July 11, 2024
What started as a typical MCDCC appointment process (one that has played out a half dozen times in the last year and a half) to undemocratically appoint a Delegate for District 16 by a vote of a handful of party insiders, took a dark twist earlier this week. These appointments are essentially a guaranteed seat until they voluntarily give it up due to the power of incumbency.
Earlier this week, we received a packet of papers about a court case from 10 years ago on one applicant. The same packet (perhaps including additional information) was confirmed to have been received by at least 3 other media outlets besides us. Maryland Matters ran an article about these court documents and where you can see the details from the applicant Diana Conway’s past. Conway also happens to be one of the biggest contributors (both financially and in her volunteer time) for the Democratic Party in Montgomery County. She is a former president of the Women’s Democratic Club of Montgomery County a major organization.
The court records were pulled on April 16, 2024 and sent to news organizations just this week of July 8th almost 3 full months later. This brings questions about who started this, why they pulled this so early (and knew to find it) and more questions about the timing it was given to reporters a few days before the appointment. Interestingly, the position didn’t even officially open up until June when Delegate Sara Love was elevated to the state Senate by the same MCDCC. The package seems to have been received by Maryland Matters shortly before the Tuesday July 9th MCDCC meeting where we were told they talked to some of the subjects of the article.
Appointment Process Under Scrutiny
Earlier this year, it looked like there was a possibility of special elections bills passing in Annapolis to change the appointment process but to the dismay of many, none of them passed.
According to analysis by MoCo360, “By the middle of 2023, more than 40% of the county’s 35-member Senate and House legislative delegation (14 members) owed their initial entry into the General Assembly to appointment rather than election—up from 25% (nine members) at the beginning of the year.”
Maryland Matters reported in January on advocates renewing the press for changes: “Changing the system has been a goal of good government groups including the Maryland Public Interest Group and Common Cause Maryland for several years. Those changes have failed even as the public grows irritated with how appointments are made to fill open seats. Proponents say the current system ignores voters and must go.”
Later, that article goes on to say: “An October poll conducted by Annapolis-based Gonzales Research and Media Services for Common Cause Maryland and the Maryland PIRG found that 85% of those surveyed favor a special election to fill vacant seats.”
From the other Maryland Matters article this week: “Of the 188 legislators in the Maryland General Assembly, nearly 25% were initially appointed to their seats. Many go on to be re-elected. Some appointed to the House are later appointed to fill a Senate vacancy.”
MCDCC Appoints One of Their Own
During the appointment meeting, MCDCC appointed their own secretary to the D16 position.
According to MCDCC member Liza Smith, Teresa Woorman had the least community support of the final 3 applicants. Both Diana Conway and Melissa Bender received dozens of community letters in support compared to just a handful of letters of support for Teresa Woorman. Diana got the most community letters (particularly among D16 residents) with 52 letters. Bender received 26 community letters in support. Woorman got 7 letters of support (1 from D16).
Smith said “We didn’t choose the better candidate, and I feel the fix was in. We will never live this down because that is our brand, to pick our own. This is the third member of the WDC that we didn’t support. I feel bad for District 16. She was less qualified and didn’t have the experience or support of the community.”
When it comes to the process, Smith said “They don’t give a **** about democracy.”
Lou Peck, contributor for MoCo360 and Maryland Matters tweeted about the appointment of one of their own members: “The 24-member Montgomery Co. Democratic Central Committee hews to its frequent practice of elevating one of its own to a vacant seat in the MoCo Annapolis delegation–the fifth time in the past decade that the @mcdcc has opted for such a move.”
Someone else close to the central committee said: “These decisions are very difficult for MCDCC, they spend a lot of time collectively and individually talking to every candidate to try to make sure they are heard and give them a fair shot. They’re not rigging this game, they’re just people trying to make the most of a difficult situation.”
This was the 7th appointment filled by MCDCC this term alone.
Damaging to Democracy
Bottom line is that we shouldn’t have people digging dirt out on people to win a popularity contest of 24 people.
This appointment process has been shown to impact not only democracy, but also damages the reputation of the Democratic party in Maryland but particularly in Montgomery County when these sorts of shenanigans take place.
Besides the drama and undemocratic appointment process, MCDCC has not been free of other shenanigans.
In August of 2023, we reported upon the large tax lien from the IRS that MCDCC had based on not paying their taxes previously which was also discussed in Montgomery Perspective and a follow up piece published in Moderately MOCO. This and other actions by the body resulted in the former Vice Chair of the Maryland Democratic Party Jefrey Slavin and multiple MCDCC members publicly calling for a boycott of the MCDCC Fall Gala (one of their top fundraising events) which led to a smaller turnout
Conclusion
In conclusion, now is the time to fix the appointment process or at least begin to move away from it. There are many different ways it can be done but it’s clear that this process is extremely flawed and need to be corrected.