Ellis/Andrews Back Bipartisan Effort to Clarify Maryland’s Vote Counting Standard
By MDBayNews Staff
ANNAPOLIS, MD — In a rare show of cross-party alignment, Green Party gubernatorial candidate Andy Ellis and Lt. Governor candidate Owen Silverman Andrews have endorsed HB 979, a bipartisan proposal aimed at correcting what many election-law observers consider a structural flaw in Maryland’s constitutional convention process.
The bill, introduced by Kevin Hornberger (R-Cecil County) and Vaughn Stewart (D-Montgomery County), would amend the Maryland Constitution to clarify how votes are counted when asking voters whether to convene a constitutional convention.
At issue is Article XIV, Section 2 of the Maryland Constitution — a provision that currently requires approval by a majority of all voters participating in the election, not merely a majority of those voting on the convention question itself.
The 2010 Example
The controversy is not theoretical.
In 2010, Maryland voters were asked whether to call a constitutional convention. Of the 1.86 million ballots cast:
- 897,239 voted yes (48.1%)
- 751,228 voted no (40.3%)
- 216,817 left the question blank (11.6%)
A majority of those who voted on the question supported calling a convention. But because the “yes” votes did not exceed 50% of all ballots cast statewide — including those who skipped the question — the convention was not triggered.
Under current law, leaving the question blank effectively functions as a “no” vote.
HB 979 would change that standard to a majority of votes cast on the question itself, bringing the convention mechanism in line with how other statewide ballot questions are decided.
If approved by three-fifths of both chambers of the Maryland General Assembly, the proposed amendment would go before voters in November 2026.
A Rare Moment of Bipartisan Agreement
The endorsement from Ellis and Andrews is notable, not because Greens often align with Republicans, but because the bill itself has bipartisan sponsorship.
From a center-right perspective, the issue is less about party politics and more about structural fairness.
If more citizens vote “yes” than “no” on a question placed before them, should the measure fail simply because other voters skipped it?
That is the core question HB 979 seeks to resolve.
The Green campaign framed the issue as one of democratic clarity. But even those who disagree with the Green Party’s broader platform may find the logic difficult to dismiss: election rules should be transparent and consistent.
As Ellis put it in the campaign’s release, the convention question is currently “the only one where skipping it functionally counts as voting against it.”
Why It Matters
Maryland’s constitution requires voters to be asked every twenty years whether to convene a constitutional convention. The mechanism exists as a structural “reset button” — a way for citizens to reexamine foundational governance rules outside the normal legislative amendment process.
Regardless of one’s position on calling a convention, the threshold for doing so should not be distorted by procedural ambiguity.
Supporters argue HB 979 does not make it easier to pass controversial reforms; it merely clarifies how votes are counted.
Critics may worry that lowering procedural barriers could open the door to sweeping structural changes. But it is worth noting that the ultimate decision would still rest with voters — first on the amendment itself, and later on whether to call a convention.
In other words, the electorate would decide twice.
The Road Ahead
HB 979 has been referred to the House Rules and Executive Nominations Committee. No hearing date has been set.
The Ellis/Andrews campaign is urging lawmakers to schedule a hearing and advance the proposal.
Whether this bill moves forward may reveal something broader about Annapolis: when Republicans, Democrats, and Greens agree on a procedural reform, does the system adapt — or does it default to institutional inertia?
For now, one thing is clear: the debate over Maryland’s constitutional convention mechanism is no longer confined to academic circles. It is becoming a live political issue heading into 2026.
About the Campaign
Andy Ellis and Owen Silverman Andrews are running for Governor and Lt. Governor on the Green Party ticket in 2026.
MDBayNews will continue monitoring HB 979 and related constitutional reform proposals throughout the 2026 session.
Editor’s Note:
This article reports on the Ellis/Andrews campaign’s position regarding HB 979. Publication by MDBayNews does not constitute an endorsement of the candidates, their campaign, or the proposed legislation. MDBayNews covers developments across the political spectrum as part of its ongoing reporting on Maryland policy and elections.
Keep MDBayNews Reporting Free
MDBayNews exists to help Marylanders understand decisions made by state and local leaders — especially when those decisions affect daily life, rights, and public services.
If this article helped clarify what’s happening or why it matters, reader support makes it possible to keep publishing clear, independent reporting like this.
Have a tip or documents to share?
We review submissions carefully and confidentially. Anonymous tips are welcome when appropriate.
Discover more from Maryland Bay News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.