April 4 – Opening Days

I gave this prayer at the start of today’s General Assembly Session.

 

Seventy years ago, the Opening Day second baseman for the AAA Montreal Royals, was making his minor league debut. Jackie Robinson made history that Opening Day.

He hit a three-run homer in the third inning. His next at bat, he reached on a bunt single, stole second, and advanced to third on a ground out.  Dancing off third base, he scored when the pitcher balked.  No disputed tag by Yogi Berra this time. But the way baseball was played had changed.

Twenty years later, the Opening Day right fielder for the Baltimore Orioles was making his American League debut. In his first plate appearance, Frank Robinson was hit by a pitch.  Two at bats later, he hit one over the Green Monster as the Orioles beat the Red Sox, 5-4, in 13 innings.

“We knew how to play,” says Brooks Robinson, “but starting with spring training, Frank taught us how to win.”  The Oriole way of playing baseball had changed.  All the way to the World Series that October.

Frank left Florida early that spring. He needed to find a home in Baltimore.  No one would rent to his family in all-white neighborhoods.

The previous winter, Cardinal Sheehan was booed when he spoke in support of a fair housing ordinance at the War Memorial Building in Baltimore. Our predecessors did not pass a state law until 1967, but it was full of exceptions.

When Jerry Hoffberger, the Orioles owner, learned that his star player had no place to live, he helped the Robinsons rent a home on Cedardale Road in Ashburton – what is now the 41st District.

Before he went to the team party after Game 4 of the World Series, Frank and his wife celebrated with their neighbors.

On this Opening Day, let’s recall two – Jackie and Frank Robinson.

March 31 – It’s what you have to do after you take nothing for granted…

“take NOTHING for granted.”

A friendly lobbyist on my pre-kindergarten funding bill wrote that to me today.

I responded, “Earlier today, on another bill I had occasion to remind my staff and myself to take NOTHING for granted…

And after you take nothing for granted, an issue may arise that you didn’t think about.

As it did at today’s hearing on my bill to incentivize fathers who owe child support to find employment.

Committee members were skeptical when they heard that those who failed to comply with the program could be jailed for contempt of court.

Under existing law, if you don’t comply with a child support order, you can already be found in contempt, a Department of Human Resources official reminded us right after the hearing. .

That will be shared with the committee’s counsel.

March 30 – An avoidable dispute

It’s about to get late early in Annapolis.

Normally, the Governor vetoes a bill after the General Assembly has adjourned.

The override vote takes place in January when the legislature returns.

However, if a bill takes effect then, it does not apply to the fiscal year starting that July.

Several of the bills we’re about to pass would impose mandates in next year’s budget.  Governor Hogan opposes mandates.

Several of the bills would benefit Baltimore City by paying to keep Pratt Library branches open for 12 hours every day of the week, redevelop blighted areas, and use public schools for after-school and summer programs.

This $290 million five-year initiative is designed to begin this year. I will be working with the neighborhoods in the 41st District this summer so that we can get our fair share of this money.

That will be delayed if the Governor vetoes the bills in May and we override in January.

The Maryland Constitution provides that if a bill passes both houses and is presented to the Governor by this Friday and he chooses to veto it, he must do so before we adjourn.

That would enable us to override his veto and have the law take effect in 30 days.

It doesn’t have to happen this way.

The Governor could sit down with the Speaker and the Senate President to resolve most, if not all, of the issues presented by the bills he might veto.

I’ve seen it happen many times before.

 

March 29 – SLAPP Happy

I thought I was going to get SLAPPed.

Mother, that is not a spelling mistake.

Translated, I had a far better hearing than expected on my bill to amend the statute dealing with a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.

A SLAPP suit seeks to intimidate someone from exercising their 1st Amendment rights.  The suit itself is without merit, but that would not be resolved until the defendant has gone through the expense and turmoil of depositions.

Under the law that I successfully sponsored several years ago, you can put a quick end to such a case if you can persuade a judge that it is a SLAPP.

As introduced, House Bill 263 would have made several controversial procedural changes to the existing law, such as awarding lawyer’s fees.  They were amended out of the bill by the House of Delegates.

The revised HB 263 would make two modest but important changes to the definition of a SLAPP, I began my testimony today.

The bill would include a suit brought to prevent a person from making a statement, not just after the individual has exercised his or her free speech right.

It would also cover a statement made in a public forum, such as a park, not just before a public body.

My best guess is that today’s hearing went well because the more controversial provisions were no longer in the bill.

But I’m not taking that for granted.  We’re going to talk further with several committee members to try to find out.

March 28 – The decisions we make

“We are about to pass a structured settlement bill largely because one judge became a rubber stamp for financial arrangements that took advantage of people who were without an attorney or financial advisor,” I said to Chief Judge John Morrissey of the District Court.  “In light of that, should we now give discretion to a judge to decide whether someone should be reincarcerated for certain parole violations?”

In response, the Chief Judge spoke of the training that all judges receive every year on the changes made to the law by the legislature.  What we decide on structured settlements and parole will, of course,  be part of that training.

It’s an awesome power to sentence someone to jail – to deny their liberty, he continued.  I never made that decision lightly.

How much discretion to give judges, as well as members of the executive branch, is a decision that my colleagues and I make on countless bills.

Not lightly, I’d like to think.

 

March 24 – A parent with a disability and the best interest of a child

This time I was in the room.

At the request of the National Federation of the Blind, I introduced House Bill 976.

When deciding what is in the best interest of a child – whether the issue is adoption, guardianship, a Child In Need of Assistance, custody, or visitation, the focus cannot be on whether an individual is blind.

My bill would require a finding by clear and convincing evidence that blindness affects an individual’s ability to provide proper care.

That’s the most rigorous standard in a civil case.

The first change to the bill: we broadened its coverage to include a parent with any disability, as defined by federal law.

Today’s meeting was to see if we could reach a compromise with the Department of Human Resources, which objected to this higher standard in cases where DHR is involved.

Let’s take those cases out of the bill, I suggested, and spend the summer persuading DHR that the law should be expanded next year.

For now, we have less than three weeks to pass the amended bill.

March 23 – Giving and receiving advice

I’ve written before about learning things by just taking a walk down the hall or, now that it’s warmer, the sidewalk.

Today I was on the other end, giving advice, instead of receiving it.

A lobbyist for a non-profit asked me about an issue before the Board of Public Works.

Send me the question where the answer would benefit your position, I advised.  I’ll send it to our non-partisan budget staff.  Their analysis will have credibility.

The next encounter dealt with the effect that language in the budget bill could have on another piece of legislation.

Lobbyists whom I respect don’t understand the budget process, but serving on the Appropriations Committee for 20 years has given me knowledge that others don’t have.

The next question I couldn’t answer.

I went to the Attorney General’s office for advice.

March 22 – Nothing for granted, again

I’ve given this speech before.

The topic was Medicaid funding for abortion.  My first session in 1983, I was a floor whip for the pro-choice side.

The Republicans’ amendment would deny funding if the medical justification was the woman’s mental health.

I reminded my House colleagues that the voters of Maryland approved the law protecting a woman’s right to choose whether to have a child and to make that decision after consulting with the people she chooses.

Most of them knew that.

However, most of my students do not.

When we discuss abortion in my law school classes every fall, a majority of the class does not know that Senate Bill 162 – Abortion, was approved on referendum in 1992, 62-38%.  Delegate Larry LaMotte and I were the lead sponsors of the House bill.

As I wrote yesterday about the legislative process, my students should take nothing for granted.

March 21 – Too close to assume

Two favorable committee votes today send different messages.

The Senate bill to require the Governor to fund the state’s $11.1 million match for a $30M federal grant to expand pre-kindergarten opportunities got a favorable committee report.  The vote was on party lines.

That was also the case when my identical bill passed the House on Saturday, 93-41.

Governor Hogan opposes legislation mandating that he spend money for certain purposes.

It will soon be up to the Governor whether to sign the bill or seek a compromise.

My legislation dealing with the sale of tobacco to minors also received a favorable committee report.

The vote was 12-10, despite my amendments, which prompted tobacco lobbyists to take no position on the bill, instead of opposing it.

With that close call, I will take nothing for granted the rest of the way.

March 17 – Out of the box first

Top Maryland Democrats agree to $290 million package to help Baltimore

That was the headline on a front page story in today’s Baltimore Sun.

There would be new funding for demolition of vacant housing, redevelopment of distressed areas, after-school and summer programs, college scholarships for 7th and 8th graders, and mentorship programs.

I’ve already talked with my 41st District colleagues about working with our neighborhoods to get their fair share of this money.  If we’re out of the box first, we’ll succeed.

—-

As my parents taught me by both words and deeds, the life of public service is as much a gift to the person who serves as it is to those he is serving.

            I could have said that, but it was Judge Merrick Garland, speaking in the Rose Garden yesterday.

  • My Key Issues:

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