They saved the best (and most important) comment for last.

 “Homeless kids must find food and shelter on their own, but it’s difficult for them to obtain health care,” I began my testimony.  “They need their parents’ consent, but they’re living on the street without them.”

 House Bill 32 would allow someone from 12-18 years old to consent to medical care if certified as homeless, abandoned, or a runaway by the director of a homeless services provider, a health care provider, or a licensed social worker.

 We hadn’t anticipated some of the questions from committee members:

 “What if the child is living in a homeless shelter with one or both of his parents?”

 “Why did you make 12 years old the cutoff?”

 The dysfunctional nature of many of these families and the unwillingness of these kids to deal with a government system that has failed them were concepts that our witnesses knew well but several committee members did not. 

 The hearing was drawing to a close. 

 My chief of staff whispered to me, “We should meet with our folks afterwards to discuss how to respond to the issues raised by the committee members.”

 As I started to respond, I heard the chairman say, “We’ll be working on this bill in the Public Health Subcommittee.”

 That’s a very positive sign. A chairman doesn’t ask a subcommittee to work on a bill unless he thinks it’s worthy. 

February 9

It’s what you learn after you know it all that counts.

Harry Truman, John Wooden, and Earl Weaver said that.  (I knew Weaver had; Google told me about the others.)

Today I experienced that expression.

We were talking about the floor amendment that did serious damage to one of my bills a few years ago. 

Legislator X was “genuinely confused” about the amendment, commented one of my allies. 

I had never heard that expression before, but I understood it. 

 A legislator who committed to vote for your bill can support an amendment that does major damage and act as if he didn’t know the implications.  In that case, you’re being genuinely used. 

On the other hand, in the heat of debate, a member can truly be unaware of the effect of an amendment, especially if you don’t have a whip system – where designated members remind those sitting near them how to vote.

 Organization can trump genuine confusion.

February 7

An Absolute Majority

       Asking colleagues to co-sponsor the death penalty repeal bill during today’s floor session reminded me that co-sponsorship is the biggest waste of time in Annapolis – except when it isn’t. 

        In this instance, we can demonstrate that we have absolute majorities in both houses who are willing to sign on to the legislation and, more importantly, to vote for it – if given the chance. 

       We did not have 24 votes for repeal in the Senate two years ago when a weakening floor amendment was adopted.  We do now, after the election last November.  Then and now, we’ve had majority support in the House.

       Not everybody said yes.  One delegate was “not just yet” ready to sign on.  Nonetheless, that was progress from our last conversation on the issue.    

       What do you think I did when several delegates asked me to sponsor their bill right after agreeing to do just that for my legislation?  I said yes too. 

        Under normal circumstances, I might have declined.  However, if someone supports repeal, it’s unlikely that any bill they’re sponsoring is unpalatable to me.

        My focus was a lot narrower on another bill – the chair of the subcommittee that will consider my proposal.  The chair did cosponsor but said, “This doesn’t guarantee I’ll vote for it.”

        But it’s a leg up.

February 4

        For nearly 40 innings this past week, I needed to count to one, instead of 71 –  the votes needed to pass a bill in the House of Delegates.

        I’m a catcher.  If I put down one finger and the pitcher agrees, he will throw a fastball.  If he doesn’t like my pitch selection, I will put down two fingers for a curve ball and three for a slider.

         In the Fantasy Camp championship game yesterday, I caught eight innings.  Neither of my pitchers shook me off because he disagreed with my pitch selection. 

          We won, 8-7. 

          I didn’t reach base, nor did I tag a runner out at the plate in a crucial situation, as I had earlier in the week. 

            But it’s a team game, and my bobble head trophy is now displayed in my Annapolis office.         

            Speaking of sport, horse racing was the subject of the committee briefing today.

            Penn National has an ownership interest in two thoroughbred tracks, Pimlico and Laurel, and a harness track, Rosecroft, that it just bought in bankruptcy court. 

            Its principal business, however, is slots.

            So I asked this question of a witness:

               Can Penn National’s slots license be made contingent upon its performing certain acts as the holder of a racing license, such as running a minimum number of racing dates at Laurel and Pimlico?

            I also emailed the same question to the Attorney General’s Office.

 February 3