SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2010
KLMNO
K EZ RE Local OPINIONS 6
washingtonpost.com/localopinions localopinions@washingtonpost.com
CLOSETOHOME MARYLAND
What it will take to change Annapolis In theNov. 7 story aboutMarylandGov.MartinO’Malley’s reelec-
tion, “O’Malley charts unclear course for 2nd term,”Aaron C.Davis and colleagues presented an interesting picture of a governor re- elected by a landslide butwith no clearmandate or plan for his next term. The story contained amisstatement—or,more charitably, a restatement of awidely heldmisperception—that obscures the need for government reforminMaryland. The sentence said ofMr. O’Malley, “In his first year inAnnapolis, he orchestrated the state’s biggest-ever package of tax increases to fix a structural imbalance.” “Structural imbalance” is a euphemismfor “structural deficits,” which is a euphemismfor deliberate and acknowledged budgeting of government spending into the future that exceeds accepted fore- casts of government revenue. Structural deficits contrast with cyclical deficits, created by
revenue shortfalls that result fromeconomic downturns. State and local governments typically run surpluses in good times to create “rainy day funds” to cover cyclical deficits. During his first year in Annapolis in 2007, when the national and state economies were growing,Mr. O’Malley did not “fix” structural deficits creat- ed largely by unfunded education spending. Instead, with the sup- port of the large Democraticmajority in the General Assembly in regular and special legislative sessions, he used a billion-dollar rainy day fund and a billion-dollar-plus tax increase to cover the revenue gaps in a continuing structural deficit. These were short- termsolutions and did not address the long-termbudget problem. In April 2008, less than sixmonths after the General Assembly ap- provedMr. O’Malley’s proposals, the state forecast a continuation of its structural deficit until fiscal 2013. (This sequence is authori- tatively documented in a July 2008 paper, “Avoiding Structural Deficits inMaryland: Recommendations for Reform,” by Cecilia Januszkiewicz, then a senior fellow at the Free State Foundation.) The 2008-09 recession required significant spending reductions to offset a cyclical deficit, but they have not been sufficient to re- duce the structural deficits. OnWednesday, the state forecast that structural deficits will continue until fiscal 2016—halfway through the termof the governor who will succeedMr. O’Malley. This is not a record that supports the claimof “good gover-
nance” that the governor and his supporters cite as the basis of his electoral success. It is a record that should—as it has in other states and in the federal government—produce competing pro- posals for fiscal reform, if not a clear-cutmandate to enact them. The Post story, reporting no such proposals as a result of a politi- calmandate inMaryland, probably presented an accurate picture. The Republican opposition inMaryland is feeble, and the gover- nor’s constituency, anchored by government unions dedicated to preserving underfunded pension and health benefits, will ada- mantly oppose reforms that reduce them. It will probably require a solvency crisis to produce change inMaryland. Paul Edwards, Towson
Local Blog Network
voices.washingtonpost.com/local-opinions Some of the region’s best bloggers sharework ontheAllOpinions
AreLocal blog.Below, anexcerpt fromone of lastweek’sposts.
McDonnell’s Palin calculus VirginiaGov.BobMcDonnell is smart enough to knowthat a
2012 presidential bidwould constitute a premature reach beyond his experience level. Sowhy did he tellMSNBC’sAndreaMitchell onWednesday that Sarah Palin has enough experience for the job? “Listen, I think Sarah Palin’s been amayor, she’s been governor
of a state. I happen to be a little partial and think governorsmake great chief executive officers and have the experience to be good chief executive officers of theUnited States,’’McDonnell said. “I think Sarah Palin is qualified.” Speculation aboutMcDonnell’s chances to one daywin the
WhiteHouse began rippling across the country the day hewas elected.Afewweeks ago, he finally ruled out a run in two years, while leaving open the door for 2016.He responds to questions about his political futurewith a demure assurance thatVirginia is hisworld right nowand that he intends to keep it thatway through the remainder of his term. And yet he thinks that a governorwho quit her only termhalf-
way in has stored up enough tokens to cash in for the presidency. Really? Let’s do a quick comparison:McDonnell has held elect-
ed office for 18 years—14 as a state delegate, three asVirginia attor- ney general and nowone as governor. Palin held elected office for 12 1/2
years—four years on city council, six years asmayor and 2 1/2
years as governor.The gapwidenswhen you compare state experi- ence:McDonnell has spent his entire public career dealingwith statewide issues,while Palin has only her partial termas governor and a year as chairperson of theAlaskaOil andGasConservation Commission. PerhapsMcDonnell hopes that Palin self-destructs this time
around so she’s out of theway four years later.And if she ruins the GOP’s chances ofwinning back theWhiteHouse in 2012, somuch the better for his chances in 2016. PaigeWinfieldCunningham,OldDominionWatchdog
WRITE FOR US Local Opinions, a place for commentary about where we live, is looking for submissions of 300 to 500 words on timely local topics. Submissions must include name, e-mail address, street address and phone number, and they will be edited for brevity and clarity. To submit your article, please go to
washingtonpost.com/localopinions. NEXT WEEK’S TOPIC The Mall: What would you do to spruce it up?
J.H.SNIDERSEVERNAPARK
Give Marylanders the constitutional convention they voted for
In an Oct. 21 gubernatorial de-
bate with Republican challenger Robert Ehrlich, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley was asked if he supported convening a constitu- tional convention — a “con-con” — in Maryland. He replied: “If that’s what people want to do, then that’s what we should do.” O’Malley undoubtedly made that promise confident that the con-con referendum would fail (none has succeeded anywhere in the United States since 1984), al- lowing him to costlessly appease con-con supporters. Now that the referendum has
received 54 percent of the vote, the governor should be held ac- countable for that promise. Even though more people vot-
ed for this referendum than against it, a con-con probablywill not be called automatically, thwarting the will of the people. That’s because a quirky rule writ- ten into Maryland’s constitution essentially counts blank votes on this question as no votes. This undemocratic rule exists
because incumbent legislators from both parties hate con-cons, which serve as a check on their power. As George Mason, one of
the delegates to the 1787U.S. con- con,put it inarguingforacon-con mechanism for amending the Constitution: “It would be im- proper to require the consent of the [legislature], because they may abuse their power and refuse their consent on that very ac- count.” The lastMaryland con-conwas
convened after a 1964 U.S. Su- preme Court ruling that the legis- lature had for decades knowingly violated the principle of one per- son, one vote.Over the years, resi- dents hadmigrated fromrural to urban areas, but legislative dis- tricts had remained unchanged. As a result, each rural legislator came to represent far fewer peo- ple than each urban one. Rural legislators had for decades re- fused to implement one person, one vote because it would have cost them seats in the General Assembly. To reduce the chances of a con-
con ever coming to pass, lawmak- ers have long pushed for the in- nocuous-sounding requirement that winning a majority of all voters taking part in an election, with non-votes treated as no votes, would be necessarymerely
to convene a con-con. Remark- ably,of the 14stateswithconstitu- tionallymandatedautomaticcon- con referendums, only two have such a majority election require- ment (and in the second state, Hawaii, the language can be read eitherway). Maryland legislators’ dislike of
the con-con referendumwas also reflectedinthe language they em- ployed for the 2010 referendum. The question—“Should a consti- tutional convention be called for the purpose of changing the Maryland Constitution?” — con- veyedtheimpressionthat thepar- ticipants of the con-con would have thepower to alter the consti- tution themselves, rather than to merely propose amendments for voter approval. The ballot also madenomentionof the fact thata non-votewould be treated as a no vote. Thiswas not only amislead- ing attempt to suppress the yes vote but possibly an illegal one. It didn’t have to be thatway. In
1966, Maryland Gov. J. Millard Tawes responded to the Supreme Court’s rebukeby askingthe legis- lature for a con-con referen- dum. To get around the “majority of all voters” requirement, he
asked the legislature to hold a separate, special electionsimulta- neouslywith the regular election. The 1966 con-con only won 26 percent of the total election vote, but itonlyneededtowinamajori- ty of those weighing in on the question. It passed because of Tawes’s commitment to one per- son, one vote. If Tawes’s method had been
used in 2010, the con-con would have passed. Even using the legis- lators’ self-serving supermajority requirement, it received 48.5 per- cent of the vote, almost twice as much as in 1966. This doesn’t have to be the end
of it. Because yes voters outnum- bered the no’s, the legislature has not only the power but also the moral duty to convene a con-con without another referen- dum. O’Malley should follow Tawes’s precedent in upholding the principle of one person, one vote, and fight hard for a conven- tion. Otherwise, this will be the first broken campaign promise of his newadministration.
Thewriter is president of
iSolon.org andwrites
theMarylandConCon.org blog.
C5
BROOKHAILUBESHAH Why can’t they answer my questions? On themorning ofDec. 10, 2008, I said
goodbye to my 19-year-old son, Hailu Brook, and left for work. It was the last time I would see him alive. The pain of what transpired that daywill remainwith me andmy family until we die. But it has been made so much worse by the Fairfax County authorities’ refusal to provide an- swers to our questions. ArlingtonCounty andFairfaxpolice say
thatHailurobbed aBB&Tbank branchon Old Dominion Drive in McLean after he left home thatmorning. They say he then drove across the county line into Arling- ton, crashed his car and fled on foot. Ultimately, three Fairfax officerswho pur- suedhimfiredsome 20times according to a witness quoted by NBCWashington. At 10:30p.m.,manyhours after the shooting, the police finally came to our home to break the news to us thatHailuwas dead. It was originally reported that Hailu ex- changed gunfire with the police, but later we were told he was shot because he pointed a toy gun at them. Andwe are expected to take theirword
for all of this and go away. But we cannot dothat.Thereis still somuchthatdoesnot make sense to us.We owe it to our son to seek the truth. Theareawhereallof thisoccurredis familiar
to us — as it was to Hailu. He drove past this bank onhisway toYorktownHighSchool every day, and we believe that is exactly what he was doingonthatday,aswell.Hewasaverysociable and pleasant youngman; his backpackwas full of textbooksandnotebooks. Itwas simplynot in Hailu's personality to carry out such a crime. IfHailu had not been killed by the police, he
wouldhavehadtheright toatrial,duringwhich the policewould have presented their evidence
Hailu Brook in a family photo.
against him. This is the right and proper thing. But his death has prevented this. Because he waskilledbythepolice,allwehavebeengivenis a short letter stating that the shooting was justified.Whyshouldthequestionofhisguiltbe of any less importance now? Here are some of the questionswe have: lThe internal investigation:Why won’t the
police share their report? No doubt it was comprehensive.Asimple statement saying “the action is justified”without detailed evidence is
an insult to our intelligence. lVideo recordings: It is routine police
procedure to have video equipment in their cars. It was reported that the police were in hot pursuit of my son. Therefore, they may have video footage. Do they? If not,why not? lClosed-circuit bank videotape: Is
there a tape fromBB&T? Allowus to view it, and many of our questions can be answered. Itdoesn’t seemlike toomuchto ask. lThe level of force:Whywere somany
shots fired? Andwhywas he struck, as his autopsy indicated, in the back? We have anxiously pursued thismatter
for almost two yearsnow.Arlingtondetec- tiveshavehadthedecencytositdownwith us, but it is Fairfax that has most of the information we seek. Despite our respect- ful requests, the Fairfax authorities have not met with us, for reasons we don’t understand. Our doubts and suspicions have only increased. What is it that they don’twant us to know? Lastweek,Hailuwould have turned 21.
As parents, we need to know how his life ended, and we want closure. If events transpired as the police say they did, we willmove onwith our lives.
We are an ordinary, law-abiding family. We
pay our taxes. It is not our intention to pick a fight with a strong and rich county such as Fairfax. But such silence does not go hand in handwiththe responsibility andaccountability ofpublic officials.Wehave a right to knowwhat happened.
The writer is a former deputy Ethiopian ambassador to the United States. He lives in Fairlawn, Ohio.
The police killed my son.
JIMARKEDISWASHINGTON Help wanted: One second-chance job Tim Cofield needed his public
defender again way too soon. After his release from jail in March, I wrote on this page that Tim would soon be back in front of a judge if he did not get consistent access to substance- abuse counseling, mental health care and stable housing. Tim, who turned 55 onWednesday, is a bipolar-schizophrenic who has rotated in and out of jail, usually for narcotics and parole viola- tions, for most of his adult life. Eight months later, Tim still
isn’t receiving the care he needs. The result has hardly been sur- prising. His latest incarceration was from mid-October, when he submitted “dirty urines” at sub- stance tests, until last week. It was the cognac Courvoisier, he told me.
I’ve mentored Tim once a week
since February 2009 through the Welcome Home Reentry Pro- gram, a wonderful charity that matches mentors with recently released inmates. Despite the many and often self-inflicted challenges Tim faces, I refuse to believe he is doomed to society’s dumpster. It might be unrealistic to think
that counseling, mental health services or the long public hous- ing list will be improved over- night, but they don’t have to be. The past eight months convince me that Tim needs to catch one simple break to have a chance at turning his life around immedi- ately: a job. When Tim and I met, he had a
temporary gig as a maintenance worker with theD.C. government.
It wasn’t glamorous, but even at $9 an hour and with a 4:30 a.m. wake-up call, he knewhowvital it was, and he worked hard. After his six-month contract ended, he became stressed and depressed, and he got into trouble. Without steady employment,
he remains mired in a negatively reinforcing cycle: jail, insufficient treatment, unemployment, pa- role violation, jail. Rinse and repeat, except that the parole violations become more serious or more frequent. With his current slate of treat-
ments, he won’t break out of the cycle. Tim has attended a sub- stance counseling programsever- al times a week. But as the Cour- voisier attests, it has been only marginally effective. He receives infrequent psychiatric care,
through sessions that seem fo- cused on prescribing sleep medi- cations. And I worry constantly about where he spends the night. Rightnowhe has a girlfriendwho lets him crash with her.His other options are the homeless shelter at Second and D streets NW or sleeping on couches of friends, not all of whom are people with Tim’s best interests in mind. Tim survives on $606 a month
in Social Security and disability payments from the District. The money is a blessing and a curse: It keeps him afloat but isn’t enough to build a budget around. Instead of putting money away for a security deposit on an apartment, he buyswhat he needs, then picks up things like speakers and fancy shoes with whatever is left over. That’s why a job would mean
much more than a few extra dollars in his pocket. A job would give him a stake in his own life. It would build a sense of accom- plishment, occupy time other- wise spent with questionable as- sociates and create a reason to save money for long-term goals. Moreover, as Michelle Singletary wrote inThe Post just this month, a job would reduce Tim’s and others’ recidivism and crime throughout the community. Instead, doors slam all around
him. Tim has filled out applica- tion after application. I’ve helped him look online for openings, and he has met consistently with an employment counselor at Green Door, an organization that pro- vides services to the mentally ill. Tim gets an interview here and there, but thanks to his record,
they never lead to anything. Our community deserves a se-
rious conversation about employ- ing recently released inmates.We need quality programs that place those with troubled pasts in sta- ble jobs while mitigating employ- ers’ financial exposure for hiring a risky employee. In the long run, I’ll bet the employers and the community would benefit. I try to help Tim stay focused
on the long term. I want him to envision a life without the cycle he’s known, and I want him to know that sobriety, hard work and a little luck will get him there. Unless he secures a pay- check, I worry it’s all in vain.
The writer is a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute. The views expressed here are his own.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168