Long Knives for Franchot, Part One

In the aftermath of the slots campaign, Comptroller Peter Franchot is unquestionably the most hated man in Annapolis. As I write this, the preponderance of insider speculation is that it will be difficult for Governor Martin O’Malley and Senate President Mike Miller to resist the temptation to run someone against him. But if they try to get rid of Franchot, can they succeed?

It was not always this way. In 2006, Franchot’s predecessor, former Governor William Donald Schaefer, had become an embarrassment to the state Democrats. Schaefer’s comment that AIDS patients “brought it on themselves,” his tirade against McDonald’s workers who did not speak English and his blatant ogling of an aide to Governor Ehrlich fueled a barn-burning three-way election. Then-Delegate Peter Franchot, the surprise winner, had a reputation for going his own way in Annapolis but few expected him to behave as badly as Schaefer.

As soon as he took office, Franchot made clear he wanted to be a player in ways that exceeded the historical role of the Comptroller. He quickly proclaimed himself the state’s “Chief Fiscal Officer,” started showing up at news conferences everywhere and described himself as “an independent, fiscal watchdog who's a progressive.” That drew a quick rebuke from Big Daddy, who said he was elected to serve as a “tax collector, not as a policymaker.”

As long as Franchot’s battles were primarily against Miller, he benefitted. Big Daddy is the most feared man in Annapolis but he is not particularly well-liked, especially in the House of Delegates. Many legislators secretly enjoyed Franchot’s tweaks of Miller, something that few others dare to do. Some were willing to overlook Franchot’s behavior as the actions of a long-time gadfly. About a year ago, one Baltimore-area lawmaker told me, “That’s just Peter being Peter.”

But then Franchot started to go after Governor O’Malley, criticizing the 2007 special session, taunting the Governor over Montgomery County school construction money and demanding that the Governor “call off the attack dogs” during his anti-slots campaign. That made Annapolis legislators nervous. The office of Maryland Governor is unusually powerful by U.S. standards, especially over budgetary matters. Few legislators are interested in direct confrontation with the Governor and many became wary of getting too close to Franchot.

Franchot broadened his attacks during the slots campaign, when he told Prince George’s County church leaders, “We see what comes out of Annapolis... we know we can't trust them.” The anti-slots ad slamming “Annapolis Politicians” made matters worse. But the breaking point came when the state Democrats refused to let Franchot speak at their 2008 gala, prompting him to rant that the party “has become indebted to the national gambling industry.”

Franchot’s continued escalation of hostilities has earned him legions of enemies. One of my better-placed sources tells me:

Beyond the slots issue where Peter at least arguably took a principled position (regardless of his contrary position on the same issue a decade earlier) and beyond his daily shots at the Democratic Governor which serve no clear cut purpose other than to get Peter’s name in the paper, many including myself are perplexed by the self-serving shots he’s now begun taking at the Democratic State Legislature. If this continues during the difficult upcoming Session, I think the chances of a serious primary challenge go way up. If he tones it down, the chances of such a challenge go down.

Peter Franchot is capable of many things, but “toning it down” does not appear to be one of them. That means he may very well attract a primary challenge. More on that in Part Two.