bipartisanship – Sandy Rosenberg

Why we meet

January 15, 2019 | by delsandy | Uncategorized | No Comments

I’m no expert on health insurance, but I do know how to count.

My committee held its first briefing today. The subject was Insurance 101.

The Insurance Commissioner, a gubernatorial appointee, was asked whether we could pass a law that would impose certain requirements, with the intent of increasing the number of Marylanders with insurance.

“With 71 votes you can,” he responded with a smile.

That’s the number of votes needed to pass a bill in the House of Delegates.

“But will we need 85?” I whispered to a colleague.

That’s the number of votes needed to override a Governor’s veto.

Our recent history says there won’t be a veto.

Last year we passed a bill to establish a reinsurance program to reduce the cost of premiums.

It was complicated but by the end, uncontroversial.

It passed the House unanimously, 135-0, and the Senate, 43-4.

(The bill has resulted in an average reduction of premiums by 13.2%.)

That bipartisan support did not exist on the seventh day of last year’s session.

That’s why we meet for 90 days.

Bipartisanship: Sooner rather than later

March 26, 2018 | by delsandy | Sandy's 2018 Legislative Diary | No Comments

Bipartisanship shouldn’t start at the end of the 90-day session.

It’s needed earlier in the legislative process.

I’ve written in this diary about meetings I had with the opponents of my bills.

In several instances, we reached a compromise.

Sometimes people at a higher pay grade are needed to reach consensus.

During my time here, the governor has met with the presiding officers in the final weeks of the session.

Agreement was reached.

During this four-year term, such a meeting didn’t take place on an important bill that the Governor had introduced.

Instead, he lamented the fact that the bill didn’t pass.

Between now and Thursday, several controversial bills are likely to pass both houses of the General Assembly and be sent to the Governor for his signature.

Or his veto.

A veto on bills that meet the Thursday deadline must be made before the session ends.

The legislature will have the opportunity to override those vetoes.

The voters will then judge whether a bipartisan result would have been better.

A bipartisan compromise between different parties

January 11, 2018 | by delsandy | Sandy's 2018 Legislative Diary | No Comments

We’re going to hear the word bipartisan quite often this session.

And well we should.

The public wants the two parties to work together, and we should try to do so.

Today we had an example of bipartisanship between labor and business.

The issue was the Governor’s veto of the Maryland Healthy Working Families Act

The bill would require businesses with 15 or more employers to provide paid sick leave.

When the bill was introduced, it applied to businesses with ten or more employees.

This change was one of 30 amendments adopted at the request of the business community.

“Advocates feel they’ve compromised enough,” said the chairman of the committee that considered the bill.

That’s a compromise. That’s bipartisanship.

Governor Hogan’s veto was overridden by the House, 88-52.

Every Republican voted with the Governor. One Democrat joined them.

In this instance, however, bipartisanship had already produced a compromise bill with those 30 amendments.

– – –

E.J. Dionne writes about the virtual impossibility of compromise in Washington in his most recent op-ed. It begins:

There is a reason bipartisan government is so hard these days. It’s not because “both parties” are intransigent or because “both parties” have moved to the “extremes.” It’s because what were once widely seen as moderate, common-sense solutions are pushed off the table by a far right that defines compromise as acquiescence to its agenda.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-accidental-moment-of-truth/2018/01/10/5119b312-f636-11e7-b34a-b85626af34ef_story.html?utm_term=.d1dea1ed0295