You don’t get your bills passed if you wait until January to start working on them. If your bills are enacted, you have to keep working to make sure they’re implemented.
So ninety days into our nine-month interim, I write to discuss with you some of the issues I’m working on.
The Congress has passed two laws that create opportunities for similar action at the state level.
The sale and distribution of tobacco products will be regulated by the federal government under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. This law gives the states clear authority to regulate in this area as well. My focus will be on sales to minors and advertising directed at these potential smokers.
It will be easier for young people saddled with academic debt to enter public service under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, whose chief sponsor was Congressman John P. Sarbanes. If you work for the government or a non-profit for ten years, what you still owe on your federal student loans will be forgiven.
I sponsored the laws which created similar incentives with state funds. I will be meeting with financial aid experts to see if we should modify our programs in light of this major federal initiative.
As vice chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, criminal law is one of my responsibilities. The rash of violence perpetrated by gangs and the senseless shooting of a five-year old bystander by a teenager with a long history of offenses demand a thorough review of our existing policy. I have begun that process.
Do you have a reasonable expectation of privacy about the cell phone calls you make when you’re traveling from one place to another? Should the police be required to get a judge’s approval for a search warrant before they obtain the records of the locations where you made such calls? I think they should and will introduce a bill to require that they do so.
My green jobs bill was enacted this past session, making it a priority to train current and former welfare clients for jobs in this growing sector of the economy. I just learned that this will be a key aspect of the state’s job training efforts.
My Lilly Ledbetter bill reversed a Supreme Court decision that made it very difficult for workers to recover damages from employers who had discriminated against them because of their gender.
Justice Ruth Ginsburg wrote the dissent in this case. I had the honor of presenting her a copy of our legislation, signed by Governor O’Malley.
This was not the first time I met the Justice. She was one of my law school professors. Her class was “Sex Discrimination and the Law.”
I may get a second chance to give the Justice a bill that reverses a decision she dissented from. Last month, the Supreme Court made it very difficult for workers to win a case if they had been treated unfairly because of their age.
I welcome your thoughts about these issues or other matters of concern to you.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Finally coming to the floor
Jim McKay died last June on the day that the Belmont Stakes was run.
Not long after that (I don't remember exactly when), I thought of renaming the Maryland Million in his memory.
Earlier today, after the Rules Committee took favorable action on my resolution to accomplish that, I said to myself, "It's finally coming to the floor."
There was a lump in my throat and a tear in my eye.
Not long after that (I don't remember exactly when), I thought of renaming the Maryland Million in his memory.
Earlier today, after the Rules Committee took favorable action on my resolution to accomplish that, I said to myself, "It's finally coming to the floor."
There was a lump in my throat and a tear in my eye.
More than a name
Newly offered amendments won’t jeopardize my bill to allow wrongly convicted prisoners to present newly discovered evidence.
At this late hour, prosecutors are proposing changes to my bill creating a writ of innocence. They would be offered in a conference committee, except the conferees won’t be meeting.
The Senate crossfile of this legislation has already passed. That bill can be signed by the Governor.
I’m not going to accept weakening amendments to my bill so that it too can be reviewed and then signed by the Governor.
If both bills were to pass the legislature, the prosecutors would lobby the Governor to sign only the one with my name and their amendments.
So my chairman has agreed not to have the House conferees meet.
You can get a lot done, the old saying goes, if you don’t have to get all the credit for doing so.
At this late hour, prosecutors are proposing changes to my bill creating a writ of innocence. They would be offered in a conference committee, except the conferees won’t be meeting.
The Senate crossfile of this legislation has already passed. That bill can be signed by the Governor.
I’m not going to accept weakening amendments to my bill so that it too can be reviewed and then signed by the Governor.
If both bills were to pass the legislature, the prosecutors would lobby the Governor to sign only the one with my name and their amendments.
So my chairman has agreed not to have the House conferees meet.
You can get a lot done, the old saying goes, if you don’t have to get all the credit for doing so.
Thursday, April 9 – Little things and new things
Lots of little things can go wrong with your bills in the final week.
But not this session. Not so far, at least.
In fact, little things have been going right.
A hurdle was removed for my writ of innocence legislation when the Senate committee acted favorably on my bill and did not adopt the wordsmithing amendment it put on the Senate version.
We finally read the Senate amendment to the green jobs bill. It’s ok. So we won’t need a conference committee on that legislation.
So with fewer of my bills still to watch over, I’ve been given additional responsibilities.
In addition to the workgroup on the Preakness bill, I was appointed to the conference committee that will decide whether we should issue a driver’s license for people who don’t have the documents to establish legal presence in the country.
But not this session. Not so far, at least.
In fact, little things have been going right.
A hurdle was removed for my writ of innocence legislation when the Senate committee acted favorably on my bill and did not adopt the wordsmithing amendment it put on the Senate version.
We finally read the Senate amendment to the green jobs bill. It’s ok. So we won’t need a conference committee on that legislation.
So with fewer of my bills still to watch over, I’ve been given additional responsibilities.
In addition to the workgroup on the Preakness bill, I was appointed to the conference committee that will decide whether we should issue a driver’s license for people who don’t have the documents to establish legal presence in the country.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Great Odds on Saving the Preakness
If Susette Kelo had won her case in the Supreme Court four years ago, Governor O’Malley’s bill to save the Preakness could not have been introduced today.
Ms. Kelo challenged the constitutionality of the City of New London’s using the power of eminent domain to buy her home against her will.
The public purpose that prompted the City’s taking of her property was economic development.
Writing for a 5-4 majority, Justice Stevens held that the Court had a “longstanding policy of deference to legislative judgments” as to what should be considered a public purpose, where the state has formulated a plan that “it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community.”
“Today the Court abandons…[a] long-held, basic limitation on government power,” said a dissenting Justice O’Connor. “Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being given to an owner who will use it in a way that the legislature deems more beneficial to the public.”
House Bill 1578 would give the State the authority to exercise eminent domain to buy Pimlico Race Course and the Preakness Stakes. The Governor’s legislation declares that the race “has a very significant and positive economic development impact on Baltimore City and the State.”
When Ms. Kelo lost her case in 2005, if you had wagered that it would have an impact on the Preakness, you would have gotten great odds. And today, you would have collected your winnings.
Speaker Busch has named me to the House workgroup that will hold a hearing on the bill tomorrow morning.
Ms. Kelo challenged the constitutionality of the City of New London’s using the power of eminent domain to buy her home against her will.
The public purpose that prompted the City’s taking of her property was economic development.
Writing for a 5-4 majority, Justice Stevens held that the Court had a “longstanding policy of deference to legislative judgments” as to what should be considered a public purpose, where the state has formulated a plan that “it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community.”
“Today the Court abandons…[a] long-held, basic limitation on government power,” said a dissenting Justice O’Connor. “Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being given to an owner who will use it in a way that the legislature deems more beneficial to the public.”
House Bill 1578 would give the State the authority to exercise eminent domain to buy Pimlico Race Course and the Preakness Stakes. The Governor’s legislation declares that the race “has a very significant and positive economic development impact on Baltimore City and the State.”
When Ms. Kelo lost her case in 2005, if you had wagered that it would have an impact on the Preakness, you would have gotten great odds. And today, you would have collected your winnings.
Speaker Busch has named me to the House workgroup that will hold a hearing on the bill tomorrow morning.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Deals struck and struck
Who would oppose providing training in green jobs for current and former welfare clients?
23 members of the House did this morning, all but one of them Republicans.
And I thought the Gingrich revolution was about moving people from a welfare line to the work place.
Giving people an opportunity to enter a growing sector of the economy is apparently no longer a plank in the GOP platform.
----
Dozens of conference committees will meet over the next seven days. Three delegates and three senators will be asked to resolve the differences in a bill that were created by amendments put on the legislation after it crossed over to the second house.
Of particular interest to me are those for my bills.
My legislation creating a writ of innocence is one of them. I expressed my desire to serve on the conference committee.
“The difference here is over just a couple of words,” someone responded.
“I want to make sure the right thing happens,” I replied.
A discussion on someone else’s bill that’s headed to a conference committee revealed that a deal has already been struck as to the end result.
“You need a conferee who will keep the deal struck,” I replied.
23 members of the House did this morning, all but one of them Republicans.
And I thought the Gingrich revolution was about moving people from a welfare line to the work place.
Giving people an opportunity to enter a growing sector of the economy is apparently no longer a plank in the GOP platform.
----
Dozens of conference committees will meet over the next seven days. Three delegates and three senators will be asked to resolve the differences in a bill that were created by amendments put on the legislation after it crossed over to the second house.
Of particular interest to me are those for my bills.
My legislation creating a writ of innocence is one of them. I expressed my desire to serve on the conference committee.
“The difference here is over just a couple of words,” someone responded.
“I want to make sure the right thing happens,” I replied.
A discussion on someone else’s bill that’s headed to a conference committee revealed that a deal has already been struck as to the end result.
“You need a conferee who will keep the deal struck,” I replied.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Opening Day
I don’t leave many baseball games in the 7th inning, especially when the Orioles are ahead.
But it’s not often that I’ve volunteered to give the prayer to open the session.
This is what I wrote and said:
“Wait ‘til next year,” they used to say at Ebbets Field, until the Brooklyn Dodgers finally won their first and only World Series in 1955 – after 71 years without a championship.
How does that compare to 11 consecutive losing seasons?
And the start of a season where the Orioles’ most highly regarded player has yet to make it to the Show and is beginning the season in the minor leagues?
This year, Passover begins two nights after Opening Day.
“Next year in Jerusalem!” Jews have said for millennia at the conclusion of the Seder.
Long before this season’s end, Oriole fans may have to settle for “Next year in October!”
And then I added:
But when you win on Opening Day, beating the Yankees, 10-5, there’s no one better to quote than Mr. Cub, Ernie Banks:
“Let’s play two!”
But it’s not often that I’ve volunteered to give the prayer to open the session.
This is what I wrote and said:
“Wait ‘til next year,” they used to say at Ebbets Field, until the Brooklyn Dodgers finally won their first and only World Series in 1955 – after 71 years without a championship.
How does that compare to 11 consecutive losing seasons?
And the start of a season where the Orioles’ most highly regarded player has yet to make it to the Show and is beginning the season in the minor leagues?
This year, Passover begins two nights after Opening Day.
“Next year in Jerusalem!” Jews have said for millennia at the conclusion of the Seder.
Long before this season’s end, Oriole fans may have to settle for “Next year in October!”
And then I added:
But when you win on Opening Day, beating the Yankees, 10-5, there’s no one better to quote than Mr. Cub, Ernie Banks:
“Let’s play two!”
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Entering the home stretch
A new entrant in the Pimlico bankruptcy stakes.
Except horse racing and the Preakness are not in Carl Versatandig’s plans for the race track site, according to Friday’s Sun. He wants to build a shopping center instead.
That prompted me to ask the Attorney General’s office if the State or Baltimore City could take certain steps to prevent the track from being razed.
I don’t want to go public with a proposal if it’s unworkable or unconstitutional.
My requests outnumber those from any other legislator, the AG’s office has also advised me.
----
My green jobs bill got a favorable report from the secondary committee, its chairman informed just before Friday’s floor session.
So I asked the Chief Clerk what steps had to be taken now to get the bill to the House floor.
Then I passed the details on to my colleague and co-sponsor on Appropriations, the lead committee.
On the General Assembly web site this morning, I read the good news:
HB 268 Status as of April 6, 2009: Bill is in the House - Favorable with Amendments Appropriations
On to the House floor and the final week of the session!
Except horse racing and the Preakness are not in Carl Versatandig’s plans for the race track site, according to Friday’s Sun. He wants to build a shopping center instead.
That prompted me to ask the Attorney General’s office if the State or Baltimore City could take certain steps to prevent the track from being razed.
I don’t want to go public with a proposal if it’s unworkable or unconstitutional.
My requests outnumber those from any other legislator, the AG’s office has also advised me.
----
My green jobs bill got a favorable report from the secondary committee, its chairman informed just before Friday’s floor session.
So I asked the Chief Clerk what steps had to be taken now to get the bill to the House floor.
Then I passed the details on to my colleague and co-sponsor on Appropriations, the lead committee.
On the General Assembly web site this morning, I read the good news:
HB 268 Status as of April 6, 2009: Bill is in the House - Favorable with Amendments Appropriations
On to the House floor and the final week of the session!
Final days and delays (April 2)
It isn’t glamorous, but it’s what I need to do.
The green jobs bill should be on the voting list of the Economic Matters Committee (ECM) this afternoon.
So for this morning’s floor session, I wrote the names of the seven ECM subcommittee chairs on a file card. I spoke with five of them - and the committee chairman, about the bill. Positive responses from all.
---
The politics can get very local in the final days of the session.
A House committee or member will delay action on a Senate bill and a Senator will do likewise in response.
Or put another way, if you kill my cat, I’ll kill your dog.
So it was encouraging to see that 36 House bills, many of which were heard in my committee, Judiciary, got a favorable report from the Judicial Proceedings Committee yesterday and will be considered by the full Senate tomorrow.
The green jobs bill should be on the voting list of the Economic Matters Committee (ECM) this afternoon.
So for this morning’s floor session, I wrote the names of the seven ECM subcommittee chairs on a file card. I spoke with five of them - and the committee chairman, about the bill. Positive responses from all.
---
The politics can get very local in the final days of the session.
A House committee or member will delay action on a Senate bill and a Senator will do likewise in response.
Or put another way, if you kill my cat, I’ll kill your dog.
So it was encouraging to see that 36 House bills, many of which were heard in my committee, Judiciary, got a favorable report from the Judicial Proceedings Committee yesterday and will be considered by the full Senate tomorrow.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
To vote or not to vote
“I don’t care which bill gets signed.”
I was talking to Senator Delores Kelley.
The subject was green jobs.
She is the sponsor of the Senate crossfile.
“You shouldn’t wait for my bill to pass the House and then get out of the Senate Rules Committee,” I continued. “The sooner the Senate Finance Committee acts on the issue the better.”
Under my longstanding newsletter test, if I can legitimately take credit for moving public policy in the right direction, my name doesn’t have to be first on the sponsor line of a bill.
----
I was about to speak on my burial bill before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.
I always try to begin my testimony with a phrase or sentence that will get the attention of my colleagues. “It’s the rhetorical equivalent of hitting someone in the middle of the forehead with a two-by-four,” I tell my students.
I thought about quoting from the graveyard scene in Hamlet: “Alas, poor Yoric, I knew him well.”
But the committee chair said no one had signed up in opposition to my bill. So I kept it short and simple.
I was talking to Senator Delores Kelley.
The subject was green jobs.
She is the sponsor of the Senate crossfile.
“You shouldn’t wait for my bill to pass the House and then get out of the Senate Rules Committee,” I continued. “The sooner the Senate Finance Committee acts on the issue the better.”
Under my longstanding newsletter test, if I can legitimately take credit for moving public policy in the right direction, my name doesn’t have to be first on the sponsor line of a bill.
----
I was about to speak on my burial bill before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.
I always try to begin my testimony with a phrase or sentence that will get the attention of my colleagues. “It’s the rhetorical equivalent of hitting someone in the middle of the forehead with a two-by-four,” I tell my students.
I thought about quoting from the graveyard scene in Hamlet: “Alas, poor Yoric, I knew him well.”
But the committee chair said no one had signed up in opposition to my bill. So I kept it short and simple.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
The bill is before us
I was reminded today that we don’t act on a bill unless it is before us. Literally.
“There is no more work at the desk,” the Speaker said at the conclusion of this morning’s session. Nothing unusual about that.
For the full House to take action on a bill, a folder containing a hard copy of the bill and any amendments to it must be on the Chief Clerk’s desk, right in front of the Speaker’s rostrum.
One time, a bill of mine failed because my chairman couldn’t retrieve it from the Clerk’s Office and bring it to the chamber before midnight on the last night of the session.
I didn’t lose a bill today, but for a while no one knew where the folder was.
The green jobs bill was referred to two committees. Appropriations acted favorably on it Saturday, but Economic Matters had not taken it up.
The reason: the bill folder could not be found. This morning, my staff helped find it.
Economic Matters will vote on it tomorrow – when the bill will be before it.
“There is no more work at the desk,” the Speaker said at the conclusion of this morning’s session. Nothing unusual about that.
For the full House to take action on a bill, a folder containing a hard copy of the bill and any amendments to it must be on the Chief Clerk’s desk, right in front of the Speaker’s rostrum.
One time, a bill of mine failed because my chairman couldn’t retrieve it from the Clerk’s Office and bring it to the chamber before midnight on the last night of the session.
I didn’t lose a bill today, but for a while no one knew where the folder was.
The green jobs bill was referred to two committees. Appropriations acted favorably on it Saturday, but Economic Matters had not taken it up.
The reason: the bill folder could not be found. This morning, my staff helped find it.
Economic Matters will vote on it tomorrow – when the bill will be before it.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Magic Number
Who knows eight?
Eight lights of Hanukkah will be the answer at the Passover seder next week.
On this Crossover Monday, eight bills of mine are alive and must be worked in the Senate to become law.
When the Voter’s Rights Protection Act was on 2nd reader today, no questions were asked and no amendments were offered. My peace treaty with the Republicans is holding. However, no action so far on the Senate crossfile.
On the state police spying legislation, the differences between the House and Senate versions should be easily resolved. Ditto on my bills dealing with newly discovered evidence of innocence and the weight given to an adult’s disability at a custody hearing.
The green jobs bill didn’t make it to the floor today. Assuming it passes the House later this week, I’ll need to get it out of the Senate Rules Committee. The Jim McKay Maryland Resolution is still in the House Rules Committee, but the odds are very good that it will be on track for passage in time.
Legislation providing incentives for state employees who propose ideas that save money and clarifying who must be consulted if human remains are disinterred should not be controversial.
But I’ll take nothing for granted.
Eight lights of Hanukkah will be the answer at the Passover seder next week.
On this Crossover Monday, eight bills of mine are alive and must be worked in the Senate to become law.
When the Voter’s Rights Protection Act was on 2nd reader today, no questions were asked and no amendments were offered. My peace treaty with the Republicans is holding. However, no action so far on the Senate crossfile.
On the state police spying legislation, the differences between the House and Senate versions should be easily resolved. Ditto on my bills dealing with newly discovered evidence of innocence and the weight given to an adult’s disability at a custody hearing.
The green jobs bill didn’t make it to the floor today. Assuming it passes the House later this week, I’ll need to get it out of the Senate Rules Committee. The Jim McKay Maryland Resolution is still in the House Rules Committee, but the odds are very good that it will be on track for passage in time.
Legislation providing incentives for state employees who propose ideas that save money and clarifying who must be consulted if human remains are disinterred should not be controversial.
But I’ll take nothing for granted.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Not too late
It was late Friday night, but it felt like early Saturday morning.
The second floor session of the day had lasted four hours. Bills on early voting and driver’s licenses for undocumented residents had prompted many amendments and much debate.
But the Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human Resources had two bills to vote on. One was my green jobs bill.
The chair, a co-sponsor of the legislation, called the meeting to order. The discussion was brief, and the favorable vote was unanimous.
It was 9:54 p.m.
The second floor session of the day had lasted four hours. Bills on early voting and driver’s licenses for undocumented residents had prompted many amendments and much debate.
But the Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human Resources had two bills to vote on. One was my green jobs bill.
The chair, a co-sponsor of the legislation, called the meeting to order. The discussion was brief, and the favorable vote was unanimous.
It was 9:54 p.m.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Hard work, real results
There is life after the death penalty – for several of my bills.
Today, the following took place:
The Lilly Ledbetter fair pay bill got a favorable report from the Health and Government Operations Committee.
The Voter’s Rights Protection Act got a favorable vote from the Election Law Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee.
My legislation to prevent a judge from considering a person’s disability in a custody proceeding, unless there is a specific finding that the disability causes a condition which is detrimental to the best interest of the child, got a favorable report from the Judiciary Committee.
The bill to prevent the police from infiltrating organizations that are exercising their First Amendment rights when protesting government policy passed the House unanimously. I was the floor leader for this legislation.
Finally, my proposal to allow an inmate to present to a judge newly discovered evidence of innocence got preliminary approval from the full House.
Much still to be done to get these bills enacted, but as my campaign slogan once said:
Hard work, real results.
Today, the following took place:
The Lilly Ledbetter fair pay bill got a favorable report from the Health and Government Operations Committee.
The Voter’s Rights Protection Act got a favorable vote from the Election Law Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee.
My legislation to prevent a judge from considering a person’s disability in a custody proceeding, unless there is a specific finding that the disability causes a condition which is detrimental to the best interest of the child, got a favorable report from the Judiciary Committee.
The bill to prevent the police from infiltrating organizations that are exercising their First Amendment rights when protesting government policy passed the House unanimously. I was the floor leader for this legislation.
Finally, my proposal to allow an inmate to present to a judge newly discovered evidence of innocence got preliminary approval from the full House.
Much still to be done to get these bills enacted, but as my campaign slogan once said:
Hard work, real results.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
87-52
I knew we had the votes.
Today’s death penalty debate began with an amendment that would permit a death sentence for murdering a prison guard or officer, without having to meet the new standards for evidence in the Senate bill. It failed, 61-75, a closer margin than the vote on any of yesterday’s amendments.
Our margins grew on the five amendments that followed.
Then the Speaker called for the vote. As delegates rose to explain their vote, I did my eyeball count of the green/yes votes on the electronic tally board.
85 green.
I initially decided not to speak. We had the votes.
More members rose to speak, in greater numbers than on any other bill that I can recall over the years.
I changed my mind and was one of the last people recognized by the Speaker.
“The death penalty is fatally flawed – for many reasons. The bill before us is also flawed. However, it would significantly reduce the risk of the State of Maryland executing an innocent person. I urge a green vote.”
The final tally was 87-52.
Today’s death penalty debate began with an amendment that would permit a death sentence for murdering a prison guard or officer, without having to meet the new standards for evidence in the Senate bill. It failed, 61-75, a closer margin than the vote on any of yesterday’s amendments.
Our margins grew on the five amendments that followed.
Then the Speaker called for the vote. As delegates rose to explain their vote, I did my eyeball count of the green/yes votes on the electronic tally board.
85 green.
I initially decided not to speak. We had the votes.
More members rose to speak, in greater numbers than on any other bill that I can recall over the years.
I changed my mind and was one of the last people recognized by the Speaker.
“The death penalty is fatally flawed – for many reasons. The bill before us is also flawed. However, it would significantly reduce the risk of the State of Maryland executing an innocent person. I urge a green vote.”
The final tally was 87-52.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
One step from final passage
We’re only one step away.
This morning, the Republicans offered seven amendments to the death penalty reform bill. Each one failed. The closest vote was 59-79.
Additional amendments will be offered when the bill is before us on third reader and final passage tomorrow morning.
There is no sure thing in Annapolis - or any legislature, until they take the roll call.
So late this afternoon, we’re making sure we have some delegates prepared to speak for the bill tomorrow. Even if we have the votes in the chamber, we’re speaking to the world outside.
But if we had a minimum of 79 votes today, we’ll have the necessary 71 tomorrow.
----
The death penalty is not my only bill still alive.
I didn’t learn until today that a certain person has concerns about my green jobs bill. I sent this individual an email:
As the sponsor of HB 268, I would appreciate hearing from you directly about your concerns regarding this bill. I will be in my office tomorrow from 8-9 am.
This morning, the Republicans offered seven amendments to the death penalty reform bill. Each one failed. The closest vote was 59-79.
Additional amendments will be offered when the bill is before us on third reader and final passage tomorrow morning.
There is no sure thing in Annapolis - or any legislature, until they take the roll call.
So late this afternoon, we’re making sure we have some delegates prepared to speak for the bill tomorrow. Even if we have the votes in the chamber, we’re speaking to the world outside.
But if we had a minimum of 79 votes today, we’ll have the necessary 71 tomorrow.
----
The death penalty is not my only bill still alive.
I didn’t learn until today that a certain person has concerns about my green jobs bill. I sent this individual an email:
As the sponsor of HB 268, I would appreciate hearing from you directly about your concerns regarding this bill. I will be in my office tomorrow from 8-9 am.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Not at cross purposes
A crossfile can help you crossover week.
If a Senator agrees to introduce an identical version of my bill, it’s called a crossfile.
If my legislation passes the House of Delegates and crosses over to the Senate by the close of business next Monday, it is guaranteed a public hearing there during the last two weeks of the session.
So this is crossover week. Hundreds of bills, included some of the most important ones this session, will be debated and voted on by next Monday evening. “It’s the biggest week of the year,” one veteran legislator said today.
My green jobs bill had a very good hearing in the Appropriations Committee two weeks ago. Unfortunately, Delegate Mary-Dulany James, my co-sponsor and chair of the subcommittee that will consider my bill, was absent for the hearing and several days following because her mother passed away.
However, Senator Delores Kelley had agreed to introduce a crossfile. Her bill got a favorable hearing in the Finance Committee, where she serves.
It will be voted on by that committee this week.
I’ll wait for the Senate crossfile to crossover – hopefully, before I ask Del. James to act on my bill.
If a Senator agrees to introduce an identical version of my bill, it’s called a crossfile.
If my legislation passes the House of Delegates and crosses over to the Senate by the close of business next Monday, it is guaranteed a public hearing there during the last two weeks of the session.
So this is crossover week. Hundreds of bills, included some of the most important ones this session, will be debated and voted on by next Monday evening. “It’s the biggest week of the year,” one veteran legislator said today.
My green jobs bill had a very good hearing in the Appropriations Committee two weeks ago. Unfortunately, Delegate Mary-Dulany James, my co-sponsor and chair of the subcommittee that will consider my bill, was absent for the hearing and several days following because her mother passed away.
However, Senator Delores Kelley had agreed to introduce a crossfile. Her bill got a favorable hearing in the Finance Committee, where she serves.
It will be voted on by that committee this week.
I’ll wait for the Senate crossfile to crossover – hopefully, before I ask Del. James to act on my bill.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Sitting in place
It was our second meeting of the afternoon on the death penalty bill, which will be debated by the full House tomorrow.
We were reviewing our vote count. Who would vote for the bill and who would oppose all amendments?
We decided to ask six members to speak to the first three amendments, to build momentum for the rejection of all.
For our whip system during the debate, we divided the House floor into groups of four to six members, who sat near each other and had pledged to oppose all amendments.
“Where members sit on the floor seems to be random,” said one of the people around the table.
“Nothing in Annapolis is random,” I replied.
We were reviewing our vote count. Who would vote for the bill and who would oppose all amendments?
We decided to ask six members to speak to the first three amendments, to build momentum for the rejection of all.
For our whip system during the debate, we divided the House floor into groups of four to six members, who sat near each other and had pledged to oppose all amendments.
“Where members sit on the floor seems to be random,” said one of the people around the table.
“Nothing in Annapolis is random,” I replied.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
The party line
“The orders came down from above.”
We were voting on the death penalty legislation in committee. One of my Republican colleagues was implying yet again that Democrats were meekly following the Governor’s orders to oppose all amendments.
He said it once too often.
Another member of the committee objected; then I did.
“The advocates and I independently decided that the Senate bill was the best that we could achieve,” I calmly but pointedly stated. “The Governor did not lobby any of us.”
----
Earlier Friday, I had another insight into the Republicans’ philosophy.
I sponsored House Bill 482, which would clarify who must be notified if someone’s remains are moved – within a cemetery or to another location.
After we reached agreement on amendments among all of the affected parties – cemetery owners, religious groups, and state regulators, the bill sailed through my committee.
It passed the House, 128-7, but then quite a few Republicans rose to change their vote from green (yes) to red (no).
“Is it a sponsor problem?” I emailed someone.
Dumbfounded, I asked a Republican delegate what was happening.
The bill would establish the priority among family members for arranging a reinternment. At the top of the list: a surviving spouse or domestic partner.
Earlier in the week, the Republicans had offered a floor amendment to move a domestic partner to the bottom of the list. It failed, 33-98.
Twenty one members rose to change their vote to “no” .
We were voting on the death penalty legislation in committee. One of my Republican colleagues was implying yet again that Democrats were meekly following the Governor’s orders to oppose all amendments.
He said it once too often.
Another member of the committee objected; then I did.
“The advocates and I independently decided that the Senate bill was the best that we could achieve,” I calmly but pointedly stated. “The Governor did not lobby any of us.”
----
Earlier Friday, I had another insight into the Republicans’ philosophy.
I sponsored House Bill 482, which would clarify who must be notified if someone’s remains are moved – within a cemetery or to another location.
After we reached agreement on amendments among all of the affected parties – cemetery owners, religious groups, and state regulators, the bill sailed through my committee.
It passed the House, 128-7, but then quite a few Republicans rose to change their vote from green (yes) to red (no).
“Is it a sponsor problem?” I emailed someone.
Dumbfounded, I asked a Republican delegate what was happening.
The bill would establish the priority among family members for arranging a reinternment. At the top of the list: a surviving spouse or domestic partner.
Earlier in the week, the Republicans had offered a floor amendment to move a domestic partner to the bottom of the list. It failed, 33-98.
Twenty one members rose to change their vote to “no” .
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Core values
For me, these are core values.
My life’s work is in a legislative body, where the majority rules. If you can count to 71 in the House and 24 in the Senate, you win.
But the First Amendment provides that the majority does not prevail when fundamental rights are violated.
The constitutional protection of freedom of the press does not prohibit a court from requiring a reporter to reveal a source, the Supreme Court has ruled. Nonetheless, the legislature can provide such protections by statute.
Similarly, the Court has held that the government can burden an individual’s exercise of his or her religious beliefs if there is a rational basis for a law of general applicability. Here as well, the legislature can enact additional protections, and the Congress has.
What prompts this discussion of constitutional law?
After the hearing concluded on my reporter’s shield bill yesterday, I learned that my religious accommodation bill had failed, 8-2.
Fundamentally, we were unable to persuade a majority of the members of the subcommittee that the exercise of religious belief – whether it’s a Shabbat elevator or a Hindu wall covering, is worthy of special consideration.
My life’s work is in a legislative body, where the majority rules. If you can count to 71 in the House and 24 in the Senate, you win.
But the First Amendment provides that the majority does not prevail when fundamental rights are violated.
The constitutional protection of freedom of the press does not prohibit a court from requiring a reporter to reveal a source, the Supreme Court has ruled. Nonetheless, the legislature can provide such protections by statute.
Similarly, the Court has held that the government can burden an individual’s exercise of his or her religious beliefs if there is a rational basis for a law of general applicability. Here as well, the legislature can enact additional protections, and the Congress has.
What prompts this discussion of constitutional law?
After the hearing concluded on my reporter’s shield bill yesterday, I learned that my religious accommodation bill had failed, 8-2.
Fundamentally, we were unable to persuade a majority of the members of the subcommittee that the exercise of religious belief – whether it’s a Shabbat elevator or a Hindu wall covering, is worthy of special consideration.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Defining bloggers
For a handful of my older colleagues, a laptop is a foreign object.
Of course, many younger delegates are far more adept at using the Internet than I am.
So I brought my laptop to the witness table to make this point: A growing number of people get their news from this machine, not from a newspaper delivered to their door or the tv set in their living room.
Maryland was the first state to enact a shield law, which protects a reporter, in certain circumstances, from being compelled by a court to disclose the source for a story.
My legislation would amend that law to include bloggers, using a definition from a bill pending in Congress.
Most of the questions dealt with how “blogger” should be defined, not whether or not someone who communicates over the Internet should receive this protection.
That’s a definite improvement over the reception I got five years ago.
Nonetheless, this is a bill that won’t pass until next year, at best. After the hearing, my witnesses and I agreed to meet this summer to discuss a revised definition.
We’ll invite one of the delegates who raised questions today about that language.
Of course, many younger delegates are far more adept at using the Internet than I am.
So I brought my laptop to the witness table to make this point: A growing number of people get their news from this machine, not from a newspaper delivered to their door or the tv set in their living room.
Maryland was the first state to enact a shield law, which protects a reporter, in certain circumstances, from being compelled by a court to disclose the source for a story.
My legislation would amend that law to include bloggers, using a definition from a bill pending in Congress.
Most of the questions dealt with how “blogger” should be defined, not whether or not someone who communicates over the Internet should receive this protection.
That’s a definite improvement over the reception I got five years ago.
Nonetheless, this is a bill that won’t pass until next year, at best. After the hearing, my witnesses and I agreed to meet this summer to discuss a revised definition.
We’ll invite one of the delegates who raised questions today about that language.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
2,000 hours and 10 seconds
“Do you think that spending 2,000 hours on one death penalty case is a worthwhile use of Professor Millemann’s time?”
I posed that question to Scott Shellenberger, the Baltimore County State’s Attorney and a leading supporter of the death penalty.
In my testimony, I had again made the point that the extraordinary amount of time spent litigating and legislating death penalty cases could be put to far better use on other criminal justice issues that prevent crime and make people safer where they live, where they work, and where they play.
Following me to the witness table, Prof. Millemann noted the time he had spent handling the appeals after his client’s court trial. Hence my question.
Mr. Shellenberger paused for at least 10 seconds before responding.
“No one in my office has ever spent that much time prosecuting a capital case,” he responded, in part.
He did not answer my question. I don’t think he could.
----
My LBJ-style vote count of the Judiciary Committee on the death penalty has gone very well.
But after today’s hearing, I put a new roll call list in my breast pocket.
I’m going to take the count again. Just to be sure.
I posed that question to Scott Shellenberger, the Baltimore County State’s Attorney and a leading supporter of the death penalty.
In my testimony, I had again made the point that the extraordinary amount of time spent litigating and legislating death penalty cases could be put to far better use on other criminal justice issues that prevent crime and make people safer where they live, where they work, and where they play.
Following me to the witness table, Prof. Millemann noted the time he had spent handling the appeals after his client’s court trial. Hence my question.
Mr. Shellenberger paused for at least 10 seconds before responding.
“No one in my office has ever spent that much time prosecuting a capital case,” he responded, in part.
He did not answer my question. I don’t think he could.
----
My LBJ-style vote count of the Judiciary Committee on the death penalty has gone very well.
But after today’s hearing, I put a new roll call list in my breast pocket.
I’m going to take the count again. Just to be sure.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Science and counting
I may not be good at science, but I do know the chemistry of the legislature.
Governor O’Malley budgeted $18.4 million for stem cell research. Our staff has recommended a drastic reduction – to only $5 million.
I thought this would send the wrong signal to the scientific community about Maryland’s commitment to this research specifically and the biotechnology sector generally.
So I asked that the Stem Cell Research Commission send me a one-pager on the benefits of the state’s funding this research.
When I give this memo to members of the relevant Appropriations subcommittee, here’s how I boil down their argument.
* This is stimulus money for the biotech sector in the short term
* Significant federal $$ are not coming soon
* A cut of this size would jeopardize MD’s leadership in this area of research in the long term
----
I began testifying on my resolution for the Jim McKay Maryland Million, the annual day of racing for horses sired by stallions standing in the state, by saying:
“If you’re as old as I am, you remember watching Wide World of Sports on a black-and-white tv.
“But I’m sure that everyone on this committee heard Jim McKay say, ‘They’re all gone,’ when he informed the world of the fate of the Israeli hostages at the Munich Olympics.”
Afterwards, one of the committee members came up to me and said, “I wasn’t born until 1973, the year after Munich.”
I may not have known his age, but I hope I have his vote.
Governor O’Malley budgeted $18.4 million for stem cell research. Our staff has recommended a drastic reduction – to only $5 million.
I thought this would send the wrong signal to the scientific community about Maryland’s commitment to this research specifically and the biotechnology sector generally.
So I asked that the Stem Cell Research Commission send me a one-pager on the benefits of the state’s funding this research.
When I give this memo to members of the relevant Appropriations subcommittee, here’s how I boil down their argument.
* This is stimulus money for the biotech sector in the short term
* Significant federal $$ are not coming soon
* A cut of this size would jeopardize MD’s leadership in this area of research in the long term
----
I began testifying on my resolution for the Jim McKay Maryland Million, the annual day of racing for horses sired by stallions standing in the state, by saying:
“If you’re as old as I am, you remember watching Wide World of Sports on a black-and-white tv.
“But I’m sure that everyone on this committee heard Jim McKay say, ‘They’re all gone,’ when he informed the world of the fate of the Israeli hostages at the Munich Olympics.”
Afterwards, one of the committee members came up to me and said, “I wasn’t born until 1973, the year after Munich.”
I may not have known his age, but I hope I have his vote.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Not extinct
I go to lots of functions and community meetings.
But none with the anticipation and sense of history that I brought to the dedication of the Ohr Hamizrach synagogue.
For 2700 years, there was a Jewish community in Persia/Iran. The Iranian revolution of 1979 prompted an exodus.
The late Rabbi Herman Neuberger was instrumental in bringing (sometimes smuggling) people to freedom. Thus, Baltimore has one of a handful of Iranian Jewish communities in this country.
Today, their synagogue on Park Heights Avenue was dedicated.
“We always have a beautiful shul in Iran,” a rabbi told the congregation.
The exterior is striking – pinkish stone with Oriental/Iranian design work and six-pointed Jewish stars..
By contrast, the first synagogue built in Baltimore, on Lloyd Street in East Baltimore in 1845, has no outward indication of its use.
Perhaps my ancestors attended similar ceremonies when the German and Russian Jewish communities reached a similar critical mass.
As a rabbi said today: “This is a public proclamation that a tribe of the Jewish people has not become extinct.”
But none with the anticipation and sense of history that I brought to the dedication of the Ohr Hamizrach synagogue.
For 2700 years, there was a Jewish community in Persia/Iran. The Iranian revolution of 1979 prompted an exodus.
The late Rabbi Herman Neuberger was instrumental in bringing (sometimes smuggling) people to freedom. Thus, Baltimore has one of a handful of Iranian Jewish communities in this country.
Today, their synagogue on Park Heights Avenue was dedicated.
“We always have a beautiful shul in Iran,” a rabbi told the congregation.
The exterior is striking – pinkish stone with Oriental/Iranian design work and six-pointed Jewish stars..
By contrast, the first synagogue built in Baltimore, on Lloyd Street in East Baltimore in 1845, has no outward indication of its use.
Perhaps my ancestors attended similar ceremonies when the German and Russian Jewish communities reached a similar critical mass.
As a rabbi said today: “This is a public proclamation that a tribe of the Jewish people has not become extinct.”
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Channel surfing
I must have been channeling Yogi.
The Sun reporter asked me if the Judiciary Committee would act favorably on both my death penalty repeal bill and the Senate’s amended version.
It was a question I had never been asked before.
Her article today ended with my response:
Rosenberg, however, predicted only the Senate plan would survive. "You don't send out two conflicting bills," he said, "even if you can."
Now it’s time to channel LBJ.
As Senate Majority Leader, Lyndon Johnson would carry the roll call listing of the Senators in his breast pocket. When he had a member’s commitment to vote for a bill, he would mark it down.
I’ll do that now with the Judiciary Committee, to confirm who will vote for the Senate bill and oppose all amendments. Assuming we have the 12 votes necessary, I’ll do the same with the full House of Delegates.
Until I’ve counted to 71.
The Sun reporter asked me if the Judiciary Committee would act favorably on both my death penalty repeal bill and the Senate’s amended version.
It was a question I had never been asked before.
Her article today ended with my response:
Rosenberg, however, predicted only the Senate plan would survive. "You don't send out two conflicting bills," he said, "even if you can."
Now it’s time to channel LBJ.
As Senate Majority Leader, Lyndon Johnson would carry the roll call listing of the Senators in his breast pocket. When he had a member’s commitment to vote for a bill, he would mark it down.
I’ll do that now with the Judiciary Committee, to confirm who will vote for the Senate bill and oppose all amendments. Assuming we have the 12 votes necessary, I’ll do the same with the full House of Delegates.
Until I’ve counted to 71.
Friday, March 13, 2009
The death penalty and keeping people safe
I issued the following statement on the death penalty this afternoon.
I continue to believe that Maryland should end capital punishment. The Civiletti Commission, on which I served, identified significant problems in how the death penalty is applied in our state. The Commission concluded that these problems can not be fixed.
The possibility of the State of Maryland’s executing an innocent person is one of those flaws. Over the last 35 years, there have been 1,125 executions and 130 exonerations of innocent persons nationwide from death row
I have concluded that the likelihood of executing an innocent person will be significantly reduced by the enactment of the amended version of Senate Bill 279. This legislation would place important new restrictions on the types of cases in which prosecutors can seek the death penalty.
I applaud Governor O’Malley and Senator Gladden for their courageous leadership on this issue. If we are not to end the death penalty, Senators Zirkin and Brochin are to be commended for the amendments that they offered.
Several years ago, I concluded that we should repeal the death penalty. The reason underlying my decision: the time and money spent litigating and legislating on this issue should be put to far better use.
Keeping people safe where they live, work, and play is one of the primary obligations of government. The resources diverted to the death penalty diminish our capacity to fulfill that requirement.
The money spent on death penalty cases could be used instead to target career offenders, protect at-risk children, and identify youthful offenders who are on the road to becoming murderers.
In the years ahead, I am confident that the General Assembly will revisit the other issues raised in the Civiletti Commission report, such as racial and jurisdictional disparities in how the death penalty is applied and the detrimental impact it has on the lives of victims’ families.
For now, I urge my colleagues in the House to join me in supporting the Senate bill and opposing any amendments.
I continue to believe that Maryland should end capital punishment. The Civiletti Commission, on which I served, identified significant problems in how the death penalty is applied in our state. The Commission concluded that these problems can not be fixed.
The possibility of the State of Maryland’s executing an innocent person is one of those flaws. Over the last 35 years, there have been 1,125 executions and 130 exonerations of innocent persons nationwide from death row
I have concluded that the likelihood of executing an innocent person will be significantly reduced by the enactment of the amended version of Senate Bill 279. This legislation would place important new restrictions on the types of cases in which prosecutors can seek the death penalty.
I applaud Governor O’Malley and Senator Gladden for their courageous leadership on this issue. If we are not to end the death penalty, Senators Zirkin and Brochin are to be commended for the amendments that they offered.
Several years ago, I concluded that we should repeal the death penalty. The reason underlying my decision: the time and money spent litigating and legislating on this issue should be put to far better use.
Keeping people safe where they live, work, and play is one of the primary obligations of government. The resources diverted to the death penalty diminish our capacity to fulfill that requirement.
The money spent on death penalty cases could be used instead to target career offenders, protect at-risk children, and identify youthful offenders who are on the road to becoming murderers.
In the years ahead, I am confident that the General Assembly will revisit the other issues raised in the Civiletti Commission report, such as racial and jurisdictional disparities in how the death penalty is applied and the detrimental impact it has on the lives of victims’ families.
For now, I urge my colleagues in the House to join me in supporting the Senate bill and opposing any amendments.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
An armistice on Lilly
Today, I negotiated an armistice on Lilly Ledbetter.
An armistice is a cessation of hostilities. It is not a peace treaty.
As I’ve written before, my bill would make Maryland’s civil rights law on equal pay identical to the federal legislation that President Obama signed into law.
The Senate version of this measure was debated in that body this week. Senator Jamie Raskin, the bill’s sponsor, told me about his discussions with the Republican leader.
I made two suggestions.
First, don’t accept any changes that affect the most important part of the bill. Workers in Maryland must be treated the same as they are under the federal law. That goal was accomplished.
Second, if you reach agreement with the Senate Republicans, they should ask their House colleagues to accept these amendments as well and seek no other changes to the bill.
They don’t have to vote for the bill. We’re just asking that they don’t delay or prevent its passage by proposing any further amendments.
I decided to take matters into my own hands. I spoke to one House Republican leader, then another. My version of shuttle diplomacy.
I am pleased to report that an armistice is at hand.
An armistice is a cessation of hostilities. It is not a peace treaty.
As I’ve written before, my bill would make Maryland’s civil rights law on equal pay identical to the federal legislation that President Obama signed into law.
The Senate version of this measure was debated in that body this week. Senator Jamie Raskin, the bill’s sponsor, told me about his discussions with the Republican leader.
I made two suggestions.
First, don’t accept any changes that affect the most important part of the bill. Workers in Maryland must be treated the same as they are under the federal law. That goal was accomplished.
Second, if you reach agreement with the Senate Republicans, they should ask their House colleagues to accept these amendments as well and seek no other changes to the bill.
They don’t have to vote for the bill. We’re just asking that they don’t delay or prevent its passage by proposing any further amendments.
I decided to take matters into my own hands. I spoke to one House Republican leader, then another. My version of shuttle diplomacy.
I am pleased to report that an armistice is at hand.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
All relationships are local, some are longstanding
I get great professional and personal satisfaction from working on bills that deal with major public policy issues.
In this session alone, I’ve got death penalty, voting rights, and religious accommodation.
But I also get pleasure from helping a constituent resolve a problem with the bureaucracy or the law. Even more so when that person is someone I’ve known since elementary school.
Herman Berlin is an auto parts wholesaler. He runs a family business. Over the last 60 years, Baltimore Auto Parts has done significant business with state agencies.
Then a contract with Autozone put the brakes on the requests for quotes from Herman and other small businesses in Maryland.
Last summer, he came to me for help. I asked the legislature’s reference library for assistance.
The state had signed an intergovernmental cooperative purchasing agreement (ICPA) with Autozone. However, once the state decides to enter into an ICPA, it does not allow any other businesses to submit a bid.
House Bill 1203 would change that. Potential competitors would be given 21 days to submit their bid.
“It’s a question of fairness,” I told the Health and Government Operations Committee today.
The chairman of the subcommittee that will consider my bill said, “These bids need to be competitive.”
The request from the chairman of the full committee to the witness from the state agency that handles these contracts was simple and direct: “Attend the next meeting of that subcommittee.”
It was very clear that the committee wants to change the law.
Afterwards, I said to Herman Berlin: “That was a good hearing!”
In this session alone, I’ve got death penalty, voting rights, and religious accommodation.
But I also get pleasure from helping a constituent resolve a problem with the bureaucracy or the law. Even more so when that person is someone I’ve known since elementary school.
Herman Berlin is an auto parts wholesaler. He runs a family business. Over the last 60 years, Baltimore Auto Parts has done significant business with state agencies.
Then a contract with Autozone put the brakes on the requests for quotes from Herman and other small businesses in Maryland.
Last summer, he came to me for help. I asked the legislature’s reference library for assistance.
The state had signed an intergovernmental cooperative purchasing agreement (ICPA) with Autozone. However, once the state decides to enter into an ICPA, it does not allow any other businesses to submit a bid.
House Bill 1203 would change that. Potential competitors would be given 21 days to submit their bid.
“It’s a question of fairness,” I told the Health and Government Operations Committee today.
The chairman of the subcommittee that will consider my bill said, “These bids need to be competitive.”
The request from the chairman of the full committee to the witness from the state agency that handles these contracts was simple and direct: “Attend the next meeting of that subcommittee.”
It was very clear that the committee wants to change the law.
Afterwards, I said to Herman Berlin: “That was a good hearing!”
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Public and Private and Action
Lots of questions from committee members at my green jobs bill hearing.
I took that as a sign of interest, until my GOP friends started asking why we were singling out former and current recipients of cash assistance for job training.
“The heart of welfare reform is providing incentives for people to join the work force,” I stated. “This bill builds on the legislation we passed a decade ago.”
----
I received the legal memo on whether a court is likely to require accommodation of those hypothetical religious practices in a multi-family dwelling.
Not to use a legal term, it’s common sense. You don’t make exceptions for a religious practice that violates a law, such as those dealing with treatment of animals or fire hazards.
The subcommittee is supposed to consider the bill tomorrow. My staff hand delivered the memo to members’ offices. I added a handwritten note - not to sway anyone’s vote but to get their attention.
---
Lilly Ledbetter is moving in both houses – favorable subcommittee action on the House bill and floor debate on the Senate version. Both have been amended but in different ways.
I’ve offered advice on how to allay Republicans’ concerns and then reach agreement between the two houses on identical language.
I took that as a sign of interest, until my GOP friends started asking why we were singling out former and current recipients of cash assistance for job training.
“The heart of welfare reform is providing incentives for people to join the work force,” I stated. “This bill builds on the legislation we passed a decade ago.”
----
I received the legal memo on whether a court is likely to require accommodation of those hypothetical religious practices in a multi-family dwelling.
Not to use a legal term, it’s common sense. You don’t make exceptions for a religious practice that violates a law, such as those dealing with treatment of animals or fire hazards.
The subcommittee is supposed to consider the bill tomorrow. My staff hand delivered the memo to members’ offices. I added a handwritten note - not to sway anyone’s vote but to get their attention.
---
Lilly Ledbetter is moving in both houses – favorable subcommittee action on the House bill and floor debate on the Senate version. Both have been amended but in different ways.
I’ve offered advice on how to allay Republicans’ concerns and then reach agreement between the two houses on identical language.
Zero is a good number
Mine is not the only green jobs legislation introduced this session.
I learned last week that the other bill died because its projected cost was “just under $600 million.”
To avoid the same fate, I wrote our fiscal staff:
“It is my intention that HB 268 be funded with either existing resources or federal stimulus money. If the fiscal note writer believes that this is not the case, please let me know so that I can draft an amendment to that effect.”
I won’t have to contact the Amendment Office. I was told that the fiscal note for my bill is zero.
My email didn’t make it so, but it’s better to ask than to be surprised.
----
I ended Monday at dinner with Sister Helen Prejean.
I haven’t read her autobiography or seen the movie, Dead Man Walking.
So I listened to try to learn what motivated her opposition to the death penalty.
There are two factors: the class bias of the justice system, especially in her home state of Louisiana, and an execution’s degrading effect on humanity – for both the prisoner and those who carry out his death.
I learned last week that the other bill died because its projected cost was “just under $600 million.”
To avoid the same fate, I wrote our fiscal staff:
“It is my intention that HB 268 be funded with either existing resources or federal stimulus money. If the fiscal note writer believes that this is not the case, please let me know so that I can draft an amendment to that effect.”
I won’t have to contact the Amendment Office. I was told that the fiscal note for my bill is zero.
My email didn’t make it so, but it’s better to ask than to be surprised.
----
I ended Monday at dinner with Sister Helen Prejean.
I haven’t read her autobiography or seen the movie, Dead Man Walking.
So I listened to try to learn what motivated her opposition to the death penalty.
There are two factors: the class bias of the justice system, especially in her home state of Louisiana, and an execution’s degrading effect on humanity – for both the prisoner and those who carry out his death.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Spotting the walkers
We didn’t need Plan B.
For the second week in a row, we lacked enough members for a quorum of the Baltimore City delegation on Friday morning.
My bill making paint manufacturers liable for knowingly marketing their poisonous product was on the voting list.
I was certain that several of my colleagues were taking a walk: the opponents of my legislation had asked them not to come to the meeting so that we couldn’t take a vote on the bill.
My Plan B: If we didn’t get a quorum, the chairman of the delegation could convene a meeting immediately after Monday’s floor session. The first item on the agenda would be my bill.
If anyone took a walk, they would be spotted.
However, nearly an hour after the scheduled start of Friday’s meeting, we had a quorum. The vote for m y bill was unanimous.
----
Later in the day, a delegate from another part of the state paid me a visit.
He wanted to talk to me about a bill of his that was in the Judiciary Committee. As we spoke, in the front of my mind was the fact that one of my bills was in his subcommittee.
I gave him advice but didn’t make a commitment.
On Saturday, the New York Times had an article about another issue of interest to my colleague. I asked a friend in the bureaucracy for an update on how Maryland was handling this matter.
I’ll share it with the delegate.
For the second week in a row, we lacked enough members for a quorum of the Baltimore City delegation on Friday morning.
My bill making paint manufacturers liable for knowingly marketing their poisonous product was on the voting list.
I was certain that several of my colleagues were taking a walk: the opponents of my legislation had asked them not to come to the meeting so that we couldn’t take a vote on the bill.
My Plan B: If we didn’t get a quorum, the chairman of the delegation could convene a meeting immediately after Monday’s floor session. The first item on the agenda would be my bill.
If anyone took a walk, they would be spotted.
However, nearly an hour after the scheduled start of Friday’s meeting, we had a quorum. The vote for m y bill was unanimous.
----
Later in the day, a delegate from another part of the state paid me a visit.
He wanted to talk to me about a bill of his that was in the Judiciary Committee. As we spoke, in the front of my mind was the fact that one of my bills was in his subcommittee.
I gave him advice but didn’t make a commitment.
On Saturday, the New York Times had an article about another issue of interest to my colleague. I asked a friend in the bureaucracy for an update on how Maryland was handling this matter.
I’ll share it with the delegate.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Not a hypothetical question
Law students and legislators dread hypotheticals.
In the classroom, a professor will change the facts of the case and ask you if the court should reach the same result.
In Annapolis, committee members will think of not so likely situations that could sink your bill.
At the bill hearings on my religious accommodation legislation and at subsequent subcommittee work sessions, legislators have asked how various hypothetical requests for religious accommodation would be resolved if the bill were to become law.
Walking to my office this morning, I ran into Delegate Steve Lafferty, one of the co-sponsors of the bill. He told me about some of the hypotheticals his colleagues were discussing.
What if a resident belongs to a satanic cult and, as part of the devil worship, wanted to have a confined fire?
What if it is a practice of withcraft (and whatever goes along with that practice)?
I decided we needed a legal analysis of how the courts would handle these situations.
A recurring theme for my week.
In the classroom, a professor will change the facts of the case and ask you if the court should reach the same result.
In Annapolis, committee members will think of not so likely situations that could sink your bill.
At the bill hearings on my religious accommodation legislation and at subsequent subcommittee work sessions, legislators have asked how various hypothetical requests for religious accommodation would be resolved if the bill were to become law.
Walking to my office this morning, I ran into Delegate Steve Lafferty, one of the co-sponsors of the bill. He told me about some of the hypotheticals his colleagues were discussing.
What if a resident belongs to a satanic cult and, as part of the devil worship, wanted to have a confined fire?
What if it is a practice of withcraft (and whatever goes along with that practice)?
I decided we needed a legal analysis of how the courts would handle these situations.
A recurring theme for my week.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Minor changes, Major effect
I’m a firm believer in incremental progress, but not this time.
If the House passes the Senate’s death penalty bill, without adopting any further amendments, it will go to the Governor for his signature.
These minor changes would have a major political effect.
Legislation ending the death penalty in Maryland would not get to the floor of the Senate or the House for another decade.
The thinking would be: let’s see what effect these changes have upon the system before we again debate whether to eliminate it.
This afternoon, I spoke to several of the House co-sponsors of the repeal bill. All of them agreed that we should still pass it – unamended.
I’ve also asked for research on court decisions that demonstrate the inadequacy of the evidentiary changes in the Senate bill.
----
I promised that I’d share with you my response to the personal attack on me in the Washington Examiner. Here it is:
Dear Editors:
Deception was the hallmark of the lead paint industry throughout most of the 20th century – when it marketed and sold its poisonous product to families, knowing full well of the dangers of lead pigment to children. Legislation in Annapolis that would finally hold the lead industry responsible for its conduct prompted an equally misleading column by Marta Mossburg.
House Bill 1156 seeks to end both the cycle of poisoning of Baltimore’s children and taxpayer subsidies of treatment for the preventable disease caused by the lead-paint industry’s pollution. It would allow for market share liability, based on evidence in a court of law as to each manufacturer’s share of the lead paint market. This is a recognized legal concept to apportion responsibility for wrongdoing.
The facts are clear: lead paint continues to poison thousands of innocent children every year, causing life-long, irreversible brain and nervous system damage. Medical and hospital costs associated with lead poisoning can reach more than $700,000 over a lifetime of a child.
Baltimore City has the highest lead poisoning and=2 0exposure rate in the state. The bill simply provides poisoned Baltimore City children the opportunity to hold the lead industry responsible for the damage it has knowingly caused.
Perhaps your columnist was deceived by the team of high-priced, lead paint lobbyists and publicists who have lined up to defeat my bill and protect the profits the lead paint industry made through its campaign to poison generations of children.
Ms. Mossburg compares innocent, lead paint poisoned children to gamblers and overeaters. A child doesn’t ask to be lead poisoned.
Good business policy does not encourage poisoning of children, nor does it encourage gambling, alcohol or any other addictions. As it has for more than a century, the lead paint industry has yet again shown the lengths to which it will go to avoid being held financially responsible for its wrongdoings.
If the House passes the Senate’s death penalty bill, without adopting any further amendments, it will go to the Governor for his signature.
These minor changes would have a major political effect.
Legislation ending the death penalty in Maryland would not get to the floor of the Senate or the House for another decade.
The thinking would be: let’s see what effect these changes have upon the system before we again debate whether to eliminate it.
This afternoon, I spoke to several of the House co-sponsors of the repeal bill. All of them agreed that we should still pass it – unamended.
I’ve also asked for research on court decisions that demonstrate the inadequacy of the evidentiary changes in the Senate bill.
----
I promised that I’d share with you my response to the personal attack on me in the Washington Examiner. Here it is:
Dear Editors:
Deception was the hallmark of the lead paint industry throughout most of the 20th century – when it marketed and sold its poisonous product to families, knowing full well of the dangers of lead pigment to children. Legislation in Annapolis that would finally hold the lead industry responsible for its conduct prompted an equally misleading column by Marta Mossburg.
House Bill 1156 seeks to end both the cycle of poisoning of Baltimore’s children and taxpayer subsidies of treatment for the preventable disease caused by the lead-paint industry’s pollution. It would allow for market share liability, based on evidence in a court of law as to each manufacturer’s share of the lead paint market. This is a recognized legal concept to apportion responsibility for wrongdoing.
The facts are clear: lead paint continues to poison thousands of innocent children every year, causing life-long, irreversible brain and nervous system damage. Medical and hospital costs associated with lead poisoning can reach more than $700,000 over a lifetime of a child.
Baltimore City has the highest lead poisoning and=2 0exposure rate in the state. The bill simply provides poisoned Baltimore City children the opportunity to hold the lead industry responsible for the damage it has knowingly caused.
Perhaps your columnist was deceived by the team of high-priced, lead paint lobbyists and publicists who have lined up to defeat my bill and protect the profits the lead paint industry made through its campaign to poison generations of children.
Ms. Mossburg compares innocent, lead paint poisoned children to gamblers and overeaters. A child doesn’t ask to be lead poisoned.
Good business policy does not encourage poisoning of children, nor does it encourage gambling, alcohol or any other addictions. As it has for more than a century, the lead paint industry has yet again shown the lengths to which it will go to avoid being held financially responsible for its wrongdoings.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Death Penalty Revived
I’ve never been on such an emotional roller coaster.
Last night, I thought the death penalty repeal bill was dead.
Senators whom we had always counted as solid votes for the bill were not going to vote for the motion that would bring the legislation to the floor for debate.
I ran into one of them in the State House. The problem: we shouldn’t give special treatment to repeal of the death penalty when issues of great concern to this Senator were languishing in committee.
I let the Governor’s office know of the Senator’s concern.
The evening ended on a better note. The Senator at our table got a cell phone call from the Governor at 9:30. No vote was being taken for granted.
This morning, I resolved not to follow the Senate debate on the web. The bad news would travel fast enough.
So I was very pleasantly surprised when someone told me that we had narrowly prevailed on the procedural motion.
The bill would be considered by the full Senate!!
But the debate this afternoon soon turned sour.
Two amendments were adopted that would allow executions if certain evidentiary conditions were met.
One was “a video-taped voluntary interrogation and confession of the defendant to the murder.” But what took place before the video was turned on?
I am certain that death penalty sentences that meet this standard have been overturned on legal grounds or because serious doubts were later raised about the guilt of the defendant as he sat on death row.
Last night, I thought the death penalty repeal bill was dead.
Senators whom we had always counted as solid votes for the bill were not going to vote for the motion that would bring the legislation to the floor for debate.
I ran into one of them in the State House. The problem: we shouldn’t give special treatment to repeal of the death penalty when issues of great concern to this Senator were languishing in committee.
I let the Governor’s office know of the Senator’s concern.
The evening ended on a better note. The Senator at our table got a cell phone call from the Governor at 9:30. No vote was being taken for granted.
This morning, I resolved not to follow the Senate debate on the web. The bad news would travel fast enough.
So I was very pleasantly surprised when someone told me that we had narrowly prevailed on the procedural motion.
The bill would be considered by the full Senate!!
But the debate this afternoon soon turned sour.
Two amendments were adopted that would allow executions if certain evidentiary conditions were met.
One was “a video-taped voluntary interrogation and confession of the defendant to the murder.” But what took place before the video was turned on?
I am certain that death penalty sentences that meet this standard have been overturned on legal grounds or because serious doubts were later raised about the guilt of the defendant as he sat on death row.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Snow Jobs
You can get a lot done when it snows…
If you drive to Annapolis before the snow starts and spend the afternoon in your office pecking away at your laptop, with no phone calls or other distractions, provided you don’t read the Sunday NY Times until 5 pm.
If the snow stops in time on Monday for people to make it to your meetings to discuss…
* Your bill requiring the state to inform people that they are eligible to vote after serving their prison sentence and successfully meeting the conditions of their parole and probation. We agreed on how this could be done, without having to enact my legislation; and
* Your bill clarifying when and if a notice must be published if human remains or cremations are moved within a cemetery or outside its boundaries. With bureaucrats, the cemetery industry, and religious groups at the table or participating by conference call, we reached agreement. This time, we need to pass my bill and amend the existing law.
----
My first state senator was Rosalie Silber Abrams. She died this past Friday. I spoke about her on the House floor tonight.
In her second year in the House, Rosalie introduced and passed House Bill 273, which authorized the Governor to develop a mechanism for Comprehensive Health Planning.
“That legislation is the foundation for Maryland’s all-payer hospital system,” I stated. That system means that all patients pay the same rate, whether they have private insurance, are Medicaid eligible, or are uninsured.
If you drive to Annapolis before the snow starts and spend the afternoon in your office pecking away at your laptop, with no phone calls or other distractions, provided you don’t read the Sunday NY Times until 5 pm.
If the snow stops in time on Monday for people to make it to your meetings to discuss…
* Your bill requiring the state to inform people that they are eligible to vote after serving their prison sentence and successfully meeting the conditions of their parole and probation. We agreed on how this could be done, without having to enact my legislation; and
* Your bill clarifying when and if a notice must be published if human remains or cremations are moved within a cemetery or outside its boundaries. With bureaucrats, the cemetery industry, and religious groups at the table or participating by conference call, we reached agreement. This time, we need to pass my bill and amend the existing law.
----
My first state senator was Rosalie Silber Abrams. She died this past Friday. I spoke about her on the House floor tonight.
In her second year in the House, Rosalie introduced and passed House Bill 273, which authorized the Governor to develop a mechanism for Comprehensive Health Planning.
“That legislation is the foundation for Maryland’s all-payer hospital system,” I stated. That system means that all patients pay the same rate, whether they have private insurance, are Medicaid eligible, or are uninsured.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Reasonable accommodations, unreasonable attacks
So I was feeling pretty good about myself.
I had just finished my testimony early Thursday evening on the religious accommodation bill.
No notes, no stumbles, and I had made all the points I wanted to make.
Or so I thought.
The first question from a member of the committee was: “Last year, when you testified on this legislation, it was all about installing an elevator in an apartment building. What happened?”
“You’re right,” I replied. “This bill would assist individuals who need an elevator that would stop on every floor so that residents don’t have to violate the prohibition on working on the Sabbath by pushing a button on the elevator.
“More generally, it would require dwelling owners to make reasonable accommodations for residents of all faiths who are seeking to follow their religious beliefs.”
----
I got angry when I read this op-ed in The Washington Examiner the next morning.
Del. Samuel “Sandy” Rosenberg is like one of those people who walk around with iPod earphones and can’t hear what’s going on in the real world. How else can he be so deaf to the economy tanking around him?
Last year, The Baltimore Examiner ran an equally nasty editorial criticizing me for sponsoring similar legislation to make paint manufacturers liable for poisoning young children.
Del. Rosenberg must drop HB1241. Only his trial lawyer benefactors, his campaign coffers and those of his fellow Judiciary Committee members will gain from it.
Thousands of children have been poisoned by lead paint, and its manufacturers knew that it was harmful. Instead of compensating their victims, they blame the messenger.
Last year, the lead lobbyist for the paint industry promised me that there would be no more personal attacks directed at me. I guess that commitment applied only to The Baltimore Examiner, which ceased publication a few weeks ago.
I am drafting my reply to this latest piece of garbage, which I will share with you. The full text of the op-ed is at http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/columns/marta-mossburg/Trial-lawyers-lining-up-at-the-state-trough-40386217.html.
I had just finished my testimony early Thursday evening on the religious accommodation bill.
No notes, no stumbles, and I had made all the points I wanted to make.
Or so I thought.
The first question from a member of the committee was: “Last year, when you testified on this legislation, it was all about installing an elevator in an apartment building. What happened?”
“You’re right,” I replied. “This bill would assist individuals who need an elevator that would stop on every floor so that residents don’t have to violate the prohibition on working on the Sabbath by pushing a button on the elevator.
“More generally, it would require dwelling owners to make reasonable accommodations for residents of all faiths who are seeking to follow their religious beliefs.”
----
I got angry when I read this op-ed in The Washington Examiner the next morning.
Del. Samuel “Sandy” Rosenberg is like one of those people who walk around with iPod earphones and can’t hear what’s going on in the real world. How else can he be so deaf to the economy tanking around him?
Last year, The Baltimore Examiner ran an equally nasty editorial criticizing me for sponsoring similar legislation to make paint manufacturers liable for poisoning young children.
Del. Rosenberg must drop HB1241. Only his trial lawyer benefactors, his campaign coffers and those of his fellow Judiciary Committee members will gain from it.
Thousands of children have been poisoned by lead paint, and its manufacturers knew that it was harmful. Instead of compensating their victims, they blame the messenger.
Last year, the lead lobbyist for the paint industry promised me that there would be no more personal attacks directed at me. I guess that commitment applied only to The Baltimore Examiner, which ceased publication a few weeks ago.
I am drafting my reply to this latest piece of garbage, which I will share with you. The full text of the op-ed is at http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/columns/marta-mossburg/Trial-lawyers-lining-up-at-the-state-trough-40386217.html.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Spots and hurdles
It’s the same advice I got 26 years ago.
Pick your spots.
Don’t stick your nose and your voice into lots of issues. Become knowledgeable and respected on a few issues instead.
I had just been elected to the House of Delegates when a former committee chairman gave me this advice.
Today, a freshman delegate was about to participate in an informal gathering of members to discuss the legislation pending before us.
“If there’s one bill you feel comfortable talking about, do it,” I advised, “For most of the bills, just listen and learn.”
----
Many hurdles still to clear before reaching the Governor’s desk, but important steps along that way today on two issues.
Lilly Ledbetter got a favorable vote in subcommittee. Next stop the full committee, where positive action also likely.
The death penalty repeal bill won’t die in a Senate committee. It will be considered by the full body, according to news reports.
Governor O’Malley acknowledged yesterday that we’re two votes shy of the 24 votes needed. He will now use his persuasiveness, moral authority, and powers of the office as he meets with undecided senators.
In our strategy for repeal over the last 2+ years, the Governor’s efforts have always been crucial.
So we're entering the 7th inning, and as Earl Weaver would say when he maneuvered the other manager into bringing in a right-handed reliever so that he could pinch hit Terry Crowley: "The gun is loaded."
Pick your spots.
Don’t stick your nose and your voice into lots of issues. Become knowledgeable and respected on a few issues instead.
I had just been elected to the House of Delegates when a former committee chairman gave me this advice.
Today, a freshman delegate was about to participate in an informal gathering of members to discuss the legislation pending before us.
“If there’s one bill you feel comfortable talking about, do it,” I advised, “For most of the bills, just listen and learn.”
----
Many hurdles still to clear before reaching the Governor’s desk, but important steps along that way today on two issues.
Lilly Ledbetter got a favorable vote in subcommittee. Next stop the full committee, where positive action also likely.
The death penalty repeal bill won’t die in a Senate committee. It will be considered by the full body, according to news reports.
Governor O’Malley acknowledged yesterday that we’re two votes shy of the 24 votes needed. He will now use his persuasiveness, moral authority, and powers of the office as he meets with undecided senators.
In our strategy for repeal over the last 2+ years, the Governor’s efforts have always been crucial.
So we're entering the 7th inning, and as Earl Weaver would say when he maneuvered the other manager into bringing in a right-handed reliever so that he could pinch hit Terry Crowley: "The gun is loaded."
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Facts of this case
What are the facts of this case?
Every law student lives in dread of being asked that question - by your professor, in front of your classmates.
A satisfactory answer doesn’t get you off the hook. You will then be asked what the court decided and most importantly, why it reached that outcome.
In preparation for the hearing tomorrow on my religious accommodation bill, I decided to read the leading Supreme Court decision on this issue, Trans World Airlines v. Hardison. If someone asks me what the facts are in that case, I’ll know.
If I’m on my game, I won’t wait for someone to ask me that question. I’ll discuss it in my testimony instead.
Why? In Hardison, the Court held that an employee, whose Christian faith compelled him not to work on Saturday, his Sabbath, could be fired because his job “was essential, and on weekends he was the only available person on his shift to perform it.”
It will help make the point that passage of my legislation would not mean that the religious belief must be accommodated in every circumstance.
----
Nobody asked me the following questions. I posed them to myself at today’s Judiciary Committee hearing.
Can we comply with the federal law requiring that someone demonstrate a lawful status in the United States before obtaining a driver’s license and also provide a driver’s license to people who don’t have the required documentation - to avoid marginalizing immigrants and increasing the risks on our roads by having these individuals drive without a license or insurance?
Can we afford the extra cost of such a two-tier system?
Every law student lives in dread of being asked that question - by your professor, in front of your classmates.
A satisfactory answer doesn’t get you off the hook. You will then be asked what the court decided and most importantly, why it reached that outcome.
In preparation for the hearing tomorrow on my religious accommodation bill, I decided to read the leading Supreme Court decision on this issue, Trans World Airlines v. Hardison. If someone asks me what the facts are in that case, I’ll know.
If I’m on my game, I won’t wait for someone to ask me that question. I’ll discuss it in my testimony instead.
Why? In Hardison, the Court held that an employee, whose Christian faith compelled him not to work on Saturday, his Sabbath, could be fired because his job “was essential, and on weekends he was the only available person on his shift to perform it.”
It will help make the point that passage of my legislation would not mean that the religious belief must be accommodated in every circumstance.
----
Nobody asked me the following questions. I posed them to myself at today’s Judiciary Committee hearing.
Can we comply with the federal law requiring that someone demonstrate a lawful status in the United States before obtaining a driver’s license and also provide a driver’s license to people who don’t have the required documentation - to avoid marginalizing immigrants and increasing the risks on our roads by having these individuals drive without a license or insurance?
Can we afford the extra cost of such a two-tier system?
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Talking between the branches
How does the legislature communicate with the judiciary?
That’s not a theoretical question.
I’m working on two bills where it’s very important to express legislative intent.
What does “reasonable accommodation” mean? That’s the key phrase in my bill that would require an apartment owner or condominium association to make a “reasonable accommodation” for the religious practices of tenants or unit owners.
I didn’t make up this term. For 40 years, the courts have used it in deciding whether an employer has made a reasonable accommodation for the religious practices of its employees.
I want my bill to express the legislature’s intent that the courts are to apply the legal analysis that decided “reasonable accommodation” cases in the workplace to a residential setting.
A group of women wrestlers alleged that they had been treated differently than their male counterparts. Their lawsuit was thrown out because, like Lilly Ledbetter, they had not brought their suit within 180 days of the initial discriminatory act.
I’ve drafted language that expresses the legislature’s intent that we don’t want the same thing to happen in cases brought under Maryland’s civil rights laws.
As we were discussing this language today, one lawyer wrote me, “State judges, like federal judges, don't like to be told what to do.”
“Legislators are initial audience for this language” I responded. “So we need to provide some reassurances to them (We can't provide guarantees), that if they pass the bill, this is how we want it to be implemented.”
That’s not a theoretical question.
I’m working on two bills where it’s very important to express legislative intent.
What does “reasonable accommodation” mean? That’s the key phrase in my bill that would require an apartment owner or condominium association to make a “reasonable accommodation” for the religious practices of tenants or unit owners.
I didn’t make up this term. For 40 years, the courts have used it in deciding whether an employer has made a reasonable accommodation for the religious practices of its employees.
I want my bill to express the legislature’s intent that the courts are to apply the legal analysis that decided “reasonable accommodation” cases in the workplace to a residential setting.
A group of women wrestlers alleged that they had been treated differently than their male counterparts. Their lawsuit was thrown out because, like Lilly Ledbetter, they had not brought their suit within 180 days of the initial discriminatory act.
I’ve drafted language that expresses the legislature’s intent that we don’t want the same thing to happen in cases brought under Maryland’s civil rights laws.
As we were discussing this language today, one lawyer wrote me, “State judges, like federal judges, don't like to be told what to do.”
“Legislators are initial audience for this language” I responded. “So we need to provide some reassurances to them (We can't provide guarantees), that if they pass the bill, this is how we want it to be implemented.”
State of Mind
If you know you’re breaking the law, you’ve committed a crime.
Without that knowledge, it’s only a civil violation.
For certain provisions of our election law, I was reminded today, you can be found guilty of a criminal or civil violation, depending upon your state of mind.
My tutorial arose in an email exchange about the Voter’s Rights Protection Act.
My bill would add a new provision to the law, making it a crime to use a foreclosure list to challenge people’s right to vote because there has been a foreclosure at the address on their registration card.
That’s already illegal, I was informed the day before my bill hearing, because the only grounds on which to challenge a potential voter on Election Day is that person’s identity, not his or her address.
That makes using the foreclosure list a violation of the prohibition on influencing or attempting to influence “a voter’s decision whether to go to the polls to cast a vote” through the use of fraud. (My voting rights legislation in 2005 made that a crime – if done “willfully and knowingly,” but only a civil violation otherwise.)
While reviewing these provisions, I came across the language making it a felony to “vote or attempt to vote during the time that the person is rendered ineligible to vote” while on parole or probation after being convicted of a felony.
Informing people when they can register after they’ve been released from jail is the purpose of my House Bill 483.
“Why shouldn’t there be a civil alternative for those who are unaware of this prohibition?” I emailed.
“Do we treat dirty tricksters more leniently than we do ex-cons?” I later said to myself.
Without that knowledge, it’s only a civil violation.
For certain provisions of our election law, I was reminded today, you can be found guilty of a criminal or civil violation, depending upon your state of mind.
My tutorial arose in an email exchange about the Voter’s Rights Protection Act.
My bill would add a new provision to the law, making it a crime to use a foreclosure list to challenge people’s right to vote because there has been a foreclosure at the address on their registration card.
That’s already illegal, I was informed the day before my bill hearing, because the only grounds on which to challenge a potential voter on Election Day is that person’s identity, not his or her address.
That makes using the foreclosure list a violation of the prohibition on influencing or attempting to influence “a voter’s decision whether to go to the polls to cast a vote” through the use of fraud. (My voting rights legislation in 2005 made that a crime – if done “willfully and knowingly,” but only a civil violation otherwise.)
While reviewing these provisions, I came across the language making it a felony to “vote or attempt to vote during the time that the person is rendered ineligible to vote” while on parole or probation after being convicted of a felony.
Informing people when they can register after they’ve been released from jail is the purpose of my House Bill 483.
“Why shouldn’t there be a civil alternative for those who are unaware of this prohibition?” I emailed.
“Do we treat dirty tricksters more leniently than we do ex-cons?” I later said to myself.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Not done yet
Jobs will be saved. Cuts won’t be made.
That was the Governor’s very good news message at a press conference yesterday to herald the impact of federal recovery/stimulus money on the state budget.
I believe that the stimulus package will accomplish two things.
* Repair the safety net for those of us who have lost their jobs because of the recession, while maintaining the incentives and requirements for seeking work in our welfare system; and
* Invest in our infrastructure and future – from repaving roads so people can get to work and to shop more efficiently to enhancing our ability to obtain energy from sources other than the oil kingdoms of the Middle East.
However, I have also heard from constituents who think that this spending will not stimulate our economy but will leave us further in debt instead.
It is essential, therefore, that we, as taxpayers, are able to find out how this money is spent and how many jobs it creates.
After the Obama administration pledged to put this information on a website, I urged state officials to provide this accountability and transparency as well.
They have agreed to do so.
That was the Governor’s very good news message at a press conference yesterday to herald the impact of federal recovery/stimulus money on the state budget.
I believe that the stimulus package will accomplish two things.
* Repair the safety net for those of us who have lost their jobs because of the recession, while maintaining the incentives and requirements for seeking work in our welfare system; and
* Invest in our infrastructure and future – from repaving roads so people can get to work and to shop more efficiently to enhancing our ability to obtain energy from sources other than the oil kingdoms of the Middle East.
However, I have also heard from constituents who think that this spending will not stimulate our economy but will leave us further in debt instead.
It is essential, therefore, that we, as taxpayers, are able to find out how this money is spent and how many jobs it creates.
After the Obama administration pledged to put this information on a website, I urged state officials to provide this accountability and transparency as well.
They have agreed to do so.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Out of order
I thought this would happen.
My committee had just taken preliminary action on House Bill 45, Crimes - Tattooing, Branding, and Body Piercing - Parental Consent.
Someone could offer a floor amendment requiring parental consent before a minor could obtain an abortion, I commented to some of my colleagues last Friday.
My next step was to ask the Attorney General’s Office for advice.
Such an amendment would not violate the requirement in the Maryland constitution that a bill deal with a single subject, began the response.
However, when the abortion issue was raised in an amendment to a bill requiring parental consent before a minor could use a tanning bed, the Senate President ruled last year that it violated the Senate rules because it changed the purpose of the bill.
I shared that legal advice with appropriate delegates and staff.
Today, a floor amendment was offered to HB 45 that would require parental consent for “any invasive medical or surgical procedure.”
The Speaker ruled the amendment out of order because it changed the purpose of the bill.
In response to some of the comments made by supporters of the amendment, I rose to explain my vote.
“No one will be silenced and prevented from having a full hearing on this issue if this amendment is ruled out of order,” I declared. “Put in a bill and it will be considered by the appropriate committee, like any other piece of legislation.”
The Speaker’s ruling was upheld, 103-35.
My committee had just taken preliminary action on House Bill 45, Crimes - Tattooing, Branding, and Body Piercing - Parental Consent.
Someone could offer a floor amendment requiring parental consent before a minor could obtain an abortion, I commented to some of my colleagues last Friday.
My next step was to ask the Attorney General’s Office for advice.
Such an amendment would not violate the requirement in the Maryland constitution that a bill deal with a single subject, began the response.
However, when the abortion issue was raised in an amendment to a bill requiring parental consent before a minor could use a tanning bed, the Senate President ruled last year that it violated the Senate rules because it changed the purpose of the bill.
I shared that legal advice with appropriate delegates and staff.
Today, a floor amendment was offered to HB 45 that would require parental consent for “any invasive medical or surgical procedure.”
The Speaker ruled the amendment out of order because it changed the purpose of the bill.
In response to some of the comments made by supporters of the amendment, I rose to explain my vote.
“No one will be silenced and prevented from having a full hearing on this issue if this amendment is ruled out of order,” I declared. “Put in a bill and it will be considered by the appropriate committee, like any other piece of legislation.”
The Speaker’s ruling was upheld, 103-35.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Life, liberty or license
Someone who violates a criminal law can lose their life, their liberty, or their license.
While our Senate counterparts listened to Governor O’Malley testify for repeal of the death penalty, the House Judiciary Committee held hearings on eight drunk driving bills.
The argument for tougher penalties: the state’s ability to protect the safety of the traveling public is limited by existing laws that permit the most frequent violators, repeat offenders and young drivers, to remain on the road.
The opposing view: people who lose their license may be unable to get to work or to transport other family members to important activities and events.
When we’re not depriving the accused of life or freedom, I err on the side of preventing harm to others.
Nonetheless, the devil is in the legislative details.
We may begin voting on these bills later this week.
While our Senate counterparts listened to Governor O’Malley testify for repeal of the death penalty, the House Judiciary Committee held hearings on eight drunk driving bills.
The argument for tougher penalties: the state’s ability to protect the safety of the traveling public is limited by existing laws that permit the most frequent violators, repeat offenders and young drivers, to remain on the road.
The opposing view: people who lose their license may be unable to get to work or to transport other family members to important activities and events.
When we’re not depriving the accused of life or freedom, I err on the side of preventing harm to others.
Nonetheless, the devil is in the legislative details.
We may begin voting on these bills later this week.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Still counting
“It’s early,” I said.
Survey of state Senate finds narrow majority oppose repeal read the headline across the front page of today’s Baltimore Sun.
So I sought to calm the waters at the start of our weekly strategy meeting on death penalty repeal. I also noted that vote counts are fluid before the public hearing on a bill. It’s tomorrow in the Senate.
Prior to our discussion, I spoke to someone who had been the chief legislative officer (lobbyist) for a previous Governor. “When you held that job,” I asked him, “didn’t the Sun run a story mid-session saying that the Administration’s agenda was in deep trouble with the General Assembly?”
You are right and they were wrong, he replied. I had a similar conversation with another former chief legislative officer.
Later in the day, I told someone in the Governor’s Office that a story written days before the Special Session of 2007 would have said that there wasn’t enough support to pass a slots bill or tax increases. However, when the roll was called, the votes were there.
After I recounted that conversation to an Annapolis veteran, he made the valid point that how a legislator makes a decision on the death penalty is not the same as with slots.
We’re still counting.
----
“It’s the end of welfare reform.”
I didn’t say that. Joe Scarborough did on MSNBC this morning.
I checked with a bipartisan expert on the issue, Sheri Steisel of the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Her response: “It's from the Heritage Foundation. (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm2287.cfm) It's totally wrong. Ron Haskins, the leading Republican staffer on welfare reform, agrees that in an economic downturn, the federal government needs to increase spending to meet the case load demand.
"There is no change in work requirements or time limits on eligibility for cash assistance. Those are the key elements of the welfare reform Congress enacted in 1996. There’s no new entitlement.”
So much for transparency, accountability, and accuracy from the loyal opposition.
Survey of state Senate finds narrow majority oppose repeal read the headline across the front page of today’s Baltimore Sun.
So I sought to calm the waters at the start of our weekly strategy meeting on death penalty repeal. I also noted that vote counts are fluid before the public hearing on a bill. It’s tomorrow in the Senate.
Prior to our discussion, I spoke to someone who had been the chief legislative officer (lobbyist) for a previous Governor. “When you held that job,” I asked him, “didn’t the Sun run a story mid-session saying that the Administration’s agenda was in deep trouble with the General Assembly?”
You are right and they were wrong, he replied. I had a similar conversation with another former chief legislative officer.
Later in the day, I told someone in the Governor’s Office that a story written days before the Special Session of 2007 would have said that there wasn’t enough support to pass a slots bill or tax increases. However, when the roll was called, the votes were there.
After I recounted that conversation to an Annapolis veteran, he made the valid point that how a legislator makes a decision on the death penalty is not the same as with slots.
We’re still counting.
----
“It’s the end of welfare reform.”
I didn’t say that. Joe Scarborough did on MSNBC this morning.
I checked with a bipartisan expert on the issue, Sheri Steisel of the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Her response: “It's from the Heritage Foundation. (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm2287.cfm) It's totally wrong. Ron Haskins, the leading Republican staffer on welfare reform, agrees that in an economic downturn, the federal government needs to increase spending to meet the case load demand.
"There is no change in work requirements or time limits on eligibility for cash assistance. Those are the key elements of the welfare reform Congress enacted in 1996. There’s no new entitlement.”
So much for transparency, accountability, and accuracy from the loyal opposition.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Sometimes the words sing
Today, I preached to the converted.
Governor O’Malley had already spoken to the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) ministers and congregants. Repeal of the death penalty was one of the issues he discussed.
Not an enviable position for me to be in on the program.
I quoted Nelson Mandela at the dedication of the new Constitutional Court of South Africa, "The last time I was in a court room, it was to learn whether I would be sentenced to death."
I said that the men on death row were far different from Mandela. “They have committed heinous acts. But, to paraphrase the Sermon on the Mount,” I continued, “we should judge our society by how it treats the least among us.”
Sometimes the words sing, and sometimes the audience listens to every word.
Today was one of those special occasions.
Governor O’Malley had already spoken to the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) ministers and congregants. Repeal of the death penalty was one of the issues he discussed.
Not an enviable position for me to be in on the program.
I quoted Nelson Mandela at the dedication of the new Constitutional Court of South Africa, "The last time I was in a court room, it was to learn whether I would be sentenced to death."
I said that the men on death row were far different from Mandela. “They have committed heinous acts. But, to paraphrase the Sermon on the Mount,” I continued, “we should judge our society by how it treats the least among us.”
Sometimes the words sing, and sometimes the audience listens to every word.
Today was one of those special occasions.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
No notes
I try to practice what I preach.
“Don’t use notes when you’re testifying on a bill or making your oral argument,” I tell my law school students. “Know the issue well enough so that you don’t need notes as a crutch.”
I spoke without notes when I testified on my voting rights and Lilly Ledbetter legislation last week. What those bills would do and why we need them I can speak to with passion.
Not so with two bills dealing with wills that I introduced at the request of the Maryland State Bar Association. Estates and trust law was one of the many business-oriented classes that I didn’t take at law school.
So I made sure that a lawyer from the Bar Association would be sitting next to me to help me answer any questions that arose.
On Tuesday, I’ll be testifying on my bill to require that when an inmate makes a post-conviction claim of innocence, a judge must hold a hearing on the merits.
I met with attorneys from the Office of the Public Defender last week. They told me that such a claim would not be heard today if filed after a certain time period, and I practiced the arguments I would make.
My pre-testimony testimony left me with a better understanding of the issue. But I still want an attorney sitting next to me at the witness table.
“Don’t use notes when you’re testifying on a bill or making your oral argument,” I tell my law school students. “Know the issue well enough so that you don’t need notes as a crutch.”
I spoke without notes when I testified on my voting rights and Lilly Ledbetter legislation last week. What those bills would do and why we need them I can speak to with passion.
Not so with two bills dealing with wills that I introduced at the request of the Maryland State Bar Association. Estates and trust law was one of the many business-oriented classes that I didn’t take at law school.
So I made sure that a lawyer from the Bar Association would be sitting next to me to help me answer any questions that arose.
On Tuesday, I’ll be testifying on my bill to require that when an inmate makes a post-conviction claim of innocence, a judge must hold a hearing on the merits.
I met with attorneys from the Office of the Public Defender last week. They told me that such a claim would not be heard today if filed after a certain time period, and I practiced the arguments I would make.
My pre-testimony testimony left me with a better understanding of the issue. But I still want an attorney sitting next to me at the witness table.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Orioles Fantasy Camp – Reverse Elrod and Mr. February
When we arrived at the baseball complex, my taxi driver asked, “Are you a trainer?”
“No,” I replied, “I’m a catcher.”
Over the next four days, I tagged two runners out at the plate.
The second time, I caught a one-hop relay throw from shallow right field from former Oriole pitcher Dave Johnson, turned, and made the tag.
Then I took the ball out of my glove to show the umpire that the runner’s slide had not jarred it loose. But I did it so quickly that the other bench yelped that I had made the tag with my glove while the ball was in my hand.
I may be relaxed behind home plate, but I don’t catch throws from the outfield with my bare hand.
The ump correctly signaled "Out." A reverse Elrod!
The economy and the Orioles’ 11 consecutive losing seasons made this the smallest Fantasy Camp I’ve attended. There were enough players for only four teams, compared to 12 teams at my first camp 15 years ago.
So our post-season contest on Sunday morning for the Division 2 title would determine which team finished third in a four-team league.
After batting .200 in the six-game regular season, I singled to right with two out in the seventh, driving in a run that put us ahead, 7-5. By my next trip to the plate, leading off the bottom of the ninth, the score was tied.
I walked on five pitches. After a station-to-station trip around the bases, I scored the game-winning run on a single up the middle.
On this day, I was Mr. February.
----
Two Yankee Stadium stories from the former Orioles at the camp:
With Dave Winfield batting in the eighth inning, Rick Dempsey signaled fastball to starter Mike Flanagan, who shook him off. Dempsey again put down one finger. Flanny threw a fastball that Winfield deposited in the upper deck.
The next day, the busts of the Yankee greats on the monuments in left center were still upturned towards the flight of Winfield's ball.
In his first appearance at Yankee Stadium, pitcher Bill Swaggerty got signaled into the game from the bullpen by Earl Weaver. Swags hops into the pick-up truck that transports the pitcher to the dugout, but the driver doesn't move.
He finally says, "You should roll up your window unless you want to get wet."
On the drive in, they're pelted by cokes and beers.
If you can soak them there, you can soak them anywhere…
“No,” I replied, “I’m a catcher.”
Over the next four days, I tagged two runners out at the plate.
The second time, I caught a one-hop relay throw from shallow right field from former Oriole pitcher Dave Johnson, turned, and made the tag.
Then I took the ball out of my glove to show the umpire that the runner’s slide had not jarred it loose. But I did it so quickly that the other bench yelped that I had made the tag with my glove while the ball was in my hand.
I may be relaxed behind home plate, but I don’t catch throws from the outfield with my bare hand.
The ump correctly signaled "Out." A reverse Elrod!
The economy and the Orioles’ 11 consecutive losing seasons made this the smallest Fantasy Camp I’ve attended. There were enough players for only four teams, compared to 12 teams at my first camp 15 years ago.
So our post-season contest on Sunday morning for the Division 2 title would determine which team finished third in a four-team league.
After batting .200 in the six-game regular season, I singled to right with two out in the seventh, driving in a run that put us ahead, 7-5. By my next trip to the plate, leading off the bottom of the ninth, the score was tied.
I walked on five pitches. After a station-to-station trip around the bases, I scored the game-winning run on a single up the middle.
On this day, I was Mr. February.
----
Two Yankee Stadium stories from the former Orioles at the camp:
With Dave Winfield batting in the eighth inning, Rick Dempsey signaled fastball to starter Mike Flanagan, who shook him off. Dempsey again put down one finger. Flanny threw a fastball that Winfield deposited in the upper deck.
The next day, the busts of the Yankee greats on the monuments in left center were still upturned towards the flight of Winfield's ball.
In his first appearance at Yankee Stadium, pitcher Bill Swaggerty got signaled into the game from the bullpen by Earl Weaver. Swags hops into the pick-up truck that transports the pitcher to the dugout, but the driver doesn't move.
He finally says, "You should roll up your window unless you want to get wet."
On the drive in, they're pelted by cokes and beers.
If you can soak them there, you can soak them anywhere…
An e-mail for Lilly
“When your employer decides to discriminate against you, he or she does not send you an email.”
That’s how I began my testimony on the Lilly Ledbetter bill.
The Supreme Court said that the law required you to sue within 180 days of the first illegal act, whether or not you knew or should have known that your rights had been violated.
The Congress, recognizing the realities of the workplace, decided that you can obtain back pay and other relief for violations that occurred up to two years before you file a complaint.
Twelve months ago, when I first spoke before this committee, I was probably the only legislator in the room who knew who Lilly Ledbetter was. Not this time around.
A bill signing at the White House has done wonders for her name recognition.
And the hearing today appeared to do well for the prospects of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act of 2009.
That’s how I began my testimony on the Lilly Ledbetter bill.
The Supreme Court said that the law required you to sue within 180 days of the first illegal act, whether or not you knew or should have known that your rights had been violated.
The Congress, recognizing the realities of the workplace, decided that you can obtain back pay and other relief for violations that occurred up to two years before you file a complaint.
Twelve months ago, when I first spoke before this committee, I was probably the only legislator in the room who knew who Lilly Ledbetter was. Not this time around.
A bill signing at the White House has done wonders for her name recognition.
And the hearing today appeared to do well for the prospects of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act of 2009.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Come back blue back
I haven’t lost one in 27 years, but I had my doubts this morning.
To introduce a bill, a member must take it to the House Clerk’s office. One copy of your proposed legislation is stapled to a sheet of blue paper. It’s called the blue back.
Two days ago, I took a blue back to that office, but this morning it was not on the list of bills I’ve introduced on the General Assembly’s web site.
Did I not take it there? Had I lost it?
We called the Clerk’s Office. They said they’d look for it. My aides anxiously awaited a return call.
One traumatic half hour later, a staffer came up to me on the House floor.
“Your blue back affects the Maryland Health and Higher Educational Facilities Authority,” he told me. “It’s been so long since we had a bill dealing with the Authority, we’re not sure what committee to send it to. That’s why it’s not on your list.”
“The last bill was probably mine,” I replied. “The very first legislation I introduced – 26 years ago, dealt with the Authority because Loyola College wanted to buy an apartment building, finance it with the Authority, and convert it to student housing, displacing my constituents.”
“That bill went to the Appropriations Committee,” I concluded.
Thirty minutes later, so had this year’s.
----
“Your written statement mentions dirty tricks performed by Republicans but not any by Democrats,” complained a Republican delegate after I had testified on my Voter’s Rights Protection Act.
“I have a left leaning Google,” I replied.
Afterwards, I kicked myself for not giving a less humorous but politically accurate response.
So when I saw my colleague in the hallway, I told him, “It’s only the Republicans who are trying to suppress the vote in minority communities.”
To introduce a bill, a member must take it to the House Clerk’s office. One copy of your proposed legislation is stapled to a sheet of blue paper. It’s called the blue back.
Two days ago, I took a blue back to that office, but this morning it was not on the list of bills I’ve introduced on the General Assembly’s web site.
Did I not take it there? Had I lost it?
We called the Clerk’s Office. They said they’d look for it. My aides anxiously awaited a return call.
One traumatic half hour later, a staffer came up to me on the House floor.
“Your blue back affects the Maryland Health and Higher Educational Facilities Authority,” he told me. “It’s been so long since we had a bill dealing with the Authority, we’re not sure what committee to send it to. That’s why it’s not on your list.”
“The last bill was probably mine,” I replied. “The very first legislation I introduced – 26 years ago, dealt with the Authority because Loyola College wanted to buy an apartment building, finance it with the Authority, and convert it to student housing, displacing my constituents.”
“That bill went to the Appropriations Committee,” I concluded.
Thirty minutes later, so had this year’s.
----
“Your written statement mentions dirty tricks performed by Republicans but not any by Democrats,” complained a Republican delegate after I had testified on my Voter’s Rights Protection Act.
“I have a left leaning Google,” I replied.
Afterwards, I kicked myself for not giving a less humorous but politically accurate response.
So when I saw my colleague in the hallway, I told him, “It’s only the Republicans who are trying to suppress the vote in minority communities.”
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Some other intrigue
The Second Amendment Sisters were absent.
Mayor Dixon was testifying on her bill to increase the amount of prison time served for the illegal possession of a regulated firearm.
But where was the opposition?
One thing I’ve learned during my five years on the Judiciary Committee: the Second Amendment Sisters and other gun owners have far more passion and stamina than the advocates for gun control.
Since the Mayor’s bill had been before us last year, I checked the witness list. No one opposed the bill that time either.
I guess it didn’t pass because of some other intrigue.
----
I got an answer from the Attorney General’s Office to my Ledbetter question, and it’s favorable.
It is my view that the courts are not bound by the holding in Ledbetter in interpreting Maryland laws, but they have frequently looked to federal law in interpreting the State’s employment discrimination laws, and they could do so in this context.
Mayor Dixon was testifying on her bill to increase the amount of prison time served for the illegal possession of a regulated firearm.
But where was the opposition?
One thing I’ve learned during my five years on the Judiciary Committee: the Second Amendment Sisters and other gun owners have far more passion and stamina than the advocates for gun control.
Since the Mayor’s bill had been before us last year, I checked the witness list. No one opposed the bill that time either.
I guess it didn’t pass because of some other intrigue.
----
I got an answer from the Attorney General’s Office to my Ledbetter question, and it’s favorable.
It is my view that the courts are not bound by the holding in Ledbetter in interpreting Maryland laws, but they have frequently looked to federal law in interpreting the State’s employment discrimination laws, and they could do so in this context.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Devious minds and technology
Two of my most important bills this session will have public hearings this week.
The Voter’s Rights Protection Act passed the House last year but not the Senate. The opposite was the case for the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act.
Preparing for this week’s testimony, however, entails a lot more than just changing the date on last year’s testimony.
Devious minds and technology produce new types of dirty tricks designed to prevent people from voting.
Last November, the Michigan Republican Party tried to prevent every one from voting whose home had been foreclosed – if they lived in a certain suburb of Detroit.
I added a provision to my voting rights bill that would prohibit using an “unverified match list” in this manner unless there is a “signature, photograph or unique identifying number” ensuring that the same individual is on the voter rolls and the foreclosure list.
I left a voice mail this afternoon with someone who has decades of experience in housing and neighborhood preservation, asking if he could testify on Wednesday about the many instances where people live in their homes for a significant period of time after they are foreclosed and remain eligible to vote from that address.
Why do we need this bill?
That’s the question a bill sponsor must always answer.
Why do we need a Lilly Ledbetter law in Maryland if President Obama has already signed the undoing the Supreme Court decision that prevented her from recovering from her employer for giving her male co-workers a higher salary?
I asked the Attorney General’s Office if Maryland courts are likely to rule that the restrictive Supreme Court standard still applies if we don’t revise our law to reflect the changes the Congress has made.
I expect to have the answer before Thursday’s hearing.
The Voter’s Rights Protection Act passed the House last year but not the Senate. The opposite was the case for the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act.
Preparing for this week’s testimony, however, entails a lot more than just changing the date on last year’s testimony.
Devious minds and technology produce new types of dirty tricks designed to prevent people from voting.
Last November, the Michigan Republican Party tried to prevent every one from voting whose home had been foreclosed – if they lived in a certain suburb of Detroit.
I added a provision to my voting rights bill that would prohibit using an “unverified match list” in this manner unless there is a “signature, photograph or unique identifying number” ensuring that the same individual is on the voter rolls and the foreclosure list.
I left a voice mail this afternoon with someone who has decades of experience in housing and neighborhood preservation, asking if he could testify on Wednesday about the many instances where people live in their homes for a significant period of time after they are foreclosed and remain eligible to vote from that address.
Why do we need this bill?
That’s the question a bill sponsor must always answer.
Why do we need a Lilly Ledbetter law in Maryland if President Obama has already signed the undoing the Supreme Court decision that prevented her from recovering from her employer for giving her male co-workers a higher salary?
I asked the Attorney General’s Office if Maryland courts are likely to rule that the restrictive Supreme Court standard still applies if we don’t revise our law to reflect the changes the Congress has made.
I expect to have the answer before Thursday’s hearing.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Visualizing an Issue
I always try to have a witness who can personalize the issue my bill addresses.
This person will benefit from the legislation or has been harmed by the situation I’m trying to correct.
It’s far more effective than my speaking in abstract terms about the problem.
Today I realized I have a bill I can visualize.
I met with a woman whose landlord has prohibited her and others from having a sukkah outside her apartment. In observance of the harvest festival, Jews eat their meals in a sukkah.
They’re don’t inconvenience any other tenant and cost the property owner nothing.
Photos of these sukkahs will help tell the story at the hearing on my bill to require a landlord to make reasonable accommodation for tenants’ religious expression.
This person will benefit from the legislation or has been harmed by the situation I’m trying to correct.
It’s far more effective than my speaking in abstract terms about the problem.
Today I realized I have a bill I can visualize.
I met with a woman whose landlord has prohibited her and others from having a sukkah outside her apartment. In observance of the harvest festival, Jews eat their meals in a sukkah.
They’re don’t inconvenience any other tenant and cost the property owner nothing.
Photos of these sukkahs will help tell the story at the hearing on my bill to require a landlord to make reasonable accommodation for tenants’ religious expression.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Time Has Come
Sometimes your bill may be an idea whose time has come.
Governor O’Malley will deliver remarks at the Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference this Friday.
At the first meeting of the Middle Class Task Force, the focus will be on “green jobs, those jobs that pay well, can’t be outsourced and will help us move toward a cleaner, more self-sufficient energy future,” said its chairman, Vice President Biden.
Tomorrow, I will be meeting with Executive Branch officials and environmental advocates about my legislation, House Bill 268 - Welfare to Work - Job Skills Enhancement Program - Green Jobs.
My goal: create a consensus in support of my bill.
Governor O’Malley will deliver remarks at the Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference this Friday.
At the first meeting of the Middle Class Task Force, the focus will be on “green jobs, those jobs that pay well, can’t be outsourced and will help us move toward a cleaner, more self-sufficient energy future,” said its chairman, Vice President Biden.
Tomorrow, I will be meeting with Executive Branch officials and environmental advocates about my legislation, House Bill 268 - Welfare to Work - Job Skills Enhancement Program - Green Jobs.
My goal: create a consensus in support of my bill.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
The Second or Third Time Around
It’s the rare bill that gets enacted the first time it’s introduced.
This is the third year I’ve introduced legislation to repeal the death penalty. It’s the first year that Governor O’Malley has also sponsored the bill.
In his State of the State Address, the Governor asked the General Assembly to “follow me in abolishing an outdated, expensive, and utterly ineffective death penalty in Maryland.” He recognized the presence in the House chamber of Benjamin Civiletti, the chair of the Commission that studied the issue this past summer. Afterwards, the Senate President said the bill was likely to pass.
Lilly Ledbetter lost her discrimination case in the Supreme Court in 2007. Efforts to overturn that ruling in the Congress were thwarted by President Bush and a filibuster by the Republican minority in the Senate. A new President and more Democrats in the Senate sent the bill to a White House signing ceremony this Thursday.
Four years ago, I introduced a bill to add bloggers to Maryland’s shield law, which protects journalists from revealing their confidential sources. Last year, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee adopted a shield law that includes bloggers. This year, I’m reintroducing my bill, this time with the definition of blogging in the federal bill.
This is the third year I’ve introduced legislation to repeal the death penalty. It’s the first year that Governor O’Malley has also sponsored the bill.
In his State of the State Address, the Governor asked the General Assembly to “follow me in abolishing an outdated, expensive, and utterly ineffective death penalty in Maryland.” He recognized the presence in the House chamber of Benjamin Civiletti, the chair of the Commission that studied the issue this past summer. Afterwards, the Senate President said the bill was likely to pass.
Lilly Ledbetter lost her discrimination case in the Supreme Court in 2007. Efforts to overturn that ruling in the Congress were thwarted by President Bush and a filibuster by the Republican minority in the Senate. A new President and more Democrats in the Senate sent the bill to a White House signing ceremony this Thursday.
Four years ago, I introduced a bill to add bloggers to Maryland’s shield law, which protects journalists from revealing their confidential sources. Last year, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee adopted a shield law that includes bloggers. This year, I’m reintroducing my bill, this time with the definition of blogging in the federal bill.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Loud, sustained and genuine
The first mention of Barack Obama generated loud, sustained, and genuine applause.
Early in his State of the State address, Governor O’Malley declared, “With the inspired leadership of our new President, Barack Obama, we finally have a federal partner who shares our commitment to progress.”
I turned to the delegate sitting next to me and said, “The Republicans in Washington were dead wrong yesterday to march in lock step opposition to Obama.”
Granted the Governor’s audience today was overwhelmingly Democratic. Nonetheless, the broader public overwhelmingly and enthusiastically (with far more hope than trepidation) supports the President’s efforts to turn around the economy.
Governor O’Malley also acknowledged the effect the stimulus legislation would have on the state budget.
“It is my hope, and it is my belief, and it is my expectation that the balanced budget we were required by law to submit this month will be a better budget by the time it’s up for final consideration in April. Why? Two reasons. Barack… Obama”
A reduction in state aid to local schools is one of the most controversial elements in the Governor’s budget. He hopes that the amount targeted for education in the stimulus package will be greater than the cut he is calling for.
The stimulus money will be coming to the states for two years. At a meeting yesterday and in conversations today, I suggested that the General Assembly sunset the reduction in state aid to local schools that the Governor has proposed.
A sunset provision in the Governor’s bill would mean that two years from now, when the stimulus money is no longer flowing, the law would obligate the Governor to provide full funding for aid to local schools.
Early in his State of the State address, Governor O’Malley declared, “With the inspired leadership of our new President, Barack Obama, we finally have a federal partner who shares our commitment to progress.”
I turned to the delegate sitting next to me and said, “The Republicans in Washington were dead wrong yesterday to march in lock step opposition to Obama.”
Granted the Governor’s audience today was overwhelmingly Democratic. Nonetheless, the broader public overwhelmingly and enthusiastically (with far more hope than trepidation) supports the President’s efforts to turn around the economy.
Governor O’Malley also acknowledged the effect the stimulus legislation would have on the state budget.
“It is my hope, and it is my belief, and it is my expectation that the balanced budget we were required by law to submit this month will be a better budget by the time it’s up for final consideration in April. Why? Two reasons. Barack… Obama”
A reduction in state aid to local schools is one of the most controversial elements in the Governor’s budget. He hopes that the amount targeted for education in the stimulus package will be greater than the cut he is calling for.
The stimulus money will be coming to the states for two years. At a meeting yesterday and in conversations today, I suggested that the General Assembly sunset the reduction in state aid to local schools that the Governor has proposed.
A sunset provision in the Governor’s bill would mean that two years from now, when the stimulus money is no longer flowing, the law would obligate the Governor to provide full funding for aid to local schools.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Never done before
Tomorrow, I will do something I’ve never done before.
On the same day that a bill is signed into law by the President of the United States, I will introduce legislation to make Maryland law identical to that new federal statute.
Congress just enacted the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, overturning a much criticized Supreme Court case that erected a major hurdle for employees seeking to challenge unlawful pay discrimination based on gender, race, age and disability.
In a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled that Lilly Ledbetter - and all other employees subject to pay discrimination, must file a claim within 180 days of an employer's original action treating them unfairly. This was the case even if the employee continued to receive smaller paychecks or the employee did not discover the discriminatory treatment until months or years after the first violation.
Justice Ginsburg, reading her dissent from the bench, declared:
“Each and every pay decision she [Ledbetter] did not immediately challenge wiped the slate clean. Consideration may not be given to the cumulative effect of a series of decisions that, together, set her pay well below that of every male area manager.”
I was not at the Supreme Court that day, but I have heard Justice Ginsburg discuss gender discrimination in the workplace.
I was a student in her law school class on Sex Discrimination and the Law.
On the same day that a bill is signed into law by the President of the United States, I will introduce legislation to make Maryland law identical to that new federal statute.
Congress just enacted the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, overturning a much criticized Supreme Court case that erected a major hurdle for employees seeking to challenge unlawful pay discrimination based on gender, race, age and disability.
In a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled that Lilly Ledbetter - and all other employees subject to pay discrimination, must file a claim within 180 days of an employer's original action treating them unfairly. This was the case even if the employee continued to receive smaller paychecks or the employee did not discover the discriminatory treatment until months or years after the first violation.
Justice Ginsburg, reading her dissent from the bench, declared:
“Each and every pay decision she [Ledbetter] did not immediately challenge wiped the slate clean. Consideration may not be given to the cumulative effect of a series of decisions that, together, set her pay well below that of every male area manager.”
I was not at the Supreme Court that day, but I have heard Justice Ginsburg discuss gender discrimination in the workplace.
I was a student in her law school class on Sex Discrimination and the Law.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Lowballing and Simply untrue
“Is $350 million in federal stimulus dollars a lowball estimate?”
My question dealt with the amount Governor O’Malley had included in his budget. I posed it a meeting yesterday afternoon.
Based on what I knew about President Obama’s proposal, I expected the answer to be yes.
Indeed it is.
“O’Malley postpones plans as $3.5 billion expected for Md. during next two years,” read the headline in today’s Baltimore Sun.
It’s prudent budgeting to err on the conservative side when estimating the amount of money Maryland will receive. But now the stimulus cards are on the table.
Legislators and interest groups will now urge the Governor to use this additional money for the programs nearest and dearest to their hearts.
------
“Morning Joe” on MSNBC this morning and a friend’s email about the effect of Obama’s election on our political dialogue prompted me to respond:
“The buffoons on the right will be reduced to saying nasty things and called to task for it to a degree that they were not when the right wing was in the ascendancy. eg, Rush Limbaugh saying he hopes Obama fails.
“The more sophisticated on the right will say things that sound plausible but are simply untrue. Tucker Carlson on MSNBC this a.m.: New Deal didn't work, can you name a successful government job training program or government decision about what industry should be favored?
“Obama's policies and rhetoric and the public's desire for him to succeed will outweigh the false claims of the right.
“And demographics are not on the side of the right. Even young evangelicals are significantly more open minded on social issues than their elders.”
My question dealt with the amount Governor O’Malley had included in his budget. I posed it a meeting yesterday afternoon.
Based on what I knew about President Obama’s proposal, I expected the answer to be yes.
Indeed it is.
“O’Malley postpones plans as $3.5 billion expected for Md. during next two years,” read the headline in today’s Baltimore Sun.
It’s prudent budgeting to err on the conservative side when estimating the amount of money Maryland will receive. But now the stimulus cards are on the table.
Legislators and interest groups will now urge the Governor to use this additional money for the programs nearest and dearest to their hearts.
------
“Morning Joe” on MSNBC this morning and a friend’s email about the effect of Obama’s election on our political dialogue prompted me to respond:
“The buffoons on the right will be reduced to saying nasty things and called to task for it to a degree that they were not when the right wing was in the ascendancy. eg, Rush Limbaugh saying he hopes Obama fails.
“The more sophisticated on the right will say things that sound plausible but are simply untrue. Tucker Carlson on MSNBC this a.m.: New Deal didn't work, can you name a successful government job training program or government decision about what industry should be favored?
“Obama's policies and rhetoric and the public's desire for him to succeed will outweigh the false claims of the right.
“And demographics are not on the side of the right. Even young evangelicals are significantly more open minded on social issues than their elders.”
Sometimes you don’t
Sometimes you need to introduce a bill, and sometimes you don’t.
I’ve known Herman Berlin since childhood. He now runs an auto parts distributorship.
When the state entered into a contract with a national company, Herman did not have an opportunity to make a competing bid. He has lost a sizeable amount of business, as have other local firms – many of them small or minority companies.
We held our second meeting on this matter with Secretary of General Services Al Collins this morning. Since this national company has entered into similar contracts in other states, we agreed that I would draft a bill modeled on the Pennsylvania law dealing with this issue.
Our third meeting will take place after my bill is drafted, but before it is introduced.
Another bill I was considering deals with a more controversial issue. Federal legislation would provide money for states to provide this benefit in an innovative way.
Instead of waiting for the Congress to act, I thought, let’s do a pilot project with the state dollars already budgeted for this program for the upcoming fiscal year. (That means no additional cost to implement my bill.)
During a conference call today, state agency officials told me they already planned to do this. Keep me informed, I responded.
No need for a bill now.
I’ve known Herman Berlin since childhood. He now runs an auto parts distributorship.
When the state entered into a contract with a national company, Herman did not have an opportunity to make a competing bid. He has lost a sizeable amount of business, as have other local firms – many of them small or minority companies.
We held our second meeting on this matter with Secretary of General Services Al Collins this morning. Since this national company has entered into similar contracts in other states, we agreed that I would draft a bill modeled on the Pennsylvania law dealing with this issue.
Our third meeting will take place after my bill is drafted, but before it is introduced.
Another bill I was considering deals with a more controversial issue. Federal legislation would provide money for states to provide this benefit in an innovative way.
Instead of waiting for the Congress to act, I thought, let’s do a pilot project with the state dollars already budgeted for this program for the upcoming fiscal year. (That means no additional cost to implement my bill.)
During a conference call today, state agency officials told me they already planned to do this. Keep me informed, I responded.
No need for a bill now.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Not many have their experience
In their previous lives, Mike German and John Kellerman had little in common.
Mike was an undercover agent for the FBI, John a banker.
Mike now works for the American Civil Liberties Union and will testify in support of our bill to end State Police surveillance of lawful First Amendment activity.
John has Parkinson’s disease and has testified for funding of embryonic stem cell research.
“When I infiltrated an extremist group, I would go to lunch with the people who were considering violent activity, not those who weren’t,” Mike told me and another committee member Friday afternoon.
The State Police did not make that distinction.
I saw John at a fundraiser for stem cell research where he was the honoree Saturday night. He discussed my advice to him the first time he was to speak in Annapolis.
“You told me to be myself,” recalled John. “Not many have my experience crawling from my bed to the bathroom.”
He’s also testified that he’ll dance at his daughter’s wedding.
Mike was an undercover agent for the FBI, John a banker.
Mike now works for the American Civil Liberties Union and will testify in support of our bill to end State Police surveillance of lawful First Amendment activity.
John has Parkinson’s disease and has testified for funding of embryonic stem cell research.
“When I infiltrated an extremist group, I would go to lunch with the people who were considering violent activity, not those who weren’t,” Mike told me and another committee member Friday afternoon.
The State Police did not make that distinction.
I saw John at a fundraiser for stem cell research where he was the honoree Saturday night. He discussed my advice to him the first time he was to speak in Annapolis.
“You told me to be myself,” recalled John. “Not many have my experience crawling from my bed to the bathroom.”
He’s also testified that he’ll dance at his daughter’s wedding.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Exceptions to the rule
Asking other members to co-sponsor your bill is the biggest waste of time in Annapolis – except when it isn’t.
As I’ve written in the past, getting your colleagues to scribble their initials on your legislation has little, if any, impact on the committee that will hear your bill. But there are exceptions.
Last year, I was the lead sponsor of the death penalty repeal legislation in the House. This year, Governor O’Malley is introducing the bill. My name will be listed second.
One of the Governor’s lobbyists asked me today if I wanted to walk the bill around and get co-sponsors to sign on.
After hesitating for a moment, I said, “Last year it was a high when I was gathering names on the House floor and people asked to cosponsor the bill who had not in the past. I’ll do it.”
If we get additional co-sponsors again this year, it will generate some momentum for repeal.
A great deal of momentum was generated today for my legislation to rename the Maryland Million in memory of its originator, Jim McKay.
After the hearing on the companion bill in the Senate this afternoon, the motion to give the bill a favorable report was unanimously approved.
I turned to Joe Kelly. He and McKay were the announcers for the first telecast of a horse race on local tv – sixty years ago.
“It’s not usually a sprint in Annapolis,” I said in a stage whisper.
Except, I could have added, when it is.
As I’ve written in the past, getting your colleagues to scribble their initials on your legislation has little, if any, impact on the committee that will hear your bill. But there are exceptions.
Last year, I was the lead sponsor of the death penalty repeal legislation in the House. This year, Governor O’Malley is introducing the bill. My name will be listed second.
One of the Governor’s lobbyists asked me today if I wanted to walk the bill around and get co-sponsors to sign on.
After hesitating for a moment, I said, “Last year it was a high when I was gathering names on the House floor and people asked to cosponsor the bill who had not in the past. I’ll do it.”
If we get additional co-sponsors again this year, it will generate some momentum for repeal.
A great deal of momentum was generated today for my legislation to rename the Maryland Million in memory of its originator, Jim McKay.
After the hearing on the companion bill in the Senate this afternoon, the motion to give the bill a favorable report was unanimously approved.
I turned to Joe Kelly. He and McKay were the announcers for the first telecast of a horse race on local tv – sixty years ago.
“It’s not usually a sprint in Annapolis,” I said in a stage whisper.
Except, I could have added, when it is.
Beginning a Conversation on Green Jobs
I always read Tom Friedman’s op-ed columns. (I don’t think that surprises any of you.)
I didn’t know who Van Jones was until Delegate Nathaniel Oaks and I heard him speak at Morgan State University this past May.
Jones spoke about creating a green economy – to resolve our ecological crisis and provide jobs that lift people out of poverty.
In September, Friedman quoted Jones: “Let’s put people back to work – retrofitting and repowering America.”
Put another way: Making a house in West Baltimore energy efficient can’t be outsourced to Bangalore.
So Delegate Oaks and I will be introducing legislation to add green jobs to the job skills enhancement program in Maryland’s welfare reform statute.
That law already requires certain companies doing business with the State to give priority in hiring to qualified welfare recipients.
We’re going to propose extending that preference to contracts funded by the economic stimulus legislation now before the Congress.
“That language in the bill will begin a conversation with the Governor’s Office,” I told a group of environmental lobbyists.
I’m also researching if other states are considering this approach.
I didn’t know who Van Jones was until Delegate Nathaniel Oaks and I heard him speak at Morgan State University this past May.
Jones spoke about creating a green economy – to resolve our ecological crisis and provide jobs that lift people out of poverty.
In September, Friedman quoted Jones: “Let’s put people back to work – retrofitting and repowering America.”
Put another way: Making a house in West Baltimore energy efficient can’t be outsourced to Bangalore.
So Delegate Oaks and I will be introducing legislation to add green jobs to the job skills enhancement program in Maryland’s welfare reform statute.
That law already requires certain companies doing business with the State to give priority in hiring to qualified welfare recipients.
We’re going to propose extending that preference to contracts funded by the economic stimulus legislation now before the Congress.
“That language in the bill will begin a conversation with the Governor’s Office,” I told a group of environmental lobbyists.
I’m also researching if other states are considering this approach.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
An Extraordinary Force, A Great Gift
This historic day began for me with the incredible sight of thousands of people marching on Washington in the pre-dawn darkness. They were walking from the Lincoln Memorial, where Dr. King spoke 45 years ago, to the Capitol Building, where President Obama would speak today.
“It reminds me of the day the Berlin Wall fell,” said a cable pundit.
Freedom is an extraordinary force, I said to myself.
In his Inaugural Address, President Obama sought to set the tone for the four years ahead.
He began by speaking of the politics he hopes to leave behind, noting “our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age.”
After recalling George Washington’s words during that desolate December at Valley Forge, he concluded by saying:
“In this winter of our hardship, let it be said by our children’s children that we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.”
Now the work – those hard choices, begins.
“It reminds me of the day the Berlin Wall fell,” said a cable pundit.
Freedom is an extraordinary force, I said to myself.
In his Inaugural Address, President Obama sought to set the tone for the four years ahead.
He began by speaking of the politics he hopes to leave behind, noting “our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age.”
After recalling George Washington’s words during that desolate December at Valley Forge, he concluded by saying:
“In this winter of our hardship, let it be said by our children’s children that we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.”
Now the work – those hard choices, begins.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
More than a Photo Op
It sends a powerful message when the President-elect, on the day before his Inauguration, volunteers in a homeless shelter.
It’s a photo op, but in this case, a substantive program encouraging public service – both full-time and volunteer, is sure to follow.
Of all the issues I’ve worked on over the years, the laws I’ve passed that mean the most to me are those that enable people to take public service or non-profit jobs. They reduce the academic debt of students who choose to work for the government or a non-profit – during the summer or after graduation.
My next piece of legislation will be modeled upon what President Obama proposes over the next 100 days.
It’s a photo op, but in this case, a substantive program encouraging public service – both full-time and volunteer, is sure to follow.
Of all the issues I’ve worked on over the years, the laws I’ve passed that mean the most to me are those that enable people to take public service or non-profit jobs. They reduce the academic debt of students who choose to work for the government or a non-profit – during the summer or after graduation.
My next piece of legislation will be modeled upon what President Obama proposes over the next 100 days.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Moved by the music
It wasn’t as cold as I thought it would be Saturday afternoon on the steps of the War Memorial.
Granted, I was wearing more layers of clothing than I ever have.
Nor was the event as emotional as I thought it would be. Nonetheless, I emailed a friend, “Very glad I went.”
What did move me this weekend was music on Sunday.
“Lift Every Voice and Sing” at the Mass at All Saints Church and “We Shall Overcome” at Bethel AME’s joint service with Oheb Shalom Congregation.
In the afternoon, I was surfing between football and the pre-Inaugural concert at the Lincoln Memorial.
I was hoping I’d catch Stevie Wonder, and I did.
I didn’t expect to hear Pete Seeger, blacklisted in the 1950’s, singing "This Land Is Your Land" with his grandson and Springsteen.
Shades of Marian Anderson on the same steps. J. Edgar Hoover must be turning over in his grave.
No mention of Seeger in the Baltimore Sun’s account today.
I guess you have to be my age to appreciate Seeger’s being there.
Granted, I was wearing more layers of clothing than I ever have.
Nor was the event as emotional as I thought it would be. Nonetheless, I emailed a friend, “Very glad I went.”
What did move me this weekend was music on Sunday.
“Lift Every Voice and Sing” at the Mass at All Saints Church and “We Shall Overcome” at Bethel AME’s joint service with Oheb Shalom Congregation.
In the afternoon, I was surfing between football and the pre-Inaugural concert at the Lincoln Memorial.
I was hoping I’d catch Stevie Wonder, and I did.
I didn’t expect to hear Pete Seeger, blacklisted in the 1950’s, singing "This Land Is Your Land" with his grandson and Springsteen.
Shades of Marian Anderson on the same steps. J. Edgar Hoover must be turning over in his grave.
No mention of Seeger in the Baltimore Sun’s account today.
I guess you have to be my age to appreciate Seeger’s being there.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
A "Reasonable" Accommodation
It depends on what the meaning of “reasonable” is?
The owners of an apartment or condominium will have to make reasonable accommodations for the religious practices of residents of the building – if my legislation is adopted.
I didn’t originate the phrase “reasonable accommodation.” It’s been part of our civil rights laws for 40+ years. However, the meaning it has been given in court cases dealing with fair housing differs from that used in cases involving access for the disabled.
For myself and the lawyers in the room today, the question was this: Which meaning will better protect the religious practices of residents AND be accepted as a reasonable solution by the members of the General Assembly?
Details when the bill is introduced.
P.S. Interest in my lead paint bill is unabated.
Two more lobbyists asked me about it today.
The owners of an apartment or condominium will have to make reasonable accommodations for the religious practices of residents of the building – if my legislation is adopted.
I didn’t originate the phrase “reasonable accommodation.” It’s been part of our civil rights laws for 40+ years. However, the meaning it has been given in court cases dealing with fair housing differs from that used in cases involving access for the disabled.
For myself and the lawyers in the room today, the question was this: Which meaning will better protect the religious practices of residents AND be accepted as a reasonable solution by the members of the General Assembly?
Details when the bill is introduced.
P.S. Interest in my lead paint bill is unabated.
Two more lobbyists asked me about it today.
My first day in school
Today began my 27th year as a member of the House of Delegates. For two former colleagues I spoke with, Clay Mitchell and Nancy Kopp, this was their 39th opening day in Annapolis. Or first day in school, as a younger, parenting staffer termed it.
I began the day with my annual cholesterol binge of eggs and hash browns at Chick and Ruth’s Deli. I asked the owner what the prices were 26 years ago when my family joined me to start this tradition, hoping he might give me a 1983 discount, but no such luck.
At work, I put two bills in the hopper, decided not to introduce one, and was asked about another by two lobbyists who will oppose it.
House Bill 57 would refer to family planning counseling and services a person whose parental rights have been terminated or has been found guilty of child abuse or neglect.
The logic: if a court of law has found someone not capable of raising children, the state should encourage that person not to have more children – without violating that individual’s religious beliefs.
House Joint Resolution 1 is the Jim McKay Maryland Million legislation.
The bill I won’t be introducing would have required a court to give notice to the media before issuing a gag order, which prohibits the parties in a case from speaking to the press. A law isn’t necessary, two newspaper lawyers told me this afternoon, because reporters learn about these gag orders anyway.
Lastly, twice today lobbyists asked if I would be reintroducing my legislation to make lead paint manufacturers liable for the harm they’ve done to children based on each company’s share of the marketplace.
“No, but we will,” I replied.
More homework to be done. Today’s only the first day.
I began the day with my annual cholesterol binge of eggs and hash browns at Chick and Ruth’s Deli. I asked the owner what the prices were 26 years ago when my family joined me to start this tradition, hoping he might give me a 1983 discount, but no such luck.
At work, I put two bills in the hopper, decided not to introduce one, and was asked about another by two lobbyists who will oppose it.
House Bill 57 would refer to family planning counseling and services a person whose parental rights have been terminated or has been found guilty of child abuse or neglect.
The logic: if a court of law has found someone not capable of raising children, the state should encourage that person not to have more children – without violating that individual’s religious beliefs.
House Joint Resolution 1 is the Jim McKay Maryland Million legislation.
The bill I won’t be introducing would have required a court to give notice to the media before issuing a gag order, which prohibits the parties in a case from speaking to the press. A law isn’t necessary, two newspaper lawyers told me this afternoon, because reporters learn about these gag orders anyway.
Lastly, twice today lobbyists asked if I would be reintroducing my legislation to make lead paint manufacturers liable for the harm they’ve done to children based on each company’s share of the marketplace.
“No, but we will,” I replied.
More homework to be done. Today’s only the first day.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Spanning the Globe
Bad news travels fast.
The session hasn’t started, and I attended my first budget briefing today.
No, I haven’t returned to the Appropriations Committee. The projected deficit was the topic at our Democratic Caucus meeting this morning.
“The forecast for 2009 is very bad, and that’s assuming benefits to the economy from the Obama stimulus package,” the General Assembly’s principal fiscal adviser informed us. “Even if we freeze spending, we still have a $1 billion problem.”
That deficit would be even greater if we had not enacted tax increases at the 2007 special session and reduced state spending by $1.75 billion over the last two years.
Better news for two of my bills at meetings this afternoon.
The first would prohibit the State Police from infiltrating undercover agents into groups engaging in lawful First Amendment activity. We had what we hope will be our last meeting to discuss the language in the bill.
The second bill would rename the Maryland Million, the annual day of racing for horses bred in Maryland. To honor the person who thought of this event, it would be called the Jim McKay Maryland Million. I met with the chair of the committee that will hear the bill, and she agreed to co-sponsor it.
From police surveillance to the race track.
To paraphrase what Jim McKay said in the opening sequence of Wide World of Sports: “Spanning the globe to bring you the constant variety of the sport of legislation.”
The session hasn’t started, and I attended my first budget briefing today.
No, I haven’t returned to the Appropriations Committee. The projected deficit was the topic at our Democratic Caucus meeting this morning.
“The forecast for 2009 is very bad, and that’s assuming benefits to the economy from the Obama stimulus package,” the General Assembly’s principal fiscal adviser informed us. “Even if we freeze spending, we still have a $1 billion problem.”
That deficit would be even greater if we had not enacted tax increases at the 2007 special session and reduced state spending by $1.75 billion over the last two years.
Better news for two of my bills at meetings this afternoon.
The first would prohibit the State Police from infiltrating undercover agents into groups engaging in lawful First Amendment activity. We had what we hope will be our last meeting to discuss the language in the bill.
The second bill would rename the Maryland Million, the annual day of racing for horses bred in Maryland. To honor the person who thought of this event, it would be called the Jim McKay Maryland Million. I met with the chair of the committee that will hear the bill, and she agreed to co-sponsor it.
From police surveillance to the race track.
To paraphrase what Jim McKay said in the opening sequence of Wide World of Sports: “Spanning the globe to bring you the constant variety of the sport of legislation.”
Monday, January 12, 2009
Concentrating the Mind
This Wednesday, January 14, is the first day of the session, but that’s a ceremonial occasion. January 27 is the more important date looming on the legislative calendar.
It’s the Bill Request Guarantee Date. That’s the last day I can ask that legislation be drafted and know that it will be ready in time for me to meet the next deadline – on February 12.
If I introduce my bills by that date, they will get a public hearing before one of the six standing committees in the House of Delegates. No such guarantees for legislation put in the hopper after 2/12.
Nothing concentrates the mind like a hanging, wrote Samuel Johnson, the 18th Century English author. In Annapolis, nothing concentrates the mind like a bill hearing. Everyone who would be affected by your legislation has an opportunity – and an obligation, to make their views known.
Twice last week, I ended meetings by saying, “Get back to me before January 27. If I need to introduce a bill to address the problem we’re discussing, I’ll still have time to do so.”
Most of my many bill requests were made weeks – or even months, ago. But some won’t be executed until January 27.
It’s the Bill Request Guarantee Date. That’s the last day I can ask that legislation be drafted and know that it will be ready in time for me to meet the next deadline – on February 12.
If I introduce my bills by that date, they will get a public hearing before one of the six standing committees in the House of Delegates. No such guarantees for legislation put in the hopper after 2/12.
Nothing concentrates the mind like a hanging, wrote Samuel Johnson, the 18th Century English author. In Annapolis, nothing concentrates the mind like a bill hearing. Everyone who would be affected by your legislation has an opportunity – and an obligation, to make their views known.
Twice last week, I ended meetings by saying, “Get back to me before January 27. If I need to introduce a bill to address the problem we’re discussing, I’ll still have time to do so.”
Most of my many bill requests were made weeks – or even months, ago. But some won’t be executed until January 27.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)