News-Record.com

Every year when Hurricanes start rolling into the state, Gov. Mike Easley goes through a predictable series of steps. He gets his emergency response guys together and holds press conferences telling folks to stockpile water and food and generally stay safe. As the storm gets closer, he switches from business suits to what we scruffy media types call "disaster casual," kaki pants and opened collared shirts with logos. After the storm, he goes riding about in a helicopter to survey the damage, declares disasters, etc... You know, governor stuff.

So a couple of news releases from Sen. Dole's office had us confused. Here's the latest:

Friday, September 5, 2008 6:15 p.m. MEDIA AVAILABILITY

Dole will meet with the North Carolina State Emergency Response Team (SERT) to discuss preparations for Tropical Storm Hanna and Hurricane Ike. Yesterday, Dole spoke with North Carolina Governor Mike Easley, Department of Homeland Security Undersecretary for Federal Emergency Management R. David Paulison, who heads the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and officials at the American Red Cross to help coordinate an effective response to the severe weather.

North Carolina Emergency Operations Center
Administration Building
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, N.C.

It's not just that senators don't have a whole lot to do in disaster given that whole lack of executive authority thing. Honestly, I can't remember her ever doing this before for any previous hurricane.

You don't think this could have something to do with it being an election year, do you?

Update: I had ask Dole's office this afternoon if she had ever done anything like this. I got a response back saying that she had and listing all the times. The problem with the list is most (if not all) are touring damage after the fact, not getting ready for it. But by way of full disclosure, I'll post the list after the jump. My point remains that there's not much for a federal (or state-level) legislator to do in preparation for a hurricane.

Update 2:And by way of fuller disclosure, Dole spokesman Wes Climer takes issue with my characterization, saying that Senators have a role in marshaling the resources of the federal government and "encourage and advise" on the placement of public resources.

"Senators work with state officials and federal officials to ensure a smooth response," he said.

Even after hearing that, I'm still am a bit dubious. But here's the jump, and you can look through this list yourself and decide.

Continue reading "Dole moving in on Easley's turf?" »

Gov. Mike Easley says it's going to get windy. Click here for video from our friends at the AP.

If you want to make some last minute preparations but aren't sure what they should be, these guys are from the government and are here to help you.

Of course, the guys running the street festival outside my window say they're just going to batten down the hatches and ride out the storm. Big Mama E is sounding pretty good coming through my window right now, though.

The Decision 2008 blog and related election work has been keeping me hopping lately, but the wheels of government continue to turn here in Raleigh.

Some of those wheels can be found at the North Carolina Supreme Court, which has the lawsuit seeking to end the lottery on its docket for Monday.

The case was brought by the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law, a conservative legal think tank based in Raleigh, on behalf of several plaintiffs, including Rep. Paul Stam, the Republican minority leader in the House.

Click here for the institute's document library on the case, which includes filings from both sides.

The lawsuit doesn't allege that North Carolina can't have a lottery. Rather, it makes the case that the lottery is tax and a pledge of the full faith and credit of the taxpayers, and therefore needed to be passed as a "revenue bill," essentially requiring votes on two separate days in each chamber of the legislature.

For those who care to get in the way-back machine and head back to the 2005, the North Carolina legislature was a bit more rough and tumble than it is today. Rep. Jim Black, a Democrat now doing time in the federal pokey following conviction on corruption charges, was Speaker of the House. It passed the House on a 61-59 vote and was confirmed on a voice vote, rather than being voted on two separate days.

Months later, the Senate approved the bill after being deadlocked over the measure. Here's what I wrote at the time:

RALEIGH - North Carolina is about to join the lottery club thanks to a hastily called legislative session and a rare tie-breaking vote cast by the lieutenant governor.

Supporters of the game sounded more relieved than elated that Tar Heels would relinquish their status as the only state on the East Coast without a government-run game.

"I'm glad we passed it," said Sen. Katie Dorsett, a Democrat from Greensboro. "I wanted it to end. If people all around us are having the lottery , we might as well bring that money to our state."

[snip]

The House approved the lottery legislation in April, after which the issue cast a shadow over the Senate. As other business chugged through the chamber, speculation about lottery prospects and how it might come to pass has consumed staff members, lobbyists and senators themselves.

A coalition of five Democrats and all 21 Republican senators had blocked the bill.

Last week, that coalition held and Senate leaders sent their colleagues home and promised no more votes for the year.

But Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight, a Dare County Democrat, reversed that decision late Friday, recalling all 50 senators to meet this week.

Two lottery opponents - both Republicans - could not make the session Tuesday. Sen. Harry Brown of Jacksonville is on his honeymoon; Sen. John Garwood from Wilkes County was too ill to attend.

Neither took advantage of a Senate rule that would allow their votes to be counted in their absence. Although some lottery opponents complained leaders didn't give proper notice of the session or ample opportunity for Brown and Garwood to record their wishes, Basnight and Berger said that was not the case.

The two opponents' absences left the measure deadlocked at 24-24.

Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue, a Democrat, cast the tie-breaking vote in favor of the lottery . It was the first time since 1996 that a North Carolina lieutenant governor had played such a role in the Senate.

Lottery opponents still grumble about the way the Senate vote went down. So far, the courts haven’t sided with lottery opponents, but the Supreme Court oral arguments should be fascinating anyway.

Courts generally seem reluctant to tell other branches of government how to carry out their business, mindful of the separation of powers. But the Supreme Court took the case, so you have to figure there is some chance they'd rule against the lottery. Such a ruling would put official Raleigh in a tizzy, if for no other reason that outlawing the thing would throw the budget completely out of whack - not to mention all those lottery players who would be holding lottery tickets of dubious value.

...it took the House all of seven minutes to vote 92-7 93-7 (one member changed her vote after the fact) to override the governor's veto. The big boats bill now goes to Senate, which is expected to give it a similar vote approval.

This would be the first time Gov. Mike Easley (or any governor) has been over-ridden on a veto.

Update: The Senate voted 39-0 with one pair to over-ride the veto.

For those scoring at home, that means Easley's veto has been thoroughly ignored.

Is that a quack I hear?

Here is how the Associate Press wrote it up:

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) _ For the first time in state history, North Carolina lawmakers have voted to override a governor's veto.

Members of the House and Senate voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to override Gov. Mike Easley's rejection of a new law easing the restrictions on the towing of boats.

Easley rejected a measure approved last month that allows boats up to 10 feet wide to be towed without a permit. The new law also allows boats up to 9 1/2 feet wide to be towed at night.

House Majority Leader Hugh Holliman said lawmakers tried to work out a compromise with Easley before Wednesday's vote, but were unsuccessful.

North Carolina lawmakers have never overridden a veto since the state's governors were given the power in 1996.

Update: Three more members have been allowed to vote after they showed up to the House session late. But their votes don't change the outcome.

Update: An hour and nine minutes after coming in, the General Assembly is out of here.

As I mentioned, Gov. Mike Easley has vetoed a bill that would allow people to transport wide boats on state roads without a permit.

And apparently some readers picked up a bit or sarcasm when I said the honorables would be “delighted” to head back to Raleigh to reconsider this thing. A bit.

Here’s why: The constitution does require the honorables to be brought back into session if there’s a veto by the governor, unless they turn down the opportunity in writing. That’s been done before.

And while a special session isn’t unprecedented or all that uncommon in recent history, it’s still kind of a big deal. The fact that a big deal is being made over the boat bill might be a little less noxious if there weren’t other things that might actually might warrant a special session in some folks’ estimation lurking about, like say:

• * An under-funded state health plan.
• * Continuing problems in the state mental health system.
• * Shortfalls in road construction funding.

So is running back to Raleigh so people who schlep around 9.5-foot boats can tow them at night, over narrow two-lane roads while moderately beered up a good idea? You tell me.

On the flip side, it doesn’t seem like the honorables are planning on taking a whole lot of time redrafting the legislation or otherwise messing about.

The bill first goes to the House and Rep. Hugh Holliman, the Democratic leader there, said this morning “I don’t anticipate spending a lot of time with it.”

He said that barring some breakthrough, folks should expect to see an up-or-down veto over-ride vote. And, he said, this is unlikely to be a caucus decision, which means each individual member will be free to vote their conscience.

“I don’t think you’ll see any arm twisting,” Holliman said.

Three-fifths of those who show up tomorrow will get a vote on the bill. If everyone who voted for it the first time votes for the bill this time around, the veto should be easily overridden. There were only five “no” votes on its final passage in the House, including Reps. Bordsen, Fisher, Insko, Luebke and Wess. The final senate vote was 43-0.

Two updates: A couple of folks have passed on thoughts regarding the boat bill. The first (actually, the first couple) suggested that maybe Easley should get a dart for calling the General Assembly back the session when it looks like he could be massively voted down on a relatively minor bill.

Point taken. This doesn't really strike one as a case of choosing one battle's wisely. And if Easley does suffer his first veto over-ride, that could be a reason: legislators hacked off about the bad timing and the odd thing to pick a fight about.

Secondly, a friend in the Senate President Pro Tempore's office sent along some "stats for your enjoyment." So I thought you'd enjoy too. This is the pro-side of the boat bill argument. (Just to be really clear, I don't give a rats behind much about what the law is, but it seems to me there are issues with bigger constituencies that might be addressed.)

Safety issues

* Current law forces wide boats to travel during daytime hours when traffic is more congested. This bill allows boaters to travel early in the morning or at night, or on weekends and holidays, when school buses are not on the road and traffic is not as heavy.

* This bill requires new safety measures for boats and trailers – boats and trailers wider than 8 ½ feet must be equipped with amber lights at their widest point to ensure greater visibility.

* Existing law already requires someone pulling a boat/trailer in excess of 10,000 pounds to be 18 or older.

* Of 230,000 total vehicle accidents statewide (yearly average), an average of about 7 accidents per year involve boats greater than 8 feet wide.

* From 2005-2007, fewer than 5% of boat trailers involved in accidents were wider than 8 ½ feet.

* For accidents that were directly due to boat width (sideswipes and hitting parked vehicles), on average, there were only 2 accidents per year involving boats wider than 8 ½ feet.

Economic issues

* NC is home to more than 3,000 boatbuilding or boating-related companies, employing more than 25,000 workers.

* More than $500 million in sales of boats, motors, and boating equipment is generated annually in NC – fifth in the country.

* NC has 370,000 registered boats, ranking 11th in the US in boat registrations.

* NC is 4th in the nation in the number of outboard (trailerable) boats.

* NC saw more than $662 million in total boating trip spending in 2007.

* Boating and fishing are important sectors of NC’s tourism economy.

* Since 2007, boat sales in NC have dropped by more than 20 percent.

* More than 14% of the boatbuilding workforce has been laid off within the past year.

I’m back from vacation and delighted to see that political campaigns of all ilks seem to be preparing for an enthusiastic slide into trivial silliness as we approach the two months of campaign season where most folks are paying attention.

In the mean time, Gov. Mike Easley has called the honorables back to down to deal with his veto veto of H 2167, known affectionately as the wide boats bill.

The veto session has been called for Wednesday at 11 a.m.

I can well imagine the honorables glee at being pulled away from the campaign trail and their real jobs to re-consider this bill. I mean, there must be legions of constituents that have a 9-and-1/2-foot wide boats sitting around that they’re just dying to tow to the coast and fuel up?

The Barkeep has detailed where the push for the bill is coming from. Meanwhile, as many pictures of tractor trailers wedged under overpasses as my paper has run over the past year, how long is it before we get our first picture of a wide boat wedged on a one-land bridge?

By the way, the legislature has several options during a veto session: let the veto stand, over-ride and pass the bill as is or craft some new bit of legislation that addresses the topic but fixes whatever problem the governor has. As of yet, the North Carolina legislature has never done a straight-up veto-override.

I'm on vacation until Aug. 25. Talk amongst yourselves.

Cross-posted from Decision 2008.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

North Carolina Republicans opened their Triad “Victory Office” this afternoon. These things are joint operations between Arizona Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign and the state party.

Should you be inclined to stop by, this one is in High Point near the N.C. 68 and Wendover intersection. The address is 3800 Tinsley Road.

As noted in my my first-take story, former Senator and presidential candidate Bob Dole was on hand to celebrate the opening.

Those doing the speechifying today were particularly upbeat about Republican chances in November. Part of that had to do with the nature of the event. But there was a bit of genuine optimism emanating from the GOP faithful that I haven’t heard from them in a while.

Click here to listen to Sen. Richard Burr give his take as to why Republicans might win more races this fall. Short answer: he thinks the party has better candidates this time around.

Congressman Howard Coble also gave a go-get-‘em speech, which surprised me a little bit because from December through this spring he’s been talking about “a very difficult year.” So has he changed his mind?

Click here for Coble’s answer, which started “No, I’m still pessimistic.” He said that McCain’s chances were improving, but the real bright spot on the ballot was Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory, who is running for governor. In particular, he said there seems to be growing sentiment that its time for a change in the executive office that plays, ironically enough, off Obama’s message of change.

More pictures of the ribbon cutting...

...and Laura Wiley sporting her convention outfit:

Congressman Howard Coble is going to join the "Republican revolt" on the energy debate. From his Congressional office:

(WASHINGTON, D.C.)----U.S. Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC) will travel to Washington on Tuesday, August 12, to participate in the Republican debate calling for comprehensive energy reform. Congressman Coble said he will return to Capitol Hill so that he can lend his voice for the need to produce more domestic energy.

“I have been pleasantly surprised at the number of 6th District residents who have been calling and emailing all of our offices urging me to participate in this important debate,” Coble stated. “Even though the Speaker has turned off the cameras and the microphones, she has not been able to silence the voice of the people who want us to continue working on real energy reform. I am pleased that I was able to adjust my district work schedule so that I could return to Washington to lend my support to this effort.”

According to the House Republican Conference, what began 10 days ago as a spontaneous uprising on the floor of the U.S. House after Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) sent Congress home for a five-week break without allowing a vote on more American energy to lower gas prices has now become an unprecedented nationwide protest. The House Republican-led revolt against the Majority’s decision to defy the will of the American people, who solidly support more American energy production to lower gas prices, enters its second full week – and shows no signs of slowing down.

Rep. Coble will participate in the news conference at 11 a.m. that occurs outside the House Chamber in the Capitol and then he will join his colleagues on the House floor for the energy reform debate. He plans to return to Greensboro later in the day Tuesday to resume his district work schedule.

U.S. News' Luke Mullins caught up with Rep. Brad Miller regarding the mortgage market crisis.

1. Could you please explain what you are asking the mortgage industry to do in terms of foreclosures?

We're asking them to hold off on foreclosing on homeowners who may be eligible for refinancing under the new FHA "Help for Homeowners" program, at least until the program is up and running on October 1. We're also asking pointed questions about whether they're really going to use the program and what they're doing to be ready to start using the program as soon as possible.

2. Why are you asking them to do that?

We're partly asking to get their attention, to let them know we're serious about the mortgage industry taking responsibility for the mess they've made.

Critics say the mortgage industry has done precious little to help homeowners, but the mortgage industry claims that they're voluntarily modifying mortgages like crazy to help strapped homeowners keep their homes, and the industry has successfully fought off legislation to give real, enforceable rights to homeowners with bad mortgages.

The mortgage industry supported the "Help for Homeowners" legislation and said it would be a real help. Why would they foreclose on homeowners who would be eligible for the program in just a couple of months? Are they serious about using the program, or are they just stalling to keep Congress from passing tougher legislation?

Click here for the whole thing.