The Worn Out Bridge Over The Patuxent: A Daily Danger

The recent tragic death and injury on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge during two-way traffic emphasizes the danger present every day for users of the Thomas Johnson Bridge.

The thirty-one year old Southern Maryland bridge handles roughly three times the traffic it was built to accommodate. Every day, over the bridge’s narrow two lanes, tractor trailers, dump trucks and all manner of huge vehicle roll along with ordinary passenger vehicles.

Twenty years ago, the stress cracks in the support beams caused the bridge to be closed for months by the State Highway Administration (SHA) for repairs.

According to the Secretary of Transportation John D. Porcari’s comments last May, he sees this bridge closure as a half full glass. He views the bridge’s close for structural repairs as proof that the SHA is Johnny-on-the-spot when it comes to repairing possible threats "to ensure public safety." I see the glass as half empty. I see the bridge closure for repairs as a warning that this bridge is stressed by the traffic it handles every day. And that traffic can only increase as the years go by, perhaps to four times the traffic the bridge was built to handle.

Secretary Pocari says the issue regarding the Thomas Johnson Bridge "isn’t safety." The issue "is capacity." What kind of double talk is that? One of the very things that makes the two lane bridge a safety threat is that it does not have the capacity to handle the traffic that rumbles over it day after day.

Far be it for me to bite the hand that feeds us. However, I feel compelled to point out that we are just beginning the state study to determine the best possible option for either a wider or a new bridge. That study should have begun two decades ago. But it is what it is.

The $4 million in the 2009 capitol budget will enable state highway officials to pick the best option by fall 2009. Project planning could be completed by fall 2011. Design could be completed by fall 2014. Actual construction could be completed by 2017. But knowing that government tends to move at a snail’s pace on capital construction, the construction completion date will probably be closer to 2020…and that’s if the needed funds will actually be appropriated.

I don’t kid myself. And I’m not going to kid you. I believe the Thomas Johnson Bridge is a safety hazard. I’m not a civil or structural engineer, so I cannot declare, with expert knowledge, that the bridge is structurally unsound today. But common sense tells me that a bridge bearing three times the traffic it was built to handle is not a good thing. Certainly, it does nothing to strengthen the bridge or its structural integrity. I have no doubt that the two-way traffic barreling continually over two narrow lanes increases the odds of crashes, injury and death.

In his remarks, Secretary Pocari takes me to task, declaring, "It serves no useful purpose for Senator Dyson to raise unnecessary alarm regarding the condition of a bridge that is structurally sound."

Senator Pocari should know that I am not alone in questioning the bridge’s structural soundness and its threat to public safety. He should know I am not "raising unnecessary alarm." No, Secretary Pocari, I have, I am and I will continue to call attention to the danger the bridge poses every step of the way, until all the funds are appropriated and all the construction is completed.

While Secretary Pocari characterizes it as "raising unnecessary alarm," I call it fighting for a safer and adequate transportation infrastructure that meets the needs of the people I serve in St. Mary’s, Calvert and Charles Counties. Because he does not hold elected office, maybe Secretary Pocari doesn’t know that what I am doing is representing my constituents.

A PERFECT STORM –

EXPANDING SENIOR POPULATION &

SHRINKING DOCTOR SUPPLY

As Maryland’s 1.55 million baby boomers turn sixty, the state’s medical community has called urgent attention to an alarming doctor shortage. These two factors – a growing demand for medical services and a health care system already struggling to keep pace with the current demand – can combine to create a perfect health care storm.

Baby boomers, the newest segment of the aging population, will live longer and will need an unprecedented amount of health care.

In February 2008, the Maryland Hospital and MedChi, the state’s medical society reported to the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee, that the State fell 16% below the national average of doctors in clinical practice. The report projected that the shortage would deepen by 2015, when 32% of the current doctor workforce could retire. Nearly 10% of Maryland’s are 65 or older.

Both the doctor and nurse shortage is not due to too few people choosing the medical profession. There is a profound shortage of medical and nursing school teachers and not enough openings in either professional school. MedChi has recommended an increase in medical school slots and residency slots. Bruce Smoller, president of MedChi’s board of trustees has noted that the increases will take about ten years to bear fruit.

Rural Maryland is now and will continue to be the hardest hit by the doctor shortage. According to the National Rural Health Association, while nearly 25% of the population lives in rural areas, only about 10% of physicians practice there.

As Vice-Chairman of the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee, and a Southern Marylander all my life, I was deeply concerned to learn that Southern Maryland with "critical shortages" in 25 of 30 physician categories, or 83%, will be hit most severely.

The recommended legislative remedies, including higher physician reimbursement rates by insurers, medical malpractice reforms and a state loan forgiveness program to attract young physicians to regions most in need.

The 2008 General Assembly approved legislation, which I sponsored, to establish a Task Forced to Review Physician Shortages in Rural Areas of the State. Current law does not specifically address health care in rural areas. The Task Force is required to report its findings and recommendations to the General Assembly by December 1, 2008.

The panel is charged with studying recruitment and retention of primary care physicians in rural areas… funding of programs to encourage physician practice in rural areas…new academic physician recruitment programs to enroll students interested in rural life and practice… and financial and tax incentives for physicians who practice in rural areas.

The Governor’s Task Force on Health Care Access and Reimbursement is also required to report to the Governor and the General Assembly on December 1 its findings and recommendations regarding the state’s strained health care system.

No two ways about it, we know the problem of providing adequate medical services for a burgeoning elderly population is here now. We know it’s going to get worse. The State must act decisively, boldly and immediately to prevent a medical care calamity. Maryland’s doctor shortage will be one of the major issues in the upcoming 2009 General Assembly session.

AMBER ALERT – 10 YEARS OLD –

An AMBER Alert is a multi-media notification to the general public that the police have confirmed that a child has been abducted.

The AMBER Alert is named for 9-year old Amber Hagerman, who was abducted, sexually assaulted and murdered in Arlington, Texas in 1996. To save other children from Amber’s tragic death, Donna and Richard, her parents formed P.A.S.O (People Against Sex Offenders) to alert communities when an abduction occurs. The AMBER Alert grew from that effort. Today, all fifty states and Canada have AMBER Alert systems.

It’s been 10 years since the first automated implementation of the AMBER Alert was created by the Child Alert Foundation in 1998.

And it’s been nearly 10 years – November 1998 - since the first child in the United States was recovered as a result of an AMBER Alert. That child was 8-week old Rae Leigh Bradbury. On April 4, 2007, 9-year old Rae Leigh introduced First Lady Laura Bush at the announcement of the future opening of the Texas Regional Office of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The National Center is a nonprofit group that helps the Justice Department train police to use the alert system.

Federal guidelines for AMBER Alerts require that the child be under 18 and believed to be in grave danger and that the abduction has been confirmed by police. The public information in an AMBER Alert usually consists of the child’s name, description and a description of the suspected abductor and the abductor’s car and license number, if available.

AMBER Alerts are distributed via commercial and satellite radio, TV stations and cable TV through the Emergency Alert System, as well as e-mail, electronic traffic condition signs, Wallgreen Drug Stores’ electronic readerboard road signs and wireless text messages. Those interested in subscribing to receive AMBER Alerts in their area visit Wireless Amber Alerts.

According to the National Center for Missing or Exploited Children, relatives were involved in 47% of the AMBER Alerts in 2007. Non-family abductions accounted for 41% of the alerts.

It should be noted that over the past few years, the number of AMBER Alerts has declined. Police and researchers cite as reasons for the decline, more restrictive use of the alerts. The alerts must meet the federal criteria. For those cases that do not meet the strict criteria, a less widely distributed secondary alert is issued.

Today, police use the alerts only for children in the most danger. Thus, the number of alerts has fallen from 275 in 2005 to 261 in 2006 and 227 in 2007. During the first six months of 2008, there were 102 alerts issued.

Virginia’s AMBER Alert coordinator, State Police Lt. Pete Fagen, states that Virginia wants to restrict AMBER Alerts to the most serious cases in order to get and keep the maximum public attention and the maximum media cooperation.

Bob Hoever, the associate director for training of the National for Missing and Exploited Children said, "We have the eyes and ears of the public assisting us." Indeed, the goal of AMBER Alert is to instantly galvanize the entire community to assist in the search and safe recovery of the abducted child. AMBER Alerts have led to 400 successful recoveries. There have been 12 successful recoveries in the first six months of 2008.

Many of the tough laws against child sex offenders take their names from children who were brutally abducted, sexually assaulted and killed. Megan’s Law, a federal statute and law in 50 states, requires convicted sex offenders to register their current address in a Sex Offender Registry which is open for public inspection. The law takes its name from Megan Kanka, a 7-year old child who, was kidnapped, molested and murdered in 1994 by a neighbor who was a convicted sexual predator. No one knew that the neighbor who lived across the street was a convicted pedophile. Megan’s law assures that the community can keep informed of the whereabouts of convicted sex offenders in their neighborhoods.

Jessica’s law, recently adopted by the Maryland General Assembly, takes its name from Jessica Lunsford, a 9-year old child who was kidnapped, molested and murdered in 2005. The law toughens penalties for child sex offenders. It imposes a mandatory 25-year to life, with no chance of parole, on anyone over 18 years of age convicted of a first or second degree sex offense against anyone younger than 13 years of age.

The names of these tragically murdered young children - Amber Hagerman, Megan Kanka and Jessica Lunsford – live on in laws that impose stronger penalties on child sex offenders and protect children from becoming their victims.

On June 30, the new child car seat law became effective. The measure was approved overwhelmingly by the 2008 General Assembly session.

The new laws requires safety seats for children up to 8 years of age or have reached a height of 4 feet 9 inches or a weight of 68 pounds. Violators of the law will be fined $25.

For years, pediatricians and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have recommended booster seats for 7 and 8 year old children. Passage of the new law brings Maryland in line with all its neighbor states and all the Mid-Atlantic States that have higher weight and height requirements for child safety seats.

The NHTSA guidelines for child passenger safety recommend use of the:

· Rear-facing seat for children younger than age 1 and who weigh at least 10 pounds.

· Forward-facing seat for children up to the age of 4 and who weigh 40 pounds.

· Booster seats for children under age 8 and 4 feet 9 inches tall.

· Seat belts should be used when children reach the age of 8 or the height of

4 feet 9 inches

For the past several years, Maryland law has required safety seats for children younger than age 4. Since 2003, the State has mandated safety seats for children less than 6 years old.

Vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death for children in the U. S. Studies show that a properly used safety seat or booster seat reduces the chances of a child being seriously injured or killed in a car crash by more than half. Research by the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia shows that the use of a safety seat, strapped into a vehicle reduces by 59% the risk of injury for children.

Statistical evidence shows that since 2003, the number of children injured in car crashes has decreased. According to the State Highway Administration, in 2006 there were 827 children injured and four killed in automobile crashes. That number represents a drop from 1,069 injuries and six child deaths in 2002.

With the adoption of the new child safety car seat requirements, Maryland becomes one of 18 states, along with the District of Columbia, with more stringent child car seat laws.

Most parents have commented favorably regarding passage of the bill. Nevertheless, you can’t please everyone. A few did object to the further intrusion of government into our personal lives and our personal judgment. I, too, object to the intrusion of government into every aspect of our lives. Nevertheless, I strongly supported the car seat legislation because I would rather err on the side of child safety.

The aspect of getting old we all fear most is not death. It is disability to a degree that makes nursing home care necessary.

As a society, we are judged by the manner in which we treat our most vulnerable citizens – the very young and the very old. By that standard, we have set the bar relatively low.

Governor O’Malley recently signed into law legislation to determine if there is a link between nursing home ownership and the quality of care they provide. Such ownership ranges from small nonprofits to giant corporations with worldwide holdings, known as private equity firms.

Beginning in 2000, these huge private equity firms began buying nursing homes. The Carlyle Group, a private equity firm, paid $6 billion in December 2007 to purchase HCR Manor Care nursing homes.

Of Maryland’s 233 nursing homes, HCR Manor Care owns 14.

This year, two Maryland nursing homes, Manor Care Rossville, owned by the Carlyle Group, and the Waldorf Center, owned by Formation Capital, were placed on the national federal watch list. This means that instead of one yearly inspection, these homes will have to undergo two yearly inspections and be subject to possible penalties.

According to a Service Employer International Union – SEIU – study, buyouts of two other nursing homes in the State have led to violation of state and federal law and paved the way for the creation of new business structures that limit the nursing home’s liability and make it more difficult to track how federal Medicaid and Medicare funds are spent. Stephen Lerner, a spokesperson for SEIU, said, "Private equity (ownership of nursing homes) is corporate greed on steroids – how that melds with
patient care is hard for us to figure out."

According to Wendy Kronmiller, director of the State Office of Quality Care, a task force with membership that includes representatives from nursing homes and consumer groups will examine and analyze data to see if there is a ling between ownership and quality of care.

Charlene Harrington, a professor at the University of California, referring to the Maryland task forced study, stated, "I am not sure they need to do another study." Professor Harrington asserted that national studies, with which she is familiar, reveal that for-profit nursing homes operate with lower cost and less staff than nonprofit nursing homes, which operate with larger staff and provide higher quality care.

Voices for Quality Care has been urging Congress to pass legislation requiring more transparency in nursing home ownership. The Group has noted a Nursing Home in Southern Maryland that has a high number of state and federal violations.

It is difficult to determine how ownership of some nursing homes are structured and who is responsible for what. Tracing corporate responsibility through layers of limited liability corporations is like pealing an onion. According to Jason Frank, Chairman of the Elder Law section of the Maryland State Bar Association, these complicated structures make it hard for nursing home residents to identify who to sue for poor care.

We owe our seniors who must seek nursing home care a better deal. As I see it, the further away nursing home ownership and liability get, the more likely it is that the quality of care will suffer. We cannot depend on huge corporate entities with worldwide holdings to be too concerned with nursing home quality of care. These businesses are concerned with profit, many times to the exclusion of what has to be done or not done to turn that profit. At the very least, Maryland has the responsibility to nursing home residents to pin down who the owner is and where the ultimate responsibility for care rests.

For the fourth time in the past 15 years, the General Assembly approved legislation to create a state commission to study and provide an assessment of the death penalty’s merits and costs.

In 1993, the Governor’s Commission on the Death Penalty concluded that racial disparity in the death penalty was "a legitimate concern." In 1996, the Governor’s Task Force on the Fair Imposition of Capital Punishment concluded that the racial disparity in the death penalty "remains a cause of concern" can requires further study.

In 2000, a University of Maryland study was approved by the General Assembly. It concluded, in 2003, that the race of the offender did not have a significant impact on the process, but that the jurisdiction where the murder was prosecuted was relevant because some county State’s Attorneys asked for the death penalty more frequently.

In January 2008, an Abell Foundation study revealed that the cost of the death penalty has been $186 million, at least three times greater than the state would have spent to imprison for life those convicted of first degree murder.

Ever since the death penalty was reinstated in 1978, opponents of the penalty have been trying and failing to repeal it. Failure to repeal the death penalty often resulted in the creation of another commission to do another death penalty study. That is what happened during the recent 2008 session. Frankly, I think the death penalty has been studied and studied beyond a reasonable degree.

This newest study is modeled after the New Jersey study group and will include legislators, state officials, religious leaders, a prosecutor, public defender, police chief, correctional guard, a family member of a murder victim and a former prisoner who was later exonerated of the crime for which he served time. Obviously, the composition of this group is heavily weighted toward abolishing the death penalty. The New Jersey study led to that state abolishing the death penalty last year.

At the center of the latest effort to abolish the death penalty is the question of lethal injections. Lawyers for inmates have contended that the fatal doses of three drugs used in lethal injections, if administered improperly, can cause a painful death. In April, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled 7-3 that lethal injection executions do not violate the Fifth Amendment, which protects against cruel and unusual punishment.

The Supreme Court’s decision has no direct impact on Maryland’s current de facto death penalty moratorium. The moratorium has been in effect since 2006 when the State’s highest court ruled that the state’s procedures for lethal injections had not been properly administered. For executions to resume, Governor O’Malley would have to issue new regulations. He has resisted taking this step.

Marylanders are almost evenly divided on the death penalty. According to a January 2008 poll, 48% of Marylanders believe that the appropriate penalty for first degree murder is life in prison without possibility of parole, while 42% believe that the death penalty for first degree murder is more appropriate. Whether one is for or against the death penalty, most people believe that the matter has been mired down in one study after another.

Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1978, Maryland has executed 5 murderers. Today, five inmates are on death row.

The truth of the matter is that it can take up to 20 years before a murderer sentenced to death is actually executed. The vast majority of death penalty sentences are eventually reversed in the long and expensive appeals process. The sad fact is that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment for victims’ families. These families are forced to endure years of trials and legal procedures which replay the murder of their loved one and almost never end in the murder’s execution.

Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said, "if there is any deterrent effect to the death penalty, there isn’t one if there aren’t any executions." I couldn’t agree more.