are after me, but I’m going to dispel these evil spirits. I am withdrawing," Britt said to the crowd, who gave him a standing ovation.

OK, I promise here and now to never call the MCDCC evil spirits. That is, unless you select someone who endorsed Michael Steele to fill one of our seats!

Update:
The Washington Post's story makes clear that Prince George's County Executive Jack Johnson lobbied hard to defeat Baker and possibly even decided the outcome. Now that's understandable: many politicians will go to great lengths to punish enemies. But the thought of how easily the District 47 appointment process was manipulated makes my skin crawl. It requires much more effort for politicians or political power brokers to manipulate thousands of real, live voters than a handful of Central Committee members. That's why so many politicians are so comfortable with the status quo. The District 47 case makes at least as good of an argument for special elections as anything MCDCC has done.

Mike Miller (and Kumar Barve) Meet the Bloggers: Part Three

In Part Two, I recounted the Senate President’s remarks to our rag-tag band of bloggers. In this part, let’s find out what the number two leader in the House had to say.

Kumar Barve, the House Majority Leader from District 17 (Rockville), is a fluid and intelligent speaker. His low-key style reflects the cool, technocratic politics still practiced in some parts of Montgomery County. While he is not as flamboyant a character as the belly-laughing, fist-pounding Miller, he has a tack-sharp mind, a dry wit and ample patience for blogger grillings.

Here’s what Delegate Barve had to say, as best as my scrawling hand could record:

On Governor O’Malley
“Martin O’Malley is a gambler. He likes to take calculated risks. He sealed 188 people in a pressure cooker and said, ‘Take as long as you want in there!’ And the special session produced a very good product.”

On Taxes and Spending
Barve described the last couple decades of state fiscal management as a “roller coaster,” noting that the state had swung between tax hikes and tax cuts. “I wish we could find a level of taxation we’re comfortable with and stick with that, but that would probably violate human behavior!” As Barve correctly observes, it’s too tempting to dispense tax cuts in good times, making tax hikes in bad times more necessary.

On Embattled State Superintendent of Schools Nancy Grasmick
“The Governor and the leaders want her to go. I assume that’s going to happen.”

On the Computer Services Tax
“The House got rid of the computer sales tax but it came back. It’s bad public policy. It’s unwise to tax businesses that are mobile,” Barve stated. “But unless we’re willing to find $200 million in extra revenues, it will be very difficult to get rid of.” And why was the computer industry vulnerable? “In politics, when something unpleasant has to be done, it’s usually done to whoever squirms around the least!” Barve noted that Senator Rob Garagiola (D-15, MoCo) had a proposal to replace it with a gas tax, “but that is a non-starter.” Added to Mike Miller’s comments, Barve’s opinion indicates that the computer tax is not going anywhere because there is no other way to raise the money.

On Marriage Equality
“I personally don’t think marriage equality is going to happen in the way we’ve sponsored the bill. But domestic partnerships will pass.” Senator Madaleno, the prime backer of marriage equality in his chamber, chimed in, “You start with what you want, and you fight for what you can get.”

On Filling Legislative Vacancies
I asked the House Majority Leader whether he would favor a bill allowing special elections to fill vacancies in MoCo and forbidding the practice of Central Committee members appointing themselves to state legislative office. The latter point actually made him laugh. “My goodness, if you took that away from them, no one would serve on the Central Committee!” Barve snickered. “We’d have to pay them to serve!” Barve indicated that he would vote for special elections on a statewide basis, but not for MoCo alone. He favors having every county use the same system for filling vacancies.

The Majority Leader’s sardonic suggestion that Central Committee members have to be paid to abstain from appointing themselves may be cynical, but it also may be true. The fact that the highest-ranking state legislator in MoCo holds this opinion of MCDCC should make them think long and hard about how they conduct their vacancy selections.

On the Democrats’ Relationship with Latinos
“I don’t think the Democratic Party is in danger of losing the Latino community. One of the problems from a strategic perspective is that many of the groups we support have the lowest turnout rate. But things are changing. People of color are noticing how bad things are under Republican rule.”

On Whether the Delegation is Bringing the Bacon Back to MoCo
I asked Barve this question: “The Gazette recently reported that of every dollar paid by MoCo residents to the state, only 15 cents came back to the county. The state average is 30 cents. When county officials and residents accuse the delegation of not bringing the bacon back to MoCo, how do you respond?”

Barve answered by pointing out the geographic income disparities of the state. “We generate an enormous amount of income. Eighty-five percent of the richest people in the state live in Montgomery County. And if you earn $200,000, no matter where you live, you are going to be taxed. A lot of social programs go to where poor people are living, like in Baltimore City. And it’s the job of government to help people who desperately need the help, wherever they live.”

I understand this argument but only up to a point. MoCo may be wealthier than the state average, but it is not universally wealthy. There are pockets of poverty even here. There are lots of needs for school aid, school construction and transportation. Our state transportation priorities list is full of projects that have sat in limbo for many, many years. The BRAC projects alone will likely demand hundreds of millions of dollars to be effectively implemented. I for one would like to see my MoCo state legislators throw their weight around a bit more than they currently are.

And now we get to David Lublin’s Big Question, which was asked of both Senate President Miller and House Majority Leader Barve. Correct me if I’m wrong, David, but the Big Question went something like this:

“In 2006, the Democrats had as good a year as it gets. George Bush was President. We were fighting an unpopular war in Iraq. The Republicans had hopelessly mismanaged the response to Hurricane Katrina. So the Democrats won a lot of extra seats. In 2010, those things will not repeat themselves. Bush will be gone and the Democrats will be held responsible for whatever is going on. You are more likely to lose seats than gain them. So how can you motivate Maryland’s progressive voters for the next election?”

Uncharacteristically, Mike Miller dodged this one. He flatly disagreed that the party would lose any seats and contended that Governor O’Malley’s progressive record would serve the Democrats well. Kumar Barve also refused to concede that the party would lose any seats. He responded, “In Maryland, we have modest taxation and very low poverty. Maybe we should point out how bad things are in other states that are run by the Republicans.”

Is this really a winning message for 2010? We may have raised your taxes, but the other guys are worse? Is that going to motivate liberals to turn out to save Democratic seats in purple districts? I hope we’ll have a better message than that, but I guess we’ll see.

Until then, let’s credit Senate President Mike Miller and House Majority Leader Kumar Barve for willingly sitting in the Bloggers’ Hot Seat. They were good sports and did their best to deal with an unlikely gathering unseen since the Mos Eisley Cantina. Let’s see if any more politicians have the mettle to do the same.

How MoCo Does Special Elections

Montgomery County Council vacancies are filled by special elections. So why shouldn’t we do the same for state legislator vacancies?

Here’s how the county process works. When a council vacancy occurs, a special election must be held if the vacancy “occurs before December 1 of the year before a year in which a quadrennial state election will be held.” (County code, Chapter 16, Sec. 16-17(a)(4)) So, if a county council member stepped down on 11/30/09, a special election would have to be held. But if a council member stepped down on 12/2/09, the rest of the council would appoint a replacement who would serve out the rest of the term (County charter, Sec. 106).

When a special election is held, it “must be conducted in a manner consistent with provisions of state law that govern special elections to fill vacancies in the office of representative in Congress.” (County code, Chapter 16, Sec. 16-17(c)(1)) The council must adopt a resolution that sets the dates of both the special primary and the special general election.

However, “if the Council vacancy occurs during the period beginning 120 days before the next regular or special primary or general election conducted in the County under state law and ending 40 days before that election, the special primary election provided for by this Section must be held on the same date as the other election. If a second regular or special primary or general election conducted in the County under state law is held more than 30 but less than 60 days after the special primary election referred to in the preceding sentence, the special general election held under this Section must be held on the same date as the second other election.” (County code, Chapter 16, Sec. 16-17(d)(2))

So by using the same dates as other elections, the cost of special elections can be reduced and turnout can be elevated.

The last time a county council vacancy occurred was when District 5 council member Derick Berlage stepped down in June 2002 to become the county’s Planning Chairman. As the date was too late to trigger the special election requirement, the county council appointed Donnell Peterman to serve out the remaining months of Berlage’s term. Peterman was appointed on the condition that he not leverage his appointed incumbency to seek office that year. Peterman honored that commitment in 2002, choosing instead to run (unsuccessfully) for an at-large seat in 2006.

Now doesn’t this sound a lot better than the appointment process for state legislators, which brought us this and this and this?

The excuses for why we should not hold special elections for state vacancies are rapidly disappearing.

Rez-Ticked

What if you could cast one vote for yourself and become a state legislator? And you could do that without having to raise a single dollar or knock on a single door? Would you do it?

That’s what Kirill Reznik did.

Regular readers of this blog are acquainted with the selection process for state legislative vacancies by now. Kevin Gillogly, in his now-legendary “Who the Frick is Bill?” post, described how Kirill Reznik, a Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee (MCDCC) member, cast the deciding vote to make himself District 39’s next state delegate a few months ago. Never mind the fact that his opponent, Hugh Bailey, had earned 1,451 votes from District 39 residents when he ran for an at-large County Council seat the year before. Never mind the fact that Bailey earned 1,451 more votes than Reznik, who had never run for office, ever did. Reznik, as an MCDCC member, was entitled to vote for himself and Bailey, not an MCDCC member, was not. Do you think that Hugh ever had a chance?

Now I’m sure Kirill Reznik kisses babies, loves dogs, eats apple pie, collects Norman Rockwell artwork and buys American. Lots of politicians – and aspiring politicians – do. And he’s not the first Central Committee member to vote for himself. But since he appeared in Kevin’s excellent “Who the Frick is Bill?” piece, he’s the poster child for this column.

Recently, I ran into a man who was an MCDCC member many years ago. He told me, “Back in the old days, there was no Rezniking. We had a rule that MCDCC members could not be appointed as legislators.”

I asked, “What happened to that rule?”

He replied, “It was never written down. It was just the ethics of the time.”

“The ethics of the time.” Sheesh. How quaint. Does this guy still watch black-and-white TV?

I tried to explain this to my neighbors. They just shrugged and said, “Hey, it’s corrupt back-room politics. Of course they’re going to appoint each other. That’s what we expect out of politicians.”

Is this the relationship the MCDCC wants with bucket-carrying, lawn-mower-pushing Democrats? Do you really want us to believe that the only reason you join MCDCC is to sit around, waiting to get lucky for a legislator to leave so you can vote yourself into office? Don’t you want Democratic voters to find out the good things you do and participate in them? What do you know that your “ethics of the time” predecessors did not?

Even though I heckled them with such terms as “Baroness,” I’ll give credit to the MCDCC for some recent improvements to their process. In their latest selection for District 18 delegate, three of them posted their reasons for voting on this blog. They junked secret votes. They posted applications and recommendations on their website. They allowed camera-toting Kevin Gillogly to crawl all over their selection meeting. And I hear a few of them even laughed about that “Baroness” bit. Hey, anyone that can tolerate my sense of humor can’t be all that bad. Just ask my wife.

But I tell you, a lot of us Democrats – yeah, activists like me that contribute money, bang on doors, spend our entire careers working for progressive organizations, fight in every civic battle in our neighborhoods and vote Democratic in every election – are getting Rez-ticked that you can and do vote yourselves into office. Show us that you’re better than Crony-Hall-of-Fame members Harriet Miers, Alberto Gonzalez and Mike Brown. Live up to the term “Democrats.” Return to your honorable traditions of the past and once again forbid MCDCC members from running for appointments.

Or Lord help you when you run for re-election.

The Real Vote in District 18

So the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee has picked the next delegate. Activists are already running wild, yelling, “It’s undemocratic! The people were not able to vote!”

Say what? Of course the people could vote. Right here, on the Maryland Politics Watch Internet poll. Hey, what the state constitution takes away, we give back to you. Maryland Politics Watch is the REAL home of democracy.

So what if the Internet poll was imperfect? So what if we failed to check for legal residency. Or District 18 residency. Or Planet Earth residency. It was a vote! And voting is our civic duty, right? You betcha hanging chads it is!

Here’s a secret: the Internet poll allowed multiple votes from the same computer. It wasn’t supposed to, but it did. How do I know this? I’m not telling. It’s not like I pushed the button more than once.

What was that you said? You only voted once? Heh heh.

I can just imagine the scenes at the competing campaign headquarters. Al Carr, yelling at the other Town of Kensington council members, “Keep pushing those buttons! We’ve gotta stay ahead!” And Hugh Bailey (Roz Pelles’s son) looming over a team of button pushers, bellowing, “We can take those guys! Click faster!” Maybe the reports of those people running up and down Connecticut Avenue looking for extra keyboards and mice are related to all this.

I’ll say one thing for our Internet poll: there were more votes on there than in a “real” District 18 election. And you say we can’t figure out how to boost voter turnout!

Well, the race is over now. The losing candidates are already filing appeals with the Board of Elections. But we here at Maryland Politics Watch are moving on. It’s time to set up a new Internet poll for 2010. It’s never too early to start voting, you know!

I’ll bet we get more Internet poll votes than the entire population of Pennsylvania.

Long Ago and Far Away

Many centuries ago, in the Kingdom of Mary-Land, a member of the Grand Council of Elders representing the kingdom’s Eighteenth Duchy passed away. The people were in mourning. But soon enough, the Lesser Council of Elders of the Barony of Montgomery met to select a replacement. After all, these decisions could not be made by the peasants, who were too uneducated, ill-fed and unwise to be trusted on matters such as these.

The Baroness of Montgomery, leader of the Lesser Council, convened the meeting at the council’s castle in the Principality of Kensington. After a long feast in the Royal Banquet Hall, the council proceeded to the Order of Business: selecting the next royal representative.

“Bring in the pretenders!” cried the Baroness to the page. Appearing before the royal court were Sir Kessler, Sir Cooper and the slightly wobbly Sir English.

“Sire, these gentlemen report to the council from the House of Blanc,” announced the page.

“The House of Blanc!” growled the Baroness. “But we have given them the last two seats on the Grand Council. They’re being a bit greedy, don’t you think?”

“But your highness,” protested Sir Kessler, “I have cleaned the Royal Stables for twenty years and if you select me, I will dredge the Royal Pond!”

“Silence!” yelled the Baroness. “We tolerate your possession of tongues so long as you use them only with permission. Guards, send them to the dungeon!”

Just then, the Royal Court heard a pounding at the doors. “Your majesty, I believe the peasants are trying to get in!” whispered the page.

The Baroness reached down on her plate and grabbed a crumb. “Here, give them a scrap of the Royal Meatloaf. That should hold them! Who’s next?”

“Your reverence, these are Sir Carr and Lady Pelles. They come to us from the House of Noir, which has not been awarded any seats in ages. Sir Carr has been attempting to install a sidewalk in the Principality of Kensington to protect the peasants on the street.”

“Interesting…” pondered the Baroness. “I have heard that many peasants have been run down by the wagons on Georgia Avenue. But this is none of our concern. We’ll just have to tell them to breed faster!”

“Very good, your highness. And Lady Pelles is also renowned throughout the land.”

“This is taking too long,” muttered the Baroness. “It is almost time for the Royal Back Massage and the Royal Bon Bon. Have them draw lots. Either of them will serve the interests of the empire well enough.”

BOOM! BOOM! “Sire!” screamed the page. “The peasants are about to break through the doors!”

“Oh rot!” sighed the Baroness. “Wheel out the Royal Telly into the courtyard and turn on America’s Top Model. That will placate them well enough!”