Dear Friend,

Newspaper accounts report daily -- and accurately -- of the rancorous launch of the state legislature and our continuing disagreements with the governor. But as the political smoke clears, I can report that Marylanders are coming out ahead. That’s certainly true on three issues that I care deeply about and will continue to play a leadership role in.

First, reacting to our plans to override his veto of legislation limiting tuition increases, Governor Erhlich has proposed a $43 million increase in funding for the state’s university system. Generally speaking, the increased funding is good news for the university system, but it still leaves the system far short of funding levels from 2001 and 2002. If the Governor believes that we will back down and no longer pursue legislation to restore funding and cap tuition increases, he is sorely mistaken. The governor plans to take money away from other programs to pay for this one-time boost in university funding. While capping tuition increases, our legislation creates new revenue streams in order to provide for continual funding of the university system. Tuition throughout the system’s 11 campuses averages an unacceptably high $5,000 a year. At College Park, tuition and fees approach $7,400, making it one of the most expensive public universities in the country. We can and must do better for our students, their parents, and our state.

On another issue, the governor claims to have aborted his plan to sell state preservation land to a wealthy construction executive. We cannot, however, allow any governor to have sole authority to dispose of state park or preservation land. That’s why I -- and many of my colleagues -- are pursuing a constitutional amendment that will require the governor to gain legislative approval before disposing of any environmentally sensitive state land. It lets us write into the Constitution the principle that, once land has been acquired for conservation, it cannot be quietly sold off to a developer. Should it pass, a constitutional amendment would eliminate the threat of a veto from the governor and will come before the voters in November 2006.

Finally, as many of you now know, we overrode the governor’s veto of legislation to reform the state’s medical practice system. It is good legislation that limits doctors’ insurance increases to 5 percent in the coming year. Other provisions will make patients safer, discipline negligent doctors and alter the way courts award damages for injuries and improper care. It includes a modest tax on HMOs to subsidize doctor’s malpractice insurance costs. Groups on all sides of the issue -- including doctors, lawyers, and consumers -- have praised the legislation as a constructive step in addressing the worrisome trend of rising medical practice costs. The governor deserves credit for drawing attention and demanding legislative action on the issue. His veto of this important legislative remedy is another matter.

There is plenty of heated rhetoric in Annapolis these days and not a little grandstanding from all sides. But we’ve also taken some principled stands when we’ve needed to and made progress on issues of genuine concern to our state. All in all, we’re off to a good start.

Sincerely,
BRIAN E. FROSH