These identical bills mandate the development of a single form that states the individual’s wishes regarding life-sustaining treatments and end-of-life care, is signed by a physician or nurse practitioner, and is valid in all health care facilities. The form will accompany the individual when transferred to another facility, and a form will be completed for someone without it upon admission. The bill should move Maryland significantly further in honoring the wishes of individuals because the MOLST forms will be legally binding on all health care facilities throughout the state and will be in a format that will clarify choices. Both bills passed with some amendments.

Last year USM supported a bill that would permit organizations that have as one of their primary purposes representing or providing services to state retirees to make at their own expense two “blind” mailings (the sponsoring organization would not have access to the names or addresses of the persons receiving the mailing) to retirees eligible to join the sponsoring organization. The bills, which passed and were enacted, were amended so that they applied solely to the Maryland Retired School Personnel Association and were “sunsetted” after one year. The original purpose of HB 249/SB 199 was to repeal the sunset provision and make the act permanent. However, this year’s bills have been amended to broaden its application to the organizations in last year’s bill. Amended bills have passed both houses.

The Maryland Public Information Act grants public access to government records unless they are specifically excepted by law. Currently all records of the 129 senior centers in the state are required to be open upon request including the names, addresses, telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses of members and participants. This bill would require custodians of senior center records to deny personal information to those requesting it under the Public Information Act. Identical amended bills passed both houses.

This bill would permit voters to request that they receive absentee ballots automatically for each future election. Their names would be removed from the list after they failed to vote in two consecutive general elections. This would particularly benefit seniors, who often have difficulties getting to the polls on election days.  The House passed an amended bill which changed the title of the bill as well as making changes in its implementation. It was not heard in committee in the Senate. The Senate bill was heard in committee but not acted on.

This bill would establish a comprehensive, strategic state plan to address the aging-in-place preference of current and future seniors and to promote a state aging-in-place program that overcomes barriers in housing, transportation, health care, employment, and social and civic engagement. The program would be overseen by the Department of Aging. The Department would establish criteria for certifying communities as “Communities for a Lifetime” and would carry out other functions to facilitate the success of the program. The Senate bill passed both houses after being extensively modified. As amended the Department of Aging’s role has been mostly changed to advisory with the responsibility for certifying shifted to the counties and municipalities. The House bill passed the House late in the session and was not heard in the Senate.

Last year USM supported bills that would have legalized the use of marijuana for medical purposes under very strict control of the growing, distribution, and use of the drug. The Senate passed an amended version of the bill, which added further restrictions, but the House did not act. This year’s bills are based on the bill that passed the Senate last year with some minor changes. After the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene testified in opposition, the bills were essentially rewritten. The Senate bill passed both houses. It was retitled as “Medical Marijuana – Affirmative Defenses – Maryland Medical Marijuana Model Program Workgroup.” It permits a defendant to enter an affirmative defense plea of the use of marijuana for medical purposes. If successful the maximum penalty that the court can impose is $100. It also mandates that the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene convene a twenty-person work group whose membership is specified to “develop a model program to facilitate patient access to marijuana for medical purposes.” The work group is to report to the three relevant committees by December 2011 with draft legislation and a goal of having an operating program by the beginning of 2013. The House bill passed the Senate in amended form but was not returned for concurrence.

Although with the same title these are three separate bills. They have in common allowing an income tax credit for long-term care premiums, although the details differ. USM believes that encouraging individuals to purchase long-term care insurance can have the ultimate effect of reducing the state’s Medicaid costs. All bills were heard in committee but not acted on.

The primary purpose of this bill is to broaden the definition of income that is eligible for the pension exclusion to include income for retirement savings accounts such as IRAs, Roth IRAs, Keogh Plans, etc. It would end the discrimination against people who do not have either employer-sponsored retirement plans or substantial Social Security benefits. USM supported this bill last year but asked that it be delayed for a year because of the fiscal situation. The situation remains dire. By a 16-7 vote the Ways and Means Committee voted to give this bill an unfavorable committee report.

This bill would allow for the seizure of property obtained through financial crime and using the proceeds in part to compensate the victims of the crime, which would include businesses. Current law does not call for the forfeiture of property gained through financial crime. For example, someone who commits identity theft can keep the proceeds for his illegal acts while the victim is left to fend for himself in restoring his credit and reputation. The Senate bill passed the Senate unanimously and was heard in committee in the House but not acted on. The House bill was also heard in committee but not acted on.

This bill would require at least 50% of the houses in a new development of six or more single family dwellings to have at least one entrance that has a minimal height difference between the threshold and the floor and the landing and that has a circulation route to a garage, parking space, or public right-of-way with minimal grade changes. The bill would not take effect until October 2014, has a number of exceptions, and has no interior standards, but it could serve as a first step toward greater accessibility to new houses.  The bill received an unfavorable report in the Environmental Matters Committee and was withdrawn by the sponsors.

HB 170/SB 183 Health Insurance – Conformity with Federal Law and HB 166/SB 182 Maryland Health Benefits Exchange Act of 2011, HB 165,  (All bills are departmental)

These bills collectively represent an effort to enhance and extend health care in Maryland. USM supported these bills in principle because one of the tenets of our stated Aims and Principles is “Affordable health care for all Marylanders.” All four bills were passed and signed by the Governor.