MARYLAND'S Republican Party and its governor-elect, Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., may be excused for savoring the joy of victory. They've endured the agony of defeat for so long.
To celebrate the coming inauguration there will be parades, a prayer breakfast, educational events for children and, of course, a ball. It's partisan, but it's also tradition: The state inaugurates a new leader with pomp and parties.
At the same time, this new administration has to be careful. A $1 million festival at a time of enormous budget deficits could raise eyebrows. It's no time to be spending with abandon, even if, as in this case, the money comes from private sources.
Beyond the appearances, moreover, the Ehrlich administration should quickly keep its promise to disclose the names of those who are paying for the weeklong inaugural celebration. The people of Maryland deserve to know who's spending the big bucks. The cost won't be piddling, and it will be borne by individuals who may hope to do business with the new governor.
Mr. Ehrlich's spokesman, Paul E. Schurick, says event sponsors will donate in four dollar categories: $1,000, $5,000, $10,000 and $20,000. Unlike campaign finance contributions, there is no legal limit to what can be given, he says. In other years, he said, the upper limit for these gifts has been higher.
The money will go into a special inaugural fund - not to Mr. Ehrlich's campaign fund. The distinction has some validity, but the money cannot be shorn of its political character. The givers want to help Marylanders celebrate the election of a new governor, no doubt, but they won't be hurt if their generosity is remembered. It has always been so in politics, Democratic or Republican.
Mr. Schurick says the committee will not accept contributions from lobbyists or lobbying firms. It's a smart move. He knows, of course, that cutting out the middlemen and having the CEO send the check doesn't insulate anyone from the pressure that accompanies money. He says the governor-elect's plans are based on an exhaustive survey of state ethics law, which he said "is not a model of clarity." To a large extent, the administration's lawyers say, contributions of this sort fall outside the scope of the law.
If that is so, some enterprising legislator or the Ehrlich administration should ask for a review. This sort of giving is inevitably political, so it ought to be covered by the law.
With a tighter statute, every new administration can party with a clear conscience.