A Democratic Contingency Plan on Same-Sex Marriage

Persistent worries among Democrats about how -- and when -- Maryland's highest court will resolve the question of same-sex marriage have prompted a second attempt by House members to stop any ruling from taking effect before November's election.

Del. Luiz R.S. Simmons (D-Montgomery) filed a bill yesterday that offers a slightly different approach from his earlier proposal on the subject, but the aim appears to be the same: preventing a ruling from changing the law before the legislature can intervene.

Simmons called the proposal a "contingency measure" that he believes would only be seriously considered if the Court of Appeals signals it will begin consideration of the same-sex marriage ruling made by a Baltimore judge last month.

That ruling, which declared Maryland's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, has been stayed pending an opinion from a mid-level appeals court. But it touched off a spasm of action in Annapolis that ended with the House of Delegates rejecting a proposal to write the ban into the state constitution.

Still, some Democrats worry that the high court could grab the case. And if it were to uphold the lower court ruling, and sanction same-sex marriage, they fear it could drive up Election Day turnout for Republicans.

The new Simmons bill would advise, but not compel, the court to stay any ruling that overturns state law, to give the legislature a chance to address such a decision with a constitutional amendment.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Joseph F. Vallario Jr . (D-Prince George's) helped craft the proposal and said yesterday he thought the approach was prudent.

House Minority Whip Anthony J. O'Donnell (R-Calvert) called the proposal "more game playing by the Democratic Party." He said Republicans would oppose the approach. Some Democrats who support same-sex marriage rights could join them.

'Paper Trail' Technology Questioned

A pair of Maryland professors hired by the State Board of Elections to study vote-verification equipment told legislators yesterday that the technology makes it more difficult to vote, increases the time it takes to participate in elections and decreases the privacy with which votes are cast.

The study of more than 800 Maryland voters who used five types of machines found that "while a paper trail or some other verification device may sound good in the abstract, it may cause serious problems in the real world of voters and elections," according to Paul S. Herrnson of the Center for American Politics and Citizenship.

Legislation to require Maryland's voting systems to produce a paper record is working its way through the House. Advocates say documentation is critical to voter confidence in elections.

Linda Schade , executive director of TrueVoteMD, said the study was flawed because it did not consider an optical scan system that uses a paper ballot. "Voters in Maryland are tired of voting on an insecure system," she said.

Elections Official Accused of Bias

Senate Republicans yesterday accused an official at the nonpartisan State Board of Elections of violating his pledge of impartiality by helping Democrats pass legislation to allow early voting in November.

At a hearing on election bills, senators produced an e-mail from the top aide to the Democratic Senate president asking the deputy administrator of the elections board for advice on how to craft "a rebuttal" to the case for sustaining Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr .'s veto.

Sen. Andrew P. Harris (R-Baltimore County) said Republicans might ask the state prosecutor to investigate what he called "a gross violation of election law."

Ross Goldstein , the deputy administrator, said he routinely briefs the General Assembly and its staff when background information is requested. "I do so consistently, regardless of party," he said.

In an e-mail, Goldstein wrote that the "information is not a formal Board response or rebuttal" and that it was "information for you to use, but not to attribute" to the board. His advice contradicted the GOP-controlled election board's position on the issue. His e-mail offers a detailed case for early voting by rejecting a long list of arguments against it.

Sen. Allan H. Kittleman (R-Howard) said it was not factual advice but a list of talking points that he called "unethical and improper."