Summer Savings! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Readers Respond
News Opinion Readers Respond

Voter fraud in 1994? That's a rewrite of history

It is totally ridiculous to compare the recent conviction of Paul Schurick for vote suppression with the aftermath of the 1994 Maryland gubernatorial election. The letter writer claims as fact that Democrats cast votes from dead people, prisoners and out of staters ("Democrats aren't so clean," Dec. 8). The Ellen Sauerbrey campaign had its day in court on the issue of voter fraud and proved none of this. The only thing Ms. Sauerbrey's hired gun experts proved was that an astounding number of people in Baltimore City voted for the Democrat, Parris Glendening.

The judge (who admitted he had voted for Ms. Sauerbrey) ruled against them resoundingly, and Mr. Glendening became governor. Considering that the margin of victory was very slim in 1994, I don't think the Sauerbrey campaign had to prove very much.

The Republican apologists for the machinations of Robert L. Ehrlich, Julius Henson and Mr. Schurick seem to also forget that the vote suppression statute was not enacted until 2005. They either have very little awareness of recent history or hope that a plurality of Marylanders have a shared amnesia.

Paul R. Schlitz Jr., Baltimore

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Robocall incident should spur changes

    In the weeks leading up to the Maryland gubernatorial election in 2006, the campaign of then-Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.commissioned and distributed "voter guides" which were, in fact, filled with misinformation. The leaflets falsely implied that Mr. Ehrlich and Republican Senate nominee Michael...

  • Free Julius Henson

    I fully concur in all of the points made in the recent opinion piece by Larry S. Gibson of the University of Maryland School of Law ("Henson shouldn't go to jail," June 16).