We didn’t want a war, but I guess we’re going to get one anyway:
The Maryland State Republican Party on May 7th, 2011 adopted a new voting formula for party business under which counties with a combined population of 200,000 people can outvote counties with 2.5 million people.
Under this new voting formula adopted by the state party at its Spring Convention in Ocean City:
- Anne Arundel, with 28 times the Republicans as Kent County now only has only 4.5 times the vote for party business as Kent.
- Baltimore County, with 30 times Republicans as Kent County, now only has only 4 times the vote for party business of Kent.
- Prince George’s, with 12 times the Republicans as Kent County, now has only has only 1.6 times the vote for party business of Kent.
The change continues the state party’s retreat toward focusing only on the state’s few majority Republican areas.
This is only the latest example of a continuing phenomenon. Last year the state party leadership declined to run a candidate for Attorney General. Before that, a prior State Party Chair undermined our Republican legislative leaders with his feud over legislative policy and strategy.
Montgomery Republicans reject this strategy of retreat. We believe that marginalizing Maryland Republicans only to more rural areas just makes Martin O’Malley’s, Mike Busch’s and Mike Miller’s fondest dreams come true.
Out of necessity the Montgomery County Republican party will follow its own distinct, separate course. We can do this because of the long standing strong support of our Republican donors and activists, which we appreciate.
Montgomery Republicans are committed to presenting voters with a conservative governing alternative based on a belief in personal responsibility, faith in free markets and support for limited government. We will continue to build the organizational infrastructure to support candidates who advance these views.
Montgomery Republicans will also continue to work with other Maryland Republicans who share our commitment to a competitive statewide Maryland Republican Party. These include the Republican House Caucus Slate Committee and many in jurisdictions such as Baltimore City, Carroll and Prince Georges.
Mark Uncapher,
Chairman, Montgomery County Republican Party
So Mark still hasn’t gotten over his defeat, which tends to pick on Kent County as they are the smallest county in Maryland. Personally, I was happy to see the Kent County Republican Party reborn and fully represented at the convention for the first time in my memory (never mind the additional kudos for their thinking outside the box and having Brian Murphy speak at their Lincoln Day Dinner.) And I can say that even though Kent County voted completely against my motion to have the change in the threshold required to bring up and pass bylaw changes become its own separate discussion – despite my best efforts to argue the point since they were sitting directly behind us. On that front, Montgomery County was a key ally on my side, as were Prince George’s, Carroll, Dorchester, Garrett, and Howard counties.
But Mark is still in the wrong, particularly when not everyone in his own county has an equal vote on the Central Committee.
It’s worthy of note that he didn’t cite his own county’s case. Consider he had a resolution passed a couple conventions ago, back when the voting controvery started, expanding his county’s delegation to the maximum 48 members allowed. While the extra bodies and help may have been useful during the 2010 election, the sad truth is that MoCo was happy with 19 Central Committee members and its huge voting share until it was discovered that the former LCD voting system that gave them their massive advantage (because votes were distributed proportionally based solely on the number of registered voters) was only being used because no one had thought to challenge the rule allowing it. Thanks to Jim Pelura and his selections to the Rules Committee for that fateful convention a couple years back, the LCD voting system – which was loathed by the small counties because of the insignificant role they were allotted in party affairs – was scrapped because we challenged the old way of doing business. Of course, MoCo was fine with doing things as they’d always been done, even as it risked a mutiny by the smallest dozen or so counties.
Speaking strictly in terms of our county’s self-interest, the idea of one person, one vote in party affairs works out as pretty much of a wash as far as we are concerned – we end up with 9 of what potentially could be an even 300 total members in attendance this fall once Caroline County expands to a nine-member Central Committee later this year. (For all intents and purposes, we end up with 3% of the vote from either calculation.) Looking at this at a regional level, the Eastern Shore counties could conceivably vote as a bloc and control exactly 1/4 of the vote; a total of 75.
By the way, with respect to the complaint Mark Uncapher cites, that ‘1 person, 1 vote’ formula would be similarly disproportionate in terms of population in our case since we on the Shore are less than 1/10 of the state’s total population – but MoCo was fine with that particular disparity because they would hold the largest share as a single county.
The biggest advantage to the formula voted on at the convention, and more importantly inscribed into our bylaws, is that the largest county has no more than 4.5 times the pull of the smallest. It forces counties to work together for common goals and makes it possible that those seeking office outside the center of the state have a chance. (I think the best indication of this will come when we vote for the 10 at-large delegates to the Republican National Convention in Tampa. The Eastern Shore could well vote as a bloc and send several of those ten – hint, hint.)
When there’s such a target-rich environment of Democratic foibles out there and a significant array of good choices running for both the Oval Office and against the seven dwarfs Maryland has up for re-election next year – they’re better known as Ben Cardin and Maryland’s six Democratic members of Congress – I fail to understand why some continue to fight this battle. We on this side of the Bay were kicked around for several years on the regional chairs concept and voting reform, but when the rubber met the road we did our share for the Maryland Republican Party. Ask Andy Harris and Mike McDermott how they like their new seats (and ask Jim Mathias if he liked pretending to be to the right of Ronald Reagan during campaign season. It wasn’t the devil that made him do it.)
I can guarantee one thing, though. There’s a very good reason that most of the state voted against Montgomery County – even when it wasn’t in their interest in doing so. Frankly, we are tired of arguing about voting.
We gave the old set of bylaws three years before attempting to tinker with it, so why not leave the voting system go for awhile and see how things shake out? There was some serious business left on the table after our powwow because we took much of the time arguing about voting, so why not free that time up in the next go-round?
Perhaps the next shakeup should come in the Montgomery County Republican Party. I daresay it’s fortunate that the so-called ‘star chamber’ didn’t pass muster in this convention because we may have seen its first use once Mark Uncapher went public with his complaints.
Michael,
You are exactly right that everyone is sick and tired of the voting issue, and I sincerely hope it will now just go away.
That said, please stop picking on Montgomery County– it doesn’t help. The only thing worse than a sore loser is a sore winner, and postings like yours just add to the bunker mentality.
What I think are unhealthy, and need to change on both sides are the my county versus your county and my region versus your region attitudes that pervaded this debate. Suggesting that the eastern shore vote as a block and send you to Tampa isn’t likely to win you my vote, but working with me on an issue we both care about is. Voting for someone just because they come from your county is stupid–I thought we were both glad MoCo walked away from that in December. Let’s elect the best people we can to all positions, and forget about where they happen to live. Let’s think about how we can help each other, instead of blaming each other.
Trust me, Heather, it’s a rare occasion when the Eastern Shore votes as a bloc – I was just using that as an example and making the point that ‘one man, one vote’ isn’t a panacea either and it undermines the population argument Mark Uncapher posits. All 1P1V does in reality is enhance MoCo’s voting strength.
As for the comment about national convention delegates, the reason I brought that up was because none of the ten who won came from the Eastern Shore – despite the fact there were at least two or three of us on the ballot (including my former county chair.) Maybe that was more a function of the ‘slate’ than the voting pattern, but the ‘slate’ was determined by the big counties.
Thanks for reprinting in full our statement in your blog
You have misstated, though, how the structure of the Montgomery Central Committee operates. Everyone is an equal member, everyone has the same vote on officers and other issues. While the Executive Committee meets monthly, the full committee has had its fourth meeting since November.
Our structure was intended to free many members to get involved in other ways. Some CC member focus on their role as Legislative District Chairs, others get involved as Club Presidents and others serve on committee that often meets monthly, such as Communications. For example we have as many CC members at the monthly Communications meetings as other counties have on their Central Committees. Many of our most active CC members are not on the Ex Committee, such as Katja Bullock, Josephine Wang, Rick Hansen, Stella Green. Instead they have taken on specific assignments.
Under our structure, for the first year, the top two votes getter from each district are on the Ex Committee, as are the top three at-large. However after the first year, each district can designate their EX Committee representatives. It takes a vote of three of five at the district level or 5 of the 8 at-large.
From our point of view, the “Politburo” model that so many Central Committee use would not help us build our party. I think you have to acknowledge that Montgomery County has as active a Central Committee as any in the state. In just the next four weeks our county clubs and groups will hear from Tony Blankley, Andy Card, Brian Murphy (tentative), Sharon Day (RNC CoChair), and Fred Grandy. (Poor Sharon will be getting an earful.) We were doing training at our headquarters while the convention was going on. Tomorrow we will be at Taste of Wheaton and have a meeting on precinct chair recruitment. For Wheaton we developed and produced Spanish language literature. I could go on, but a major point is that we have learned to be self sufficient.
But let me make a key point for us: the 2006 and 2010 the State party and their Victory programs hurt our Montgomery County candidates. It is widely believed by Montgomery County Republicans that our incumbents lost in 06 because the State Party and Ehrlich insisted on a centralized phone banks, rather than to support our precinct presence. This really cut into our turnout operations. In 2010 the candidates that stayed away from “Victory phone banks” did better than the candidates that relied on it, such as Ehrlich. If you are skeptical, look at the numbers for our County Executive, Doug Rosenfeld, or legislative candidates, like Dwight Patel in 15. They ran well ahead of Ehrlich.
So our “ask” with the state party is very, very simple: if they are not going to work with us, please just stay away. You on the Shore is welcome to all their “help” that you can use.
Mark Uncapher
Just to be clear, I wasn’t defending 1P1V, or advocating for or against any particular voting system. No one from PG was elected at large in 2008 either (My chairman ran for delegate and lost and another member of our cc ran for alternate and lost; I got to go because I was elected in the primary). The only MoCo person elected at large was Rex Reed, who was an alternate– and Rex only talked his way onto the slate by offering to be photographer.
Let’s keep in mind that the people who put together that slate are largely out of the picture now, and I’m not at all sure there will be as much enthusiasm for slates next year as there was in 2008.