A pleasant surprise from two lobbyists

I didn’t think the two lobbyists would be pleased.

My legislation to create a college admission outreach program for high-achieving students will have its public hearing tomorrow. http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2015RS/bills/hb/hb0364F.pdf

High school seniors without a parent who went to college are really behind the eight ball when it comes to applying to the most suitable schools and obtaining financial aid.

I asked that amendments be drafted this morning. One would require the public and private colleges in Maryland to present a joint report next fall on how they will inform students about the outreach program at “all Maryland high schools in which at least 75% of the students are enrolled in the free and reduced lunch program.”

Then I sent this language to two of the lobbyists for these schools.

“I know this is short notice,” I began my email.

I expected they would not want to be required to do this study or to visit so many schools.

I was wrong.

We are “fine with your proposed amendment,” one wrote.

It’s nice to have an idea whose time has come.

Making changes to save costs and gain votes

Without amendments, most of your bills don’t have a prayer.

Amendments to several of my bills were the focus of my day.

My legislation to mandate mental health crisis response teams throughout the state would be costly, as introduced and as pared down by the amendment I offered at the bill hearing.

I suggested to the committee chairman today that the bill be stripped of the provisions requiring additional services. All that would remain is language authorizing, but not requiring, hospitals to use the existing “community benefit” program improve their crisis response services.

That would be a step forward.

The insurance industry offered amendments to my bill protecting the right to travel of life insurance policy holders and applicants. I have asked the Attorney General’s Office to review that language.

A reporter asked me about the bill’s status. I responded, “That [legal] analysis will enable me to determine what effect that amendment, if adopted, would have upon the availability of life insurance for Ken Birnbaum’s client, who was denied coverage if he traveled to the West Bank or Gaza, and for the other individuals and organizations that support House Bill 352.”

Attorneys who know far more than I about workplace harassment have agreed to amendments to my bill on that topic. That prompted me to ask the AG’s Office if these changes would make my legislation “consistent with Maryland case law on workplace harassment.”

A yes from a neutral party would be very helpful.

Finally, I learned that my bill affecting referendum petition drives passed the Election Law Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee.

It was not amended.

We’re going to hold them

The Speaker honored me by asking me to give the opening prayer for tonight’s session.

This is what I said.

Father Ted got his last wish.

Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, President of Notre Dame University from 1952-1987, died on Thursday.

His last wish was to say Mass on his last day on Earth. Thursday morning, he did.

During his career, Fr. Hesburgh’s beliefs and courage no doubt prompted Presidents and Popes to wonder who would rid them of this meddlesome priest.

He was chairman of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission in 1970 when the commission found a “major breakdown” in enforcement of federal laws and executive orders against racial discrimination.

Two years later, he resigned, at the request of White House officials.

Closer to home, he resisted the Vatican’s attempts to assert greater control over Catholic universities in the United States.

I didn’t go to Notre Dame but I did go to the Notre Dame – Miami game in 1988. The t-shirts on campus read Catholics vs. Convicts.

I went with Jay Schwartz. Dutch.

The Fighting Irish led late in the 4th quarter, but Miami was driving down the field. “I think we’re going to hold them,” I told Jay.

“Who is “we,” Delegate O’Rosenberg?” he responded.

ND won, 31-30, on its way to a national championship.

Today, WE as a nation mourn a champion – a distinguished priest, educator, and American.

Past and future travel

I thought we had already solved this problem.

Ken Birnbaum, a constituent, wrote me that one of his life insurance clients had been issued a policy denying coverage for future travel to Gaza or the West Bank.

I checked with legislative staff.

Ten years ago, we prohibited using an insured’s “past lawful travel” to deny coverage.

Ken was at the witness table beside me today, as was Muhammad Jameel, representing the Islamic Society of Baltimore. His mother lives in Pakistan.

Written testimony from Catholic Relief Services also helped us make the point that House Bill 352 would affect a broad group of consumers.

The bill would allow an insurance company to deny or limit coverage with respect to future travel where “there is an ongoing armed conflict involving the military of a sovereign nation foreign to the country of conflict.”

The life insurance industry proposed an amendment that would add “an active civil insurgency.”

The devil will be in the details.

“Mr. Sachs spoke for me.”

This is why I wanted to become a lawyer.

At age 14, I read Gideon’s Trumpet, the account of Gideon v. Wainwright, where the Supreme Court decided that the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to a lawyer if you’re accused of a felony.

I wanted to be a lawyer who protected people’s constitutional rights.

When the state seeks to deny your liberty, Gideon held, you are entitled to an attorney.

When the state seeks to deny you custody of your children, however, you are not.

House Bill 348 would change that.

The product of a task force that I served on, the bill would require the state to fund legal representation in contested child custody cases and in protective order proceedings in domestic violence cases.

In my testimony, I cited statistics that in these cases only 20% of the people involved had a lawyer.

The case for my bill was best made by someone who did not testify today.

Deborah Frase had conditions imposed on her custody of her son at the trial level. She did not have an attorney.

When she won on appeal, she was represented by Steve Sachs, former Attorney General of Maryland.

He told us today what Ms. Frase said after her case was heard by Maryland’s highest court.

“Mr. Sachs spoke for me.”

Listening and counting

When a member of the committee hearing my legislation talks, I listen.

A member of the subcommittee reviewing my bill suggested that we needed an amendment detailing an employer’s legal defense to a harassment lawsuit.

That is not necessary, a civil rights attorney advised me yesterday, because it’s addressed by court decisions.

Nonetheless, I responded to my colleague, “If the committee feels that we should amend the bill, we can do that.”

The legislative process is not a courtroom or a classroom.

We’re graded on whether we get enough votes.

At another hearing, the committee chair asked when a report would be completed on a program that my bill would continue.

“Two to four weeks,” replied my expert witness.

“The sooner the better,” I told him afterwards. “The committee might delay action until it gets the report.”

A constant about changes

Very few bills pass unamended.

Mine included.

Concerns raised at a public hearing are addressed, I hope, by the amendments we drafted for one bill.

Lowering the cost are the crux of amendments to two of my bills that will be heard this week. A pilot program in one or two counties is possible, but the price tag for a state-wide program will doom my legislation.

I’ve written the deputy general counsel at the Washington Post twice about issues raised about my bill that’s in a subcommittee. His legal advice has been transformed into amendments.

The Attorney General’s Office has informed me that a recent Supreme Court decision necessitates a change to another of my bills.

The amendments I will submit this week share one thing in common.

Changes will be made to them if my bills move forward.

A lesson learned

“I am a beneficiary of the Jew Bill.”

That’s how I began my remarks after a lecture at the Jewish Museum of Maryland on the 1826 bill that allowed Jews to hold public office.

Here’s what I learned.

There were two versions of the bill.

The “universal version” would have prohibited any “religious test” for office holders. The three living former Presidents, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison, supported the bill.

Despite that impressive endorsement, the bill failed because it would have benefitted Jews, Muslims, and atheists.

Subsequently, several Jews became prominent in the local business community, including defenders of Ft. McHenry during the Battle of Baltimore.

The “specific version,” which became law, applied to “every citizen of this state professing the Jewish religion…[who believes] in a future state of rewards and punishments.”

This compromise was eventually followed by legislation that ended discrimination against other Marylanders seeking elective office.

The art of compromise is a legislative lesson I learned many years ago.

The right man

“Hi, I’m Sandy Rosenberg.”

That’s how I introduced myself to a freshman delegate on the House floor this morning.

He didn’t know my name and truth be known, I wasn’t sure of his.

Before I introduced myself, I asked a more senior colleague from the delegate’s county if I had the right man.

What I did know was that he serves on the Election Law Subcommittee and I wanted to talk to him about my two bills that he will be voting on.

A commitment in the law and money in the budget

Same strategy, different bills.

House Bill 348 would provide for legal counsel in certain areas of family law – protective order, custody, or visitation proceedings.

House Bill 367 would require that a 24/7 behavioral health crisis response system be established state-wide to assist people with mental illness.

The annual cost to fully implement each bill would exceed $10 million.

Unamended, the bills will die.

However, an amended bill could put into law the state’s commitment to provide these services on a pilot basis in one or two counties.

That’s the compromise I proposed when I met with advocates and interested parties.
.
Success in the court room and the emergency room would make the case for expansion of these programs and the dollars needed to fund it.

  • My Key Issues:

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