Brian Frosh wasn't the reason pit bull bill failed

Marta Mossburg's recent column about pit bull legislation ("Pit bull compromise fails, trial lawyers win," April 9) was full of inaccuracies. As a dog lover, and as someone who witnessed the proceedings first hand, I hope you will correct these errors in print.

Sen. Brian Frosh has led the effort to craft a rational state policy on dog attacks in the wake of the Court of Appeals decision in the Solesky case. He brokered several compromises, all of which were fair to victims, pet owners and landlords.

Senator Frosh was instrumental in passing the compromise in the Senate, only to have the bill later killed by the House. Ms. Mossburg is incorrect that Senator Frosh reneged on any compromise deal. In fact, Senator Frosh voted against the very amendment with which she apparently disagreed.

Ms. Mossburg is wrong to assert that Senator Frosh's position on the pit bull compromise has anything to do with sympathy for trial lawyers. The trial lawyers opposed Senator Frosh's position on the bill.

So please, Ms. Mossburg, call off your attack dogs and check your facts. Senator Frosh deserves nothing but praise for his efforts to resolve these complex issues.

Sen. Lisa A. Gladden, Baltimore

The writer, a Democrat, represents northwest Baltimore in the state Senate.

Copyright © 2018, The Baltimore Sun, a Baltimore Sun Media Group publication | Place an Ad