All posts by: Dinah Winnick

As the 2014 Maryland gubernatorial race quickly takes shape, ABC7 interviewed UMBC political science professor Thomas F. Schaller on what the state can expect moving forward. Schaller’s comments focused on the strength of the Democratic party in the state. He noted, “The Republican party just has such a very short bench in Maryland.”

Schaller walked the reporter through the past several gubernatorial elections and the tactics candidates found successful. He suggested, “for a long time, Democrats maximized their votes in Baltimore City, Montgomery County and Prince George’s County.” For example, Parris Glendening (1995-2003) won those three areas and was elected, despite losing the state’s other 21 jurisdictions.

The metric gradually shifted to the point where Ehrlich won by doing sufficiently well (but not winning) in Montgomery and Prince George’s and garnering significant votes elsewhere. The Democrats learned from that experience, leading to an O’Malley victory. As for the Maryland GOP, Schaller remarked, “I’m not saying they can’t win – it depends on who they nominate, but I think the Democrats are favored.”

“Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown and Howard County Executive Ken Ulman shook up Maryland’s 2014 gubernatorial race by announcing they will run as a ticket for the Democratic nomination in 2014. Politically and electorally, it’s a shrewd and gutsy move,” writes UMBC political science professor Thomas F. Schaller in today’s Baltimore Sun.

Schaller notes, “Picking running mates before the primary remains unconventional,” with most gubernatorial and presidential candidates assuming they should make solo nomination bids and pick running mates only after receiving the nomination. Brown and Ulman, however, are positioning themselves as a complementary ticket, highlighting Brown’s service in the state legislature and executive levels and Ulman’s experience as county legislator and top county official. The candidates are also complementary in the voters they will draw, with Brown’s support in Prince George’s County, Montgomery County and Baltimore City, and Ulman’s strength in Howard County and Baltimore County.

How might gubernatorial aspirant Doug Gansler compete with the ticket? Schaller suggests he “convince rising star and openly gay [Del. Heather] Mizeur to join his ticket, setting up an epic clash for power within the post-O’Malley Democratic Party.”

A new guest column by UMBC political science professor Thomas F. Schaller on Sabato’s Crystal Ball ask the highly provocative question, “How Should We Vote?”

Schaller writes:

Given pervasive gerrymandering and a shrinking number of competitive districts, any serious reform of congressional elections might also entail changes to our voting rules — that is, how votes are cast by voters and aggregated to determine winners… So what sort of voting rule reforms might significantly alter the composition of Congress, encourage greater voter participation and create a more responsive national legislature?

Changing voting rules can change voter behavior in two important ways, notes Schaller: impacting the likelihood that someone will vote and affecting “how voters express their preferences once they do turn out to vote, especially if they are able to indicate secondary and alternative preferences and therefore vote strategically.”

Schaller suggests:

Despite the earnest efforts of FairVote.org and other electoral reform advocates to move legislation through Congress or the state legislatures, what is probably needed first is a widespread voter education effort… Election reform advocates must first get Americans to properly recognize that the roots of the problem reside as much in the voting rules as in campaign finance law or the redistricting process.

Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., recently took an unusual approach to opposing the Keystone XL oil pipeline: arguing that it’s an earmark and thus not in line with current House rules. The fact-checking site PoliFact asked UMBC political science professor Roy T. Meyers to weigh in on the accuracy of that statement.

Meyers told PolitiFact, “Earmarks have been criticized, often justifiably, for not being subject to sufficient scrutiny on their policy merits.” He continued, “Unlike most research grants that are subject to demanding peer reviews, or many contracts that must undergo extensive agency review and competitive bidding, earmarks are awarded only after cursory reviews, typically by committee staff. Congress substitutes its judgment on a particular case, cutting agencies and other experts out of the loop.”

However, in this case Meyers was “astonished to see how [Grayson] selectively and misleadingly edited the definition of earmark, then compounded the fault by drawing a bizarre inference regarding the bill’s effective approval of a permit. This bill is about administrative regulation, or more accurately, the lack of it.”

Meyers argued,  “Grayson would be smarter to argue that the bill violates the spirit, not the letter, of the earmark moratorium and the philosophy that supposedly backs it.”