From the office of Del. Kathy Szeliga:
As you know, the Maryland General Assembly is meeting this week to redraw congressional districts. This process takes place every ten years after the national census.
This is a slow drawn out drama, not an action movie. As in any good theatrical production, there are tears and tempers and all the drama is orchestrated by the directors. The script is written and all actors play their parts. In Annapolis, it’s the same. The script is written by O’Malley and the Democrat Leadership is directing the action.
The redistricting script calls for Maryland’s congressional delegation of eight members to end up with seven Democrats and one Republican. This has been part of a longer term plan by the ruling Party of Maryland. Just ten years ago, in 2001, there were four Democrats and four Republicans representing us in congress. After the 2002 redistricting, the split was six Democrats and two Republicans. The goal of governor’s plan before us today is to cut Republican representation to one congressman.
The Ruling Party does not care about representing the 42% of the state that voted Republican in the last election. This is not about fairness. This is not about people. This is not about doing what is right.
Maryland’s congressional redistricting is about power and politics, pure and simple.
This dramatic presentation is playing out like a Greek tragedy. I’m happy to play the part of the antagonist – representing you and your views. However, in the end I fear the tragedy has already been scripted and the directors have whipped the actors to fall in line. The tears and complaining by some of the Democrats are fake and provide drama for the media. But in the end they are all going to vote for the governor’s plan – just like he has scripted. The final act should be on Wednesday when Special Session comes to a close, Thursday at the latest.
Reporting to you from my front row seat in the House of Delegates.
Kathy
Delegate Kathy Szeliga
ProudDemocrat says
What a shame that Delegate Szeliga is either unable or unwilling to be professional enough to use the proper name for the Democratic Party. A sad reflection on the state of Harford County’s representation in Annapolis…
Joseph Smith says
So, Delegate Szeliga, does that mean you don’t approve of similar actions taken by Republican governors around the country? The only way to eliminate politics from this process is through non-partisan redistricting commissions. Why don’t you propose that instead of sitting on your hands in the “Front Row”?
Dave Yensan says
Hey PD. Del Szeliga is entirely correct. It is the DEMOCRAT party. there is absolutely nothing democratic about it. if it were democratic the vindictive gerrymandering would not be occurring.
Joseph Smith says
Sorry folks, the legal name, as recognized by the Maryland Board of Elections is the Maryland Democratic Party. You don’t see Democrats going around referring to the opposition as the “Republic Party”, do you? Come on, grow up!
Paul Mc says
Hey Joseph,
“Sorry folks, the legal name, as recognized by the Maryland Board of Elections is the Maryland Democratic Party.” – That is correct.
“You don’t see Democrats going around referring to the opposition as the “Republic Party”, do you?” – Nope, typically they use far worse names. I have seen them called Retard Party, Repukes, Teabaggers, for the Tea Party offshoot of the Republican Party, and I guess you get the point.
“Come on, grow up!” – You expect someone to act civilized and respectful and then tell them to grow up? Interesting.
Anyways, have a nice day.
Joseph Smith says
For the most part, this kind of name calling comes from the fringe and the fanatics. If I went too far it’s because it’s frustrating to hear leaders of the Republican Party consistently refuse to use the legal name of the Democratic Party. They have made a coordinated and concerted effort to use the “Democrat” Party as if it were a bad thing. It seems to me that this a tactic more often found on the playground and shouldn’t be one used in the halls of government. It is a blatant act of disrespect.
Paul Mc says
Hey Joseph,
“For the most part, this kind of name calling comes from the fringe and the fanatics. If I went too far it’s because it’s frustrating to hear leaders of the Republican Party consistently refuse to use the legal name of the Democratic Party. They have made a coordinated and concerted effort to use the “Democrat” Party as if it were a bad thing. It seems to me that this a tactic more often found on the playground and shouldn’t be one used in the halls of government. It is a blatant act of disrespect.” – I agree with most of what you said, but would add that I have not heard the “leaders” of the Republican Party say this though I have heard members of the Republican Party say this. I would also add that members of the Democratic Party say bad things about the Republicans and their party. I think the name calling is uncalled for on all parts. It is done by all sides and should not be approved of by anyone.
Anyways, have a nice day.
ProudDemocrat says
“Vindictive” is a term often used towards the ruling party by an entrenched minority blinded by ideology, dogma, and hatred.
Paul Mc says
Hey Prouddemocrat,
“”Vindictive” is a term often used towards the ruling party by an entrenched minority blinded by ideology, dogma, and hatred.” – So we have a lot of vindictive Republicans in Maryland and a lot of vindictive Democrats in Texas?
ProudDemocrat says
The Democratic Party is very clearly NOT dogmatic and ideological, sometimes to the dismay of true liberals like me. Democratic politicians, unlike Republicans, do not have a simple set of ideals to simply state over and over again despite what reality dictates. I do not see all of the Democrats out there standing firm against the death penalty, for a woman’s right to decide what is best for her body, for a good universal health care system, for marriage equality, and for environmental justice like so many of us wish they would. In fact, many Democrats that currently serve in Congress really should be Republicans; it is only the extremism of the current Republican Party that is forcing so many into the Democratic Party. The end result is a Democratic Party that is so ‘big tent’ that we often fail to do what is best for all of America (granted it is nearly always better than the Republican Party, which will do nothing that is not best only for the richest among us – and do so often by misleading Americans about base religious issues).
No; the Democratic Party – in Texas and in so many Midwestern and Southeastern states – may very well be a minority, but we are certainly not ideological nor are we dogmatic.
Paul Mc says
Hey Prouddemocrat,
“The Democratic Party is very clearly NOT dogmatic and ideological, sometimes to the dismay of true liberals like me.” – I thought we were talking about being vindictive.
“Democratic politicians, unlike Republicans, do not have a simple set of ideals to simply state over and over again despite what reality dictates.” – Ummmm….Ok.
“I do not see all of the Democrats out there standing firm against the death penalty, for a woman’s right to decide what is best for her body, for a good universal health care system, for marriage equality, and for environmental justice like so many of us wish they would.” – I do not see all the Republicans agreeing with each other on every topic either.
“In fact, many Democrats that currently serve in Congress really should be Republicans;” – Err, no.
“it is only the extremism of the current Republican Party that is forcing so many into the Democratic Party.” – I think the same can be said of the extremism of the Democrats.
“The end result is a Democratic Party that is so ‘big tent’ that we often fail to do what is best for all of America” – Both sides do that.
“(granted it is nearly always better than the Republican Party, which will do nothing that is not best only for the richest among us – and do so often by misleading Americans about base religious issues).” – Usually not better than the Republicans as the Democrats usually try to do what is best only for those that won’t do for themselves and others that really shouldnt even be here.
“No; the Democratic Party – in Texas and in so many Midwestern and Southeastern states – may very well be a minority, but we are certainly not ideological nor are we dogmatic.” – Yes, minority there and dogmatic there and ideological there.
Anyways, have a nice day.
ProudDemocrat says
How can you call the Democratic Party extreme? Rather than just trumpeting the line of Hannity and Limbaugh, please tell me where the Democratic Party is extreme. The Democratic Party has not stood for all of the things that I mentioned above that one would think could be labeled extreme (although they are not). The health care reforms were in every sense those previously proposed by Republicans (in Congress and in Mass). Current tax and stimulus proposals are hardly anything new and untried; and again are things previously trumpeted by Republicans. I can understand not agreeing with the Democratic Party on issues, but to call them extreme just does not make sense, and it certainly does not help find common ground and understanding. The Republican Party of today is proudly ‘extreme’ (gladly accepting the challenge of becoming more and more conservative) while the Democratic Party has been moving more and more to the right as well. In fact, it is VERY hard to find differences between today’s Democratic Party and the Republican Party of 1970. If by extreme you mean the Democratic Party of Obama is similar to the Republican Party of Nixon, then there, I would agree with you. Please – with facts, not talking points – point out where the Democratic Party is extreme…
Paul Mc says
Hey Prouddemocrat,
“How can you call the Democratic Party extreme?” – The same way you can call the Republicans extreme.
“Rather than just trumpeting the line of Hannity and Limbaugh,” – Should I instead state the lines of Maddow, Olberman and Matthews?
“please tell me where the Democratic Party is extreme.” – What is extreme? In my opinion there are many examples of Democrats and Republicans being extreme. You may think only the Republicans are, and that is your opinion. That’s fine. I think both are. I actually think there are extremists in all political parties. Now, as for the Democrats being extreme, I would call President Obama extreme because of his health care plan and for choosing Justice Sotomayor to be a member of the Supreme Court. I consider the Reverend Al Sharpton to be extreme. Michael Moore is considered extreme.
“The Democratic Party has not stood for all of the things that I mentioned above that one would think could be labeled extreme (although they are not).” – I don’t see the death penalty as extreme. I don’t see the view point of ‘right to life’ as extreme. I don’t see the environmental debate as extreme. I don’t see the debate on marriage equality or health care as extreme. Now, there are extremists on both sides of each topic, but on the whole, each side has its opinion on each subject and most discuss the issues in professional and polite ways.
“The health care reforms were in every sense those previously proposed by Republicans (in Congress and in Mass).” – Some did, yes. Just like some Democrats were in favor of the war in Iraq and some Republicans against it. Though, most Republicans have been against the health care and most Democrats were against the war in Iraq. Most toe the party lines on all subjects.
“Current tax and stimulus proposals are hardly anything new and untried;” – Nope, not new nor untried.
“and again are things previously trumpeted by Republicans.” – Yes, that is true, however, when Bush was in office the Democrats were against what he did, not that President Obama is in office, the Republicans are against what he is doing. That’s politics. Each side is against the other.
“I can understand not agreeing with the Democratic Party on issues, but to call them extreme just does not make sense, and it certainly does not help find common ground and understanding.” – But it is ok for you to say the Republicans are extreme? How does that help to find a common ground and understanding? Both have extremists. Both. It does not make sense to say only one side is extreme.
“The Republican Party of today is proudly ‘extreme’ (gladly accepting the challenge of becoming more and more conservative) while the Democratic Party has been moving more and more to the right as well.” I am sure those in the Republican Party would say the members of the Democratic Party are extreme and are becoming more and more liberal.”
“In fact, it is VERY hard to find differences between today’s Democratic Party and the Republican Party of 1970.” – The political parties constantly change. Remember when the Republican party as considered the party that supported racial equality with Lincoln?
“If by extreme you mean the Democratic Party of Obama is similar to the Republican Party of Nixon, then there, I would agree with you.” – That was 40 years ago. I think there are extremist on both sides in today’s political spectrum,
“Please – with facts,” – Isn’t the term ‘extreme’ really an opinion type term?
“not talking points – point out where the Democratic Party is extreme…” – Again, the term extreme is asking for an opinion. You, as a Democrat (I would guess based on your name you are a Democrat) would most likely have a different opinion as to what is extreme. President Obama’s health care plan and his choosing of Justice Sotomayor to be a member of the Supreme Court. I consider any politician to be extreme that is against the death penalty or against the right to bear arms. Or, how about political commentator Ed Schultz’s desire to have Glen Beck wear a shock collar or his desire to rip out Vice-President Dick Cheney’s heart? Or maybe when Vice President Biden used scare tactics to promulgate the Democratic Party’s jobs bill bay saying if the bill isn’t passed, then cops will be paid off and murder and rape will go up (not a direct quote, simply paraphrasing this). Or, how about Ohio Governor saying the member of the Tea Party were not American?
Anyways, have a nice day.