The tea party movement came to Annapolis today.
A resolution to impeach the Attorney General was debated on the House floor and then considered by my committee.
There is absolutely no basis in law for impeaching the Attorney General because he wrote a legal opinion on same-sex marriage that some members disagree with. By no stretch of legal reasoning does it constitute “incompetency, willful neglect of duty or misdemeanor in office.”
Nonetheless, over the last two days, our attention has been diverted from the legislation properly before us to this attention getter.
In the meetings I participated in yesterday, we decided that the appropriate forum for acting on this matter was not the full House but the Judiciary Committee.
During today’s floor debate, I reminded my colleagues that both the Nixon and Clinton impeachment resolutions were referred to the Judiciary Committee. I also noted that a motion to expel a Maryland state senator twelve years ago was first sent to the Joint Committee on Legislative Ethics.
Explaining my vote in committee, I stated, “The appropriate forum to decide whether the Attorney General correctly reasoned that the state may recognize same-sex marriages performed in another state is not the floor of the House of Delegates. It is not the Judiciary Committee. It is a court of law.”
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Tuesday, March 30 – No means no
No opposition means there’s no opposition.
I hope.
No one signed up to testify against my two bills in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. The chairman took note of that after I finished testifying on the first.
That legislation deals with legal liability for architectural and design firms when their employees enter on a third party’s property during a construction or renovation project. The example I gave was setting foot on a railroad property to make an assessment of a bridge overhead.
Arcane for sure.
The second was my bill extending the reporter’s shield law to student journalists for college newspapers. The chairman repeated the first argument I made in my written testimony.
But unanimity is not busting out all over Annapolis.
I was in back-to-back meetings about two very controversial issues: impeachment of Attorney General Doug Gansler because of his legal opinion that the State can recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states and a budget bill amendment that would cut funds for the Environmental Law Clinic at the University of Maryland Law School because it sued Perdue Farms for allegedly violating the Clean Water Act.
What we decided will be known shortly.
I hope.
No one signed up to testify against my two bills in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. The chairman took note of that after I finished testifying on the first.
That legislation deals with legal liability for architectural and design firms when their employees enter on a third party’s property during a construction or renovation project. The example I gave was setting foot on a railroad property to make an assessment of a bridge overhead.
Arcane for sure.
The second was my bill extending the reporter’s shield law to student journalists for college newspapers. The chairman repeated the first argument I made in my written testimony.
But unanimity is not busting out all over Annapolis.
I was in back-to-back meetings about two very controversial issues: impeachment of Attorney General Doug Gansler because of his legal opinion that the State can recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states and a budget bill amendment that would cut funds for the Environmental Law Clinic at the University of Maryland Law School because it sued Perdue Farms for allegedly violating the Clean Water Act.
What we decided will be known shortly.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Monday, March 29 – Why is this Crossover different?
Crossover and Passover coincide this year.
Crossover is the deadline for House bills to receive a constitutional majority, 71 votes, and cross over to a Senate committee, which will hold a public hearing on the legislation. Same for Senate bills coming to the House.
If you miss this deadline, your bill goes to the Rules Committee. It may still get a hearing but at a later date.
Time is not your friend in these last two weeks. So that delay can be fatal.
Because Passover begins tonight, the crossover deadline has been extended from today to tomorrow.
When we reconvene, I will offer this prayer:
Why is this Crossover different from all others?
At the seder table last night and tonight, the youngest child asks: “Why is this night different from all other nights?”
The first time that Jewish boys, and more recently girls, are able to read the Four Questions in Hebrew – in front of their extended family, is a proud moment indeed.
We call this holiday Passover because the Angel of Death, the malechamovitz, killed the first born sons of Egyptian families but passed over the houses of Pharaoh’s slaves, the Jews.
After this tenth and final plague, Pharaoh let my people go.
The exodus to freedom has inspired many generations and many peoples.
In the Palm Sunday gospel, Luke writes of the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, "Go and make preparations for us to eat the Passover."
In 1968, Dr. Maryin Luther King, Jr. was planning to join the seder of Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, who had stood beside him on the march from Selman to Birmingham. An assassin’s bullet prevented that celebration.
Last year, a seder was held in the White House for the first time. The search for the hidden piece of matzo, the afikomen, was conducted by the only two children present – Malia and Sasha.
Wherever the seder is held, it concludes with a declaration - in centuries past a dream, but now a reality:
Next year in Jerusalem.
Amen.
Crossover is the deadline for House bills to receive a constitutional majority, 71 votes, and cross over to a Senate committee, which will hold a public hearing on the legislation. Same for Senate bills coming to the House.
If you miss this deadline, your bill goes to the Rules Committee. It may still get a hearing but at a later date.
Time is not your friend in these last two weeks. So that delay can be fatal.
Because Passover begins tonight, the crossover deadline has been extended from today to tomorrow.
When we reconvene, I will offer this prayer:
Why is this Crossover different from all others?
At the seder table last night and tonight, the youngest child asks: “Why is this night different from all other nights?”
The first time that Jewish boys, and more recently girls, are able to read the Four Questions in Hebrew – in front of their extended family, is a proud moment indeed.
We call this holiday Passover because the Angel of Death, the malechamovitz, killed the first born sons of Egyptian families but passed over the houses of Pharaoh’s slaves, the Jews.
After this tenth and final plague, Pharaoh let my people go.
The exodus to freedom has inspired many generations and many peoples.
In the Palm Sunday gospel, Luke writes of the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, "Go and make preparations for us to eat the Passover."
In 1968, Dr. Maryin Luther King, Jr. was planning to join the seder of Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, who had stood beside him on the march from Selman to Birmingham. An assassin’s bullet prevented that celebration.
Last year, a seder was held in the White House for the first time. The search for the hidden piece of matzo, the afikomen, was conducted by the only two children present – Malia and Sasha.
Wherever the seder is held, it concludes with a declaration - in centuries past a dream, but now a reality:
Next year in Jerusalem.
Amen.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Friday, March 26 – Then and Now
“The Chamber of Commerce opposed the bill then. They oppose this modest change now.”
I was speaking on the House floor, in response to another delegate’s point that the Chamber opposed the SLAPP bill I was defending.
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation are brought to intimidate opponents, usually an individual or a neighborhood association, not to win in court.
I sponsored the SLAPP bill when we passed it six years ago. I drafted the amendments to it this week.
Four years ago, I introduced legislation that would authorize a court to act before fraud or voter suppression stains the electoral process. The court can intervene if there are reasonable grounds to believe someone is about to violate the law.
For the first time, this legislation will be debated on the Senate floor. By a 6-5 margin, a Senate committee gave it a favorable report last night.
Today, I spoke to one of the Democrats on that panel. I was amazed to learn that he had voted against my bill because he feared that it would be used to harass groups doing voter registration.
I told him the bill is modeled on a provision in the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965. He assured me he’d switch his vote.
I was speaking on the House floor, in response to another delegate’s point that the Chamber opposed the SLAPP bill I was defending.
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation are brought to intimidate opponents, usually an individual or a neighborhood association, not to win in court.
I sponsored the SLAPP bill when we passed it six years ago. I drafted the amendments to it this week.
Four years ago, I introduced legislation that would authorize a court to act before fraud or voter suppression stains the electoral process. The court can intervene if there are reasonable grounds to believe someone is about to violate the law.
For the first time, this legislation will be debated on the Senate floor. By a 6-5 margin, a Senate committee gave it a favorable report last night.
Today, I spoke to one of the Democrats on that panel. I was amazed to learn that he had voted against my bill because he feared that it would be used to harass groups doing voter registration.
I told him the bill is modeled on a provision in the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965. He assured me he’d switch his vote.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Thursday, March 25 – Summer Flowering
A dead bill in another forum may smell as sweet - eventually.
Some of my legislation may not flower before we adjourn, but some of these proposals will be worked on after the session ends.
Consigning a bill to summer study often delays the inevitable, but it doesn’t have to.
I realized last fall that my bill to fund loan forgiveness for public service attorneys was not going to pass this session.
That came about when I learned that the Maryland Access to Justice Commission, an arm of the judicial branch, had crafted a bill to increase funding for the Maryland Legal Services Corporation.
That bill would be in the line ahead of mine this session, but that commission could work on my idea next. Its support would be a big boost for my idea in 2011.
A second summer study came about after the committee chairman said at the public hearing on another bill of mine that he wanted to examine in greater depth how the state allocates the money from the legal settlement with the cigarette industry.
He’s already told me I can be an active participant in that review.
So I won’t be spending the entire summer on the campaign trail or Camden Yards.
Some of my legislation may not flower before we adjourn, but some of these proposals will be worked on after the session ends.
Consigning a bill to summer study often delays the inevitable, but it doesn’t have to.
I realized last fall that my bill to fund loan forgiveness for public service attorneys was not going to pass this session.
That came about when I learned that the Maryland Access to Justice Commission, an arm of the judicial branch, had crafted a bill to increase funding for the Maryland Legal Services Corporation.
That bill would be in the line ahead of mine this session, but that commission could work on my idea next. Its support would be a big boost for my idea in 2011.
A second summer study came about after the committee chairman said at the public hearing on another bill of mine that he wanted to examine in greater depth how the state allocates the money from the legal settlement with the cigarette industry.
He’s already told me I can be an active participant in that review.
So I won’t be spending the entire summer on the campaign trail or Camden Yards.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Wednesday, March 24 – On the lead but no longer unanimous
I became the lead sponsor of one bill and lost 25 votes on another during this morning’s floor session.
Mine is not the only bill that would require the Public Service Commission to make comparative information about electricity prices easily accessible to the public.
Last week, I was told that another delegate’s legislation would be the vehicle for this issue and I would be riding along as a co-sponsor.
“No problem,” I responded. “I can still tell my constituents that I played an important role. I don’t have to be the lead sponsor.”
I learned today that change has come to Annapolis. I’m now the lead sponsor.
Most consumers do not realize that when they sign a standard contract to lease or buy goods or services, they may be giving up their rights to take any contract disputes to court.
Some arbitration organizations almost invariably rule for the business, not the consumer. My House Bill 379 would require these companies to make data available on the outcome of their cases.
This legislation passed the House, 140-0, until one by one, 25 members, overwhelmingly Republicans, stood up to ask that their votes be changed from green to red.
I guess they had forgotten that the banks oppose my bill.
Mine is not the only bill that would require the Public Service Commission to make comparative information about electricity prices easily accessible to the public.
Last week, I was told that another delegate’s legislation would be the vehicle for this issue and I would be riding along as a co-sponsor.
“No problem,” I responded. “I can still tell my constituents that I played an important role. I don’t have to be the lead sponsor.”
I learned today that change has come to Annapolis. I’m now the lead sponsor.
Most consumers do not realize that when they sign a standard contract to lease or buy goods or services, they may be giving up their rights to take any contract disputes to court.
Some arbitration organizations almost invariably rule for the business, not the consumer. My House Bill 379 would require these companies to make data available on the outcome of their cases.
This legislation passed the House, 140-0, until one by one, 25 members, overwhelmingly Republicans, stood up to ask that their votes be changed from green to red.
I guess they had forgotten that the banks oppose my bill.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Tuesday, March 23 – Channeling Harpo
“He’s honest but you gotta watch him.”
Chico Marx says that about Harpo in “A Day at the Races.”
If I had followed a lobbyist’s advice today, people would have said of me, “He’s for the bill but you gotta watch him.”
The lobbyist, whom I respect, asked me about a bill I have co-sponsored.
“Are you going to vote for it?” this person asked.
“Of course, it’s important to many of my constituents,” I replied.
“Can you ask members of the committee that has the bill not to vote for it?”
“Absolutely not. I’m not going to work both ends against the middle.”
Harpo once burned a candle at both ends. But he’s not an elected official.
If you’re for a bill, you want it to pass. If you act otherwise, people are watching.
Chico Marx says that about Harpo in “A Day at the Races.”
If I had followed a lobbyist’s advice today, people would have said of me, “He’s for the bill but you gotta watch him.”
The lobbyist, whom I respect, asked me about a bill I have co-sponsored.
“Are you going to vote for it?” this person asked.
“Of course, it’s important to many of my constituents,” I replied.
“Can you ask members of the committee that has the bill not to vote for it?”
“Absolutely not. I’m not going to work both ends against the middle.”
Harpo once burned a candle at both ends. But he’s not an elected official.
If you’re for a bill, you want it to pass. If you act otherwise, people are watching.
Monday, March 22, 2010
March 22 – Working by choice
“Being a woman is no longer a pre-existing condition.”
If you were glued to the floor debate on CSPAN like I was, you heard that talking point from Speaker Pelosi and other Democratic women.
Far too many Americans – both male and female, have decided not to change jobs because a pre-existing condition would leave them uninsurable by their new employer. This roadblock to individual advancement is now a thing of the past.
But this reform also reminded me of language in an abortion case decided by the Supreme Court.
“The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives,” wrote Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Family planning and, to a lesser degree, abortion have enabled countless women to pursue their chosen role in both the workplace and the home. That opportunity will be expanded by health care reform.
If you were glued to the floor debate on CSPAN like I was, you heard that talking point from Speaker Pelosi and other Democratic women.
Far too many Americans – both male and female, have decided not to change jobs because a pre-existing condition would leave them uninsurable by their new employer. This roadblock to individual advancement is now a thing of the past.
But this reform also reminded me of language in an abortion case decided by the Supreme Court.
“The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives,” wrote Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Family planning and, to a lesser degree, abortion have enabled countless women to pursue their chosen role in both the workplace and the home. That opportunity will be expanded by health care reform.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Friday, March 19 – Cultural and Political Stereotypes
Rosenberg is "probably to the left of Bernie Sanders," writes a blogger on mdshooters.com.
Mr. Sanders is a Democratic Socialist and a member of the United States Senate.
I meet one of the criteria in Alvy Singer's cultural stereotype of a Jewish left-wing liberal in “Annie Hall.” I lived on the Upper West Side of Manhattan during law school.
But my father doesn't have Ben Shahn drawings, and I didn't go to socialist summer camps. It was Reform Judaism summer camp instead.
As to the blogger's political stereotype, I succeed in Annapolis when I seek common ground.
I raise issues that others may not - gun control and civil rights, among them, but I'm not a majority of one.
Incremental progress is better than press releases bemoaning unfavorable reports.
By the way, The Almanac of American Politics has called Senator Sanders a "practical" and "successful legislator."
----
Clarification: I wrote last week that “the alleged SLAPP [Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation] is the suit filed by the Cordish Cos., asserting fraudulent acts in the referendum petition drive opposing a slots facility at Arundel Mills.”
The only defendant in that suit is the Anne Arundel County Board of Elections. Maryland law defines a SLAPP suit as an action "brought against a party who has communicated with a federal, State, or local government body or the public at large."
However, Stop Slots at the Mall, the coalition that led the referendum effort, has filed a motion to intervene in that lawsuit.
Mr. Sanders is a Democratic Socialist and a member of the United States Senate.
I meet one of the criteria in Alvy Singer's cultural stereotype of a Jewish left-wing liberal in “Annie Hall.” I lived on the Upper West Side of Manhattan during law school.
But my father doesn't have Ben Shahn drawings, and I didn't go to socialist summer camps. It was Reform Judaism summer camp instead.
As to the blogger's political stereotype, I succeed in Annapolis when I seek common ground.
I raise issues that others may not - gun control and civil rights, among them, but I'm not a majority of one.
Incremental progress is better than press releases bemoaning unfavorable reports.
By the way, The Almanac of American Politics has called Senator Sanders a "practical" and "successful legislator."
----
Clarification: I wrote last week that “the alleged SLAPP [Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation] is the suit filed by the Cordish Cos., asserting fraudulent acts in the referendum petition drive opposing a slots facility at Arundel Mills.”
The only defendant in that suit is the Anne Arundel County Board of Elections. Maryland law defines a SLAPP suit as an action "brought against a party who has communicated with a federal, State, or local government body or the public at large."
However, Stop Slots at the Mall, the coalition that led the referendum effort, has filed a motion to intervene in that lawsuit.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Thursday, March 18 – Not taken for granted
“Did you have to ask me that?”
I had asked my Democratic colleague, “Will you vote against the two death penalty bills in our committee?”
“I’m not taking anybody’s vote for granted,” I replied.
We will send a strong message if every committee member who opposes capital punishment votes against legislation that would expand the death penalty.
Shortly before this conversation took place on the House floor, I had a chance conversation with a lobbyist who asked me about my bill dealing with education requirements for funeral directors.
The bill had sailed through the House, without any opposition. It will have a public hearing in the Senate next week.
“I’ll check with someone who alerted me to a problem on a similar bill several years ago,” I replied. “I won’t take it for granted that the bill will pass.”
I had asked my Democratic colleague, “Will you vote against the two death penalty bills in our committee?”
“I’m not taking anybody’s vote for granted,” I replied.
We will send a strong message if every committee member who opposes capital punishment votes against legislation that would expand the death penalty.
Shortly before this conversation took place on the House floor, I had a chance conversation with a lobbyist who asked me about my bill dealing with education requirements for funeral directors.
The bill had sailed through the House, without any opposition. It will have a public hearing in the Senate next week.
“I’ll check with someone who alerted me to a problem on a similar bill several years ago,” I replied. “I won’t take it for granted that the bill will pass.”
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Wednesday, March 17 – SLAPPs and Slots
“That’s my bill!” I said to myself early this morning.
An article in the Sun referred to a state statute that "prohibits meritless suits brought by large private interests, often real estate developers, to deter ordinary citizens from exercising their political or legal rights."
That quote is from Alan Rifkin, the lawyer for opponents of a casino at Arundel Mills.
He’s referring to my legislation designed to short circuit SLAPP suits – Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.
Typically, SLAPPs are frivolous lawsuits brought by a well-heeled business to intimidate an individual or community association that’s fighting a proposed development but lacks the money to defend itself in court.
Goliath vs. David.
In this instance, the alleged SLAPP is the suit filed by the Cordish Cos., asserting fraudulent acts in the referendum petition drive opposing a slots facility at Arundel Mills.
Just as the 1st Amendment equally protects Glenn Beck and George Soros, the SLAPP law protects a tiny neighborhood group and Magna Entertainment Corp.
An article in the Sun referred to a state statute that "prohibits meritless suits brought by large private interests, often real estate developers, to deter ordinary citizens from exercising their political or legal rights."
That quote is from Alan Rifkin, the lawyer for opponents of a casino at Arundel Mills.
He’s referring to my legislation designed to short circuit SLAPP suits – Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.
Typically, SLAPPs are frivolous lawsuits brought by a well-heeled business to intimidate an individual or community association that’s fighting a proposed development but lacks the money to defend itself in court.
Goliath vs. David.
In this instance, the alleged SLAPP is the suit filed by the Cordish Cos., asserting fraudulent acts in the referendum petition drive opposing a slots facility at Arundel Mills.
Just as the 1st Amendment equally protects Glenn Beck and George Soros, the SLAPP law protects a tiny neighborhood group and Magna Entertainment Corp.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Tuesday, March 16 – Half Full
By nature, I think the glass is half full.
But in Annapolis, I don’t take that for granted.
Ten years ago, I sponsored the bill creating a special fund for the money Maryland received from its legal settlement with the tobacco industry.
We targeted this money to address the health problems caused by tobacco use: preventing kids from starting to smoke, helping adults to break their addiction, and research and treatment for the diseases attributable to tobacco.
For example, a $250,000 grant to a young researcher at Johns Hopkins in 2004 was the starting point for a blood test that now monitors tumors in cancer patients.
However, the fiscal crisis has resulted in the cigarette money being siphoned off to other uses.
So I introduced a bill to redirect that money to my original priorities.
At the end of today's hearing on my bill, the committee chairman said that since there were a lot of unmet health needs, it was time to take a look at how we spend this money in the future. He told the committee there would be a summer study.
I’m already following up to make sure that the glass is flowing over at the conclusion of that study.
But in Annapolis, I don’t take that for granted.
Ten years ago, I sponsored the bill creating a special fund for the money Maryland received from its legal settlement with the tobacco industry.
We targeted this money to address the health problems caused by tobacco use: preventing kids from starting to smoke, helping adults to break their addiction, and research and treatment for the diseases attributable to tobacco.
For example, a $250,000 grant to a young researcher at Johns Hopkins in 2004 was the starting point for a blood test that now monitors tumors in cancer patients.
However, the fiscal crisis has resulted in the cigarette money being siphoned off to other uses.
So I introduced a bill to redirect that money to my original priorities.
At the end of today's hearing on my bill, the committee chairman said that since there were a lot of unmet health needs, it was time to take a look at how we spend this money in the future. He told the committee there would be a summer study.
I’m already following up to make sure that the glass is flowing over at the conclusion of that study.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Monday, March 15 – Without a Vote
“I don’t have a vote – for now.”
That’s what I told a lobbyist who came to see me about my one of my bills.
After you introduce legislation, it’s assigned to a committee. Your bill is now in the possession of that committee – literally and legislatively.
If an amendment to your bill is being considered, you can express your opinion, but the committee decides.
When the proposed change is controversial, not having a vote can be a blessing in disguise.
----
The Sun article about my bagel brain has been posted on the website of the Maryland Nazi Party.
It’s springtime for gun control, as Mel Brooks would say.
That’s what I told a lobbyist who came to see me about my one of my bills.
After you introduce legislation, it’s assigned to a committee. Your bill is now in the possession of that committee – literally and legislatively.
If an amendment to your bill is being considered, you can express your opinion, but the committee decides.
When the proposed change is controversial, not having a vote can be a blessing in disguise.
----
The Sun article about my bagel brain has been posted on the website of the Maryland Nazi Party.
It’s springtime for gun control, as Mel Brooks would say.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Friday, March 12 - Bagel Brain Jews
"Bagel Brain Jews Want Your Bullets and Your Guns"
This anti-Semitic attack on myself and Senator Brian Frosh is the handiwork of the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership.
I ignored this foul slur when I first learned of it from a Google News Alert.
After it was mailed to residents in Senator Frosh's neighborhood, a Sun reporter asked me about it.
He accurately quoted me as saying: "I'm not going to allow them to deter me from what I believe we should be doing, nor is it going to prompt me to fall into the gutter with them."
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bal-md.flier13mar13,0,3259898.story
It was front page news that my committee and my chairman were criticized for "rude behavior and ravaging witnesses" by the president of the Women Legislators of Maryland.
As I've written in this diary, witnesses need to be asked more tough questions, not fewer.
One constituent wrote me: "80 million of law abiding gun owners knows this [my bill is "just a political agenda rather than what's best for the citizenry."] and they sure remember it at re-election time."
My 28 years in Annapolis have taught me otherwise. If the voters know that you make your decisions on controversial bills after serious thought, they won't throw you out of office because of one vote.
Advocates on the right and the left may wish that were so, but it rarely is.
This anti-Semitic attack on myself and Senator Brian Frosh is the handiwork of the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership.
I ignored this foul slur when I first learned of it from a Google News Alert.
After it was mailed to residents in Senator Frosh's neighborhood, a Sun reporter asked me about it.
He accurately quoted me as saying: "I'm not going to allow them to deter me from what I believe we should be doing, nor is it going to prompt me to fall into the gutter with them."
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bal-md.flier13mar13,0,3259898.story
It was front page news that my committee and my chairman were criticized for "rude behavior and ravaging witnesses" by the president of the Women Legislators of Maryland.
As I've written in this diary, witnesses need to be asked more tough questions, not fewer.
One constituent wrote me: "80 million of law abiding gun owners knows this [my bill is "just a political agenda rather than what's best for the citizenry."] and they sure remember it at re-election time."
My 28 years in Annapolis have taught me otherwise. If the voters know that you make your decisions on controversial bills after serious thought, they won't throw you out of office because of one vote.
Advocates on the right and the left may wish that were so, but it rarely is.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Thursday, March 11 – Gunning for an answer
I don’t think I’ve quoted Justice Scalia before.
But today I did.
Testifying on my gun control legislation, I read from his decision striking down a law prohibiting a citizen from keeping a gun in the home for self defense.
"Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
I cited the Justice because witnesses had wrongly claimed that provisions in bills heard before mine violated the 2nd Amendment’s protection of the right to bear arms.
The fate of my bill won’t be decided by a judge but by the answer to a familiar question: Why do we need this bill?
In this instance, my chairman phrased it this way: Does our existing licensing system adequately prevent the sale of firearms to criminals?
But today I did.
Testifying on my gun control legislation, I read from his decision striking down a law prohibiting a citizen from keeping a gun in the home for self defense.
"Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
I cited the Justice because witnesses had wrongly claimed that provisions in bills heard before mine violated the 2nd Amendment’s protection of the right to bear arms.
The fate of my bill won’t be decided by a judge but by the answer to a familiar question: Why do we need this bill?
In this instance, my chairman phrased it this way: Does our existing licensing system adequately prevent the sale of firearms to criminals?
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Wednesday, March 10 – Equal Protection for Soros and Beck
What do George Soros and Glenn Beck have in common?
Soros, a survivor of Nazi and Communist oppression in his native Hungary, has funded various liberal advocacy and research organizations.
Beck was a Top 40 DJ before he became a leading voice of the conservative movement as a host on Fox News.
Yesterday, discussion of my libel tourism bill on the House floor was delayed 24 hours.
This legislation would protect Marylanders from libel judgments in a foreign court if that country does not provide at least as much protection for freedom of speech and press as our federal and state constitutions.
“Will this bill help George Soros?” another delegate asked me this morning.
“The First Amendment equally protects George Soros and Glenn Beck,” I replied.
Soros, a survivor of Nazi and Communist oppression in his native Hungary, has funded various liberal advocacy and research organizations.
Beck was a Top 40 DJ before he became a leading voice of the conservative movement as a host on Fox News.
Yesterday, discussion of my libel tourism bill on the House floor was delayed 24 hours.
This legislation would protect Marylanders from libel judgments in a foreign court if that country does not provide at least as much protection for freedom of speech and press as our federal and state constitutions.
“Will this bill help George Soros?” another delegate asked me this morning.
“The First Amendment equally protects George Soros and Glenn Beck,” I replied.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Tuesday, March 9 – Other people’s work
Sometimes, other people can do the work for you.
You may remember that the doctors objected to my bill allowing homeless minors to provide consent for their medical treatment.
I asked the bill’s advocate to meet with the pediatricians’ lobbyist. I have heard that their talks were productive.
Today, I was told a letter is on its way from the physicians, withdrawing their objections.
Now I’ll follow up with key members and staff of the committee that will vote on the bill.
Sometimes, a lawyer can hedge as well as a politician.
The attorney from the State Bar Association raised specific objections to my bill requiring board of directors or shareholder approval before a Maryland corporation can make an independent campaign expenditure.
It was far more effective than if he had made the tired old claim that corporations would flee the state for Delaware if this burden was imposed upon them.
Then a committee member asked if he could support the bill if certain provisions were removed.
“It would probably be ok, making it more difficult to testify against it,” he artfully responded.
You may remember that the doctors objected to my bill allowing homeless minors to provide consent for their medical treatment.
I asked the bill’s advocate to meet with the pediatricians’ lobbyist. I have heard that their talks were productive.
Today, I was told a letter is on its way from the physicians, withdrawing their objections.
Now I’ll follow up with key members and staff of the committee that will vote on the bill.
Sometimes, a lawyer can hedge as well as a politician.
The attorney from the State Bar Association raised specific objections to my bill requiring board of directors or shareholder approval before a Maryland corporation can make an independent campaign expenditure.
It was far more effective than if he had made the tired old claim that corporations would flee the state for Delaware if this burden was imposed upon them.
Then a committee member asked if he could support the bill if certain provisions were removed.
“It would probably be ok, making it more difficult to testify against it,” he artfully responded.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Monday, March 8 – Free Speech Reversal
“Can I read it first?”
I was on my way to the Amendment Office with the advocates’ proposed changes to my legislation.
And I did read the bill with the staff lawyer who would draft the amendments before I gave my OK.
It is an advocate or lobbyist’s job to advance their cause, but it is ultimately the member’s decision to make as to what is sound public policy.
----
Last week, you may recall, I testified on a bill of mine that was prompted by a Supreme Court decision.
Next fall, the court will hear a case that may affect a law that I helped pass four years ago.
Rev. Fred Phipps and the Westboro Baptist Church are infamous for their anti-gay sloganeering. "Fag troops" and "Thank God for dead soldiers" were among the signs they displayed outside the funeral in Westminster, Md. of Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq.
The Marine’s father sued in federal court and won a $5 million defamation judgment. The Supreme Court announced today that it will decide whether the church members’ right to free speech is violated by that damage award.
Our bill makes it a crime to knowingly obstruct another person’s access to a funeral, address speech to a person attending a funeral that is likely to produce an imminent breach of the peace, or picket within 100 feet of a funeral.
Rev. Phipps and his followers were not prosecuted for violating that law. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court’s decision next term will discuss the free speech principles that guided us in crafting our statute.
I was on my way to the Amendment Office with the advocates’ proposed changes to my legislation.
And I did read the bill with the staff lawyer who would draft the amendments before I gave my OK.
It is an advocate or lobbyist’s job to advance their cause, but it is ultimately the member’s decision to make as to what is sound public policy.
----
Last week, you may recall, I testified on a bill of mine that was prompted by a Supreme Court decision.
Next fall, the court will hear a case that may affect a law that I helped pass four years ago.
Rev. Fred Phipps and the Westboro Baptist Church are infamous for their anti-gay sloganeering. "Fag troops" and "Thank God for dead soldiers" were among the signs they displayed outside the funeral in Westminster, Md. of Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq.
The Marine’s father sued in federal court and won a $5 million defamation judgment. The Supreme Court announced today that it will decide whether the church members’ right to free speech is violated by that damage award.
Our bill makes it a crime to knowingly obstruct another person’s access to a funeral, address speech to a person attending a funeral that is likely to produce an imminent breach of the peace, or picket within 100 feet of a funeral.
Rev. Phipps and his followers were not prosecuted for violating that law. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court’s decision next term will discuss the free speech principles that guided us in crafting our statute.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Friday, March 5 – Nothing is guaranteed
No votes were taken today, but progress to report on several bills.
Two of my bills have been assigned to subcommittees.
That’s no guarantee of favorable action. Nothing is guaranteed in the legislative process.
But a committee chair doesn’t ask members to work on a bill that the chair wants to kill.
On the Cigarette Restitution Fund, the interested parties had positive discussions about how to streamline the distribution of funds to reduce smoking among teens and treat those with tobacco-related illnesses.
Amendments have been drafted on my bill to require stockholder approval before a Maryland corporation can make an independent political expenditure. I’ve shared these changes with the people who expressed concerns at the hearing on the Senate version of this legislation.
My objective for one of my bills is a legitimate summer study. The chair of the committee that would conduct that review is interested in doing so.
No votes were taken today, but progress to report on several bills.
Two of my bills have been assigned to subcommittees.
That’s no guarantee of favorable action. Nothing is guaranteed in the legislative process.
But a committee chair doesn’t ask members to work on a bill that the chair wants to kill.
On the Cigarette Restitution Fund, the interested parties had positive discussions about how to streamline the distribution of funds to reduce smoking among teens and treat those with tobacco-related illnesses.
Amendments have been drafted on my bill to require stockholder approval before a Maryland corporation can make an independent political expenditure. I’ve shared these changes with the people who expressed concerns at the hearing on the Senate version of this legislation.
My objective for one of my bills is a legitimate summer study. The chair of the committee that would conduct that review is interested in doing so.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Thursday, March 4 – Resolving the differences
In Annapolis, reconciliation takes place in conference committees.
For a bill to become law, it must pass both houses of the legislature in identical form.
If one of my bills passes the House of Delegates and the Senate adopts substantive amendments to it, the House can accept those changes or request a conference committee “to resolve the difference between the two houses.”
No such committees have been formed yet this session.
But twice today, I strategized about what compromise a conference committee might make if the House amended a bill I’m working on.
If we accept an unfriendly amendment because it brings us the votes needed for the legislation to pass the House, will the conference committee sufficiently diminish the negative impact of that change?
That depends, in large measure, on who serves on the conference committee.
Who selects those people?
The chair of the committee that first considered the bill.
For a bill to become law, it must pass both houses of the legislature in identical form.
If one of my bills passes the House of Delegates and the Senate adopts substantive amendments to it, the House can accept those changes or request a conference committee “to resolve the difference between the two houses.”
No such committees have been formed yet this session.
But twice today, I strategized about what compromise a conference committee might make if the House amended a bill I’m working on.
If we accept an unfriendly amendment because it brings us the votes needed for the legislation to pass the House, will the conference committee sufficiently diminish the negative impact of that change?
That depends, in large measure, on who serves on the conference committee.
Who selects those people?
The chair of the committee that first considered the bill.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Wednesday, March 3 – Moving testimony
“I am here only by chance. I could have been the one walking down the street and killed by the drunk driver. Miriam Frankl’s friends here today don’t want to lose any more of their friends.”
Miriam Frankl was the Johns Hopkins student who died last fall at the hands of a driver with a lengthy record of drunk driving violations.
I haven’t witnessed such moving testimony since we heard from the childhood victims of sexual abuse.
I wrote earlier this session that we can’t eliminate problems. We try to reduce the number of fatal accidents, the number of children poisoned by lead paint.
----
The attorney was not a constitutional lawyer, but he should have known better.
He testified that my bill violated the constitutional separation of powers.
Last year, the Supreme Court issued an opinion interpreting the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
As was the case with my Lilly Ledbetter bill last session, this decision does not limit the authority of the Congress and state legislatures to modify the relevant federal or state law.
If a student of mine made such a misguided argument, like Professor Kingsfield in "Paper Chase," I would have given him a dime to call his mother and tell her “there is serious doubt about your ever becoming a lawyer."
(No cell phones in 1973 when the movie came out; Google today so I could get the exact quote.)
Miriam Frankl was the Johns Hopkins student who died last fall at the hands of a driver with a lengthy record of drunk driving violations.
I haven’t witnessed such moving testimony since we heard from the childhood victims of sexual abuse.
I wrote earlier this session that we can’t eliminate problems. We try to reduce the number of fatal accidents, the number of children poisoned by lead paint.
----
The attorney was not a constitutional lawyer, but he should have known better.
He testified that my bill violated the constitutional separation of powers.
Last year, the Supreme Court issued an opinion interpreting the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
As was the case with my Lilly Ledbetter bill last session, this decision does not limit the authority of the Congress and state legislatures to modify the relevant federal or state law.
If a student of mine made such a misguided argument, like Professor Kingsfield in "Paper Chase," I would have given him a dime to call his mother and tell her “there is serious doubt about your ever becoming a lawyer."
(No cell phones in 1973 when the movie came out; Google today so I could get the exact quote.)
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Tuesday, March 2 – A Citizen Legislature
So this delegate walks into the Chairman’s office – in Annapolis speak, the back room.
I was about to make an impassioned 1st Amendment argument for my libel tourism bill.
But discussion of legislation was put on hold.
The delegate wanted my chairman’s advice on how to handle a theft charge against one of his clients.
We are, after all, a citizen legislature.
An hour later, I walked into the Economic Matters Committee hearing room.
My share of bills has been heard there over the years, but this was the first time I was testifying on legislation dealing with utilities.
“Each of us shops online for the best price for hotels, air travel, and books,” I told the committee. “However, very few of our constituents are going online to compare utility costs.”
House Bill 744 would require the Public Service Commission to make comparative information about electricity prices easily accessible to the public.
The chairman didn’t ask me any questions, but he did ask a later witness about how to pay for creating the website and the other educational efforts mandated by my bill.
A very positive sign.
I‘ll talk further with the chairman on the House floor tomorrow.
I was about to make an impassioned 1st Amendment argument for my libel tourism bill.
But discussion of legislation was put on hold.
The delegate wanted my chairman’s advice on how to handle a theft charge against one of his clients.
We are, after all, a citizen legislature.
An hour later, I walked into the Economic Matters Committee hearing room.
My share of bills has been heard there over the years, but this was the first time I was testifying on legislation dealing with utilities.
“Each of us shops online for the best price for hotels, air travel, and books,” I told the committee. “However, very few of our constituents are going online to compare utility costs.”
House Bill 744 would require the Public Service Commission to make comparative information about electricity prices easily accessible to the public.
The chairman didn’t ask me any questions, but he did ask a later witness about how to pay for creating the website and the other educational efforts mandated by my bill.
A very positive sign.
I‘ll talk further with the chairman on the House floor tomorrow.
Monday, March 1 – Nary an acknowledging word
The truth is an accident for right wing bloggers, pundits, and Fox News hosts.
Former Governor Ehrlich has caught the disease.
Governor O’Malley raised the sales tax “as a crippling recession hit the state and the nation,” Ehrlich asserts in an op-ed in yestyerday’s Washington Post.
The special session of 2007 took place before the recession began and nearly a year before the economic collapse in the fall of 2008.
Yet nary an acknowledging word is heard of the national economy a few sentences later. “Two years after the sales tax hike, more than 100,000 jobs have been lost in Maryland,” writes the former Governor, “and our state’s unemployment rate has hit a 26-year high.”
The former Governor also writes: “A mere 19 percent of Marylanders support same-sex marriage, according to a recent Baltimore Sun poll.”
That poll was taken two years ago, which doesn’t meet anybody’s definition of recent. My educated guess: More Marylanders would favor same-sex marriage in a poll that really was recent.
Couple this op-ed with the attack on the Governor’s trip to Iraq, and you get a preview of the kind of campaign candidate Ehrlich would wage this fall.
Former Governor Ehrlich has caught the disease.
Governor O’Malley raised the sales tax “as a crippling recession hit the state and the nation,” Ehrlich asserts in an op-ed in yestyerday’s Washington Post.
The special session of 2007 took place before the recession began and nearly a year before the economic collapse in the fall of 2008.
Yet nary an acknowledging word is heard of the national economy a few sentences later. “Two years after the sales tax hike, more than 100,000 jobs have been lost in Maryland,” writes the former Governor, “and our state’s unemployment rate has hit a 26-year high.”
The former Governor also writes: “A mere 19 percent of Marylanders support same-sex marriage, according to a recent Baltimore Sun poll.”
That poll was taken two years ago, which doesn’t meet anybody’s definition of recent. My educated guess: More Marylanders would favor same-sex marriage in a poll that really was recent.
Couple this op-ed with the attack on the Governor’s trip to Iraq, and you get a preview of the kind of campaign candidate Ehrlich would wage this fall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)