Maryland lawmakers trudged through a lengthy day Monday, nearing Democrats’ goal of changing the state’s constitution to make it easier to draw congressional districts.
The House of Delegates gave preliminary approval to changing the constitution to remove legal roadblocks that thwarted past gerrymandering efforts. That sets up a final vote and then Senate action on Tuesday.
If the measure passes the General Assembly, voters will have their say on the November ballot.
Senate President Bill Ferguson said changing the constitution will put Maryland “on equal footing” with other states, affording the state the ability to choose to redistrict. Pushed by President Donald Trump, some Republican states drew new congressional lines starting last year — and Democratic states followed.
“What we need in Maryland is certainty and clarity about the rules so we are in a position to respond,” Ferguson, a Baltimore Democrat, said at a public hearing during a rare summertime special session.
Democratic-led Maryland has been under pressure to redraw congressional districts in hopes of ousting U.S. Rep. Andy Harris, the state’s lone Republican in Congress.
House of Delegates Speaker Joseline Peña-Melnyk said the constitutional change will allow Maryland to “meet the moment” as states across the country redistrict.
After a year of wrangling over the issue, the state legislature did not pass a new map favorable to Democrats before adjourning in April. But Democratic leaders ultimately agreed to a change to the state constitution, making it clear that language requiring compact districts that take into account the geographic and county boundaries doesn’t apply to congressional districts.
If approved, the measure would give lawmakers a freer hand in drawing districts for the 2028 congressional elections and beyond.
Throughout the day and into Monday night, outnumbered Republicans tried to slow things down.
Republicans asked significantly more questions than Democrats did during an almost five-hour hearing.
Later, during a House of Delegates debate that stretched past 11 p.m., Republicans offered 20 amendments — and each one was shot down. They proposed adding voter registration requirements and establishing a redistricting commission. Some were off-topic, including limiting tax increases and putting a nonbinding question on the November ballot asking if the Eastern Shore should secede from Maryland.
Over the course of the day’s proceedings, Democrats insisted the constitutional change is simply a clarification that keeps standards that had been in place for decades until a 2022 court ruling. They emphasized that voters will approve or reject the change.
Republicans, meanwhile, countered that the language is confusing to voters and sets an unfair standard that could eliminate GOP representation for Maryland on Capitol Hill.
Sen. Bryan Simonaire, an Anne Arundel County Republican, dismissed Democratic arguments that it’s necessary to have map-drawing flexibility to help elect more Democrats to serve as a counterbalance to Trump.
He said Democrats put forward an 8-0 map — the one struck down in court — in 2021, when President Joe Biden, a Democrat, was in the White House.
“We can hide behind the veil of Trump, but this was occurring before,” Simonaire said during the bill hearing before adding: “This bill puts gerrymandering on steroids.”
The House is scheduled to take a final vote on Tuesday morning and then hand off the measure to the Senate.
Ferguson, the Senate president, said his chamber has enough votes to pass the constitutional amendment.
“We wouldn’t be here if we didn’t think that we had the votes to move forward,” Ferguson told reporters Monday morning.
Even though there’s almost no doubt about the outcome of the constitutional amendment, politicians and advocates took turns convening press conferences at the State House complex to underscore their points.
Republican lawmakers said that Democrats should be focusing their time on passing bills to lower costs for Marylanders.
“We’re here to make this as uncomfortable as possible for the Democrat supermajority to push through something as partisan as this issue is,” said Senate Minority Leader Stephen Hershey, who delayed the Senate’s introduction of the bill after citing a rule that requires a bill to be time-stamped at least four hours before introduction.
“This sham special session is all about Gov. Moore’s presidential and political ambitions, it is not about what’s best for Maryland,” said Sen. Justin Ready, the Senate minority whip.
Gov. Wes Moore, who tried and failed to get an 8-0 map passed earlier this year, blamed the actions of the Trump administration for bringing lawmakers back to Annapolis.
“None of us want to be back here for a special session,” the Democratic governor told reporters Monday. “And I want to be clear that the reason that we are here is because Donald Trump has forced us back.”
If the bill passes and Marylanders vote yes in November to kick off a process that would introduce new maps, “then we’ll do that,” he said.
The special session also drew others to the State House, angling for the attention of lawmakers and reporters who typically are scattered this time of year. Ahead of the session, though, Democratic leaders made clear they would only consider the redistricting bill, as well as a second bill to fix another ballot question.
Families who use state-funded disability services rallied against cost-cutting measures that were put into place earlier this year.
“Save our services! Save our services!” they chanted as Rachel Platten’s “Fight Song” boomed from speakers on Lawyers Mall.
After the disability family advocates cleared out, Republican candidate for governor Dan Cox stood out under the summer sun and criticized Democrats for moving forward with redistricting rather than working on affordability issues.
“Why are Gov. Wes Moore and the General Assembly spending their time changing the rules of politics, instead of solving the problems that matter most to the people of Maryland?” Cox asked.
A reporter asked Cox if he would testify against the constitutional change. No, he said, because he’s a candidate for office and he might be involved in a court challenge to the General Assembly’s action.
“It’s on the table,” he said.
Comments
Welcome to The Banner's subscriber-only commenting community. Please review our community guidelines.