Meeting offline

I chair the Subcommittee on Government Operations and Health Facilities.

After certain bills have a hearing before the full committee, they’re referred to the subcommittee.

We have eleven members and meet weekly.

If there’s a difference of opinion among the bill’s sponsor, a state agency, a service provider, or a lobbyist, we try to resolve it.

If we can’t, we’ll ask the relevant parties to meet offline to see if they can reach a compromise.

Sometimes, the subcommittee counsel and I will draft an amendment to help move those discussions forward.

Over the last two days, we came up with an amendment, with the input of another subcommittee member.

The bill’s sponsor and the lobbyists will meet to discuss it tomorrow morning.

PS  Senator Hettleman and I teach amendment drafting in our law school class, with significant help from a General Assembly drafter.

I try to practice what I teach, but political considerations sometimes intrude.

Researching and listening

I was strategizing with my staff about my bill hearings the next two weeks.

You put your bills in early.  Fifteen so far.  Your bills get heard early.

Hopefully they’re given a favorable committee report, which sends the bill to the full House for debate.

Whom can we get to testify in support of my bills?

What research will help make the case for the legislation?

Meanwhile, two of my bills have also been introduced in the Senate.

Listening to those bills hearings will be our best preparation for my bill hearings.

A More Diverse Community

We debated the redistricting map for the state legislature on the floor of the House of Delegates today.

One of the issues we debated was whether people are better served by a district with three delegates or one delegate.

This is what I said:

You’ve heard me talk about Pimlico Race Track once or twice on this floor. 

Well, last night I went to a meeting of the community compact for the neighborhoods surrounding the race track that will be very greatly affected by the future use of that site, and there’s a big difference in the demographics — in the race, in the religion — of the people on one side of the track and the people on the other side of the track.

Our City Council districts are single member.  The line between the two districts is the backstretch of the track.  

To represent a bigger area means you have a more diverse community that you answer to, that we answer to, as legislators, and that is a very good thing.  I will proudly vote for this resolution.

My Opening Day Prayer

As you may recall, I usually offer the opening prayer on the first day of the legislative session.

This year, a prayer was offered in memory of the passing that morning of Steve Sachs, the Attorney General of Maryland from 1979-87.

I offered my prayer this morning, our first floor session since opening day.

I added a sentence to mark the passing of Steve and my mother and their impact on my life.

 

“We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.”

Those are the words of President Abraham Lincoln, concluding his First Inaugural Address.

These words were spoken of Archbishop Desmond Tutu upon his passing last month:

He was “a leader of principle and pragmatism who gave meaning to the biblical insight that faith without works is dead.”

The chairmanship of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was among Archbishop Tutu’s works.

In this House, we have not seen the partisan rancor that afflicts our fellow legislators in Washington.

In the days before us, may we be guided by the words and the actions of great leaders, such as President Lincoln and Archbishop Tutu — by the better angels of our nature.

And may we remember those who mentored us and mothered us.

From silence to compromise

Silence may be golden.

But that’s not the case at a bill hearing.

The State has a study center to analyze data from various agencies.

However, the Abell Foundation has been unable to receive data to evaluate which programs better prepare prisoners for life on the outside after they serve their sentence.

My bill would treat prisoner data the same as is already the case for data on juveniles.

I testified that we had begun discussions with all of the interested parties to see if we could reach a compromise.

There was silence from the committee members.

My first reaction was that this lack of interest meant the bill was in trouble.

But then I decided to email the various parties to jump start the discussions.

And I’ll let the committee know that we’re working to reach that compromise that would pave the way for an amended bill to be enacted.

I was moved

There are photographs of all of the past presidents of the Women’s Division of the Associated Jewish Charities in one of the meeting rooms at 101 W. Mt. Royal Av.

My mother was president from 1971-73.

During a condolence call, one longtime friend told me that decades ago, when she was new to the Associated and an outsider, my mother was very kind to her.

I was not surprised.

Every time I‘m in the Mt. Royal building, I visit my mother’s photo and tell her about it afterwards.

Because of Covid, I haven’t been in that building in two years.

I made arrangements with Marc Terrill, president of the Associated, to visit today.

I was moved by my time with Mother, more so than by any other moment or event since she died.

Political Courage

I know something about political courage.

I saw colleagues vote for repeal of the death penalty, persuaded by the logic of our argument.

I know something about filibusters.

Every fall, I teach about the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

Until then, every civil rights bill since Reconstruction had died – killed by a filibuster by Southern Senators.

Last night, it was the same scenario.  A minority killed a civil rights bill.

No Labels describes itself as “a national movement of Democrats, Republicans and independents working to bring our leaders together to solve America’s toughest problems.”

Governor Hogan and former U.S. Senator Lieberman are the organization’s co-chairs.

I’m on the No Labels mailing list.  This afternoon, I opened this email.

In an act of great political courage, Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema bucked the White House and the Senate Democratic leadership to protect the filibuster, an essential tool in protecting the rights of the minority party in the chamber and ensuring that major legislative initiatives have bipartisan support.

I responded, “Characterizing Senators Manchin and Sinema’s support of the filibuster and the defeat of urgently needed campaign reform legislation as ‘political courage’ is outrageous and of great harm to the preservation of our democracy.”

Cross Roads

I don’t think I’ve ever been in this situation before – skeptical about a capital project in my district.

My 41st District colleagues and I have been working with several community associations to improve a heavily trafficked intersection.

This week, the City Department of Transportation submitted its capital improvements budget to the City Planning Commission.

What was proposed was not supported by the constituents we’ve been working with.

I need the answers to two questions.

Who supports this alternative use?

How can a recommendation to the Planning Commission be changed?

A bill I know well, fortunately

The less I bring to the witness table, the more I know about my bill.

If all I have is a copy of the bill, I’m ready to make the case for it and to answer the questions I expect to be asked.

If I bring another witness with me to the table, I expect to depend upon him or her to answer most questions.

Today I brought nothing to the table, or more accurately, my desk at home.

When I left Annapolis last week, I forgot to bring home my bill file.

So with no printer in my house, that meant no copy of my testimony or the bill.

I planned on accessing both those documents on my laptop.

This morning, however, no one could hear me on a Zoom until I shut down all of the other windows I had open.

No multitasking allowed.

The hearing was on a bill I know well.

It would allow a landlord’s compliance with the lead risk reduction standards to be offered in evidence in an eviction case.

I made the points I wanted to in my testimony.  I wasn’t asked any questions.

Exceptions to the rule

“That is not true.”

I don’t say that often in Annapolis, but today I did twice.

A witness stated that her organization was “very proactive” when my bill was enacted three years ago.

Not that I remembered.

I asked a research librarian for the witness lists for my legislation.

The organization was nowhere to be found.

My SLAPP bill protects people from frivolous and expensive lawsuits.

Maryland Right to Life claims that “It will enable frivolous lawsuits to suppress pro-life speech and hurt pro-life organizations, including pregnancy centers, potentially putting them out of business.”

It does not.

To coordinate our response, I will zoom with the attorneys testifying for my bill before Wednesday’s hearing.

  • My Key Issues:

  • Pimlico and The Preakness
  • Our Neighborhoods
  • Pre-Kindergarten
  • Lead Paint Poisoning