It is not every day that a former student and now good friend gets engaged at the White House, but, on December 13, 2022, Rod popped the question to his partner of eight years, Alex, at the White House signing ceremony for the Respect for Marriage Act. It was great to see their tweet (of course a tweet) and then to read the Religion News Service story about their engagement.   

For me, a member of the LGBTQ+ community, the day had double significance—not only did good friends become engaged, but now a federal statute requires states to recognize same-sex and interracial marriages. The act also invalidates the Defense of Marriage Act which had defined marriage as between “one man, one woman” and had permitted states to not recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. Passage of the act was a positive note to end 2022. 

And yet, many challenges remain in 2023. Despite the Respect for Marriage Act, should the Supreme Court overturn its Obergefell v. Hodges decision (2015) that established a federal constitutional right to marry someone of the same sex, then that right would be in question in 35 states that have either a state statute, a state constitutional amendment or both prohibiting same sex marriages. The Obergefell decision, decided by only a 5-4 majority, was authored by Justice Kennedy whose seat now is filled by Justice Gorsuch. There is at least one justice who thinks the Court should revisit Obergefell, namely Justice Thomas, who said as much in his concurrence in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision which overturned the fifty-year precedent of Roe v. Wade.

The Court remains a focus for other reasons. The very same week that the House passed the final version of the Respect for Marriage Act the Court heard arguments in 303 Creative v. Elenis in which a Colorado web designer and evangelical Christian who does not support same sex marriage is arguing that she should not be required to design a wedding website for same sex couples because to do so would violate her freedom of speech. Colorado law prohibits businesses from discriminating against LGBTQ+ persons. Court observers predict that the conservative majority will side with the web designer.

And then there is the wave of state legislation and local school regulations targeting the rights of transgender and nonbinary persons.  A Washington Post article noted that in 2022 more anti-transgender laws were proposed than in any other year, laws which would limit participation on school sports teams to use of bathrooms to gender-affirming medical care.

Maryland, however, continues to protect its transgender and non-binary youth. In February 2022, the House of Delegates Ways and Means Committee unfavorably reported out HB 757 also known as the “Save Women’s Sports Act”  which would have barred transgender youth from participating on sports teams that reflected their gender identity and not their biological sex.

In May, our state enacted a law which requires private schools that receive state aid to not discriminate against students based on “race, ethnicity, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.” 

Even more sobering than laws that target trans and non-binary youth is the rate of suicide among LGBTQ+ youth. Just three days after the Respect for Marriage Act was signed Henry Berg-Bousseau, the 24-year-old, transgender son of Dr. Karen Berg, a Kentucky state senator , committed suicide. Henry had been  a deputy press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBT+ advocacy group. According to The Trevor Project’s 2022 National Survey on LGBTQ Youth Mental Health, “45% of LGBTQ youth considered attempting suicide in the past year” and “fewer than 1 in 3 transgender and nonbinary youth found their home to be gender-affirming.” 

And the violence against the LGBTQ+ community continues. Right-wing militia groups, such as the Patriot Front, have targeted the LGBTQ+ community. This past June, thirty-one Patriot Front members were arrested in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho before they were going to interfere with a Pride Festival there. And, in November, at the Colorado Springs LGBT club, Club Q, an assumed haven for the LGBTQ community, five persons were gunned down, among them two transgender persons. 

Safe havens are so important. I was encouraged to read that the three LGBTQ+ organizations at Washington College are active again after the effects of Covid on campus clubs. I hope that Kent County LGBTQ+ youth have safe havens where they can be who they are and be celebrated for who they are. 

I began this piece with Rod and Alex. Let me end with them. On June 26, 2015, the three of us were outside the Supreme Court with hundreds of others, waiting to hear what the Court had decided in the Obergefell case. I had flown in from Spokane, Washington where I was teaching and was at the Court with a dear friend. I’ll never forget the cheers that erupted when the crowd learned of the outcome. It was a joyful moment. The signing of the Respect for Marriage Act on December 13 was also a joyful moment. Yes, much has changed for the better, but meanness and discrimination and violence continue. Much work remains to achieve full equality. 

Kathryn Lee (Ph.D., J.D.), is  the former chair of the Political Science Department and Director of the Women’s and Gender Studies Program at Whitworth University in Spokane, WA. Kathryn was recently profiles in the New Yorker which can be read here. She retired to Chestertown last July.

Last night, Easton’s Prager Family Center for the Arts held a concert featuring Venezuelan pianist Gabriela Montero, violinist Joshua Bell, and soprano Larisa Martinez. It was, in short, magic. The featured musicians were at the top of their game. The program was eclectic and charming. The acoustics were superb. I felt privileged to be in attendance.

During one introduction to the selected program, Joshua Bell mentioned that he had never played in a venue quite like this one. It reminded him of the salons of days gone by. He is right.  It is a unique experience to be so close to the artists in an environment with such amazing sound quality. 

Gabriela Montero is a renowned pianist who gave her first concert when she was only five years old. She has performed at the Kennedy Center, Carnegie Hall, as well as concert halls in Munich, Berlin, Bern, Amsterdam and other venues across the globe. Montero sometimes introduces improvisations into standard classical pieces, a practice that Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart also incorporated into their concerts. Montero also has composed many original compositions and released several albums. Her 2015 album won her the Latin Grammy award for best classical album.  Her mastery of the eclectic pieces played on Saturday evening was pure perfection. 

On Saturday’s performance, Joshua Bell was not front and center, as the concert truly showcased his wife, soprano Larisa Martinez. But, as usual, he did not disappoint. Bell made his Carnegie debut at the age of 17. His instrument is the Gibson ex Huberman, a Stradivarius made in 1713 during the Stradivari’s Golden Era. The violin was stolen twice and is the subject of a documentary The Return of the Violin. Bell, considered one of the greatest violinists of all time, has won numerous awards and has produced albums featuring Brahms, Prokofiev, Gershwin, Bernstein, Vivaldi, Mendelssohn and many more. 

In 2019, Puerto Rican-born soprano Larisa Martinez made both her Kennedy Center and Carnegie Hall debuts—the same year she married Bell. Martinez appeared in her first opera when she was 19 as the shepherd in the third act of Tosca.  She studied vocal performance at the Conservatory of Music in Puerto Rico and obtained her master’s degree from the Mannes School of Music in New York City. Martinez has performed in New York and other operatic stages in the United States and Europe.  In recent years, she has performed with Andrea Bocelli where she typically sings one aria and then joins the tenor in four operatic duets. 

Saturday’s program at the Prager included works by Mendelssohn, Schubert, Chopin, and Bernstein, as well as some Spanish and Puerto Rican pieces. The standouts of the evening were the Chopin Sarasate I Nocturne, Op. 9, No. 2, and the concluding Bernstein West Side Story suite with outstanding performances by Montero, Bell and Martinez. 

Easton owes a debt of gratitude to the Prager Family for bringing these amazing artists to a truly outstanding venue. Thank you. 

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of a federal human capital practice at an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, piano, gardening, and nature.

Talbot Integrity Project leader Dan Watson offer a oral closing argument for the organization’s platform to “Reset Lakeside” in the November 8th election.

The nine mostly rural counties on Maryland’s Eastern Shore have benefited from their relative isolation from East Coast urbanization: natural beauty,  low population density, enviable way of life, first class boating, hunting and fishing and the best crab in the US.  The downside is that a number of younger people born here, leave to find training and job opportunities, elsewhere; often in large cities or their environs. A number of their population replacements are retirees or seasonal visitors or wealthy families with second or third homes on the Shore.    

But, what happens to those from low/middle income families not destined for college (2/3 of Americans don’t go)? This has been a mounting problem on the Eastern Shore for decades as agriculture needs  fewer people and large companies closed or relocated. The pandemic has led to even more closures particularly smaller service firms tied to tourism..   

The last 20 years of the Cyber Revolution and its multiplying business applications has further impacted local and commuter job opportunities.  Good career, family supporting jobs offered by 21st Century employers often require a level of tech capacity many don’t have. 

However, there is evidence slow changes are beginning to take place in corporate hiring practices and in the breadth of advanced tech training. They have already made noticeable positive changes in the lives of non-college graduates. But, it’s time they reached the Eastern Shore.

Historically, the US Government, until very recently, spent a lower share of its budgets than other  industrialized countries, on job training and support for workers. And the private sector has generally perceived paying for in-house training as detracting from their principal mission, i.e. generating high profit margins  

However, the pandemic has produced tight American labor markets and pressed corporations to look beyond college graduates to expand their available labor pool. They’ve begun reaching many more applicants by including apprenticeships and additional on-the-job training in their recruitment. Some recent research shows larger American firms have started reducing the old hiring priority, once a prerequisite, for  degrees.  This traditional practice of screening for college grads, had eliminated 76% of African American and 83% of Latino adults. 

The Cyber world of the 21st Century makes liberal arts degrees alone, largely irrelevant; a fact more, but not enough, employers are accepting.    

The Biden Administration’s American Rescue Plan legislation appropriated $500 Million in grants for its Good Jobs Challenge programs to be dispersed by the US Economic Development Administration (EDA).  The principal mission of the Challenge is to raise the work force skill levels that are the keys to  career jobs and economic growth. More specifically, the Challenge goal is to create 50,000 good-paying jobs, defined as more than the regional prevailing wage for an occupation.  

In August 2022 EDA awarded grants to 32 industry-led, worker centered training in 31 states.  One was given to the Maryland Department of Labor to develop Industry Energy and Resilience. 

The Eastern Shore should consider applying for grants, perhaps through Chesapeake College or the two Workforce Investment Boards..  

One of the few nonprofit job training organizations to have achieved a good record of lifting lower income workers into jobs that serve as a bridge to the middle class, is called the “Year Up.” Their approach is a whole-life plan aimed at preparing individuals for and then getting, a well-paid job. They not only provide training in high tech skills, but also address human needs, e.g. subsidized child care, medical insurance, food assistance and even car repair to enable individuals to continue learning..  

Year Up develops close relationships with employers and offers training for local in-demand “hard tech  skills” together with coaching in important “soft skills”, communications, team work, interviews etc. Year Up like others, can only reach a few thousand people per year.    

About two years ago I started talking to a training firm called Interapt, Inc. from Louisville, Ky.  Its motto had attracted me: “We empower people through technology.”  The company provides hi-tech training to individuals across the country, that is matched to local private/public sector technical needs.  Often, the process includes post training paid internships. They were very interested in organizing classes  on the Eastern Shore.  Unfortunately, the Pandemic arrived and our discussions ended. 

Often, discussions of “education” focus solely on K-12 public schools and college deliverables, measured in “future earnings”.  The usual comment is that those with college degrees will over a life time  earn considerably more than those that who don’t.  This has always struck me as outdated, but particularly in the Cyber Era.  

The Western Europeans for more than a century recognized there is another approach to preparing for good family incomes and comfortable lives, i.e. high skilled, always in demand, professional trades.  For over a century, the European technical high schools have graduated individuals with post secondary certifications, considered the equivalent our bachelors. 

Unfortunately in America, this dichotomy between college and non-college educated people has continued to skew the way we consider successful careers and the decisions many young Americans make.  However, in 2022 and moving forward, it is essential parents and governments, particularly local, strongly support and create more easily accessible opportunities for Cyber Tech training. 

Eastern Shore high schools do offer hi tech training and today’s teenagers have been using it since they were five or younger.  However, specialization has occurred in this career path as it has across all other employment.  

The Upper Shore counties’ public high schools definitely offer hi-tech courses.  And these students also have the possibility of dual enrollment at Chesapeake Community College where they can find useful collateral courses and more advanced tech training. The Upper Shore Workforce Investment Board also offers support for job enhancing classes.

The five County Governments support Chesapeake College, but my hope is that they will also fund the dual enrollment tuition and stipend, Chesapeake professors need to teach locally.  However,  for my part, I’m going to reconnect with Interapt, Inc. and once again solicit support from prospective hi-tech  employers on the Upper Shore to partner with Interapt and offer paid internships following their training. 

We are in a very new and expanding work world and our children and grandchildren on the Eastern Shore should be able easily to obtain the type if cyber training that interests them, e.g. cyber security is a current high priority. And  we need to catch up and create these no or very low cost  options. 

Tom Timberman is an Army vet, lawyer, former senior Foreign Service officer, adjunct professor at GWU, and economic development team leader or foreign government advisor in war zones. He is the author of four books, lectures locally and at US and European universities. He and his wife are 24 year residents of Kent County.

Maybe it’s because Halloween is lurking, but I am scared that something creepy is going on in our public schools. I’m referring to the mission creep that is occurring as teachers are asked more and more to add mental health and social-emotional learning to their already grueling workloads.

Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore) recently identified school mental health as a priority in the wake of the pandemic. The U.S. surgeon general warns that “the challenges today’s generation of young people face are unprecedented and uniquely hard to navigate. And the effect these challenges have had on their mental health is devastating.” Students’ anxiety, depression and suicide symptoms doubled during the pandemic.

The saving grace is the remarkable policy response. In Maryland, federal COVID and state funds are dedicated to a dizzying array of programs, including school-based health coordinators, teacher training, community schools and partnerships linked to schools, restorative practices, and social and emotional learning (SEL) in classrooms.

SEL, which has the most potential direct impact on classroom teachers, has been around for decades. The leading national organization on SEL calls it the process through which students “acquire and apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to develop healthy identities, manage emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible and caring decisions.”

In an article “Should Schools Embrace Social and Emotional Learning?” Johns Hopkins expert Robert Balfanz notes the “strong case for taking an integrated approach to the social, emotional, and academic development of children rather than focusing on academics in isolation.” It should be a win-win for students and teachers.

Yet, it isn’t that simple. SEL and related mental health programs raise vexing questions. Are they a proper role for schools or should they be left to families, communities, and mental health providers?

And no surprise, SEL is now a political flashpoint. One prominent conservative opponent told a New York Times reporter that while SEL “sounds positive and uncontroversial in theory, in practice SEL serves as a delivery mechanism for radical pedagogy, such as critical race theory and gender deconstructionism.” Republicans are far more disapproving of SEL than Democrats.

However, apart from its political weaponization by conservatives, it’s hard to know what is really going on because there are so many question marks. How is SEL delivered? Do teachers have the right training and skills? Is it effective? (The scant research on effectiveness seems divided.)

And, in my view, here’s the toughest question of all: is SEL diverting teachers from their core academic mission? Does it change the role of the teacher, as one analyst pondered, “from a pedagogue to something more closely resembling a therapist, social worker, or member of the clergy?” In one poll, 81% of teachers said they were spending more time than ever on SEL.

Teachers had back-breaking jobs before the pandemic. According to a recent survey, “a typical teacher works a median of 54 hours per week. But just 46% of their time in the school building is spent teaching.”

No wonder the mental health of teachers, like students, is going downhill. Another survey revealed that teachers and principals suffer from job-related stress at a rate roughly double that of other working adults.

It’s also hard to predict the future course of SEL and related programs. SEL, in particular, comes in many different modes. For example: specialized SEL curricula, teacher-led discussion groups, and the infusion of SEL into all school courses.

Student mental health problems and programs are soaring in Maryland. Inquiries to several local school districts reveal an impressive assortment of efforts, notably SEL in the early grades where relationships between teachers and children are especially crucial.

One thing for sure: teachers strongly support the goals and values of SEL and other mental health programs. The kids need SEL. But that still begs vexing questions about its net effect on classroom teaching and student achievement.

Fortunately, there are straightforward ways to take the time and pressure off of teachers. One is for SEL and related mental health services to be provided largely by inside school staff who are mental health specialists like social workers, psychologists and counselors. Better still, the full panoply of mental health services can be best provided outside the regular school day.

The Blueprint for Maryland’s Future commendably blazes the outside trail, expanding “Coordinated Community Supports” and especially outside “wraparound services” for families and children. The rub, as I’ve analyzed elsewhere, is that wraparound programs compete with in-school academic instruction and mental health specialists for scarce education funds.

How, then, should the mental health crisis of students be resolved? Throughout U. S. history, reformers have often tried to lay society’s ills on the doorstep of the schoolhouse and on the shoulders of teachers. It typically hasn’t worked well, and today, more than ever, public schools face existential challenges.

That’s why policymakers must not be Halloween scaredy-cats and shy away from the challenges of mission creep. At the very least, the next Maryland governor and General Assembly should substantially increase funding for in-school psychologists, social workers and counselors, while sustaining support for outside wraparound programs. An analysis of federal data shows that Maryland ranks near the bottom of all states in the ratio of psychologists and counselors to students.

And the Maryland State Department of Education must follow through on its recent thorough overview of ongoing mental health efforts. There should be follow-up comprehensive planning, collection of data, monitoring and evaluation, including whether in-school mental health programs like SEL put undue pressure on teachers at the expense of academic instruction.

We’ll all be feeling healthier about the future of our schoolchildren if these challenges are met.

Kalman Hettleman was a member of the Maryland Commission on Innovation and Excellence in Education (also known as the Kirwan Commission), a former Baltimore City school board member, a former deputy mayor of Baltimore and a former Maryland secretary of Human Resources.

The Easton Town Council unanimously passed a new law prohibiting retail stores from providing customers with single-use plastic bags at the checkout counter.  The vote brought to the end a long process of public hearings and workshops that took place since the idea was mooted by members of Plastic-Free Easton back in March.  Council members discussed their support of the bill, finally passing it 5-0 to happy smiles and applause. This was an achievement on reducing an important source of plastics pollution in Easton guided by Council President Megan Cook.  The law is a result of an positive collaboration between town leaders and residents.

In his message supporting the new law Ward 2 Council member Don Abbatiello noted, “The overall goal is to reduce the amount of plastic trash in our community and our waterways.  Every piece of plastic that was ever produced but not incinerated is still with us today. If the Puritans invented plastic, it would still be here.”  Mr. Abbatiello said when the president of the Talbot Watermen Association spoke in favor of a ban, “We were all listening. The Tred Avon, the Miles, and the Choptank all have part of their headwaters in Easton. The ban will help to improve the bay.” He also said that unlike plastics used in life-saving medical applications, “plastic bags are a convenience, not essential.”

Ward 4 Council member Rev. Elmer Davis urged residents to consider how our lifestyles might do harm to our environment and advised residents “do good and not cause harm to our community.”

The new law not only bans single-use plastic bags at checkout, but also requires retailers to charge 10 cents for paper bags. Retailers keep the fee to help defray the added cost of paper bags.  The combination of plastic bag ban and fee on paper bags helps move consumers towards bringing in their own reusable bags. The law goes into effect April 2, 2023.

 Marion O Arnold is leader of the Plastic-Free Easton action committee.  She lives in Easton, MD.