February 29 – Bills dead but the work continues

I withdrew two of my bills today.

One because the executive branch wrote a letter.  The other because it was the right idea but not yet in the right pew.

The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene “plans to continue to make Wraparound services available to youth with intensive needs,” Secretary Van Mitchell wrote me today.

That was the purpose of House Bill 759: to maintain high quality mental health care for youth in outpatient settings.

I introduced the bill at the request of the mental health community. As we hoped, it brought everyone to the witness table for both the bill hearing and discussions afterward.

The letter and better care are the results.

The bill is no longer needed.

When I was in Israel last December, I learned that the government assumes the cost of the charitable sector’s successful social welfare programs.

“I’ll introduce a bill to do the same in Maryland,” I told my startled hosts.

I had even written the opening lines of my testimony.

Justice Brandeis wrote that the states are the laboratories of democracy.

                 In this instance, the state of Israel is a laboratory for democracy. 

House Bill 748 would have created a grant program for job training programs based on the Israeli model.

As I prepared for the bill hearing, I realized that more work needs to be done on this concept.  Instead of a poor bill hearing this week, I’ll discuss this idea with more people this summer.

Next year in Annapolis.

February 25 – Two on the floor

Sometimes, a summer study won’t do; my bill needs to be enacted.

Two made it to the House floor today.

The first dealt with the Walter Sondheim Jr. Public Service Internship Scholarship Program.

Last year, we extended the program from the summer to the fall and winter semesters. Since students will be attending classes, their internship will be fewer hours per week than during the summer.

Consequently, their stipend should be less. House Bill 107 would reduce what they receive from $3,000 to $2,000.   It passed unanimously.

I introduced House Bill 241 at the request of the State Board of Elections.

Legislators cannot accept campaign contributions when we’re in session.

Before that was the law, a legislator received a check from the landlords the week that his committee heard my lead paint bill.

HB 241 would give the Board discretion as to the fine it imposes for a violation. Under existing law, it is $1,000.

A vote on the bill was delayed until tomorrow.

February 24 – A real person’s testimony

A real person’s testimony can make the case for your legislation far better than the polished remarks of a lobbyist or a legislator.  Myself included.

That real person would be affected by the bill.  A personal story is more effective or moving than an abstract analysis.

I’m sponsoring a bill that would benefit blind parents in court proceedings.

I was about to write the lawyer who asked me to introduce the bill and ask him to have parents testify next week. Then I read his recent email to me.

“We will put together the witnesses we need (real people with real stories about the need for the legislation).”

He’s heard my lecture on the subject.

February 23 – A win in a team game

“That’s a win,” Delegate Morales declared.

She and I introduced House Bill 975.

We did so after learning about Cesar Vargas, a 32-year-old Mexican immigrant without legal status who was recently admitted to the bar of New York.

Under our bill, if someone qualifies for in-state tuition at the undergraduate level, a dreamer under the law approved on referendum in 2012, that person may qualify for the bar and practice law.

Our bill hearing is tomorrow  Last Friday, we discussed HB 975 with representatives of the Judiciary.

This afternoon they responded, telling us that they would propose an addition to the Bar Admission rule.  Undocumented immigration status, by itself, would not preclude admission to the Bar.

We’ve achieved our objective.

That’s a win.

—-

I sent an email to a friend in the Executive Branch so that his boss would be better prepared for a meeting tomorrow on an issue I’m interested in.

“I appreciate this,” he responded.

“Getting things done is a team game,” I wrote back.

February 22 – How things get done

For the second year in a row, my bill won’t pass.

That’s fine with me.

My No Wrong Door legislation would create a one-stop shop for families in need seeking state benefits.

Last year, House Bill 66 received an unfavorable report. However, the Appropriations Committee added language to the budget bill calling upon the Department of Human Resources to analyze additional steps that could be taken to ensure that when Marylanders attempt to access the social safety net, they are able to access a full range of services.

This year, House Bill 880 would put into effect DHR’s response.

Today I learned that our budget staff has recommended that the department report this fall on its implementation of these changes.

I don’t need my name on a bill that the Governor signs if we can accomplish my objective in another way.

PS Granted, this is a slow process.  Unless the Governor, the Senate President, or the Speaker puts an issue on their agenda, this is how things get done.

February 18 – Don’t reenact the wheel

When it comes to bill drafting, I’m very conservative.

If another state has adopted a law on the same topic, use it.

If that statute proves inadequate, you’ll have evidence to improve what we enacted.

When you’re proposing changes to existing law, tinker with that language instead of replacing it.

You don’t need to reenact the wheel.

Last year, Ken Birnbaum, a former neighborhood president in my district and an insurance agent, told me about a client who put on his application that he would be traveling to Israel to visit his son.

He was told there would be an exclusion on his life insurance policy for travel to Gaza and the West Bank, including the Old City of Jerusalem.

I introduced House Bill 803, which is modeled on a Colorado law. At today’s hearing, Ken and I testified in support of the bill, as did the lobbyists for the life insurance industry.

It should be smooth sailing from here.

But I won’t take that for granted.

February 17 – Remembering lynchings

I had never done this before.

I had no written testimony for the hearing on my lynching bill.

Instead, I distributed to the committee the chilling account of the lynching of George Armwood in Sherrilyn Ifill’s On the Courthouse Lawn.

I pointed out that Clarence Mitchell, Jr. reported on the Armwood lynching for the Afro American.  His successor as chair of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Wade Henderson, had submitted written testimony, I told the committee.

In response to a delegate’s question, I said that I would consider it a friendly amendment to limit the remembrance of lynchings to historical markers, removing memorials from the bill.

Ironically, the state’s historical markers program originated in 1933, the same year as the last recorded lynching in the state, George Armwood’s.

February 16 – You need to respond

You can’t expect your opponents to share with you their tactics for killing your bill.

But when you learn how they’re trying to do so, you need to respond.

Over the last two days, I’ve learned of objections to my legislation creating a Commission on Solemn Remembrance of the Victims of Lynching that took place in Maryland.

How would these brutal hangings be depicted?  Would this sensationalize these ghastly acts, instead of honoring the accomplishments of African-Americans?

I went to the webpage of the Maryland Historical Trust.

The thematic virtual tours of Maryland’s historical markers has photos of 11 markers of “the contributions of Maryland’s African Americans.”

http://mht.maryland.gov/historicalmarkers/TourSearchResults.aspx?tour=African American

We printed a copy for the committee members at tomorrow’s hearing.

 

February 15 – Deep depth

Earl Weaver might call it deep depth.

I introduced legislation at the request of one of the Cabinet agencies.

Since the bill hearing is this week, I met with the department’s lobbyist.

“You need to show the committee chair that this bill is important to you,” I advised. “That means your Secretary should meet with him.”

Then we discussed who should testify.

“You want to have people who would be helped by this bill. Mothers and fathers,”  I said.

You cover all of your bases.

February 13 – Justice Scalia

Justice Scalia was one of my 81 closest friends.

As an Orioles season ticket holder, I go to 81 home games with my friends. For over twenty years, I have gone to a game with the Justice.

We met at a Johns Hopkins event in 1993. My cousin, Jerome Schnydman, was the Director of Alumni Relations.

I asked the Justice if I could go to the oral argument on Wisconsin’s hate crimes law. I had sponsored a similar law.

He said yes. I then asked if he had been to the recently opened Camden Yards.  He had not.

Every year since, he came to a ballgame and I went to an oral argument.

It didn’t take many innings for him to realize that we did not agree on the Constitution or baseball.

Not infrequently, I would tell him that I was working on legislation that would reverse a decision that he had written or supported.

He is a Yankees fan.

He talked about the extraordinary response that his nomination brought about in the Italian-American community. He even got to meet Joe DiMaggio.

His original intent philosophy extended to baseball. He was not a fan of the designated hitter.

The beauty of the law is that people can disagree on principle, make their arguments, and respect the outcome.

Justice Scalia and I agreed on that.

 

  • My Key Issues:

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