Quote:
|
Originally Posted by smc33 I don't believe that a Judge who has been fully qualified and officially appointed should just be replaced by either of two private lawyers who have multiple times been found unqualified by the Judicial Nominating Committee. You may not agree with governor Ehrlich's appointment of Judge Stamm but he didn't hand pick him. A committee made up equally of lawyers appointed by the district (Calvert and SM), lawyers appointed by the governor, and citizens of the district deemed him qualified beforehand. For them not to have found both Sparling and Mattingly to not have been qualified for the position is something that makes me think. |
Could you expand on this a little? My research into the candidates hasn't led me to the same conclusion as you (that Mr. Sparling and Mr. Mattingly were 'multiple times...found unqualified by the Judicial Nominating Committee').
Mr. Sparling did not put his name in for the Judicial Nominating Committee when Judge Kaminetz retired. He specifically mentions this in his letter to the editor announcing that he was filing for the election. See
http://stmarystoday.com/sparling_files_for_election.htm. According to his letter, he was previously nominated three separate times, "in 1982 for the District Court, in 1985 for the Circuit Court seat to which Judge John Hanson Briscoe was appointed, and in 1989, along with Judge Marvin Kaminetz, Judge Clarke Raley and Judge John Slade, for the seat to which Judge Kaminetz was appointed". According to his letter, he made the decision to run for election rather than apply for the appointment because he is placing his "trust in the people rather than political insiders."
I haven't read anything specific on whether or not Mr. Mattingly put his name in for the nomination, so I can't comment on whether or not the committee found him qualified or not. Maybe you can point me to a reference that says he did (or did not).
I'm still undecided on who I'm going to vote for, but I don't think that people should vote for Judge Stamm just because he was appointed by the governor. It seems that the selection process is, or has become, very biased and politicized, and it should be, and is, up to the citizens of the county to select the candidate who is most qualified. It is very well known that the Judicial Nominating Committee has, in fact, revised their list of recommendations after 'feedback' from the governor. If the governor doesn't like any of the candidates on the list provided by the committee, they keep revising it until the nominee the governor favors is put on the list. That seems like the line of separation of power between the executive and judicial branches of Maryland is being blurred. I for one, think that the governor should choose from the original list of nominees, as recommended by the committee, and shouldn't be allowed to send the list back for revision. Basically, Judge Stamm might as well have been 'hand-picked' by the governor, because I think the process is flawed.
Just because Judge Stamm has been the sitting judge for 9 (+/-) months doesn't mean he is the most qualified of the three candidates. Looking at the qualifications and experience of the candidates, as referenced on their web sites, should give the voter more than enough information to make the right decision.