Charles, District 28

UPDATE: Edith Patterson Files for Delegate

EdithPattersonMHEC Commissioner Dr. Edith Patterson

UPDATE: As always, readers provide the scoop and are quick to catch errors–very helpful since situations can quickly change. Since I wrote this piece, Edith Patterson has filed for delegate, thus setting up for a more exciting contest between her and Kelly for the third delegate seat in District 28 (Charles).

While Kelly has little money, Patterson has filed an affidavit attesting to less than $1K. On the other hand, that could change–Patterson was honored by the State NAACP and has a network. Nevertheless, though Patterson is unquestionably a known name, Kelly won the last round.

If Middleton slates with Kelly, as his donation suggests he might (see previous post), that would give her a concrete advantage. It would also require African-American Del. C.T. Wilson to join the slate, as it is politically unthinkable for Middleton to form an all-white slate in today’s Charles County. It gives Wilson some interesting political power. I don’t know Wilson’s relationship with either Middleton or Patterson. However, one could reasonably think that Wilson sees himself as the first African-American senator from Charles in the future.

Share
Charles, District 28, Mac Middleton

Somnolent Elections in Changing Charles

charles

Charles County, District 28

District 28 is almost coterminous with Charles County. Charles keeps growing so the district keeps shrinking, and 12% of Charles’ population is now in District 27A.

Charles is now solid Democratic turf. It didn’t use to be that way. While President Obama won 65% in Charles in 2012, he won 62% in 2008. Kerry also received 62% in 2004 but Gore narrowly edged out George W. Bush with 49% in 2000. In 1996, Bill Clinton won 44%.

What changed? The population of Charles County has grown dramatically, rising from 72,751 in 1990 to 120,524 in 2000 to 146,551 in 2010. Much of the growth has been due to an influx of African-American Democrats from Prince George’s.

In 2012, the U.S. Census estimated that blacks composed 42.4% of Charles’ population up from 26.6% in 2000 and 18.4% in 1990. Whites formed just 50.0% of the population in 2012. Blacks remain a heavily Democratic constituency and now dominate all elections in Charles County.

Powerful Sen. Mac Middleton has managed to surf the changing dynamics well. He chairs the Senate Finance Committee and is unopposed for reelection. Prior to his election to the Senate in 1994, Sen. Middleton served two terms before that on the Charles County Commission. He has $160K in his campaign account.

Two incumbent delegates are seeking reelection. Del. Sally Jameson is seeking her fourth term while Del. C.T. Wilson is running for his second. Jameson has $44K in her campaign kitty compared to $22K for Wilson.

Del. Peter Murphy has decided to run for President of the Charles County Commission, so there is one open delegate seat. And, as it happens, Charles County Commission President Candice Quinn Kelly is running for delegate.

After having been nominated to fill a vacancy, Kelly ran as a Republican for the District 2 seat (elected at-large but with a residency requirement) on the County Commission in 2006, losing with 44% of the vote. She had more success in 2012 running as a Democrat for Commission President. In the primary. Kelly defeated Edith Patterson, the first African-American elected to the Commission. Gov. O’Malley appointed Patterson to a four-year term to the Maryland Higher Education Commission after her loss.

Though Kelly has just $3K in her campaign account, she can count Mac Middleton among her donors, as can Jameson and Wilson. Middleton’s support combined with her own success in winning at-large in Charles, which encompasses the whole district, should make her the odds on favorite to win the vacancy. I don’t know if Middleton plans to form a slate with Kelly as well as Jameson and Wilson but that would seal the deal.

The fourth candidate is a real estate agent, John Coller, who has yet to file a campaign finance report. He lives in Port Tobacco and works in Waldorf. Coller is new to Charles politics, so presumably is little known and has no experience running a successful campaign.

Open seat but not an exciting primary and the general election is now a lock for Democrats in Charles.

Share
Bobby Zirkin, brian frosh, Luiz Simmons

Simmons Backs the Wrong Dog

bewareofdog

In 2012, the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that pit bulls are an inherently dangerous breed. In order to avoid massive emails on this topic, I will not wade into that question. (Write Judge Judy instead; she thinks they’re dangerous.)

The Court’s decision made it so that it is not necessary to show negligence by a pit bull’s owner in order to collect damages for a pit bull dog bite. Pit bull owners worry that the Court’s decision will lead landlords to bar pit bulls and that animal shelters will euthanize them —both of which are possible. In short, they demand an end to pit bull discrimination.

The issue has become a serious problem. The General Assembly wants to eliminate the single breed focus but still protect the public from dog bites. However, it has been unable to resolve this problem due to Del. Luiz Simmons’ recalcitrance.

Simmons wants a one bite rule. Essentially, unless an owner had knowledge that a dog bit people through previous experience, the owner could not be held liable for a dog’s first bite. The one bite rule would even protect owners who negligently fail to obey leash laws.

As a result of Simmons’ demands, the bill died in the last session of the General Assembly, as reported by the Baltimore Sun:

At issue is an amendment adopted by the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, which [Sen. Brian] Frosh chairs, on Thursday night. Simmons said the amendment “killed” the bill. Frosh said Simmons is overreacting.

“He told me he’s going to kill the Senate bill as a result,” Frosh said. “I think he’s making a mistake. I think we’re very close to passing a good piece of legislation.” . . .

Simmons charged Friday that an amendment added to the bill . . .  — proposed by Sen. Robert A. Zirkin and adopted 7-4 — would expose hundreds of thousands of owners of other breeds of dog to substantially the same strict liability standard as the court applied to pit bulls. . . .

Frosh said he fought hard to defeat the amendment — an account confirmed by several members. While Frosh said he doesn’t like the amendment, which requires the owner to provide “clear and convincing” proof there was no reason to suspect a dog would bite, he said it’s a long way from strict liability — an almost automatic legal presumption that the owner is responsible.

Simmons preferred to kill the bill rather than let it go to a conference committee to work out the differences, stating that Sen. Brian Frosh “reneged” and is “incompetent” if he couldn’t defeat the amendment.

Frosh, now a candidate for Maryland Attorney General, and Simmons have reconciled and the bill has been reintroduced this year without the amendment that Simmons intensely dislikes. However, Sen. Zirkin has introduced a bill with the stricter language. Zirkin feels strongly but on the other side.

Zirkin’s explained his views in the Washington Post:

Zirkin told his colleagues that everyone agrees the law shouldn’t discriminate against pit bulls. He said the only remaining question is whether owners should be held liable when their dogs have no prior history of violence. And Zirkin considers it unjust to make a victim pay for medical bills if that person didn’t provoke the attack.

Tony Solesky, the father of the boy who was mauled, and their attorney, Kevin Dunne, also spoke against Frosh’s bill.

“It’s not a compromise — it is a surrender,” Dunne said. “The victims will lose.”

In other states with “strict liability” laws, insurance companies often cover the dog owners’ expenses.

Zirkin is right. Owners should be held responsible for the actions of their dog unless they can prove convincingly that the dog was provoked. The effect of an injury is the same whether it’s the first or second bite. Either way, medical bills should absolutely be covered. The number of previous bites seem more relevant to the question of punitive damages.

As the Gazette has reported, Del. Simmons’ thinks that demands for stricter liability are rooted in “histrionics:”

In its November report, titled “Dog Bites in Maryland and Other States: Data, Insurance Coverage and Liability,” the Department of Legislative Services found that since 2005, only one death in Maryland was attributed to a dog bite.

Compared to other states, Maryland has an average number of dog bite injuries, the report said, noting that very few states had data available.

Among injuries from external causes — such as from motor vehicle accidents, firearms, water, fire, machinery, falls, medications and more — dogs bites accounted for about 1 percent. Maryland logged about 465,000 externally caused injuries in 2010, of which about 4,800 were dog bites.

“The facts are an antidote to the epidemic of disinformation and factoids about dog bites and the histrionics that have accompanied it,” Simmons said in a statement provided to The Gazette.

My guess is that means around 4,800 more people per year who disagree strongly with Del. Simmons. While I imagine most injuries are relatively mild, some aren’t. The anecdotal cases derided by Simmons include some very serious ones.

Supporters of a loose standard claim that this is a boondoggle for trial lawyers. But the tighter standard provides a much stronger incentive for owners to take responsibility for their dogs. And responsibility is the key word here. Should the responsibility rest with the dog owner or the injured person?

Seems obvious to me.

Share
District 4, Tea Party

UPDATE: Hough Announces Primary Challenge

The battle for Republican purification by Tea Party in Frederick County commences. As expected (see here and here), Del. Michael Hough has announced a primary challenge to incumbent Sen. David Brinkley. Sure enough, Hough is already calling Brinkley a RINO–John Wagner at the WaPo has the story.

Will it make it harder to get these done in the session? Democrats have huge majorities in both chambers. But the challenge incentivizes Brinkley to be not just oppositional but intransigent as Hough will attack any compromise as a heretical betrayal. Result: the Republicans get even less than usual.

For the Maryland GOP, this vote boils down to whether they even want to be relevant in a state hostile to their ideas.

Share
Anthony Brown, Doug Gansler, health care, Heather Mizeur, polls

Marylanders Like Obamacare

The Washington Post reports that Marylanders approve of Obamacare by a 55-40 margin. The poll also says few attach blame to LG Brown but instead to state and federal administrators. One suspects that the share of Democratic primary voters who blame Brown is even lower.

I suspect that this aspect of the poll is more vulnerable to the answer choices provided. It is also unclear or whether voters deem the issue important or have fixed opinions. Campaigns also have the capacity to raise the salience of issues and to frame them in ways that opinions shift (i.e. who oversees those administrators blamed by the voters). However, the poll suggests that has yet to occur despite efforts by both AG Gansler and Del. Mizeur.

Share
District 16, Susan Lee

D16 Not so Competitive After All

District 16

District 16 is centered on Bethesda. In redistricting, it lost a small amount of territory around Garrett Park and White Flint. It gained more area in Potomac to compensate. The overall net change is small. The district has a high number of Reform Jewish voters. Asian Americans compose 11% of the voting-age population.

It almost seems like a cliché that this chock full o’lawyers district has produced not one but two candidates for attorney general. Sen. Brian Frosh and Del. Bill Frick are both seeking the office. Brian heads the Judicial Proceedings Committee in the Senate. Bill surprised by winning the delegate appointment and is one of the most talented delegates in Montgomery. (Note: This district is very near to mine and it just feels too weird to call all those people I know or have met by their surnames.)

Their candidacies have produced rare open seats in D16. Well-liked Del. Susan Lee is gliding towards the Senate without opposition despite rumors of everyone from Duchy Trachtenberg to Kyle Lierman entering the race. None has filed and no one is expected to do so. Susan will almost certainly become the first Asian American senator in Montgomery County (in Maryland?)–and not from one of the districts with an especially high Asian populations.

The action is in the delegate race. Del. Ariana Kelly probably never thought she would be the senior delegate when she joined the House in 2011 after having beat Kyle Lierman by 356 votes in the Democratic primary. Read: the election. D16 used to elect liberal Republicans like Sen. Howard Denis and Del. Connie Morella but that era just seems over.

This is probably the wealthiest district in the State and the campaign account balances of the candidates reflect it. Ariana has $120K in her campaign account and is returning to the House of Delegates. She seems most likely to be joined by Marc Korman and Hrant Jamgochian.

Attorney (go figure) Marc Korman has served on the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee. He is passionate about transit, including an independent funding sources for Metro, the Purple Line, and redecorating the Bethesda Metro station. Marc has $121K in his campaign account. (Note: Marc is a friend and used to write for this blog on occasion. He will likely win a seat despite these flaws.)

Hrant Jamgochian (yep, another attorney) ran in 2010 and made a very good impression. He won the Washington Post endorsement and came in a respectable fifth. Crucially, he carried himself well even after he lost–this does not always happen. Hrant has $116K in his campaign account.

Jordan Cooper is working very, very hard but has only $27K in his campaign account. He is 27 (correction: he’s 28) but looks even younger–an advantage in almost every aspect of life except politics and getting senior citizen discounts. Jordan seems a dark horse in this race but his effort impresses and, at the least, has a political future.

Gareth Murray won election from District 20 in 2002. He won the third slot in the Democratic primary when incumbent Del. Dana Dembrow imploded after being arrested for domestic violence. In 2006, he came in seventh in a field of seven, an unusually poor showing for an incumbent.

He has moved to Potomac but retains ties to Silver Spring as the assistant pastor of a church. No money in his campaign account means a similarly poor finish on primary day but he is a welcome addition to the contest.

Karen Kuker-Kihl is a frequent candidate. In 1998, she came tantalizing close to beating Republican Betty-Ann Krahnke in District 1 (Bethesda-Potomac) with 47%. In 2002, she performed abysmally in the District 16 Democratic primary. She hasn’t filed yet this year but is expected to run.

Peter Dennis has not filed a campaign finance report (unless it is just not coming up on the website). He won only 419 votes in the 2010 Democratic primary and will turn in a repeat performance.

In short, District 16 is less competitive than the number of candidates indicates. Only one question remains: will Susan Lee and Ariana Kelly slate with Hrant Jamgochian or Marc Korman? It’s unusual for incumbents to slate with non-incumbents but hardly in the news of the weird column.

UPDATE: Major egg on my face for forgetting Kevin Walling. An openly gay candidate, Kevin moved to the district to run. While he has $30K in the bank and is a very personable guy who will be good on the campaign trail, I rate Kevin’s chances a below those of Jordan’s, who has a more impressive campaign operation.

 

Share
District 3, District 4, Frederick County

Two Fredericks: D3 and D4

In the not too distant past, Republicans looked at counties like Frederick and got excited. Fast growing exurbs like this and the loss of population in places like Baltimore City would gradually shift Maryland in their direction.

Frederick has indeed grown but disappointed the GOP bitterly by becoming much more Democratic in the process. President Obama received 49% in 2008 and 47% in 2012 of Frederick votes. A marked increase compared to the 39% received by Al Gore in 2000.

Under the old legislative district plan, Frederick had all but a tiny piece of District 3. Frederick and Carroll Counties shared District 4 with 4A located in Frederick electing two delegates. District 4B, situated entirely in Carroll except a small bit around Mt. Airy, elected the remaining delegate.

FredCtyDistsOld

The 2010 Frederick Districts

Redistricting has been  good to Frederick. As shown below, Frederick nearly has all of two full districts under the new plan–less than 10% of District 4 remains in Carroll and its subdistricts have accordingly been eliminated.

FredCtyDistsNew

The 2014 Frederick Districts

The new districts follow Frederick’s partisan divisions more closely than the old map. As the map below from Dave’s Redistricting shows, District 3 takes in the most Democratic portions–the City of Frederick and areas to the south–with the remaining much more Republican areas in the County composing District 4.

Additionally, Del. Michael Hough’s (R-3B) home was moved to District 4. Altogether, the changes help Democrats as it strengthens their position in swingy District 3. Meanwhile, District 4 remains a little piece of Republican heaven.

FredCtyPartisanship

Partisan Composition of Frederick (Blue is D and Red is R)

District 3

In District 3, former Frederick Mayor Ron Young toppled shrill right-wing gadlfly Sen. Alex Mooney in 2010. He moved on to running the State GOP into the ground before fleeing to West Virginia for redder pastures where he is now a congressional candidate. Even Maryland Republicans don’t seem to miss him.

Sen. Ron Young has taken liberal stands–he was a strong supporter of marriage equality while Mooney was one of its most vocal opponents–but no one can touch him. He is unopposed in the primary and general election.

All three delegate seats are open. In 3A, neither Del. Patrick Hogan (R) nor Del. Galen Clagett (D) will seek reelection with Hogan’s decision at least partly influenced by the more Democratic version of this Frederick City district. The new redistricting plan placed Del. Michael Hough’s (R-3A) home in District 4.

In District 31A, Sen Ron Young’s wife, Karen Lewis Young has filed for one of the two delegate seats but has not filed a campaign finance report (or at least one doesn’t come up when I search for it). She has a website for her unsuccessful run for the Frederick mayoralty as the Democratic nominee in 2013. In that contest, Young came in second with 32% behind Republican Randy McClement who won with 49%. If elected, Sen. Young and Del. Young would be the only husband and wife team in the General Assembly.

The other potentially strong candidate appears to be Frederick Alderman Carol Krimm. Though she has just $1700 in her campaign account, she has held office and aldermen run citywide, so she is already known throughout a fair portion of the district.

Young and Krimm seems well positioned to win the two seats, if only due to the weakness of the other competition that has filed so far. Candidate Nicholas Bouquet just moved to Frederick one year ago and has also filed no campaign finance report (or again, it just doesn’t appear when I search for it). Roger Wilson has raised no money. The two Republican candidates are poorly funded.

In 3B, Frederick County Democratic Central Committee Vice Chair Stephen Slater is the only filed candidate. Of course, the filing deadline has not yet arrived.

District 4

All four seats in District 4 are safe for the Republicans. Though Del. Michael Hough’s website still solicits support for running in 3B, his home is now in District 4  and plans to run for the Senate against incumbent Sen. Minority Leader David Brinkley. Hough’s very active twitter feed of anti-Obamacare, anti-tax. anti-union, global warming denying posts sure has the look of a Republican straining to endear himself to tea-party voters.

Brinkley has a reputation in the Senate of a smart and cordial staunch–but not certifiable–conservative. Which means, of course, that he could be in trouble with the wing of his party that demands total purity and legislative ineffectiveness to gain election.

Brinkley has just $21K in his campaign account and has not yet filed for reelection. Along with Del. Kathy Afzali (R-4A), Brinkley sought unsuccessfully to defeat Rep. Roscoe Bartlett in the Republican primary. Bartlett limped home with 44% to 20% for Brinkley and 10% for Afzali. Some may speculate that Brinkley may be getting tired of the General Assembly, though he gives every sign of planning to run for reelection.

Michael Hough has a more robust $115K in his campaign account and will make it a humdinger of a primary. Neither Brinkley nor Hough can raise funds during the session, leaving little time before the primary and giving Hough an edge. On the other hand, Hough will need to get known in a lot of new territory that Brinkley has  represented in the House or Senate since the 1994 election. Hough will try to beat Brinkley by running to his right and presenting himself as a more authentic conservative.

Only one Democrat has bothered to file for delegate in District 4 while the Republicans have three filed candidates so far: Del. Kathy Afzali ($66K on hand) and Del. Kelly Schulz ($45K) along with Mt. Airy Councilwoman Wendi Peters ($13K). David Vogt and Ken Timmerman also plan to run but has yet to file. Gaffe-prone Vogt ran for Congress but dropped out before the primary. Timmerman is moving to the district to run for the seat.

The Quinton Report sees Afzali, Schulz and Peters as the front runners, and Vogt and Timmerman as sad cases: “With Vogt getting into the race, it guarantees he will be battling it out with Ken Timmerman to see who finishes last.”

 

Share
Public Services Commission

PSC Confirmation Controversy

Governor Martin O’Malley has nominated Anne Hoskins to the Public Services Commission, which regulates and sets rates for utilities in the State of Maryland. The nomination is controversial for several reasons despite efforts to highlight her environmental credentials.

First, Ms. Hoskins resides in New Jersey, though she now plans to live in Baltimore City. Many qualified Marylanders applied for the position, so it seems unusual to go with someone out of state.

Second, Ms. Hoskins will be coming directly from industry. Her previous employer was Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG), a major New Jersey power company, and she has made clear that she leans towards the position of the utility companies on many key issues recently before the PSC.

As a result, tonight’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Executive Nominations Committee is garnering scrutiny. Surprisingly, given the interest, the Committee has decided not to permit public testimony, which must now be submitted in writing. Abbe Milstein, who founded Powerupmoco to promote greater power reliability after the 2012 derecho, has come out strongly against the nomination:

Applied in Maryland, the utility industry in our state has co-opted the Public Service Commission.  Power companies and other utilities determine the Commissions’ decisions in their favor, as opposed to the Commission putting the interests of the consumers first. . . .

The Commission granted Pepco its unprecedented GRC surcharge and an increase in rates despite the Commission’s own findings in very recent earlier rate cases of Pepco’s imprudence, negligence and mismanagement.  How can this be?  By stacking the Commission with Commissioners whose interests align with utility companies, no matter how highly educated the Commissioners themselves are, utility customers end up with anti-consumer decisions such as Pepco’s granting of a $24 million tracker in Case No. 0311 and Order No. 86060 from Case No. 9326 where Ms. Hoskins sided with two pro-utility Commissioners in approving a tracker for BGE.  Approval of these surcharges is contrary to the precedent established by our Commission as well as sound regulatory policy. These surcharges will unfairly shift risks that are properly borne by Company shareholders to ratepayers, based on a multi-year forecast of plants that have not been demonstrated to be used or useful and estimated expenses that are not known and measurable.  The decision in Case No. 9311 is so controversial that it is currently under appeal in the Baltimore County Courts.

After my two and one-half hour discussion with Anne Hoskins last fall, it became abundantly clear that Ms. Hoskins, though highly educated and a charming mother of four, overwhelmingly approved of the granting of trackers as a method for utility companies to recover costs from ratepayers and could think of three examples during our conversation where she would implement these surcharges.

In Commissioner Harold Williams’ dissenting opinion from Case No. 9311 he discussed his view of trackers and that he “cannot justify the fundamental shift from long-standing rate-making principles merely to enable Pepco to begin recovering the cost of this project from ratepayers even before the Company begins spending it. … “We explained that ‘surcharges guarantee dollar-for-dollar recovery of specific costs, diminish the Company’s incentive to control those costs, and exclude classic, ongoing utility expenses from the standard, contextual ratemaking analysis.”

As a utility executive from power company Public Service Energy Group of New Jersey whose history of Nuclear Regulatory Commission violations for improper management of its nuclear plants is the foundation for serving on the Public Service Commission of Maryland, Anne Hoskins does not the fit the profile for the class of Commissioner Maryland consumers need or want serving on our Public Service Commission.  Please DO NOT confirm Anne Hoskins to the Public Service Commission of Maryland.

For the uninitiated, trackers are when a power company gets to charge fees ahead of time to pay for improvements. Past practice has traditionally been for companies to come before the PSC and request rate increases based on their expenses.

Tracker opponents argue that they allow the company to maintain a nice bottom line as they don’t have to invest their past profits to invest in infrastructure. Additionally, they reduce incentives to keep costs down as the company doesn’t have to prove or to justify its expenses after the fact.

People are still watching the PSC closely after past frustrating power fiascoes. The demands for better and greater scrutiny of regulatory structures that are perceived to have failed the community will continue.

Share

Maryland Politics Watch

Visit Us On FacebookVisit Us On TwitterCheck Our Feed