An advocate and I were discussing who should come to the “virtual” witness table with me.

The four of us would testify together – before questions are asked about the bill.

I wanted someone who is an expert on the issue my bill addresses.

I don’t want to be asked a question and have to respond by saying a witness who has yet to testify can answer that question better than I can.

Then I thought of another reason to have a witness “beside” me in the first group.

A lobbyist who frequently opposes my legislation had told me that one of his clients supported this bill.

Highlighting his support would be the equivalent of man bites dog.

Today is the Bill Introduction Guarantee Date.

Translated into English: If you introduced your bill by 5:00 this evening, you’re guaranteed a hearing.

However, you’re not guaranteed a vote by the committee that’s hearing your bill.

I’ve introduced 24 bills.

Nine have had hearings.

One will be voted on tomorrow – a very good sign.

I texted a committee chair about another.  The response: “I think I’m good on the policy.”  Also very good.

Another committee chair agreed to my suggestion that I draft amendments to one of my bills.

There are work groups on two of my bills.  I’m a participant in one of them.  All positive.

Plus, a former student, now a member of the legislature’s professional staff, reminded me this week of something I said in class more than once:

“Your name doesn’t have to be first on the bill, as long as you can justifiably tell your constituents that you played a part in accomplishing something.”

At one meeting today, I thought, but did not say, that if our discussions failed to bring about the desired result this session, I could introduce a stronger bill next year.

That, of course, assumes that the voters of the 41^st District will elect me to another four-year term.

I am not leaving that result to chance.

During another discussion this morning, I told a constituent that having our bill heard in Annapolis may prompt the people affected by it to be more responsive to our concerns than they would be if there was no bill.

Put another way, nothing concentrates the mind like a bill hearing.

All of the parties will be virtually meeting next Wednesday to discuss one of my bills.

(I decided not to say “all sides will be virtually meeting.”  Unlike some of my bills, the differences are not that great or longstanding.)

I was asked if I wanted to join the group.

My response: my staff can represent me at the first meeting.

If a second meeting is needed, that’s when I’ll be there.

Another of my bills would make it a crime to obstruct a proceeding of the executive or legislative branch of state government.

It’s already a crime to obstruct a proceeding of the judiciary.

Unsolicited, two organizations have told me that they will support the bill.

Today, I spoke with someone who was concerned that the bill would be wrongly applied to legitimate protest.

I didn’t try to reconcile those differences.

I’ll wait for Tuesday’s bill hearing.

If your amendment is adopted, you’re expected to vote for the bill.

I was told that early on in Annapolis.

Several years ago, my Republican friend Delegate Chris Shank modified that rule.

“If our amendment is adopted, we won’t speak against the bill on the floor,” Chris told me.

Unspoken was whether the bill would be discussed on the campaign trail.

My subcommittee met this morning.

Delegate Kathy Szeliga offered an amendment to a bill that she had opposed.

Her amendment was adopted.  Then she voted for the bill.

It just happened.

I will thank her for doing so.

As Grandma would say, “I was raised properly.”