Field Notes By Delegate Michael A. McDermott

 

Field Notes

Observations and Reflections on Legislative Activities

By Delegate Michael A. McDermott

Week 3 January 20-24, 2014

 

Monday Evening Session:

 

The House heard a presentation by Delegate Barbara Robinson (D-Baltimore City) in honor of Martin Luther King Day. It was requested that the delegates remarks be Journalized for the record (the entire speech will be included in the written record of the House of Delegates).

 

These bills were introduced on First Reader.

 

Tuesday Morning Session: These bills were introduced on First Reader.

 

Tuesday Afternoon Judiciary Briefing:

 

A briefing was conducted to hear about the recent Court of Appeals decision  which addressed the DeWolfe v. Richmond decision and the rejection of the fix provided by the General Assembly in 2012. Chief Judge Clyburn made a presentation on the Task Force recommendations on eliminating the problems associated with defendants being entitled to representation during their Initial Appearances before the court (this is currently performed by District Court Commissioners without the presence of counsel). The Office of the Public Defender estimates the additional costs would be around $30 million. The judicial task force estimates they can provide services through a variety of changes and by utilizing video conferencing with judges for a cost of roughly $6 million in total costs. I have previously proposed expanding the ability of persons to be released on citation by law enforcement and I have called for my former bill (HB-119), which passed the House in 2012, to be revisited and considered as a means of dealing with some of these issues. It is clear that there will be additional costs associated with insuring people have representation at all phases of the court process, but Governor O’Malley failed to include any money in his budget appropriated for this purpose.

 

Wednesday Morning Session: These bills were introduced on First Reader.

The House Republicans offered a few rule changes from the floor. The first change sought would require that every bill that is heard by a committee must be allowed an up or down vote by that same committee. Currently, many bills have a hearing and are never heard from again as the committee chairman will simply refuse to bring the bill out for a vote. It is a common practice known as “keeping a bill in the drawer”. I have written about this practice in the past. I spoke on the floor in support of the rule change as I do not believe that one delegate should be able to prevent a bill from receiving a vote that is offered by another delegate simply because they elect not to bring the bill forward. I believe the people of Maryland deserve better. This change was referred to the House Rules Committee where it will, no doubt, go to die.

 

Another proposed rule change would see the creation of a non-partisan House Parliamentarian. Currently, we are the only legislative body in the United States that has a Parliamentarian who is an appointed member of the majority party. Considering that this person makes decisions regarding the interpretation of rules that govern the conduct of the House, when the majority seeks to do something that the minority believes is against the rules, the Parliamentarian always takes the side of the majority. It is a ridiculous system. Even the Maryland Senate at least pretends to have a fair system by naming a Clerk as the Senate Parliamentarian (even though she merely provides advice to the President of the Senate and works on his payroll).

 

Wednesday Afternoon Judiciary Hearings:

 

HB-49 would create a uniform percentage of 15% as a “reasonable Attorney Fee” that could be charged in cases involving a Breach of Contract.

 

HB-59 would allow for the transfer of property and wealth (titles, etc.) by a person to another person that would take place upon the owner’s death. This would be similar to a “Life Estate” that currently exists within the law. It was said that this would help many elderly folks who do not desire to create a will or other type of document, but who do want to insure that their final wishes are implemented upon their death.

 

HB-83 seeks to codify the Common Law decisions that have been historically used to guide and govern Maryland in addressing Trusts. This bill was passed last year by the House and then was tied up in the Senate. The bill is a significant work that has been worked on in the House for a number of years.

 

HB-147 would allow Montgomery County to receive the same treatment as the state would in cases where the county acts on behalf of the state in cases arising out of the administration of a State Human Services program being administered by Montgomery County. It seeks to clarify the law as it is currently being carried out relationally between the state and Montgomery County.

 

Thursday Morning Session:

 

The session began with a  Special Order on HB-. This bill would offer an open ended extension of the Maryland Health Insurance Program in order to cover the massive mistakes made by Maryland Obamacare provisions. The bill would provide unlimited coverage for anyone who merely claims they tried to get insurance and were rejected prior to the deadline. This bill would provide direct payments to cover any medical issues experienced by these persons during the time that they “claim” they could not receive coverage through Maryland-Obamacare. They propose to tax the hospitals to cover the costs associated by this error. The Special Order will postpone the matter until Friday,

 

A joint session was then called to order as we invited the Senate into the House Chamber to hear Governor O’Malley’s State of the State Address. It should come as no surprise that the governor did a victory lap on his accomplishments.  You can find the Address here.

 

Here are some points that come to mind regarding the governor’s speech:

 

In a nutshell, Martin O’Malley thinks that he has been successful. He thinks our state is stronger than when he first stepped foot in the door. He believes our middle class is more vibrant, healthier, and prosperous than ever in our history. He believes that our state is friendlier for business and is a leader in the country for jobs.

The word “delusional” came quickly to mind.

 

The governor claimed he entered office “with a $1.7 billion structural deficit” when his predecessor, Gov. Ehrlich, had left him with a billion dollar surplus. Essentially, Governor O’Malley will leave office having increased our spending by over 32% and in debt up to our eyeballs. Quite a contrast.

 

He forever changed Maryland’s definition of marriage. He raised taxes and fees over 72 times to date. He redefined “rich” as any family making over $100,000 a year (and taxed accordingly), and he threw in driver’s licenses and In-State Tuition breaks for illegal aliens. He has managed to bring our agricultural industry to the brink, makes us all pay $5 a month to flush our toilets, hiked our tolls by 300%, and taxes us for the rain that falls on our roofs. He took away our rifles and did a jig on our 2nd Amendment Rights. He shut down our mental health care facilities on the shore, and he hiked taxes and fees on our Watermen by 400%.

 

Yes sir, he has been a true change agent…just don’t forget all those democrat votes that paved the way for his vision of America. I can only say I was glad to be a witness to his last State of the State Address.

 

Hearing on HB-26

 

I felt that I had a very successful hearing on my bill which would require the state to provide a fiscal impact statement on any regulations they bring before the AELR Committee (a joint, bi-partisan committee that reviews regulations when we are not in session). It is hard to believe that this is not generally required when you consider the significant impact these regulations often have on businesses and our people. No bill can be approved in the General Assembly without a fiscal note and it only makes good sense to require the same treatment on these regulations. Several folks from the agriculture community came into to testify in favor of the bill.

 

 The committee appeared to agree and I look forward to their taking action and approving the bill.

 

Thursday Afternoon Judiciary Hearing:

 

HB-73 would allow for a rebuttable presumption in cases of damages for injuries sustained from dog bites. It would stop a court from presumptions that a dog is inherently vicious simply because of the breed.

 

HB-80 would establish by law that the owner of a dog running at large is responsible for any damages caused by the dog whether or not the owner knew or should have known that the dog was dangerous. There are exceptions in this bill for service dogs and for dogs that were provoked prior to the attack.

 

*Note(HB-73 and HB-80 involved an extensive hearing that lasted several hours. There were folks on both sides of the issue. It was said by Del. Simmons, the sponsor of HB-80, that his bill and the senate bill being put forward by Sen. Frosh should be passed without amendments or they risk not being passed)

 

HB-93 would require that a person who is convicted of Cruelty to Animals may be held responsible by the court for any expenses incurred in the care, treatment, or relocation of the animal. It would apply to all offenses involving animal cruelty.

 

HB-151 seeks to expand the number of counties that would become part of the pilot program which was started in Baltimore City and Baltimore County. The pilot is an intervention program designed to provide alternatives for a Child in Need of Supervision as designated by the state. It has been utilized to keep children who qualify from unnecessarily advancing in the Juvenile Justice system without the benefit of other alternatives. Wicomico was brought in as a pilot county during this fiscal year. This expansion would continue until every Maryland county is included in this program.

 

Friday Eastern Shore Delegation Meeting:

 

Today we met with the School Superintendents from the Eastern Shore and with State Superintendent Lowry. The Superintendents introduced Dr. Memo Deriker  (BEACON) from Salisbury who relayed, for the second year in a row, the local benefit from tax dollars invested in our public schools. I commented that I felt the comparison could not really be made since the school system must first extract millions from our economy through tax dollars before it returns the money through various sources. Dr. Dericker was dug in on his position.

 

Much of the discussion was centered around the new Common Core standards that have been implemented in the public schools in every grade level. There was some solid debate regarding these concerns as the superintendents and Superintendent Lowery made an effort to defend the changes. Most of the discussion was anecdotal, but it was made clear that many states are rethinking their commitment and making significant changes to slow their process of implementation.

 

I asked Superintendent Lowery why Common Core was not phased in over time beginning with Kindergarten and First Grade. She stated that they felt it was in the best interest to adopt the standards system wide so as to give every student a better education (based upon the new standard).  I also asked her about certain standards which give students partial credit for wrong answers during Common Core testing. She agreed that this was the case, but she defended this credit by stating that students who show some degree of understanding, even though the final answer is wrong, should get some credit. I told the Superintendent that I hoped someone who got partial credit for a trigonometry response would not be a future builder of a new Bay Bridge.

 

Friday Morning Regular Session:

 

Here are the bills on First Reader.

 

There was debate on HB-119 which has been presented as an emergency bill to address the failures of Maryland-Obamacare by covering the costs of any medical care received by anyone who merely claims they called and could not get through to the system, They could offer us no realistic estimate on what these costs might be or how long we would need to continue making this available.

 

So even though they received hundreds of millions to set up this system in Maryland as an “example” to the rest of the states…and even though this democrat bureaucracy under O’Malley-Brown had over 2 years to plan ahead and make it happen…and even though, when questions began to be raised and it appeared months in advance that this was completely in the weeds and not going to work out…we followed the Obama plan and rolled it out to our fellow Marylanders anyway!  To be fair, these liberals that voted for this thing did not let me down…it is exactly as we told them it would be and that’s why every House Republican voted NO!

 

It is tough living in a “Nanny” state when the Nanny does not show up for work. Well, the final vote on this fiasco will be on Tuesday morning…do I need to say how I will be voting?