Newspaper Face Several Legislative Challenges in MD General Assembly

Like most years, the majority of these bills are ones that would have a negative impact on newspapers and require concerted effort by MDDC Press Association members to defeat or amend. (See Legislative Checklist enclosed with this newsletter.)

One major exception this year, however, is HB 1024, legislation strongly supported by MDDC and aimed at improving access to public records by clarifying various provisions of the state’s Public Information Act.

"We have to play defense a lot in the General Assembly," said MDDC Executive Director Jim Donahue, "but we are definitely on the offense with our PIA bill."

Two bills opposed by MDDC already have been killed or withdrawn this session. A measure that would have removed the requirement that public notices of abandoned property be advertised in newspapers was killed in Senate committee. The other, a bill that would have closed access to autopsy reports, was withdrawn by the state after testimony by an MDDC panel in opposition.

Four other bills that to some degree would restrict public notice advertising in newspapers remain before the legislators. The single biggest area of activity for newspapers this session, however, promises to be access to public information.

Like nearly all states in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, Maryland is addressing public safety needs, including access to information that could be used by terrorists to endanger the public. Two bills head the list. The first, SB 240, submitted by the Glendening administration, would simply give custodians of public records the authority to deny access to any records that they determine "would constitute a risk to the public or to public security."

"That is an approach so broad and loose that virtually all information could be denied to the public," said MDDC Government Affairs Committee Chair Carol Melamed of The Washington Post. "There are legitimate public safety concerns here, but they must be approached with specificity and great care so that the principle of open government is sustained to the greatest possible degree."

The second measure, SB 720, focusing on specific areas of concern as identified by county and municipal officials, presents a better starting point for consideration, and apparently the legislature agrees. The bills will be heard together in the Senate Education, Health and Environment Affairs Committee on Feb. 28.

The House versions of those bills will be heard March 13 in the Commerce and Government Matters Committee. Also to be heard that day by the same committee is HB 1024, the MDDC-supported bill aimed at improving compliance with the state’s PIA. That measure, developed last year by MDDC working with the Maryland Association of Counties, Maryland Municipal League and the state attorney general’s office, was introduced late in the 2001 session and ran into obstacles. This year the bill has been introduced by House Speaker Casper Taylor.

Another reprise from last year involves telemarketing legislation. On Feb. 12, a newspaper panel testified in the Senate Finance Committee against SB 674, a bill that would severely restrict telemarketing efforts, a practice that newspapers generally rely on for obtaining 60 percent of their new subscribers. The legislation has been successfully opposed for the past three years. Testifying for newspapers were Melamed, Mark Kukiela of the Hagerstown Herald-Mail, Glenn Murphy of The Washington Times and Gary Olszewski of The Baltimore Sun.