Lawmakers clashed yesterday with civil liberties advocates over a proposal to expand the collection of DNA samples to those who are arrested for serious crimes -- whether they are convicted or not. The debate was the first phase of what could be one of the most contentious issues in this year's legislative session.
Gov. Martin O'Malley has made the idea a centerpiece of his agenda, and several delegates are sponsoring similar legislation.
A hearing in the House Judiciary Committee yesterday over a bill sponsored by Del. Benjamin F. Kramer pitted those excited by the technology's potential to solve crimes against privacy advocates who worry that the genetic information could be misused.
Kramer's bill would authorize the state police to collect genetic information from all those arrested on suspicion of committing felonies, but O'Malley's proposal would require it for all those arrested in violent felonies or some burglary offenses.
Kramer, a Montgomery County Democrat, said the technology would provide the state with a powerful new way to solve crimes. "This is an important tool in our effort to change our status as the fifth-most violent state in the nation," he said.
Opponents of the idea said it violates constitutional privacy protections, would cost millions of dollars to carry out, could tax police departments and raises the specter of government misuse of its citizens' personal information.
"There are upward of 20,000 to 30,000 people arrested in Baltimore City alone and released without charge," said Cindy Boersma, legislative director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland. "When you overwhelm an already under-resourced system you dramatically increase the risk of error."
A bill similar to the one debated yesterday failed to pass the House committee last year, in part because of its cost.
But this year, O'Malley has proposed spending $1.3 million to pay for an expansion of Maryland's DNA database. And with the governor's backing, the chances of some version of the bill passing are much better, said Del. Samuel I. Rosenberg, vice chairman of the judiciary committee.
"I think it is far more likely than not that we will pass a bill," said Rosenberg, a Baltimore Democrat. "I think it is a legitimate law enforcement tool that exonerates the innocent and helps identify the guilty. But we want to have adequate safeguards."
