From Maryland
Charges against three tied to Ehrlich race thrown out; State law found
unconstitutional; Judge says 1979 statute infringed on free speech
By Walter F. Roche Jr. and David Nitkin
Sun Staff
April 25, 2003
A Prince George's Circuit Court judge declared unconstitutional yesterday
a state law barring the payment of Election Day poll workers, and threw out
criminal charges against three workers tied to Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s
2002 election campaign.
In an eight-page decision issued just six days after a hearing, Judge
Richard H. Sothoron Jr. said the 1979 law improperly infringed on guaranteed
free-speech rights and had been interpreted to give "carte blanche
authority" to restrict Election Day activities.
The judge's order dismisses the criminal charges leveled by a Prince
George's County grand jury against Shirley R. Brookin, 56, head of a
Washington employment agency; Rashida Hogg, 23, of Silver Spring; and Steven
P. Martin, 31, of Capitol Heights. The three could have faced penalties of a
year in jail and fines of up to $25,000 each.
The decision, if unchallenged, would end a nearly 25-year-old Maryland ban
on "walk-around money," the custom of handing out cash to Election Day
workers, a practice critics equated with buying votes.
Noting existing state laws that bar vote-buying and electioneering within
100 yards of polling places, Sothoron said that the law barring walk-around
money "is lacking in constitutionally mandated specificity."
"The reality," Sothoron wrote, "is that [the law] is unlimited in its
geographic scope, thus providing no guidance whatsoever as to how the
conduct is to be controlled on election day in Maryland."
Adopting many of the arguments offered last week by defense lawyers for
the three defendants, Sothoron also noted apparent inconsistencies and
conflicts in the law. For instance, he said, it appeared to him that the ban
applied only to final elections, not primaries.
The law states the payments are barred "on the day of the election, while
the polls are open."
Assistant State Prosecutor Thomas M. McDonough said yesterday that no
decision had been made on whether to appeal the decision. He said his office
would be conferring with state Attorney General J. Joseph Curran Jr. before
making a final decision.
A spokesman for Curran said the attorney general would be happy to consult
with State Prosecutor Stephen Montanarelli on the issue, but offered no
further comment.
McDonough, however, acknowledged that prospects for a successful appeal
were slim, especially in light of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions that
have struck down similar laws in other states.
Calling the ruling "no big surprise," McDonough said the cases against the
three defendants along with any additional investigation were "dead in the
water" barring an appeal.
"Being branded as a criminal for expressing your First Amendment rights is
clearly wrong. We are obviously pleased that Judge Sothoron moved quickly to
correct this injustice," said Larry Nathans, the lead attorney on the
constitutional challenge.
"I'm too happy to talk. I'm just ecstatic," said Wayne Clark, who
coordinated the Democrats for Ehrlich efforts in Prince George's County and
remained a possible target were the investigation to continue.
"It's a great day for the Ehrlich campaign, but it's an even better day
for democracy in the state of Maryland," Clark added.
Democratic State Party spokesman David Paulson, however, called the ruling
"unfortunate."
"There was a reason the law was put in place in the first place," Paulson
said.
Henry Fawell, a spokesman for the governor, said the judge's decision
validated Ehrlich's campaign practices.
"The governor made clear from the outset of the campaign that illegal or
inappropriate behavior would not be tolerated, and that all campaign
employees must follow the letter and the intent of the law," Fawell said.
"This ruling dispels even the appearance of impropriety."
In the hearing last week, attorneys for the three defendants argued that
the 1979 statute was an improper infringement on free speech. Citing U.S.
Supreme Court rulings on similar laws in other states, they told Sothoron
the 1979 law was too vague and was aimed at problems that no longer exist.
Prosecutors, however, said that the law met constitutional requirements
and was necessary to maintain public confidence in the election process.
They argued that even the appearance of vote-buying must be barred.
The American Civil Liberties Union had joined with the defense in calling
for the law to be declared invalid.
Brookins, the first to be indicted in the case, works with a Washington
employment agency that was paid by Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele's campaign
committee, while Hogg and Martin were paid by Democrats for Ehrlich.
Brookins was charged with paying workers from a Washington homeless
shelter to hand out Election Day literature. Hogg and Martin were charged
with recruiting high school and college students for the same task.
An investigator from Montanarelli's office, court records show, was an
eyewitness when the homeless workers collected $150 apiece the day after the
November election. The high school and college students, however, never were
paid, though they were promised it.
Advocates for campaign reform were dismayed by the ruling.
"If we don't have this ban, what's to stop us from going back to the dark
days of buying votes and buying elections?" said James Browning, executive
director of Common Cause/Maryland, a government watchdog group.
Acknowledging that campaigns have been in all likelihood paying poll
workers despite the law, Browning said the high-profile case involving a
sitting governor offered a chance to shine a spotlight on the practice.
"This was our chance to stop it this year," he said, "If we got some
enforcement, maybe it would stop."
Like many East Coast cities, Baltimore has a storied tradition of paying
workers to round up votes on Election Day. The practice thrived in the era
of machine politics that stretched deep into the 20th century.
"Walk around money many years ago in Baltimore was tantamount to buying
elections," said former longtime state Sen. Julian L. Lapides, a Baltimore
Democrat known for his reform instincts.
Some say the practice dates to at least 1849. Edgar Allan Poe collapsed on
the streets of Baltimore and died on a voting day, and legend has it that he
was accepting drinks in exchange for votes at one bar after another.
The prohibition on paying workers dates to the late 1970s, and was passed
in the aftermath of the scandal that embroiled former Gov. Marvin Mandel,
now an Ehrlich adviser, who was convicted of using his office for the gain
of friends and campaign donors.
Lapides said he hoped Montanarelli would appeal the decision and that
lawmakers would work to craft an acceptable form of the ban.
"It's a healthy law, and maybe it needs to be tightened up," he said.
"It's an unfortunate decision, and one that sets us backwards rather than
forward."
Copyright (c) 2003, The Baltimore Sun
Link to the article: http://www.sunspot.net/bal-md.elect25apr25.story