« June 2006 | Main | August 2006 »
There are, obviously, a whole lot more facets to this thing. Only bits and pieces of the $18.8 billion tax and spending plan were available last night, so us scrubby media types, legislative watchers and legislators themselves will be combing through it through July 4.
Want to join in the fun? Click here for the bill itself and Click here for the money report. (Both are big honkin’ PDF files.)
From the News & Record:
Updating stories and blog entries from the past few weeks:
Ladies and Gentlemen, the push toward ending the legislative session is upon us. (My take, after the jump.)
Continue reading "Raleigh Dispatch: On your mark, get set..." »
Behind all the bluster in the fightin’ 13th, there are some actual policy differences.
Update:(7/6): Click here for my story on the budget.
The legislature gave the state budget tentative approval this afternoon. Find the bill and vote tallies and other info by clicking here.
Both the House and Senate need to vote again tomorrow, but that second vote is not likely to change the outcome.
Of local note, two Guilford County legislators flipped their votes from the first time they weighed in on the tax and spending plans.
Rep. Laura Wiley, a High Point Republican, had originally opposed the budget. Chief among here reasons was that the House plan would have cut money for marketing the semi-annual International Home Furnishings Market in High Point from $1.75 mill to $750,000. That funding was restored in the compromise conference budget.
She said Wednesday after the budget vote that “there are some problems with this budget,” but over-all the package addressed things that were of concern to her.
Sen. Stan Bingham, a Davidson County Republican who represents High Point as well, switched his vote to “no.” He had originally voted yes on the Senate budget.
The compromise plan, he said, did not sock away enough money in reserve accounts for emergencies. And the pay raises given to teachers – an average of 8 percent – was too large, especially compared with the 5.5 percent raises given rank and file state employees. Bingham also was keen on a measure that would have required performance audits of state agencies that was in the Senate budget plan but taken out of the conference report.
More will be in tomorrow’s paper. For now, other local items of note include:
- $250,000 for the Kids Voting program, which lets those under 18 cast ballots in a straw poll during the real election. At least $2,500 of that will go directly to Guilford County.
- $1.75 million for the International Home Furnishings Market in High Point. The money would be used to help attract visitors and exhibitors to the semi-annual trade show.
- $1.3 million for new 17 new district court judges. Counties getting new judges for their district courts include Guilford, Randolph and Rockingham.
- $4.2 million for new Assistant District Attorneys and support staff. Guilford County will have three of those new ADAs. The prosecutorial districts that include Randolph and Rockingham counties will get one new ADA each.
- $452,800 for a storage shed at the N.C. Zoo in Asheboro.
-$1 million to plan a new classroom building at NCA&T.
-$2.3 million to plan a new classroom building at UNCG.
-$2.8 million in repair funds are earmarked for the Palmer Memorial Institute site in Sedalia.
-public school teachers will get average pay raises amounting to 8 percent. Community College teachers would get a 6 percent raise plus a one-time 2-percent bonus. State workers will receive 5.5 percent pay raises.
A little birdie tells me that the minimum wage bill, raising it from the federal minimum of $5.15 an hour to $6.15, is on the Senate Commerce Committee calendar for tomorrow (yes, Friday) at 9 a.m. Readers of this blog will remember that the House has passed the stand alone bill, but the Senate passed the wage rise as part of its budget bill. The wage was not in the final draft of the budget, so supporters are working to get the Senate to pass the stand alone bill.
Let’s cover a few items in short order, shall we? Good:
Q: Is the budget done yet?
A: Yes, almost. The honorables wrapped up their work today. The bill is headed off to Gov. Mike Easley for his signature or veto.
Q: Are reporters lobbyists?
A: Oddly enough, no. Why did this come up?
Well, the House is debating new rules for lobbyists. Rep. Nelson Cole, a Rockingham County Democrat, noted that publishers and the press association and the like frequently come down and lobby for things like open meetings and public records and what not.
Well, what about reporters asking about open records and the like, he asked. Are they lobbyists? Would we have to register as such?
“Inquiries from reporters are not lobbying,” said Rep. Joe Hackney, one of the lobbying bills chief sponsors.
Q: Hey, I love watching the legislature and can’t bear to be away when the honorables are meeting. When can I go on vacation?
A: Depends on how optimistic you are. The chief honorables say they’re aiming to get out of Cap City for the year by a week from tomorrow. A few will quietly say they might miss that goal and need an extra week. Even so, you’re probably safe heading out of town in August or even the last week or so of July.
The honorables are definitely pushing to get out of town by a week from today. Whether they’ll make it or not, who knows, but they’re putting on a good show.
After passing the budget update, the House and Senate took two different routes.
The House stayed late Friday to take up a passel of bills. Among those was a modification to the infamous eye exam provision from last year’s budget.
The Senate decided to work today, and will take up the minimum wage boost in committee today, among other items.
Update, 3:07 p.m.The minimum wage bill passes, 32-8. Because Sen. Eddie Goodall, a Republican of Union County, objected to third reading – a parliamentary maneuver – the bill will have to be debated by the Senate again Monday before being sent to the governor. Audio of the debate to come later, probably in a new post.
-------------
Update, 3:03 p.m. Sen. Andrew Brock (Republican of Davie): "The minimum wage is just an artificial number."
-------------
Update, 3 p.m. Sen. Stan Bingham (Republican of Davidson): Supports the bill. "I feel that it gives at least an impression that the leadership in this body is concerned about the health and welfare of workers."
-------------
Update, 2:50 p.m. Sen. Tony Rand(Democrat of Cumberland): "There's no dignity in working for $5.15 an hour, there's no dignity in any of this," he says in reply to criticism of the wage hike. "What we're trying to do is recognize the value of a person's labor."
Sen. Phil Berger (Republican of Rockingham): Opposes the bill. "The idea of the minimum wage is wildly popular ... a lot of times, we vote for things because they're popular...none of our neighbors are doing this."
-------------
Update, 2:45 p.m. The bill is being debated on the Senate floor now.
-------------
Update, 2 p.m. The minimum wage bill was just placed on today's calendar. My guess is the honorables will get to hearing it sometime after 3 p.m. or so.
-------------
Update, 1:50 p.m. The Senate Commerce Committee just scrubbed the bill of the language that had folks up in arms. The bill now mirrors the House version. Word continues to be that it will be heard on the Senate floor this afternoon.
-------------
Update, 1:15 p.m. The Senate Democrats just emerged from a caucus meeting. Apparently enough of a fuss has been kicked up about the bill that they’re going to strip the training wage provision and try passing it straight up, as the House sent it.
Technically what’s going to happen is this: the Senate will take a temporary break, the Commerce Committee will be reconvened, and then it will be kicked up to the full Senate floor. Of course, even if the Commerce Committee does one thing, members not on the committee could try to re-amend the bill once it’s on the floor.
Stay tuned.
-------
So, the Senate Commerce Committee passed a minimum wage hike to $6.15 an hour. But before sending it to the floor, they plunked in a crazy little provision that advocates for the wage increase have described as “outrageous,” “disgraceful,” and a few phrases I can’t print here on a family blog.
The new provision allows employers to pay people under 20-years-old a “training wage,” which would be equal to 85 percent of the state minimum, for 90 days. If the state minimum wage goes up to $6.15, that training wage would be $5.13 an hour. (Update, 11:15 a.m. - we have some conflicting info. Some folks are sticking with the 85 percent interpretation. But others say that the training wage could go down to a federal minimum, which would be $4.25 an hour. I'll try to clean up the difference.)
There are lots of ways to think about this, but here is one that clarifies the objections in my mind: If you’re a 19-year-old in college and come home to work for the summer, your employer can pay you 85 percent of the wage he gives a 20-year-old who may be in your same class at school.
Or say, if you’re a 19-year-old in the Army reserve, home from Iraq, you can be paid less the first 90 days you’re home from the war if you pick up a new job.
House members, including Rep. Alma Adams, say they won’t concur with the bill if it comes from the Senate in its current state. That would put it in a conference committee, which would put the bill in serious jeopardy as the session careens toward close.
By the way, both Sens. Kay Hagan and Phil Berger, a Democrat and Republican of Guilford County, voted for the change.
I’ve got conflicting word on whether the full Senate will debate the thing today. Some think yes, just to clear it off the calendar. Some think no, because the tempers are so bad at this point.
Stay tuned.
Update:(10:51 a.m.) For those new to this topic, I should note that the House already passed the minimum wage bill (back in May) and the Senate has had the bill ever since.
Update: Click here for my story from Saturday's paper.
------------------
The minimum wage bill, which would hike the lowest legal wage from $5.15 an hour to $6.15, passed its first Senate vote Friday. Because of the objection of one senator, it must be heard and debated again Monday night before it can be sent to the governor.
The earlier addition by Senators, which would have created a training wage, was stripped from the final bill.
Click here for audio of the whole 24 minute debate.
For my prior post on this topic, click here.
How did your Senator vote? Click here.
From today’s News & Record:
Around the state, here’s what some other papers and bloggers were up to:
One of my dirty little secrets is that I actually like and respect most of the elected officials I run into during an average day. Sure, there’s a few that hack me off from time to time, but by and large I respect the effort it takes to put aside one’s personal and professional life and try to do some good in the world.
There are, of course, days when the doings down here in Cap City are enough to drive me to the balcony of either chamber and start bellowing lines from famous plays, like Big Daddy’s line from Cat on a Hot Tin Roof:
“Mendacity! You won't live with mendacity! Well, you're an expert at it. The truth is pain and sweat and payin' bills and makin' love to a woman you don't love any more. Truth is dreams that don't come true, and nobody prints your name in the paper till you die.”
Good Monday morning. A couple of highlights from the calendar up here in Cap City:
But Rep. Alma Adams, who has pushed this thing through, isn’t taking anything for granted.
“I expect, based on the history of that bill, and how the senate seems to do things, they’re going to try something,” Adams said on the phone earlier today.
Sen. Eddie Goodall, of Union County, objected to third reading Friday. That’s sort of a parliamentary thing that kept the bill from passing for good before the weekend. Instead, it’s subject to debates and amendments today.
Adams says she won’t relax until the bill is passed.
If you're on pins and needles, I'll try to post something this evening once the Senate does whatever it does.
The bill to increase North Carolina’s minimum wage to $6.15 an hour effective Jan. 1 passed the Senate 37-12 Monday night. It now goes to Gov. Mike Easley, who said Monday afternoon that he would sign the bill.
The Senate was debating a bill Monday to create an actual innocence commission. The idea was that if a prisoner could prove they didn’t do a crime, they would have a route through which they may be absolved. (The bill is HB 1323 by the way.)
At any rate, Sen. Hugh Webster, Republican of Alamance, offered the following. I’m not sure if was apropos of the debate, but it made us scrubby media types in the back row stop and scratch our heads.
“I had a man who was very much involved in this piece of legislation … ask me ‘Don’t you believe in DNA?’ And I was tempted to say, ‘No, I believe in God I wish you did too.’ Don’t believe in DNA. DNA, if you believe in DNA, will lead you down a bad path.”
Yes, he was referring to the genetic material that is basic to human life and is sometimes used in criminal cases to determine whether someone is guilty or innocent.
Just thought I’d share.
From today’s paper:
On the front of the legislative building when I wandered in today: “No Smoking” signs. Today is the General Assembly's first smoke-free day.
This isn't my geographic bailiwick, but some of you UNC-CH grads may be interested:
The Council of State this morning gave approval for the university to demolish something call West House on campus. I’m not familiar with the building but this group says it’s worth saving. Apparently, it is one of the only (or the only) known example of a private dorm surviving on a U.S. college campus, according to Sen. Ellie Kinnaird. She spoke against the demolition at the meeting, but was only allowed to address the council after they had voted.
The local paper had this to say about the pending demolition.
Yeah, I did. From today’s Inside Scoop column:
Last week's tussle over the minimum wage, during which some senators tried to add a provision that would have exempted anyone under 20 from the state minimum, created some of the most openly tense moments Scoop has seen around the legislature.In fact, after a particularly contentious Senate Commerce Committee meeting, Rep. Alma Adams and Sen. Kay Hagan, both Greensboro Democrats, were -- for lack of a better description -- right up in each other's grills.
Thanks to some handy audio work by a radio reporter, Scoop confirmed that he had heard Adams say the following to Hagan:
Senate Bill 700, which amps up the requirement for public school kids to say the Pledge of Allegiance every day, passed the Senate Tuesday afternoon and is on its way to Gov. Mike Easley.
Click here for more background.
And click here for to read a news release from Sen. Julia Boseman, who sponsored a similar bill but didn’t really like this version, because it was watered down from her bill.
I just received this from Senate Leader Marc Basnight's office:
ADVISORY: NC SENATE COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER LANDFILL MORATORIUM WEDNESDAYRaleigh: The Senate Committee on Agriculture/Environment/Natural Resources will consider a moratorium on landfills Wednesday morning.
The proposal calls for an 18-month delay on new landfills so that the state could undertake a comprehensive study of solid waste issues.
The committee will meet at 11 a.m. in Room 643 of the Legislative Office Building. Link to audio capability is as follows: http://www.ncleg.net/Audio/Audio.html.
From today’s paper:
From other places:
I gave Sen. Hugh Webster some grief recently for, well, saying something kind of odd.
In the interest of balance, here’s something Webster weighed in with today that was kind of pithy. He was talking about an update of the state’s economic development laws, used to lure new businesses to the state. Those who object to the practice say it's unfair to the vast majority of businesses who will never get or qualify for incentives.
“It’s like buying your girlfriend a pretty necklace while you make your wife by the groceries.”
The Senator must run in a faster crowd than I do.
The honorables had thought they might be able to get out of town this weekend. That hope is dashed, and both chambers are now planning to work next week.
“Hopefully nothing bad happens and we get out of here next week,” Senate Leader Marc Basnight, a Dare County Democrat.
In response to this story, Rep. Pricey Harrison sent out this e-mail:
RALEIGH -- N.C. Rep. Pricey Harrison, D-Guilford, today issued the following statement in response to an article in today's Raleigh News and Observer regarding an event that she attended with other local and state officials during the festival of tall ships in Beaufort:"Had I known that the lunch was underwritten by the state, I would not have gone," said Rep. Pricey Harrison. "Ethics reform has been one of my highest priorities as a freshman legislator. I am immediately reimbursing the state for my portion of the expenses."
The House has passed House Bill 1289, which prohibits those under 18-years-old from using a cell phone while driving.
The bill now returns to the Senate for concurrence.
During one interesting episode on the House floor, an amendment was offered by Rep. Mary McAllister, a Cumberland County Democrat, which would have kept us all off the phone while driving. Actually, for adults, it would have kept us from using a hand-held mobile phone but allowed the use of hands-free devices.
McAlister has run similar bills that apply to adults and all have been shot down.
“I believe there are as many reckless drivers among adults as there are among youths,” McAlister told her colleagues.
That attempt failed.
Earlier in the debate, reference was made to things that might be distracting to drivers and might be outlawed. The suggestion was made that perhaps kissing while driving ought to be outlawed for those under 18. In response, someone else suggested that kissing was not a distraction, at least not the same kind that mobile phones can be.
Rep. Joe Kiser, a Lincoln County Republican, said what was on my mind at that point:
“I can tell you that when I was 16-to-18-years-old that if a girl was kissing me in the car it was very distracting.”
Gov. Mike Easley will sign the bill raising the state’s minimum wage by $1 at 11 a.m. today.
Meanwhile, the legislators will continue to thresh through bills in hopes of leaving town next week.
From today’s paper:
Gov. Mike Easley signed the minimum wage bill into law today. Effective Jan. 1, the state’s minimum wage will go up $1 to $6.15 an hour.
Click here to listen to the bit of the signing ceremony and the questions he got regarding the minimum wage. You’ll notice that Easley was not real committal on the next steps.
Although he did say that he thought the federal government ought to raise the minimum wage, he was more tentative on what North Carolina’s next step should be in absence of a move by the feds. He was asked point blank about indexing, a way of having the minimum wage rise year after year automatically:
“It’s very difficult for states to take these steps on their own without the entire nation doing the same thing because you don’t want to put yourself at a competitive disadvantage,” Easley said.
Easley also talked some about the tone deaf political move de jour, in infamous ferry ride over July 4 weekend.
“I don’t think it was a smart move,” Easley said. He went on to say he wanted to get to the bottom who knew what when, but didn’t say if any heads would roll over the shindig.
Click here to listen to some questions about that and other items.
But wait, there’s more. there’s more. He was asked about it a second time.
The honorables have gone home for the weekend, to return Monday afternoon. We’re in for at least one more week of the legislative session, although Speaker Black told his members Thursday that two more weeks were possible.
Although some of the ethics reform legislation that has been chugging through the General Assembly has passed, much more is still in the pipeline. Senators are due for more work on the lobbying bill Monday.
From today’s paper, here’s a story on a new way of financing school construction. Guilford County officials seem a bit leery of it. Basically, it looks like a way for school officials to continue to build when the voters refuse to approve bonds.
Okay, it’s time for me to catch up on everything I’ve been putting off while the honorables were passing bills like mad this week.
Well, legislators and other government types have found themselves on rocky seas over this whole ferry boat cruise thing.
I haven't had a whole lot of time to poke around in this arena but did get a chance this morning to ask for a list of all those who had sent an RSVP they would be on the boat. Now, keep in mind that just because you said you’d come is not the same thing as being on the boat.
For example, both Sen. Kay Hagan and Rep. Maggie Jeffus were on the guest list but both told me this morning they didn't go. Rep. Pricey Harrison, famously was on board, but said she was reimbursing the state. Rep. Laura Wiley is on the list, but I haven't caught up with her yet.
Update (4p.m.): It turns out that Wiley was on the boat.
Wiley said that she has already written a check ($91.25) for the boat is dismayed that things went awry.
“When you get an invitation from someone like the Ports Authority … you assume it’s being paid for properly.”
She added, “We’re not happy about this. It was inadvertent.”
In the spirit of sharing, click here for the list of all those who sent in an affirmative RSVP to the event. Find your favorite name on the list and head to sea, or at least ask them if they actually made the trip.
From today’s paper: An update on two stories from earlier this year. Bills to change the entry date for Kindergarten and close a gun law loophole are likely going to have to wait until next year.
Also, if you haven't read the mental health reform stories written this Sunday by Nate DeGraff, go do it now. It's one of those issues where the advocates fight it out at the state level, but folks have to deal with the consequences at home.
Via The Thicket’s post on the topic, here’s an idea causing a stir in Arizona because of it’s conflating of money and politics, but not for the typical reasons:
Osterloh's initiative, the first initiative to be certified by Arizona election officials for the November general election ballot, would use unclaimed Arizona Lottery prize money to provide a $1 million reward to one randomly selected voter after each general election. A voter would get one entry in the drawing for voting in either the primary or general election or two if voting both times.
Maybe it’s just me, but I’m almost certain that someone said at the birth of this idea: “It’s just so crazy, it might work.”
My question is if the Arizona folks get away with it, how quickly the idea will spread to other places.
The AP and N+O have reported that UNC-TV is cutting two public affairs programs, including the well-regarded Legislative Week in Review.
This here is bad news not only for policy wonks and government junkies, but is just the latest indicators of something that should be disturbing for voters and citizens in general.
Continue reading "RALEIGH DISPATCH: Bad news about state news" »
Note: “Raleigh Dispatch” is usually a once-a-week deal, sort of meant as a column/test case/place holder for a slow day. But my high horse was at a gallop on Friday, so here’s a second one for the week.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
There have been plenty of opportunities to write about the honorables making hash of ethics and campaign reform this year. Every time a lobbying or other similar bill hits the floor of the House or Senate, you can pretty much be sure someone is going to at least make you scratch your head and wonder where it is they’re coming from.
Way back before the beginning of the session, Rep. John Blust proposed changing the rules under which the chamber ran. The idea, he said, was to take power out of the hands of a few and make the House more small-d democratic.
The changes, he said, would avoid some of fund-raising and ethics-related problems that have surfaced over the past year. If power isn’t concentrated in the hands of a few, the reasoning go, there’s less reason to give those few money.
Changing the rules, Blust said, would be kin to all the other ethics reforms the legislature has been working on this year.
Blust had hoped to make the new rules effective at the end of this year’s session. That way the new House coming in next year would have the Blust’s framework to work with when they adopted rules for the chamber next year.
No dice on that idea, though.
The House Rules Committee killed that change Monday evening on a voice vote. No member of the committee spoke up in favor of the rules change.
Blust, however, was upbeat after the hearing.
"I'm getting more and more people saying 'I like some of your stuff in here' ... this keeps the momentum going."
The General Assembly is still trucking along here in Cap City, although the rank and file members, legislative staff, reporters and lobbyists are beginning to sound like the back seat of every family station wagon SUV stuck in traffic heading to the beach:
“Are we there yet?”
The subject of when, exactly, the end of session will come has become something of an obsession around the building here. Of course, if we really want to send the honorables home, all we need to do is get the facilities guy to “break” the air conditioners for a few days.
Barring a sudden malfunction with the HVAC, the honorables may be here for at least a few more days.
The biggest thing left on the legislative plate is a big ethics and lobbying reform bill. Both House and Senate leaders have said they won’t leave town without passing it.
When asked yesterday if he had a timetable for finishing up, House Speaker Jim Black said that finishing the bill was more important than any timetable.
That said, the honorables are trying to speed things up. As I type, the Senate is debating the bill. The House, which had finished its work for the day, agreed to return at 5 p.m. to see if the Senate will finish their debate and send them the bill.
If the Senate finishes their debate and votes the bill out today, the House could at least take the measure up and give it a once over with the remaining time this week.
However, the result of any House vote will likely be a conference committee of some sort to work out differences between the two chambers’ visions of what the bill should say. It’s a long bill and as complicated as anything the honorables will deal with this year short of the budget.
Once the honorables get done with the lobbying/ethics stuff, the rest of the session’s business if not easy should move with some alacrity.
By the way, I started writing this thing around 4 p.m., got distracted and came back to it a couple times. It’s not five minutes to 5 p.m. and the debate is still going strong. When the House does come back into session, they’re not going to have a bill ready and waiting.
Update: 5 p.m. came, and the Senate leadership forced a close to debate on that ethics bill. So the House will have it when they come back in. Ain't parliamentary procedure grand?
For those who care, Sen Tony Rand just outlined the following plan for the Senate’s meeting schedule on the floor:
The Senate will meet Friday morning to clear out some bills with some time sensitivity and then go home before lunch. He told the members that conferees would be working on things like the ethics and technical corrections bills, but there wouldn’t be a meeting of the full Senate until Wednesday or after.
I’ve not heard in detail the course the House leaders are plotting, although I do know some members are planning functions for in their districts tomorrow mid-morning.
Both chambers also seem to have put the breaks on a lot of their committees. It seems like even if it is not imminent, the end of this year’s legislative session is now clearly in sight.
From today’s paper:
After a bruising legislative battle to get a $1 hike in the minimum wage passed, you’d think Rep. Alma Adams would be ready to take some time off before jumping into the soup again.
You’d be wrong.
Continue reading "RALEIGH DISPATCH – Minimum Wage, round 2" »
With the end of the General Assembly session nearing (really, it is – it has to be – doesn't it – please say yes) there are only a handful of issues that are really and truly on the radar down here. Among that handful are these three:
Landfill moratorium:
You may remember that the Senate passed a landfill moratorium bill a while back. Aimed at a few mega-landfills down east, the bill would have the state take an 18 month break in permitting new trash facilities.
The folks fighting this bill the hardest – on both sides of the debate - are the folks who live near the potential mega landfills. Some say their towns ought to be able to earn revenue from a new industry, while others say the new industry will be harmful to property values, the environment, etc...
A couple of new players jumped into the debate today. Joe Sinsheimer, a consultant who runs the jimblackmustgo.com website, sent a release suggesting that money from lobbyists was influencing the House’s unwillingness to move on the bill. That was followed up by an e-mail from Democracy North Carolina, which showed contributions from trash industry lobbyists to members of the legislature.
Now, there is indubitably an abiding connection between money, power and influence. That connection may be at play in this case, but it is not the only thing in play right now and doesn’t feel like the strongest factor at play.
For example, among the folks listed as having gotten money from waste industry lobbyists over the past two years is Rep. Pricey Harrison, a Greensboro Democrat. Harrison is a big supporter of the moratorium. Sen. Kay Hagan, a Greensboro Democrat, is also on the list and she voted in favor of the moratorium.
Sure, these could be the exceptions that prove the rule. Or they could be exceptions that make us stop and ask what else is going on here?
I’m still reporting this out, but a majority of Democrats in the House reportedly favor the moratorium. But there are a dozen or so House Dems who oppose the measure at this point. The bulk of those in opposition, I’m told, are members of the black legislative caucus. That’s due to some of the race and socioeconomic issues involved with this that I’m not going to dive into here.
Remember, Democrats only hold the House by a 63-57 margin. And if a preponderance of Republicans oppose a moratorium, the Democrats would need all or almost all their troops on board to get the measure passed. So it makes sense that the Dems are negotiating among themselves to make sure the bill they tackle on the floor is acceptable to all.
There’s more to come on this. Negotiations are continuing and folks lobbying both sides of the issue are going to be out in force her in Cap City this week.
Drinking water:
The House Environment Committee took up Senate Bill 1132 Monday afternoon, except they didn’t take up whatever the bill said when it came over.
Rather, they plugged in language from something known as House Bill 1778, which basically would affect when polluters would have to clean up ground water supplies that they had fouled.
The bill would put something called risk based remediation into play.
Under this system, a company that polluted ground water – from which well water supplies are drawn – could avoid cleaning it up if it could show the chances it would be used for drinking water were minimal.
The rub is this: the corporate community and many representatives, lead by Rep. Pryor Gibson, would like to put that idea into practice with few or minimal fees in place.
Environmentally minded folks, including the Department of Natural Resources, say that companies ought to have to pay a premium for leaving behind polluted ground water. That money could then be taken and used to clean up other contaminated sites.
The theory, on the DENR side, is that the state and its citizens should be compensated for the loss of a natural resource, similar to when a company has to pay up for causing a fish kill.
Gov. Mike Easley opposes the bill in her current form and even dispatched one of his chief lieutenants to speak at Monday’s committee meeting. And word is the Senate doesn’t think much of the current form of the bill.
Still, the House Environment Committee approved the bill 14-8 and it’s headed to the House floor. And opponents of the measure are worried that in the waning days of session, goofy stuff can happen.
This is another one to keep an eye on.
Ethics:
Finally, here’s a short note on the remaining ethics legislation.
As you may remember, some of the chunkiest bits of lobbying and ethics reform have been sent to a House-Senate conference committee. These are really the bits that will govern the pernicious aspects of the money-power relations that the folks in the first section of this post are worried about.
Speaking just before the 7 p.m. House session this evening, Rep. Joe Hackney, an Orange County Democrat, said that negotiations were proceeding.
When asked if he thought the conference committee might be reviewing a final bill tomorrow, Hackney said yes.
“In fact, that would be a goal,” Hackney said.
If the lobbying bill were ready for the full House and Senate to look at Wednesday or early Thursday, then an end of the week adjournment is feasible says those in the know.
Again, this is something that we scrubby media types will be keeping an eye on.
Charlotte's Jack Betts is one of the oldest, smartest dogs in the pound down here, so when he takes note of something, I do to.
He writes about the ethics bill that House and Senate negotiators are trying to hash out right now:
Now, the bill still exempts those who engage in "acquisition and dissemination" of news from having to register as a lobbying activity, but it has now defined news gathering and publishing as one of several "lobbying activities." That could open the door to an easy amendment one day to drop that exemption and stick it to the media.And defining "news medium" to mean only the reporting of events leaves in question whether newspaper columnists and editorial writers should register as lobbyists under state law.
I don't think legislators meant to do that, but I've been wrong about legislators' intent before. And I doubt current legal authorities regard opinion writing and editorial advocacy as subject to the lobbyist registration law.
But just in case anyone does, here's what I think: That's nuts.
I second that. Read Betts’ whole column.
The risked based assessment bill I wrote about in this blog post was nceremoniously sent back to the committee from whence it came. Read: that thar bill be deader than Ol’ Yeller...for this year. Speaker Black didn’t seem real enthusiastic about it last night and when asking Senate folks today if they'd look at it I got not just "no" as an answer but "heck no."
... that Senate gang is riding back into town tomorrow.
After a few days of skeleton sessions – formal sessions with only a few members held only to hit a meeting requirement and not actually do any legislation – the full Senate is slated to ride back into town tomorrow (Wednesday) according to staffers. Session will begin at 4 p.m.
That bodes well for the ethics and lobbying reform bills, or at least bodes well for them getting a bill done. Whether that bill looks good to advocates for reform is another matter.
(Update: Rep. Hackney says of the ethics bill, "We have every expectation of finsihing our work tonight, it will probably be late tonight.")
At any rate, conferees on the bill are expected to continuing working after the House finishes their session today.
The Senate coming back to town also bodes well for the General Assembly finishing up its work this week. There was some thought Senators would stay out until Thursday, which would have killed the whole finishing up this week thing.
Update: NOPE. The House Environment committee is meeting but not on the landfill bill. That bill is in the Rules committee. Stand down, if you were standing up for this.
----
The House is still cruising right along with their full session, but a committee room has been set up for the House Environment Committee. Although I don’t have direct confirmation this is of the topic, speculation is this will be the landfill moratorium bill since it’s the only big environmental thing that would bear vetting at this late hour. (Click here for some background.) The clerk’s office does confirm there will be an environment meeting.
I’ll update when I know more.
Word from the Speaker’s office is that the big lobbying and ethics bill is finished up. Remember, this went to a conference committee between the House and Senate.
From Julie Robinson in the Speaker’s office:
Once we know when members will receive copies, Speaker Black will then decide if the House will vote on this conference report on Wednesday or wait until Thursday in order to give members plenty of time to study the bill prior to voting.
We media types were told this morning the lobbying and ethics bill was a done deal. There was an agreement in principle and the details were being worked out.
That’s been the story all day today (Wednesday). But somewhere around 7 p.m., the foundations began to look shaky. If the bill was done, where were the copies? Why didn’t the clerks of the House and Senate have them?
Now we’re told that a final draft might not be available until later tonight…potentially around midnight. I’m not making any bets on them hitting that deadline.
More on all of this and other bills will be in tomorrow’s paper.
From today’s paper:
The Democrats are holding a news conference at 9 a.m. and then both chambers are scheduled to start up shortly after. Expect the conversations about the ethics bill and a landfill moratorium to dominate the day, along with talk of ending the session.
The moratorium will last for one year under the bill. The House vote was 102-8. It now returns to the Senate where it is nearly a mortal lock to pass.
Update: For those who have asked, here is audio from the House debate on the ethics bill. I'll warn you now, the quality is kind of bad:
--------
Update: (2:53 p.m.) Both chambers have passed the ethics bills. More on this in tomorrow's paper.
--------
Update: (12:01 a.m.) The House is breaking for lunch. They will take up debate of the ethics bill when they come back, according to Speaker Jim Black.
--------
Update: (11:54 a.m.) Rep. John Blust says the bill doesn't address what it needs to. "I am reminded of a person who goes to the emergency room with a broken leg and the doctors immediately start working on his arm."
--------
Update: (11:42 a.m.) One ethics bill that won't get done this year: a proposed experiment public financing of elections. Rep. Joe Hackney just said they're not going to run it because it doesn't have enough support to pass.
--------
Update: (11:25 a.m.) The House has begun its debate of the lobbying and ethics bill.
--------
So what’s all this ethics stuff about? Glad you asked: