PRESS RELEASE
October 9, 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Delegate Michael D. Smigiel, Sr.
410-392-5815 Office
410-920-0128 Cell
Michael.smigiel@house.state.md.us
The Preliminary Injunction hearing against Governor O’Malley and the State of Maryland was held in the Circuit Court for Cecil County on October 4th and 5th, 2007.
During the two days of hearings, several interesting facts were revealed by the Maryland State Child Care Association representative, Ms. Donna Fowler. Ms. Fowler testified that on August 6, 2007, the Governor signed the Executive Order calling for the union vote and by September 7, ballots were being mailed out to daycare providers statewide.
When Ms. Fowler requested information from the State of Maryland on who to contact about election process and how to obtain ballots, the State of Maryland mistakenly provided a number to a “sex hotline” which members of the Maryland State Child Care Association called for election information.
The Maryland State Child Care Association members were promised at trial that the gag order which had been issued by the State of Maryland prohibiting the Association from discussing such issues as Health Insurance while they gathered for meetings at local resource centers throughout the State would be lifted.
According to Ms. Fowler, it is imperative that the membership be allowed to continue talking about such matters. The Association needs to sign up 1,500 of it’s’ members by October 31, 2007 or the members will not have health insurance through the Association.
Delegate Smigiel, who argued the case on behalf of Senator Kittleman and himself, argued that the Governor’s Executive Order is illegal. According to the Constitution and State Statute, the Governor does not have authority to regulate the activities of Day Care Workers without going through the State Legislature.
On September 27, 2007, the Circuit Court agreed the Executive Order should have been a regulation and issued a Temporary Restraining Order against the Governor and the State of Maryland. Without notice to the Plaintiffs and in violation of the Maryland Rules of Procedure, The Attorney General’s office obtained a Stay of the Restraining Order. The leadership of both the House and Senate Republican party sent stern letters of objection to the Chief Judge of the Court of Special Appeals.
After Delegate Smigiel and Senator Kittleman filed their Response Motion to the Court of Special Appeals Stay, a three Judge panel signed an order for the Preliminary hearing to proceed on October 4, 2007.
The hearing was held on October 4th and 5th and the Circuit Court for Cecil County held once again that the Governor’s Executive Order was illegal and should have been a regulation that resulted from legislation (See Attached Order).
Legislation was proposed in 2006 and 2007 on this exact issue to Unionize Daycare providers and was defeated. The Governor’s office now has tried to circumvent the Legislative process by implementing this failed legislation through Executive Fiat.
As Delegate Smigiel argued at trial, the Governor’s power to issue executive orders to State employees or those who deal with the State has never extended to those who deal with those, who deal with the State. “This is a dangerous precedent that would give the Country’s most powerful Governor new powers never anticipated or authorized by the Maryland Declaration of Rights, Constitution or State Statutes,” said Delegate Smigiel.
Delegate Smigiel stated that he and Senator Kittleman joined as Plaintiffs because they are both members of the Administrative, Executive, Legislative, and Review Committee (A.E.L.R.) where the regulations dealing with the day care providers have always come in the past. “We have sworn to uphold the Maryland Constitution and really had no choice but to intervene.” The Attorney General’s Office is part of the Executive Branch of Government that speaks for the Governor. There is no one else to speak on behalf of those legislators who feel they are being denied the ability to perform their sworn duties. If the Attorney General represents the Governor, who represents the Constitution?”
“We are pleased that the Circuit Court had the courage to rule in protecting the constitutional separation of powers. We are concerned with the Appellate Courts willingness to allow itself to be used by the Executive Branch as a co-conspirator in the usurpation of legislative authority and autonomy,” said Delegate Smigiel.
|
