News-Record.com

The State Board of Elections has been subpoenaed to testify before a Board of Elections fundraising panel next week.

In a written statement, Black said: "I am fully cooperating with the investigation and would have been happy to appear with or without a subpoena."

Whether he is coming willingly or not, his appearance is going to be political theater on a grand scale.

In case you missed some news amongst all the Super Bowl hype this weekend:

• I had a story in Saturday's paper about the Lottery choosing locations for its state headquarters and regional offices.

  I've noted this before, but no matter how much you folks want it to be so, I'm not the guy to call if you're looking for a job or a contract. A fastfax that ran with the story gives the lottery web address and phone number (http://lottery.nc.gov/ and 919/715-6886).

• Gov. Easley and the family are back in the governor's mansion after the state shelled out $4 million to get rid of mold. They moved out last year because the air inside the house wasn't healthy to breath.

• More from the things Jim Black has done in office file from the N+O. And from the Charlotte paper, more on Black and strip clubs.

Aspiring pols: remember to send in campaign launch announcements and get a cup of free virtual ink, just like David Carven did. From his announcement:

David Craven, a Randolph County businessman, announced today that he will file for the North Carolina House’s 70th district seat, which is being vacated by Rep. Arlee Culp.

Craven, a licensed residential and commercial contractor is Vice-president of CallCrav LLC. Craven is a native of Randolph County and a life-long resident of Ramseur. Presently, Craven is a member of First National Bank advisory Board and a past member of the Ramseur Zoning Board.

“Representative Culp has done an outstanding job of representing the people of Randolph County in the North Carolina House for the last 18 years,” Craven said. “I would be honored to follow in his footsteps and continue the fight for lower taxes, less government, and the preservation of traditional family values.”

Click here for the full release.

So during one of the intermittent periods that my e-mail was working last week, I get the following from one of Rep. Sue Myrick's flunkies about a news conference today:

Believe me when I say that you will want to come and cover this press conference. If you miss this important announcement, you will regret it. Please note the start time on Monday is at 12:05pm sharp so that noon newscasts can carry the press conference live.

If not, what, you gonna fit me with a pair of cement shoes? Had there not been things going on in Raleigh I needed to tend to, nothing would have persuaded me less the head down to Charlotte than this sort of bleepy-bleep bleepbleep. (My bosses tell me I shouldn't curse on the blog.)

Not only is it sort of offensive (and maybe a little funny, but not in a good way) it violates a couple tenants of journalistic reality:

• One virtually never regrets missing a news conference....ever...even if the reason you missed the news conference is you were hit by a truck.
• Our friends at the Associated Press will give us the bullet out of the news conference. If there's something earth shaking, we can then follow up or localize the story.

Supposedly, Myrick is considering running for governor in 2008. No word yet on whether she's hired Michael Corleone onto her campaign staff.

The folks who helped push last year's lobbying reform bill through the General Assembly are back, looking to clamp down harder on those who use money and connections to influence legislators.

Want to hear what was on their minds today? Here ya go:

• Click here for the first bit, which was their prepared presentation.
  
• The second file is longer, and includes the Q+A period.

Basically, the gist of the news conference was this: we got a good start last year but need to go further, particularly as it regards controlling the flow of money and perks from lobbyists to legislators. They also seemed to be trying to influence the work of the special House ethics committee which begins meeting later this week.

Click here for their release.

Of course, the people who are pushing these reforms are lobbyists themselves, which may lead to some head-scratching in the land beyond the Raleigh beltline.

Basically, there are two categories of lobbyists in Raleigh:

• Those who have to make their livings through presenting ideas and information. With no deep pockets to bankroll wining and dining, these people make their case as best they can through...what-cha-ma-call-em...facts and figures. These groups can be on the political left (like the NC Justice Center) or the right (like the NC Family Policy Council) and everywhere in between.
  
• Other lobbyists, who combine facts and figures with money (in the form of campaign loot) and perks - everything from dinner and booze to trips. Typically we're talking about industries that can afford to put some money into things such as the beer and wine wholesalers, cigarette companies, developers, etc...

Obviously, the would-be reformers are hoping to get a boost from the recent spate of troubles surrounding the Speaker's office and the lottery. And there are more than a few people betting that something more will get done on lobbying reform, if for no other reason so the honorables can go home and campaign on a record of having done something about "those guys down in Raleigh."

The fuel that runs the modern political campaign is money, and at the end of last month (January) state pols had to let folks know how much was in their tank. The reports in question cover the last half of 2005.

My vote for the weirdest trend is giving from the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of Triad-area pols.

Sen. Kay Hagan ($1,000) and Sen. Phil Berger ($1,000) and Reps. Maggie Jeffus ($500), Harold Brubaker ($1,000) and Hugh Holliman ($500) all got contributions from the tribe during the last half of 2005.

According to data provided by Democracy North Carolina, I shouldn't be all that surprised. The tribe gave to at least $70,500 to 66 legislative candidates during the 2002 election cycle and has kept on giving since then.

Recipients of the Tribe's largess seem to mainly include statewide leaders (Gov. Mike Easley, Senate leader Marc Basnight and House Speaker Jim Black) as well as folks in western North Carolina.

The tribe has been in the news lately for trying to modify the rules governing its Casino in Western North Carolina, mainly trying to get permission to have games dealt by hand. (Currently, as I understand it, all the games there are automated.) I'm told by folks who have been watching the gambling action in the General Assembly that the other issue on the tribe's mind is to make sure revisions to state gambling laws (like video poker rules) don't inadvertently affect their casino business.

Other things of note from the year-end 2005 campaign finance report:

• In the 2004 campaign, Rep. Laura Wiley, a High Point Republican, did not raise money above the $3,000 threshold below which candidates don't have to report their fundraising activities. This year she has begun amassing a modest war chest. Info here.
• If you read one version her report, Sen. Kay Hagan of Greensboro has amassed a ridiculous amount of money for a local candidate. That version is wrong. Candidates file paper reports with the state board and then their stuff is converted over to electronic form. Apparently, someone key-punching that electronic form gave Hagan credit for an extra $800,000 or so. Her real cash on hand total is NOT $1.2 million but $126,808.92....still a lot, but much more in line with what other state senators have raised for their campaigns at this point.
• I'm not sure I've ever seen a report filled out exactly how it should be, but the SBOE does take exception to campaign treasurers who just blow off the instructions, this means you Katie Dorsett.
• What do Budweiser distributors, Cash America, Lorillard Tobacco, the NC Home Builders Association and Wal*Mart's pac all have in common? Sen. Phil Berger's campaign report. (pdf)
• House Speaker Jim Black (not local, but I couldn't resist) drew some support from local zip codes. Among those giving to Black's campaign committee were William Armfield of Greensboro (President of Spotwood Capital LLC), Janet Ward Black of Summerfield (a lawyer with Donaldson & Black), Timothy Burnett of Greensboro (President of Bessemer Improvement Co.), John GB Ellison Jr. of Greensboro (an executive with the Ellison Company) and the Lorillard Tobacco pac.

Find out stuff about your own local politician by clicking here and following the instructions.

And so the games begin. The Associated Press reports from the Black hearings before the state Board of Elections:

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — Attorneys at a Winston-Salem law firm were asked to make campaign donations to a lawmaker whose decision to switch parties helped House Speaker Jim Black keep his leadership post, a lawyer testified Wednesday at a state Board of Elections hearing on allegations of illegal campaign fundraising.

Update: From the man himself.

More from the AP on the continuing Jim Black hearings.

The Charlotte O recaps yesterday's fun. (Reg. required)

Best turn of phrase from any of the various pundits came from Bob Hall of Democracy NC. From the Observer piece:

"It is a mistake for anyone to get fixated on Jim Black as the focus of this investigation," said Bob Hall, research director for Democracy North Carolina. "They're really looking at crimes against democracy that are not related to any campaign but ... have come to light in examining political committees and their financial records."

At the same time the hearings were going on today, the House Select Committee on Ethics and Governmental Reform continued to consider potential changes to the state's lobbying and ethics law.

I listened in on that one and heard not big earth shattering conclusions. Sec. of State Elaine Marshall did spend some time saying why she thought implementing the law by 2007 would be difficult. (Her office will have to keep track of all the paper associated with disclosing what lobbyists are up to.)

The committee is expected to continue meeting throughout the spring. Expect them to make some sort of recommendation before the short session starts in May, but I won't place any bets on exactly what that "something" will turn out to be.

From Public Policy Polling:

A majority of North Carolina voters do not think the Bush Administration has broken the law by utilizing wiretaps of American citizens without a FISA court order according to a Public Policy Polling survey. Fifty-three percent think the wiretapping policy is legal, while only 39% think the President is breaking the law.

For context:

When it comes to impeachment, North Carolinians think that President Clinton’s alleged transgressions, lying under oath about sexual relations with an intern, are worse than President Bush’s potentially illegal wiretaps. Fifty percent think that lying under oath about inappropriate relations with an intern is the more impeachable offense. Thirtythree percent think that authorizing wiretaps on Americans without a court order is more impeachable.

Click here for the full release and survey questions.

Discuss below.

Update: While a majority of poll respondents didn't question the program, the boys and girls at the House J committee do have a few things they'd like to know about. (PDF)

From our friends at the Associated Press:

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — The State Board of Elections asked prosecutors Friday to investigate whether a former lawmaker and a leader of a political action committee violated campaign finance laws, but delayed making a decision about the campaign of House Speaker Jim Black.

More here, and apparently more to come in coming months.

I have a story that should run Monday regarding how to get in contact with the legislators who represent you in Raleigh in Washington. In summary, the legislators and folks who help them handle their mail say:

• Keep it short. If you're writing more than a page, you may be writing too much.
• Get to the point. A line summarizing the opinion you're trying to pass on or the help you're looking for will help your legislator respond.
• Do ask for help. Whether they are federal or state representatives, a big part of their jobs is helping constituents navigate whatever bureaucracy they may be having problems with.
• Want a response? Include your address and phone number, even if you're writing e-mail.
• Yes, include a phone number. Many state legislators and some of the feds would rather pick up the phone than type send a type-written reply.
• The feds get snail-mail extra crispy. Due to security procedures, mail to U.S. Senators and Reps is inspected 7 ways from Sunday and irradiated. Which means it takes a long time to get there and often damaged. For federal reps it's often more efficient to send e-mail or a fax.

Now, if you're not sure who represents you in either capital, this link will be useful. The zip-code function (third option) takes a little patience, but I've tried it on a couple of my former addresses and appears to work really well.

The feds

You will notice that some federal representatives (in this case, Dole and Burr) don't publish a direct e-mail address. Instead, they offer a web page where you can type your message and send it on. You can find snail-mail, phone and fax numbers on these pages as well.

• Sen. Elizabeth Dole
• Sen. Richard Burr
• Rep. Howard Coble
• Rep. Brad Miller
• Rep. Mel Watt

They person you want to write not on the list? Find other U.S. Senate pages here and U.S. representative pages here.

The state

Rather than give you a bunch of links, just know that you can find a link to your state House member here and your state senator here.

I'm sitting at my desk scratching my head right now. There's an AP story moving apparently based on an N+O story that itself looks to be inspired by an Independent Weekly story about how there’s some concern that it will difficult or impossible to show that lottery proceeds are being used for education as promised.

Readers here got a jump start on the big news last month.

I wrote a story and blogged about this very debate between the state auditor’s office and Easley’s office. (I guess its, um, more newsy now or something.)

The point of contention is this: some of the lottery proceeds will go to pay for programs that are already up and running, like pre-K. This smacks of the dreaded “supplanting” (read more on that here and here) where lottery proceeds don’t bolster education as promised, but simply become part of the mélange that is the state’s general budget.

Here’s the shade of grey introduced by the governor’s folks though: The money that is freed up by the lottery funds will go toward paying for other education needs, such as boosting teacher salaries.

Skeptics (like State Auditor Les Merritt) say that kind of shifting around is hard to track and it will be virtually impossible to tell where the money has gone.

That argument is fair enough. The counterpoint offered by the governor’s folks is you just have to watch over-all education spending rise to tell if the lottery dollars are doing their job. Frankly, I’m not sure either one is completely right. I don’t know if Merritt needs ALL the detail he’s seeking, but I’m not sure that we can skip happily along just looking at the 10,000-foot view of the budget secure in thinking that no one is playing Three Card Monte with the lottery dollars.

I do think it’s too early to use the headline that I’ve seen a lot this morning, “Lottery not just for schools.” If the lottery proceeds are being used to boost over-all education spending over and above what it would have been, well that seems to me to meet the intent of the lottery law.

The big question is this: how can we be sure that’s happening? More to come on this from the folks up here in Raleigh, but as always you can have your say right now in the comments section below.

Two more lottery-related stories:

• Charlotte’s Sharif Durhams reports on how officials want to promote the lottery, but not too much.
  
• The bottom line from the Associated Press on a hearing Monday concerning a lawsuit to stop the lottery:

A Wake County judge says he will decide by the end of the week whether to dismiss a lawsuit to block the new North Carolina lottery from moving forward. He could also grant a temporary ban on its work.

My story today dips into the renewed buzz surrounding the supplanting debate over the lottery.

The bullet is this: Easley's folks want to pull some tax money out of a couple education programs and use it elsewhere in next year's education budget. They will replace the money they move out of pre-K and class size reduction efforts with lottery proceeds.

They argue: that as long as the education budget increases over all, the lottery funds are not supplanting.

Supplanting is a term lottery opponents have used to describe what happens when additional money generated by the lottery displaces tax dollars rather than boost spending for education.

Critics argue: that what Easley is doing is the very definition of supplanting.

Some remainders that didn't make the story:

From Paul Luebke, a Durham Democrat and UNCG prof.: Luebke voted against the lottery but is now in the curious position of being a finance chairman in the House where he'll have a say on how the lottery money is processed through the budget.

Luebke takes the strictest possible view on supplanting, saying that lottery dollars should not push tax dollars out of any program they're going to now.

He predicts that more folks in the House might share this view, where the lottery passed by just one vote. The folks in the other chamber, he speculated, might be more flexible.

"My impression is that the Senate is more comfortable with supplanting," Luebke said.

If the House and Senate can't agree on what exactly constitutes supplanting or whether they'll do it or not, it could make for a long short session beginning in May.

Speaking of the Senate...

Sen. Kay Hagan, a Greensboro Democrat, was getting ready to throw a big dinner party when I talked to her yesterday. Her quotes on the topic:

"It is my strong feeling that any lottery money should be new, additional money for education," Hagan said. "I think it needs to be new money, laid out in accordance with the language that's in the lottery bill."

So how does she feel about the supplanting issue? Yeah, I'm not sure either. Looking at my notes, she's left herself a lot of wiggle room.

My sense is she'll make sure the lottery money stays in education but may be more flexible than Luebke.

Fellow Senator Phil Berger...

...expects there to be supplanting. He's a lottery opponent who is a glass-half-empty kind of guy on all things lottery, including how the money will be spent.

"I think this is what folks were saying all along would be the net result," Berger said. "It's just additional money for the government that will free up money that's currently going to education for other things."

Berger points out that the original version of the Senate budget would have used lottery money to replace construction money that already goes to school districts. Currently, part of the money raised by the corporate income tax goes to counties.

The lottery law creates a new program that provides construction aid to counties.

However, Berger believes that what Easley is proposing is only step one down the supplanting path. He expects step two to be a merging of the two school construction programs.

It'll be interesting to see if that plays out. Cutting the corporate income tax has been a big priority for the governor and the Senate, not so much for the House. In fact, the House pretty much nixed a cut to the corporate rate last year because the budget did nothing to reduce the taxes they saw as a priority: sales tax and personal income.

Using lottery dollars to replace -- yes, supplant -- money from that tax would allow budget writers to cut (slightly) the corporate rate without imposing more sales or income taxes or cutting programs.

Berger may just be on to something.

And just to round things out, the full statement Gov. Mike Easley issued yesterday reads:

Education lottery money will supplement, not supplant existing spending for education and I will not recommend nor sign legislation that reduces the state’s spending for education.

Since 2001, when we began pre-k and class size reduction efforts, I have consistently said that once an education lottery was enacted, we would use the proceeds to fund these priorities permanently. The lottery will always be the source of funding for these programs in good and tough economic times. In addition, the education lottery funds college scholarships and school construction as provided by law.

Okay...discuss among yourselves.

In case there was any doubt, Howard Coble is running for a term number 12.

UPDATE: Click here to link to today's story.

I'll have a story in tomorrow's paper (barring calamity) about the state Republican Party asking its membership to gather membership directories from churches.

This is not a new thing for the state party to do, but the practice caused quite the national ruckus during the 2004 presidential election. National political leaders said it was too much an invasion of politics into the pulpit.

As it turns out, the Catholic diocese of Charlotte (which covers Guilford County) and several local pastors I talked to don’t think much of the practice either. A flavor of the responses I got from one local Baptist pastor:

"I would say you're encroaching on sacred territory. When congregations inject politics into their congregational life, it will be bad for everybody . . . We wouldn't want our friends to be selling their personal directories to someone who is selling something. That would be an abuse of our friendship. I would think the same thing about giving it to a political party."

I suspect this will be one of the things that "people are talking about" tomorrow. For your information and discussion purposes, here is the e-mail that sparked this conversation (after the jump):

The Republicans have found a challenger to run against Speaker Jim Black for his Charlotte-area house seat.

"Business consultant Hal Jordan, a Charlotte native, filed paperwork Friday to run against Black for the District 100 seat in the North Carolina House of Representatives," reports News Carolina 14.

Black ran unopposed in 2004, has a huge campaign war chest, lots of name recognition and as Speaker holds one of the most influential and powerful positions in the state. On the other hand, the on-going scandals connected to his fund-raising activities could make Black at least a little bit vulnerable.

By the way, for those comic book types inclined to ask, I don't think Jordan should be confused with this guy.

It’s time again for a quasi-random listing of people from the Greensboro area who have been chosen to serve on various state boards and commissions. Gov. Mike Easley has appointed:

A couple more notes on the church directory story:

• Guilford County Republican Party Chairman Marcus Kindley phoned this morning to say that he did not endorse the practice of collecting directories from churches for use in GOTV efforts.

  “It’s not something we asked our members to do,” Kindley said of the Guilford Republicans. Kindley is a lay minister at his church and, if nothing else, is earnest whether speaking about religion or politics.

• These guys don’t seem to like the church directory idea either.

A recent survey finds a majority of North Carolinians support raising the state’s minimum wage.(PDF)

Update: (Click here for the story that ran Sunday.)

More on this will be in the paper over the weekend, but you can have your say here right now via the comment links below.

Previous posts on the topic here.

A few tidbits from the weekend papers and beyond:

• If you logged on to talk about the minimum wage hike or see the survey results, Click here
• The church directory story goes national in its own way.(reg. required)
• The N+O's Rob Christensen uses his Sunday column to detail how the Speaker of the House became a position of over-arching influence.
• Filing for the May primary and November general election runs through noon on Feb. 28. Check our updated nightly list of candidates who have filed for Guilford and Rockingham races here. If you're a glutton for punishment, the SBOE has posted a PDF for all races across the state here.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

For today’s (2/21/2006) paper, I'll add to the cannon of stories on House Speaker Jim Black's campaign finances.

Update:(Click here for the story.)

In particular, this story looks at giving from chiropractors to Black's campaign during the July 1 through Dec. 31 (2005) time period. Chiropractors gave Black 33 contributions during those six months, 25 of which are recorded as having arrived on Dec. 7. The cash and in-kind total from the Chiropractors to Black during that time period was $38,779.87.

This came four months after Black helped make the following part of the state budget:

An insurer shall not impose as a limitation on treatment or level of coverage a co-payment amount charged to the insured for chiropractic services that is higher than the co-payment amount charged to the insured for the services of a duly licensed primary care physician for the same medically necessary treatment or condition.

That provision makes it cheaper for patients to go to a chiropractor. Instead of paying the co-payment one would for a specialists (like a plastic surgeon), patients pay the usually lower co-pay that goes with seeing a general practitioner.

Source material and credits:

• The state budget bill. (Section 6.29 is the relevant bit.)
  
• Black's campaign finance report. This is a large PDF file. An index of his campaign reports can be found here.
  
• Several papers noted the change for chiropractors around the time the budget bill passed in August. Here's the Google cash of the N+O's story from back then.

So why'd I get into this? A couple of reasons:

• There is somewhat of a Greensboro connection to this story, which is what got me interested initially. Four of the chiropractor-donors practice in Greensboro. Those donations were substantial, ranging from $500 to $4,000.
• I have written before about support from Speaker Black going to local candidates, but I hadn't written about local donors giving to Black. This was a good way to show the tide of political money flows both ways.

As always, feel free to leave your thoughts, suggestions and complaints at the comments link below, or e-mail me directly at mbinker@news-record.com.

This story from "The Hill" newspaper, a publication that mainly covers the scene around Congress, had me laughing this morning. (Via Romenesko.)

It covers the various things that press secretaries in Washington, D.C. do to deflect and absorb bad news for their bosses.

Most legislators here in Raleigh don't have press folks, the exceptions being House Speaker Jim Black and Senate Leader Marc Basnight. However, the list of tactics the Hill reporter came up with looked familiar. Legislators don't need a press secretary to do these all on their own.

• Say "I will call you back" and then don't.
• Repeat the same phrase over and over.
• Try to talk the reporter out of writing the story.
• Act brusque and distant.
• Don't return phone calls until the day after deadline.
• Talk in short sentences.
• Act as though you are in a hurry and need to get off the phone as soon as possible.

PR folks for the various executive and council of state agencies do some of the same stuff.

Let me add one or two others that I've run into over the years:

• Offer up what they think will be a more interesting story about something or someone else.
• Use language that is un-quotable, either by way of cuss words or by using such tortured syntax that a direct quote is impossible.
• Suggest that the reporter is stupid for even having to ask such a question.
• Suggest your reporting would be incomplete without talking to someone or getting a fact that they think would be hard for you to run down.
• Get "distracted" by an old friend/constituent/staffer who happens to wander by and get into a prolonged conversation hoping the reporter will get fed up and go away.

Now a quick disclaimer: Most of the legislators and other folks I deal with around here are delightful most of the time...really. They're nice folks who have normal lives and are all of a sudden thrust into this rather odd fish bowl. No one is ever happy to deal with bad news or a question that cuts too close to home, some are just more deft at dealing with them than others.

That said, neither anything on the Hill list nor mine has ever stopped bad news from coming down the track. As Brian Walsh, a one-time spokesman for Bob Barr (R-Ga.) said in the Hill piece:

"You have two choices," Walsh said. "Whether you like the story or you don’t like the story, you have to make the determination: Will it be less bad you telling it or your opponent telling it?"

For those who missed it, I had a story on John Blust in the paper on Saturday. Blust is the Republican representative from Greensboro in the NC House.

The focus of the story was around idea that one of his favorite issues, reforming how power is distributed throughout the House, has come into vogue with all the, um, stuff swirling about House Speaker Jim Black.

Some after-matter:

• For a summary of Blust's ideas for reforming the House Rules click here.
• For Blusts' annotated version of the House rules and what he'd like to change, click here.
• Speaker Black wrote a few paragraphs in response to a query on Blust. I only got a couple of them in the paper. The full excerpt:

"My door is always open to anyone who wants to discuss constructive change for the state of North Carolina and I have met with many members of both parties about their ideas for change.

The fact that Rep. Blust is an attorney and a CPA is proof that he is a highly intelligent person.

I suggested he share his ideas for changes in the House rules with all House members and work to implement them by building a consensus. However, I don’t think we have ever changed the House rules mid-session. Historically, the rules are adopted at the beginning of the two-year session and stay in place for the entire two years.

This short session is obviously going to bring about some changes in how business is conducted in the House. Public perception of all levels of government is something we should all be concerned about. Democracy is at risk if elected officials do not heed public perception. It is a good thing that so many people care about the way the people’s business is handled. I want to play a significant role in not only improving the lives of all North Carolinians but also how our work is viewed by our constituents."

More on Blust here. and here.

As of the opening of business on Monday morning, Blust has neither a challenger in the primary or general election this year. Any would-be opponent has until tomorrow (Tuesday) at noon to sign up.

For those who remember the story about the NC GOP collecting church directories, here's one cartoonists’ take on the issue. Via Cone.

Odds and ends, some election related, from over the weekend and this morning:

• From the "this just in" Department, Kerra Bolton at the Ashville paper reports Rep. Wilma Sherrill, a Buncombe County Republican, will not seek re-election. Sherrill is a legislative ally of Rep. Richard Morgan, a Republican who is none to popular with his own party.

• For those who remember the story about the NC GOP collecting church directories, here's one cartoonists’ take on the issue. Via Cone.

• More on Saturday's Blust story here.

• From the Letters to the Editor column (which I have nothing to do with), NC GOP Chairman Ferrell Blount takes aim at Pricey Harrison for her support of Black.

  It's enough to make one wonder whether the GOP is going to make a serious try at unseating the first-term incumbent. Last election, Harrison unseated long-time incumbent Joanne Bowie, a Republican.

  So far, the registered opposition is Republican Joseph Rahenkamp, a retired fire fighter and very nice man who has run for just about every public office he could over the past decade or so, including City Council and the state house. None of his campaigns have been successful.

  Rahenkamp's campaigns have historically been pretty laid back affairs. To unseat Harrison, an opponent is going to have to get into the political equivalent of a knife fight, something that Rahenkamp hasn't been including to do so far in his political career.

• On Friday, Gov. Easley appointed Michelle C. Collins of Greensboro and reappointed Sampson Buie Jr. of Greensboro to the N.C. Commission on Volunteerism and Community Service. Collins is a resource development specialist with the United Way of Greater Greensboro. Buie is a retired deputy secretary with the N.C. Department of Administration.

• The N+O's Rob Christensen tells us graft was worse back in the day.

• Finally, check out this column by the AP's Gary Robertson, the hardest working man in show business around the state legislative building. It's worth the read if only for this reality check:

One thing no one contests is that the cost of running a successful campaign for office has risen dramatically. In 1992, legislative candidates spent $3.9 million, a total that soared to $15 million in 2000 and around $18 million in 2004.

Ladies and gentlemen of Guilford County, we have a legislative primary.

Two Republicans are now registered in House District 57, currently held by Democrat Rep. Pricey Harrison.

Perennial candidate Joseph Rahenkamp will face Ron Styers, a name that’s new to me. A quick check with a couple local Republican officials I called yielded nothing this evening either. (I’d love to say I have a call into him, but the BOE has a bad phone number listed and the phone company doesn’t list his number.)

This legislative primary appears to be the exception in Guilford County, unless something changes between now and tomorrow (Tuesday) at noon.

None of the four state senators who represent the county – Phil Berger, Kay Hagan, Katie Dorsett and Stan Bingham – have any registered opposition in either the primary or general election.

Similarly, Reps. John Blust and Laura Wiley so far have free rides. Pending contests (other than for Harrison’s seat) for the November general election include:

• Maggie Jeffus, a Democrat, faces a rematch of her 2004 run against Republican Jim Rumley.
• Alma Adams, a Democrat, faces a rematch of her 2004 contest against Olga Morgan Wright.
• Earl Jones, a Democrat, faces a challenge from Bill Wright, a Pleasant Garden Republican and former mayor of that town councilman and mayor. In his last run for office, he took on County Commissioner Billy Yow and lost in a very close primary.

In federal races, there appear to be Republican primaries shaping up in both the 12th (Mel Watt’s seat) and the 13th (Brad Miller’s seat). More on those later.

The political story that has all us scruffy media types talking today:

Vernon Robinson, the former Winston-Salem alderman, has switched political contests.
Robinson had originally filed to run in the 12th Congressional race, putting him in a Republican primary against Ada Fisher for the right to run against Democratic incumbent Mel Watt in November.

But filing reports from the BOE and Robinson’s web site now show him as a candidate in the 13th Congressional District, a seat now occupied by Democrat Brad Miller. Robinson will have a primary in the 13th as well.

Update: I spoke with Robinson a while ago. As he wrote on his website, Robinson said that the 13th offered a better chance of winning the general election.

He really had little to say about his primary opponents, Charlie Sutherland of Mayodan and John Ross Hendrix of Cary other than he was sure all three agreed "Brad Miller is wrong on every issue."

In fact, Robinson seemed to be looking past the primary to the general eleciton. When asked about this, he said: "I'd just rather spend my scarce resources talking about his (Miller's) record and my record," calling Miller "ultra-liberal."

If things keep on this way, this primary is going to be a love-fest compared to the 2004 fracas in the fifth, where Robinson narrowly lost a primary run-off to now Congressman Virginia Foxx.