News-Record.com

Democracy NC says you're not voting (pdf):

A new "Civic Participation Index for North Carolina" shows that only two out of five adults [40.8 percent] bother to vote in the typical state election.

The Index says that young North Carolinians age 18 to 25 are half as likely to vote as their grandparents - and more likely to engage in binge drinking than participate in elections.

Pretty much any elections director will tell you the same thing.

The release appears to be sent out in support of the same day voter registration bill.

I'm not sure if any work is getting done on Jones Street this morning, but the honorables and their various hangers on are in a punchy mood.

During a Senate Judiciary Committee I meeting this morning, a particularly thorny problem in the domestic violence law consumed a majority of the time. Toward the end of the session, the honorables on hand realized they hadn't gotten too far in addressing the problem at hand (violent spouses obtaining and using weapons).

"I think we're going backwards," said Sen. Martin Nesbitt, the committee's chairman.

"But we're making good time," said Sen. Tony Rand, prompting a chuckle from the peanut gallery.

The bill in question, Senate Bill 9, was withdrawn for further technical tinkering.

Next on stage was the Senate Commerce Committee, which was due to hear from a lobbyist for the National Federation for Independent Businesses.

Another lobbyist who shall remain nameless - suffice it to say she works for an un-monied constituency - quipped "Hey Mark, I have a question. When do I get to present my legislative agenda to a committee."

The answer to that question, by the by, is probably never.

Coming up later today: school calendar bill.

Probably not coming as scheduled tomorrow: the smoking bill. (Expect to see it pushed back another week.)

Rep. Hugh Holliman is getting ready to retool his smoking bill.

It will be (or has been, I may have missed it) re-referred to the House Judiciary Committee where it will be scheduled for a hearing and a vote Thursday.

The measure, Holliman said, will be rewritten to do a statewide smoking ban in restaurants and to end pre-emption. That's the state law that requires all smoking laws be set at the state level rather than allowing local governments to set their own rules.

"I'm getting a lot of traction with that," Holliman said.

While this is a step back from the original bill - which would ban smoking in virtually any business - but would be progress as far as smoking advocates were concerned.

For those who remember Priscilla Taylor, who used to head the Cemala Foundation in Greensboro, she has been elected to the UNC Board of Governors. She was one of eight new members so elected by the state House today.

The bill that would allow local school districts to change their start dates to sometime earlier than Aug. 25 passed the House today, 74-39. Because there was an objection to third reading, we'll have an opportunity to hear it again tomorrow.

Assuming the outcome is the same, it will next go to the Senate.

For those wondering what its fate will be in the Senate, the good/bad news (depending on what side of this debate you're on) is it's hard to tell. As has been widely noted, Senate Leader Marc Basnight is a restaurant owner from down east who opposes the idea of schools starting earlier. However, a spokesman said Basnight won't use his power to derail the legislation. Rather, it will be allowed to proceed along its normal course. That's because it's not a matter of partisan difference (Republican vs. Democrat) but a matter of geographic split, and an issue on which Democrats themselves are divided.

The school calendar bill passed the House again Wednesday. (Yes, the House has to pass some things twice.) The bill is now on it's way to the Senate.

The Senate has passed Senate Bill 118, which would give the governor the power to remove judges and district attorneys is they should become unqualified to hold office. Like, say if you were a DA who happened, to you know, get disbarred or something.

The bill next goes to the House.

There is war, riot and revolution, and then there is important stuff like 'cue.

Maybe I'm just a cynic, but the House seems to be grinding its clutch this morning.

Remember Joe Sinsheimer, the Democratic activist of jimblackmustgo fame? He's once again raising some issues he wants Speaker Hackney to look at:

I am writing to ask you to request a formal investigation into the 2005-2006 legislative history of HB 503, legislation that would have required certified nurse anesthetists to work under a doctor’s supervision. Specifically, I am asking you to call for a formal inquiry into the question of whether Representative Thomas Wright, Representative William Wainwright and former House Speaker Jim Black may have collaborated to block passage of HB 503 in return for a series of bundled campaign contributions from nurse anesthetists and others.

Click here to read the whole letter.

After a news conference this morning, Hackney said that he hadn't make up his mind what to do about the letter.

"I just got it, I need to reflect on it," Hackney said.

There's been much buzz about Jones Street the past couple days about "the numbers." Specifically, lobbyists and legislators have been carping about the budget projections given to the chairs of the five big budget program areas: Education, Health and Human Services, Justice and Public Safety, Natural and Economic Resources and General Government.

As analyst and progressive do-gooder-type Chris Fitzsimon points out, if you do the math in the Health and Human Service budget and subtract the available money for next year from the figure that governor says he needs to keep everything going as it is right now you get $34.1 million.

While $34 mil is a lot of money to you or me, it's chump change in terms of government programs. It is, for example, about 1/5 of what mental health experts say is needed in terms of expansion if we're to keep going with mental health reform.

Since so many folks are yakking about them, I figured I'd share and put "the numbers" given to the subcommittees out there for discussion. (Click here/PDF)

When asked about the murmurs of discontent amongst the advocate community this morning, House Speaker Joe Hackney cautioned that it was early in the budget process and that things could change, especially when new revenue figures for the year come in later this spring.

"There's always an attempt to achieve some efficiencies early on," he said, which seemed like his cryptic way of saying, "Don't panic."

Unrelated but related: during a news conference this morning, education appropriators said they had been instructed to hold some money back from the early budget discussions so there would be some cash to act on recommendations yet to be formulated on curbing the drop out rate. It's enough to make me wonder just how much money might be "held back" in other areas as well.

The N+O ran this story about a tuition grants to the school of math and science that Sen. Kay Hagan sponsored back in 2003.

There's a House effort to repeal the bill now. I have a few notes not covered in the story from research and conversations earlier this week:

• First off, here is the individual bill that Hagan filed back in the day.

• Hagan calls the measure "The best thing she's ever done at the General Assembly" and appears ready to fight any repeal. It's worth noting that because she's an appropriations chair on the Senate side and a close ally of Senate Leader Marc Basnight, that push-back could be formidable.

• A repeal, at this point, appears unlike even if the House passes the measure. Other senators don't seem to have a sense of outrage over this like they did over, say, the chiropractic bill or the state property commission thing. It lacks that cash-in-a-bathroom flair.

• One might postulate that this is payback by the House for all the budget measures from the Jim Black era that the Senate has fast-tracked to oblivion. I wouldn't because I haven't talked to enough people about it, but you could make the case.

• That thing about Hagan's campaign manager being married to a School of Math and Science Board Member: factually accurate. Does it look bad? Probably.

We'll keep an eye on this one.

Update:Click here for Sunday's news obituary of Sen. Martin.

We have word this morning that former state Sen. Bill Martin of Guilford County has passed away. My colleague Sonja Elmquist is working on an obituary. If you have thoughts you want to share, you can reach her at (336) 373-7090 or call me at (919) 279-1300 or reach out in the comments link below.

A few tidbits and thoughts to end last week and begin the new one:

• Monday will be slow even for a Monday around Cap City this week. The honorables gave everyone a good long time for Easter weekend.

• The Senate held a skeleton session Friday and won't even be pretending to work until Tuesday. When they do get back, Senate Commerce is going to take a look at the bill to make alcohol inhalers illegal.

• The House looks like it will have some sort of session on Monday, but it looks like a complete snoozer. On Tuesday, the House ABC Committee will be looking at a new type of liquor license for inns on purty roads...because really, the state's ABC system isn't quite Byzantine enough.

Pollsters at Public Policy Polling put out their latest release on Friday (click) that showed 67 percent of those polled supported the comprehensive smoking ban floated by Rep. Hugh Holliman. One wonders where those 67 percent were in recent weeks as a hodge-podge of tobacco groups, property rights types and other did their best to kill the thing, forcing it to be retooled into a much less stringent bill.

If you remember the transfer tax fuss that kicked up a week or two ago, Scott Mooneyhamprovides some political analysis.

Regarding Joe Sinsheimer's latest missive on anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists, two points of clean up:

• Bob Hall of Democracy NC sent along this chart (click) and a note:

  There's a fair amount of attention on the nurse anesthetists, Thomas Wright, etc. and it's important to put another side of the equation into the picture -- the money from the anesthesiologists. I know the nurses certainly would like to see a tad more balance in news coverage, and I certainly agree that the substantial sums of money anesthesiologists have poured into state legislative races is directly relevant.

  Indeed, the desire to offset the huge financial advantage of the anesthesiologists underlies my earlier statement to a reporter about the nurses, quoted in yesterday's letter to Speaker Hackney from Joe Sinsheimer: "This is a case where a group has been told, or has internalized a message, that they need to pay to play and pay a lot more if they expect to prevail."

  Below (and attached) is a chart that shows the dramatic rise in giving by PACs of the anesthesiologists and the nurse anesthetists. Of particularly interest is the proliferation of PACs sponsored by local practices of anesthesiologists. This tactic allows the profession to circumvent the normal $4,000-per-election limit imposed on a single PAC.

  My research of contributions to legislative campaigns (i.e., excluding donations to parties, statewide candidates, etc.) shows that the profession jumped from 4 PACs giving $204,250 in the 2002 election period to 15 PACs giving $504,827 in 2006 legislative elections -- a leap of $300,000 in four years. Meanwhile, the nurse anesthetists PAC soared from giving $3,500 in the 2002 legislative elections to $103,500 in 2006.

  As more attention is rightly given to what I call the "wannabe" players, including pay-day lenders, video-poker operators, chiropractors, nurses, and S & M brands, it's also important to note the money their "opponents" are putting into politics because that sets an important part of the context for "follow the money" stories.

• Meanwhile, Speaker Pro Tempore Wainwright sent out this note:

  Let me start by saying unequivocally I have done nothing legally or morally wrong.

  I took a position on anesthesia legislation based solely on my belief that the system we had in place was working and working well based on information in the administrative code that was agreed upon by the North Carolina Medical Board and the state Board of Nursing. In turn, nurse anesthetists chose to legally provide financial support for my campaign based on the belief that I am an effective legislator and would be a strong advocate for their cause. It was not the other way around – they did not pay me in an effort to win my support and I did not solicit any donations from them.

  I was only one member of the Health Care Committee and not in a leadership position on that committee. My opposition was not enough to stop the bill from being approved by that committee and I played no part in preventing the bill from reaching the Finance Committee or the full House.

  I in no way played any improper role in the handling of this legislation. I fully reported all of my donations from nurse anesthetists and from anesthesiologists with an interest in this matter.

  I reject the notion that I have somehow played a role in corrupting the process and I look forward to the time when everyone realizes that this claim is baseless.

As for me, I'll be spending a few days at my paper’s mother ship in Greensboro learning more about these new-fangled computin' machines, but I'll still be keeping tabs on the honorables from afar. E-mail me with items of interest: mbinker@news-record.com

From story in Sunday's New York Times:

But other states, especially those where housing prices soared in recent years, are also seeing their collections slow, especially in the sales and real estate transfer tax categories. While the economy remains generally strong and it is too early to predict whether the housing slump will have long-term effects, some states will have to adjust their wish lists.

For example, New Jersey could face a $2.5 billion shortfall by mid-2008, Gov. Jon S. Corzine has said, and may lease its turnpike or its lottery to a private company to raise money. In California, where income tax receipts in January were $1 billion less than forecast, a nonpartisan legislative analyst has urged budget cuts and warned that the state could have about $2 billion less in revenue this year and next than Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has projected.

This will be relevant right here in River City North Carolina for a couple reasons.

I've been learning about some of our web publishing tools today. So just for you, I've put together some audio from last week on curbing the dropout rate.

Click here to listen to a little presentation I worked up using two press conferences from last Thursday. One regarded Sen. Harry Brown's effort to push vocational education. The other was held by Speaker Joe Hackney and House Democrats on their efforts to curb the dropout rate in North Carolina.

Services for former Sen. Bill Martin:

Funeral services for the Honorable William Nelson Martin will be held on Thursday, April 12th 2007 at 1:00 p.m. at Providence Baptist Church. The church is located at 1106 Tuscaloosa St., Greensboro, NC 27406. A family visitation will occur at the church from 12:00 p.m. to 12:45 p.m.

I'm back in Cap City tomorrow (Wednesday) after a couple days of training. The calendars are choc full in interesting stuff. A few of the more notable stops along the way:

• The House is scheduled to debate two bills apologizing for slavery and other ills of racism. There is both a House version of the bill as well as a Senate version.

  According to staffers at the General Assembly (who are still slogging away at this hour) they're going to take up both versions of the bill at the same time, which is odd. On almost any other piece of legislation, they'd have picked a vehicle and sent it through solo.

  "I don't know how they're going to handle that. It's a little unusual," said Rep. Alma Adams when I called her this evening. Adams is one of the primary co-sponsors of the House measure.

  Update: A House staffer says the plan is this: They will debate and pass the House version. And then they will pass the Senate version without debate.

  By-the-by, the House resolution is far more blunt than the Senate version. Take this bit from the Senate bill:

  Whereas, North Carolina took legal actions to deny freedom to black people, including an 1826 law that prohibited free blacks from entering the State, an 1830 law that prohibited anyone from teaching a slave to read or write, and a provision of the 1835 Constitution denying free blacks the right to vote;

  In the House bill, it reads:

  Whereas, in the 19th century, the State began to discourage black businesses and the presence of free blacks in North Carolina and passed legislation to restrict the liberty of free blacks. An 1826 law provided that a free black who moved into the State and failed to leave after being notified of the law, after 20 days, could be fined $500.00 or held to labor for 10 years or less. An 1830 law prohibited free blacks from returning to this State after being absent for a period of 90 days or more; and

  Whereas, the passage of such harsh laws served to force free persons of color from the State, often splitting families and resulting in the loss of property and economic gains; and

  Whereas, in 1830, North Carolina law provided that a slave could be sentenced to 39 lashes if he or she was found guilty of teaching another slave how to read;

• Far less serious, but the bill to name the Lexington Barbecue festival the state food festival is also on the calendar.

• Call him "Tex." If HB 573 passes judges will be able to carry concealed weapons in the court room. The House will debate the measure Wednesday.

• On the House Committee calendar, corporal punishment would be outlawed in N.C. schools under a bill in the House Committee on Children Youth and Family.

But wait, there's more.

• The Senate is due to vote on a bill to outlaw alcohol inhalers. Yes, I've written about this before.

So tune in tomorrow. It should be a busy day.

Click here to read the paid obit on former Sen. Bill Martin. You can also sign an online condolance book there.

For previous entries on Sen. Martin, click here.

For those following the fuss over former Speaker Jim Black's chiropractic provision (click here) the Senate Health Committee took less than four minutes to vote in favor of repeal.

I'm still amused how the bill sponsors speak in kind of vague terms about this deal. For example, Rep. Hugh Holliman told senators that the provision was created by "a former member of the House" who later plead guilty to "putting this in for a bribe."

What, is Jim Black now "he who must not be named?"

Anyway, Holliman told the Senators that the House is running a bill to redo the chiropractic bill that this current piece of legislation is undoing. Why? Well, some people think equal co-pays for chiropractors and general practitioners is a good idea. They just need to run the bill all honest like.

If you're really interested listen to the full committee hearing on the bill.

Next step: the full Senate will vote, and then the bill will be off to the governor's desk - assuming no amendments are made on the floor.

The House Committee on Children Family and Youth voted 6-4 in favor of a bill that would ban corporal punishment in schools across the state. (No, there's no paddling allowed in Guilford County schools, but that's a system decision.)

Rep. Laura Wiley, a High Point Republican, might just have been the swing vote on the bill. As she herself noted, one might have expected a good conservative from a right-ward tilting district to vote against the ban. Had she done so, the vote would have been 5-5 and the bill would have languished in committee.

But Wiley is a former school teacher who said the thought of hitting a child "turned her stomach."

Click here to listen to her give her reasons for voting for the ban after the meeting ended.

There was a pretty robust debate on the measure, with several groups who lobby down here all the time lining up for and against it.

Those in favor of the repeal included:

• The North Carolina Association of Educators. President Eddie Davis said that new teachers should be put in a position of winding up somewhere that uses corporal punishment when they themselves oppose the practice.
  
• The North Carolina Parent Teacher Association.

Those who want to keep corporal punishment legal:

• The North Carolina School Boards Association. Association lobbyist Leanne Winner said, "We believe the current statute provide the necessary protections and provides for local decision making." She also added that her group had reports of schools that use corporal punishment and have great success keeping discipline.
  
• The North Carolina Family Policy Council. Lobbyist John Rustin said that corporal punishment can be administered in a "caring and controlled" way and that schools shouldn't bee deprived of a discipline keeping tool.

The bill's next stop is the House Education Committee and then the House floor.

So the State Ethics Commission has collected ethics forms from legislators, members of the council of state and other folks who hold positions of public trust. The forms detail things like real estate holdings and stocks in one's portfolio and such.

After getting them, the commission promptly filed those away in the basement office of the state administration building here in Raleigh where no one can see them.

Well, gosh darned it, I think paperwork like that is made to be perused. So at least for our local (Guilford County) honorables, some statewide folks and a few other hangers on, we've put their ethics forms on the internets.

Click right here to go to the page where they've been collected. And if you find the link useful or have suggestions for more folks we should put up, comment below or send me an e-mail: mbinker@news-record.com

Senate Bill 125, which would ban the Alcohol WithOut Liquid device, passed the N.C. Senate today. The measure next goes to the House.

As I've noted before, the device is made by a Greensboro company.

There was no debate on the bill. It now goes to the House.

Update: (5:52 p.m.) The House has passed both the House and Senate versions of the slavery apology bill. The vote was 117-0.

-=-=-=-

The debate on the slavery apology resolution in the House is still going on as of 5 p.m. (It started about 90 minutes ago.)

Here are some quotes from the speeches so far:

• "The past is never dead and in order to learn from history, you must acknowledge it and accept it, no matter how ugly it may be." - Rep. Alma Adams, Guilford County.

As you may have read, the House wrapped up debate today on resolutions apologizing for slavery. To tie up any loose ends:

• Click here for an audio presentation featuring some of those who spoke during Wednesday's House debate. (Alternate link if your browser goes too slow.)
• Click here for the House version of the bill.
• Click here for the Senate version.
• Prior posts on this topic can be found here and here.
• Click here to read Thrusday's newspaper story on the resolutions.

Update: Tomorrow's story is now online.

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

The presser by mental health groups on recent cuts to the reimbursement rate for community support services came on what was a busy day for a Thursday at the General Assembly.

It also came as DHHS was saying those cuts would be temporary, which was boon to advocates.

A few hours later, House Speaker Joe Hackney held a news conference and said this:

"One of the things I do before I go into a news conference is I look to see what my latest e-mails are. And one of them said that reduced rate was only in effect until next Friday and that a new rate was to be calculated and set. So I really think the action that the executive branch took on that was intended as a warning shot and a warning not to be gaming the system so to speak and I think there will be an adjustment."

Hackney fielded a couple mental health related questions and you can click here to listen to his full take on both of them.

My colleague Amy Dominello is working on a full report for tomorrow's paper. In the mean time, here's a picture from the press conference:

(Click to enlarge.)

So there's been news of late that U.S. Rep. Brad Miller might kind of, sort of, maybe be thinking about running against Elizabeth Dole.

So I guess the boys over at PPP decided to poll what that might look like:

According to a Public Policy Polling survey released today, if Congressman Brad Miller were to challenge Senator Elizabeth Dole in a 2008 race for the U.S. Senate he could be competitive. The survey of likely general election voters in North Carolina reveals that 44% of voters would choose Dole today and 33% would choose Miller, while 22% are undecided.

Of course, one wonders whether Miller will actually take the plunge. He’s begun acquiring seniority and status in the House, is in a district that he will seemingly always poll well in, and a Senate campaign would by no means be a certain proposition. While there is no sure thing in politics, do you trade in the low hanging fruit for a far from certain prize?

Remember the bill to name the Lexington BBQ festival the official state food festival?

That bill passed the House today, but not without controversy. The vote was 98-12, with some eastern advocates unable to give any kind of endorsement to the home of western 'cue.

The measure now goes to the Senate.

House Speaker Joe Hackney spoke with us scruff press types Thursday afternoon. I've already loaded one out-take regarding mental health. Here are some more audio clips concerning news of the day:

• There has been talk, by Republicans and Democrats, about a bill that would amend the constitution to restrict government use of eminent domain. Republicans sent out a news release on it earlier this week and there are Senate and House versions of the bill.

  Hackney was a little circumspect, saying, "I really think that amending the constitution is a serious, serious thing and deserves not be used for a remedy for the passion of the moment."

  Click here to listen his whole answer.

• The N.C. Association of County Commissioners were fuzzy with excitement about a House bill that would cap the county share of Medicaid costs. The House measure has 119 co-sponsors.

  At a separate news conference this afternoon, Rep. Bill Owens (D-Pasquotank) talked up the bill. (Click for audio.)

  Well, there are 120 members in the House and member 120, Hackney, was not so enthusiastic:

  "On the other hand, I think it's obvious we don't have $100 million that's available for that subject right now."
  
  Click here for his whole answer.

• Gov. Easley wants to monkey about with the lottery distribution formula.

  One of the areas that he wants to change is formula by which proceeds are sent to different programs. Hackney says that proposal is "actively under discussion," mainly because of its impact on the budget.

  Click here for Hackney's full answer on the lottery.

• Finally, the House voted to apologize for the state's part in slavery this week.

  Some members said afterward that the General Assembly needed to follow up the apology with concrete acts of contrition - changing some state laws or funding certain programs. I asked Hackney about this:

  "The best thing we can do in that regard is improve our educational system."

  Click here for his full response.

Your local delegation has been playing hurt down here at the General Assembly this week:

• Rep. John Blust, Greensboro Republican, has been getting over a nasty cold.
• Sen. Stan Bingham, a Republican who represents Davidson County and parts of Guilford, has been in the hospital this week but is expected to return to action on Monday, according to an announcement on the Senate floor Thursday.
• Rep. Laura Wiley, High Point Republican, has been hobbling around on crutches all week after turning her ankle outside the legislative building.

Here's hoping everyone feels better soon.

I have a story in the paper today (Sunday) on the N.C. Legislative Black Caucus Foundation. From the lede:

RALEIGH - A nonprofit foundation run by African American legislators and designed to provide scholarships for minority students could be at odds with the spirit - if not the letter - of new state ethics and lobbying rules, good-government advocates and other lawmakers say.

The N. C. Legislative Black Caucus Foundation is associated with the General Assembly’s Legislative Black Caucus, which is made up of the legislature’s African American members - eight senators and 20 representatives - and headed by Rep. Alma Adams, a Greensboro Democrat.

Companies and others with interests pending before the General Assembly can give virtually unlimited donations to the group without disclosing them to the public. Good-government advocates worry this type of arrangement could allow special interests to curry undue favor with lawmakers.

Click here to read the whole story.

Some linkage and credit where credit is due:

• As I understand it, questions about the black caucus foundation have apparently floated about the General Assembly building for quite some time. I've only recently begun to hear about them from a couple of sources. WUNC's Laura Leslie was the first person that I know of to write about them, doing so in a blog post. (Click here to link.)

• Laura mainly was reporting a rumor that money had gone missing from the caucus foundation's coffers. The Charlotte Observer's Mark Johnson picked up that story and wrote it on Friday. (Registration may be required to follow the link.)

• Adams said that she doesn't think any money is missing. My story pulls on a different thread: how the caucus's foundation's as a potential nexus for money and politics.

• You can click here to read the caucus foundation's I990, which is referenced in the story.

So why does any of this matter?

As said in the story, the N.C. Legislative Black Caucus is a powerful voting block within the General Assembly. While they're not large enough to make anything happen on their own, they are large enough to keep controversial bills from moving. For example, one of the reasons that Rep. Hugh Holliman's smoking bill is having such a hard time moving is some serious dissention within the caucus.

Although allegiances can shift issues to issue, the normal configuration of the House on controversial vote has most, if not all, Republicans arrayed against the Democrats.

A bill needs 61 votes to pass the chamber. There are 68 Democrats and 20 members of the black caucus in the House. The math is pretty easy from there.

Now the caucus foundation is a separate 501(c)3, but its officers as listed on its 990 forms going back a few years are all legislators. And I heard from donors feel that the missions of providing scholarships and putting on the foundation's educational weekend are worthy, good things.

But it strains credulity to think that large corporations and interest groups - which already spend a lot on lobbying and influencing government through normal channels - don't think about the very strong connection between this nonprofit and a group of legislators when they donate.

So who is giving to the caucus foundation and why is of interest pretty much in the same way who gives to political campaigns is of interest. But in this case, those donors are rarely a matter of public record.

A few more points.

• I see the problems that could crop up in connection with the caucus foundation as very similar to those that could arise in connection with legal defense funds, which don't have to disclose their donors either.

• It is worth repeating that Rep. Alma Adams just took over this group in January and is in the position of figuring out what's what for the first time. She told me she has not been that involved with the foundation's operations in the past, and I'll take that on face value for the moment.

• No one has said that those involved with the caucus have done anything wrong vis-a-vise the foundation. What has been said very clearly is that there is a potential problem, especially under the state's new ethics guidelines.

• Given the recent history of House Speaker Jim Black and the 2005-2006 push for ethics reforms, you can pretty much bet any group connected to a group of legislators is going to get its share of scrutiny from now on.

If I had a big interest in coastal issues, this release from the state auditor's office would have my attention:

While the report found that the State acquired the Gallant’s Channel property well below its current fair market value, it also found that State Departments of Agriculture and Cultural Resources violated State regulations, and that the State Property Office failed to take title to Gallant’s Channel after the State provided funds for its purchase in 1997 and 1998. In addition, the State Property Office failed to inform the Council of State in 2006 of $190,000 in liens attached to the property.

“My biggest concerns are whether the State has failed to take title on other properties purchased with taxpayers’ money and who might be using those properties as collateral for new loans,” said State Auditor Leslie Merritt. “I think the State Property Office needs to go back and research all property acquisitions to resolve any unknown ownership issues, in addition to correcting the process moving forward,” added Merritt.

Click here for the full report.

Last week's big freeze didn't do any farmer any favors. And if you were one of the farmers who, like those mentioned in Lex's story, didn't have irrigation and lost your crop well, bad is bad.

But relative to other parts of the state Guilford and Rockingham counties were bright spots on the crop report, according to the Department of Agriculture.

Of the $112 million in estimated damage reported statewide, Guilford had just over $79,000 and Rockingham about $150,000. (Stokes County, according to the Ag folks, was one of the few counties that have reported no damage so far.)

The reason the Triad may have escaped relatively unscathed is a matter of crop choice, says Brian Long, a spokesman for the Ag Department.

Down in the Sandhills area, the peach crop got blasted. Out west, it was the Apple trees that were done in. And anyone growing grapes pretty much saw their crop get ravaged.

While the Triad has its share of some of those fruit crops, our farmers are still more into tobacco, soy beans and such, crops that aren't out yet.

"The Triad Region fared far better than most," Long said.

Still, that's small consolation to someone's whose blueberry patch won't produce enough "to make a cobbler out of them."

Still, expect to see state officials moving as fast as their farm-vote-loving-selves can move to get help to those affected.

The House remembered Benjamin S. Ruffin Jr., the former chairman of the UNC Board of Governors, Monday night.

Among those who remembered Ruffin was Rep. Earl Jones, a Greensboro Democrat.

"But more importantly, North Carolina Central University, and Ben was an integral part of this, it taught us that if you work hard, you study hard, and you be focused, not only could you rule the state of North Carolina but you could rule the world. So that is the seed that was planted in me in knowing and matriculating and discussing various issues and being around Ben Ruffin during my college years," Jones said.

Click here to listen to Jones' full remarks.

Remember the effort to outlaw the alcohol vaporization machines? You know, rather than waste all that time drinking you can just breath in your booze.

The Senate passed its bill last week.

The House passed its bill Monday night.

Click here to listen to that rather brief House debate. The vote was 110-0.

The House version is sponsored by Rep. Pryor Gibson, D-Anson. When I spoke to him before session this evening, he said that the Senate version will be the legislative vehicle that eventually becomes law. So yes, the House gets the chance to vote on this again.

But you may be wondering: what happens to the House bill once the Senate bill becomes law?

One possibility is it will wander over to the Senate and reside there, perhaps to die at the end of the 2008 session.

Or, it could get gutted and turned into something completely unrelated should the need arise to quickly pass some unexpected "good idea" that happened to miss the bill filing deadline. Only time will tell.

So Rep. Hugh Holliman's anti-smoking bill is back and once again passed the House J-I Committee. The broad strokes are these:

• It repeals state restrictions that have kept local governments from regulating smoking. If the bill passes, Guilford County or the City of Greensboro could enact smoking regulations tougher than state standards.

  This has been a thorn in the side of local governments for a while and politically gets the local government lobby behind the bill. (That's not a move to be discounted when trying to get a squeaker through the legislature.)

• It bans smoking in eating and lodging establishments.

  You would still be able to smoke in a bar if a bar limited its patrons to those over the age of 21. My reading of that is that the bar at the local Applebee's is probably going smoke free but the private club hole-in-the-wall can still let patrons light 'em up.

• It bans smoking in state government buildings. This measure has passed in other forms, so I guess Holliman was just trying to be comprehensive here. One might view this as an indicator that supporters think this measure has all the legs it needs to get done.

Debate was limited in committee today. Rep. Paul "Skip" Stam spoke out against the bill, making a few points.

"Since this only applies to lighted cigars and cigarettes, you'll want to buy stock in the smokeless tobacco products because that's what the kids are going to go to," he said.

He also worried that cities and towns would enact local ordinances that infringed on property owners' rights in different ways, so someone might have a freer hand in their business in one county and be more restricted the next county over.

"Are property rights any different one county to another, are the health risks? No.

Holliman opened the meeting by saying that the health risks of smoking were well known and kind of giving his standard stump on the bill. And he had an answer for Stam's property right's complaint.

"Obviously, Rep. Stam doesn't believe in local control," Holliman said. "I believe that's the appropriate way for this to be handled."

Next stop for the bill is the House floor.

Update: The N.C. chapter of Americans for Prosperity has been fighting against this bill every inch of the way. Click here for their release sent after today's committee decision.

From Gov. Mike Easley's office:

RALEIGH - Gov. Mike Easley today ordered all North Carolina state flags to be flown at half-staff in honor of the victims of the tragic shootings Monday at Virginia Tech University. In addition, all U.S. flags will be flown at half-staff at state buildings.

"We join those in Virginia and around the nation who mourn the loss of loved ones at Virginia Tech," said Easley. "Our thoughts and prayers go out to those who are suffering because of this senseless act of violence."

Flags will be flown at half-staff until sunset on Sunday, April 22.

This post is following up on a post and story that can be found by clicking here regarding the N.C. Legislative Black Caucus Foundation.

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

Click here for a story from today's paper regarding a call for the foundation to open its books.

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

I've been getting coached up on some of the State Board of Elections new online toys. One, that has behaved kind of clunky for me, lets you search for individual donations to and from PACs. After more than one person walking me through it, I've finally been able to get something useful out of the system.

So in fiddling with this thing today, I've discovered a bunch of contributions that the SBOE has coded as going to the "NC LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS" and other similar names. I have to assume that this is the Black Caucus foundation because the caucus' PAC has not been active since 1992. In fact, there are two letters (here and here) that speak to that point pretty directly. They are correspondence with former state Rep. Phil Baddour's campaign committee.

In other words, if the black caucus PAC was getting money, it was operating outside the law. And the donations I've found are consistent with contributions to the foundation, so let's just assume no one should be going to jail for failing to report hundreds of campaign contributions right at the moment.

Click here for one MS Excel spreadsheet and then click here for another. They show contributions to the black caucus foundation since 2000 that the SBOE database was willing to spit out last night. There could be more that I'm not capturing in either of my search methods. (In fact, I think I've picked up bits and pieces not in either of those sheets, but I'll leave them be for the moment.)

Now remember, the fuss here is that individuals, corporations and interest groups with axes to grind at the general assembly can give contributions to a nonprofit associated with a group of legislators pretty much undetected. And I strongly suspect that the folks who were smart enough to use money that didn't come from a campaign account were giving bigger dollars.

At any rate, some details and comments on the money sources found in that MS Excel file:

• The N.C. Beer and Wine Wholesalers, last contribution = $1,500 in 2005. If the name doesn't give it away, these folks keep a sharp eye on the state's alcohol laws, including how beer and wine are taxed. Their name has come up in connection to the ongoing investigation linked to former House Speaker Jim Black and co-speaker Richard Morgan. Bonus tidbit: They're campaign finance entry called this a "political contribution."

• Hackney for House, last contribution = $180 in 2003. This is the campaign committee for House Speaker Joe Hackney, who won his post this year over a challenge from former Speaker Dan Blue.

• NC Realtors PAC, last contribution = $1,000 in 2006. Being involved in real estate, the realtors have interest in everything from property taxes to deeds regulations. They are currently involved in an interesting campaign to kill proposed transfer taxes.

• NC Amusement Machine Association PAC, last contribution = $3,000 in 2004. This was the lobby for the video poker machine industry, which fought and fought to stay alive. They're due to be completely outlawed on July 1.

• Piedmont Triad Anesthesia PAC, last contribution = $500 in 2005. This is an anesthesiologist PAC. These doctors were in a running legislative battle with nurse anesthetists at the time. Background here.

• Committee to Elect Jim Black, last contribution = $1,000 in 2005. Former House Speaker Jim Black often turned to support among the Black Caucus to get legislation passed. Black is now facing jail time for accepting bribes from chiropractors.

Other big name names on the list include Sen. Kay Hagan of Greensboro, Ely Lilly, Gov. Mike Easley, Insurance Commissioner Jim Long and the state Democratic Party.

Now, is there anything wrong with any of these folks giving to the caucus foundation?

Nope, not in the least.

But did all those donations very definitely happen in a political context?

Yup, pretty much.

And there's the rub. If those donations are being given to influence legislators, even just buy good will, then I can line up a panel of campaign finance experts who will tell you that the public ought to know about them.

And the $10,000 question remains: who was giving - and maybe gaining influence - that we still don't know about?

It's great to see y'all at the General Assembly today for your "grass roots" lobbying day. The big red "Stop the N.C. Home Tax" stickers make you nice and easy to pick out.

But if y'all really want me to buy the "grass roots" uprising against taxes shtick, please have your members ditch their blackberries, $500 suits and embossed name tags at the door. Those accoutrements spell lobbyist want-to-be, not folksy and truly aggrieved.

That is all.

(Audio link below.)

Gov. Mike Easley was on a conference call this afternoon for Pre(K)Now, a group that lobbies for early childhood education programs.

Basically, the group was touting the fact that 29 governors labeled Pre-K programs as one of their top budget priorities.

Speaking of budget priorities, you may have heard the governor wants to shift how lottery money is raised and spent. He's doing that so he can add more Pre-K slots, something on the order of 20,000 over the next couple years.

So can he do that without the changes to the lottery he's asking for? After all, some legislators are leery of doing anything with the state-sponsored gambling program, for fear of incurring the ire of the voters or inadvertently giving opponents an opportunity to delete the darned thing.

Short answer: He says yes. If nothing else, he said, the money will have to come from the general fund (read: tax revenue).

Click here to listen to the somewhat fuller explanation.

So the state House has passed a bill to allow judges to carry concealed weapons in courthouses only two days after one of the worst U.S. campus shootings ever.

The vote was 91-20, but because of an objection to third reading - something that happens when someone REALLY doesn't like a bill - the honorables will hear it again tomorrow. Assuming it passes again, it will next head to the Senate.

Click here to check in on what our honorables had to say on the debate, including Rep. Earl Jones who offered, "I know criminals, I've worked with criminals."

You'll also here from Reps. John Blust, R-Guilford, Maggie Jeffus, D-Guilford, and Paul Luebke, D-Durham.

House Bill 1287 would require sheriff's to report to the SBI when they deny a permit to purchase a gun permit.

I wrote about a similar bill last year, which came under fire from gun rights activists.

Those activists weren't in evidence today, as the bill was voted out of the House Judiciary III Committee unanimously.

Rep. Maggie Jeffus, a Greensboro Democrat, is a prime sponsor of a bill but was not in the committee hearing today. Instead, it was run by Rep. Ronnie Sutton, a Robeson County Democrat.

"There's nothing technical about it. There's no hidden agenda," she said.

Click here to listen to him pitch the bill to the committee.

The bill heads next to the full House, which passed the bill last time around. It next heads to the Senate, which killed the measure last year.

Sen. Phil Berger gave a news conference today to talk about a bill, passed by a Senate committee, which would strip pension benefits from former lawmakers who get caught doing illegal stuff while in office.

He used the occasion to talk a little bit about nonprofits affiliated with legislators, such as the Legislative Black Caucus Foundation.

"It should concern all of us if legislators are soliciting funds for their control, something that they can control, from individuals that have business before the General Assembly," Berger said. "We need to know that that is occurring and we need to know who is contributing."

Click here to hear his full thoughts.

From Gov. Mike Easley's office:

RALEIGH - Gov. Mike Easley today declared Friday, April 20, a day of mourning in memory of the victims of the Virginia Tech shooting. He is asking all North Carolinians, as an expression of solidarity and respect, to observe a minute of silence at noon to honor those who were killed and injured during this week's tragedy.

"We mourn for the losses suffered by our neighbors in Virginia, share in their sorrow and offer our support," said Easley. "While it will take time for the wounds from this tragedy to heal, we are confident in the resilience of the university community and thankful for the outpouring of support for the injured and the families of those who lost loved ones."

Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine on Thursday encouraged other states to join with him in declaring April 20 a day of mourning for the victims of Monday's shootings at the campus in Blacksburg, Va., which left 32 dead. North Carolina is joining with at least 30 other states in the observance, according to the National Governors Association.

The pollsters over at Elon have been at it again and are ready to treat us to three days (today, Monday and Tuesday) of poll releases.

Today's (click here for the release and click here for more data) looks at likely contenders in the presidential and governor's races.

And the winner is ... I don't know.

No, really, more people answered "I don't know" or "Too early to tell" than actually choose a candidate. In fact, 87 percent of those who responded said they didn't have a choice in the governor's race.

The curious among you may remember polls by Civitas or PPP that seemed to show pretty firm indicators of support for one candidate over another.

So why is the Elon Poll so squishy?

A couple reasons:

• Elon merely asked who people would vote for, but did not give a list of choices. Other polls have given respondents a list of those who might be running to choose from.

• Elon did not poll "likely primary voters" but called a more general population-wide sample.

What does all this mean?

"What you're going to pick up framing it (the question) this way are the political elites," said Poll Director Hunter Bacot.

Those folks who had opinions in the Elon Poll were activists, gadflies or the politically engaged (probably campaign donors to boot).

The presidential campaign has made more noise, so you had more people give an answer. But over-all, the general population is not all that engaged in the 2008 campaign yet.

So this is what a Capital Beat podcast might sound like.

As an esteemed former editor of mine used to say, "Needs more beer."

For those of you who know the N+O's "Under the Dome" column, it now comes in blog form.

Elsewhere from around the state, here's what we scruffy press types have been up to:

• Charlotte Raleigh reporter Mark Johnson apologizes:

  I'll step up. I apologize for being a newspaper reporter, the kind of person George W. Bush once described as a "major league" unprintable word. Come to think of it, HE didn't apologize.

  I'd apologize too, except I'm so obnoxious newspapering is the only thing I'm fit to do.

• It's official, reports Jim Morrill: the Edwards campaign is now officially Dean 2004 Redux. Except, Dean's hair never came close to looking $400 worth of good.

• Scott Mooneyham writes a column worth reading for this line alone: "And with about as little fanfare, House Speaker Joe Hackney might as well have been Tony Soprano sending a message to Uncle Junior about moving in on the family business: fuhgetaboutit."

• Carter Wrenn says the GOP is lacking for killer instinct.

• Winston-Salem's Paul O'Connor: the accidental environmentalist.

• And Laura reveals that once you become a blogger, you will blog even on your off hours. It's a sickness. I'm thinking of starting a support group.

I somehow missed this item in my weekend reading:

The N.C. State Board of Elections will schedule a public hearing on the campaign finances of Rep. Thomas Wright, a Wilmington Democrat under investigation by the board since early March.

Board Chairman Larry Leake said Friday that he expects to hold a hearing by mid-May.

Update: And with remarkable (for them) alacrity, the state GOP weighs in, only a day or so behind the news:

It is becoming widely believed that it is just a matter of time before the North Carolina State Board of Elections will call for hearings into Rep. Wright's suspect activities. Rep. Wright, a close ally with former Democrat Speaker of the House Jim Black, may be one more in the long list of Democrat cronies who has broken North Carolina's law for personal gain and power.

So the Elon Poll is out with its Monday release of data. (Click here for the data.)

They polled on three broad topics: smoking, the transfer tax and the OLF. All of them are big issues on the political landscape right now:

• The smoking results make no sense to me. I don't understand how 62 percent of those surveyed can favor a statewide smoking ban and in the same poll favor letting businesses make the decision to ban smoking. Either an awful lot of people are unclear on the meaning of "a statewide law in North Carolina that would not allow smoking" or they thought they were being asked something different on the business question.

• On first blush, the N.C. Association of Realtors ought to be really happy with the transfer tax result. More than 68 percent of those surveyed either oppose or strongly oppose the transfer tax, which the realtors have been down here fighting tooth and nail.

  But wait a minute.

  Those numbers flip if those taking the survey are told the money raised would go for education - only 42 percent oppose at that point. (That's the old lottery strategy: win support by telling folks it's "for the children.")

  Funnier yet: When the survey takers said forget about this transfer tax thing, how do you feel about impact fees, opposition dropped below 40 percent. An impact fee is something that's charged each time a new housing unit (house/townhouse/etc...) is built in a county. In fact, more than half those survey said they would support impact fees.

  Such fees have been the subject of long-running disputes here in the state. Realtors and builders hate the idea, probably worse than they hate the transfer tax idea. That leads me to believe they should use caution if they whip out this poll as evidence for stopping the transfer tax. Because the next question after they do will inevitably be, "So, would you favor impact fees as the poll indicates?"

• On the Navy's proposed OLF, I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Fewer respondents knew about it the farther geographically the pollsters got from its proposed location in the east. And those in Western NC were more likely to say that Navy should be able to build the thing. I'm a little surprised that the strongest opposition number came from Central NC rather than the East, but those two figures are within the margin of error of one another.

Okay...how many times have I written, "remember Rep. Hugh Holliman's bill to ban smoking?"

I'm not going to go back and count, but do ya?

Know how it was supposed to get debated on the House floor Tuesday (4/24)?

Well, it ain't on the calendar.

The people who count the votes say it's close and want to give some legislators who have either been sick or out of town time to get back in the saddle.

Maybe Wednesday, maybe not.

If and when it gets here, this thing is shaping up to be one of the closest votes of this young legislative session. And then, should it pass the House, it gets to go be worked over by the Senate.

The honorables in the House are abuzz with the possibility of doing their budget next week. The schedule that's been floating about would have them doing day-time committee meetings on Monday and read the full budget bill in at their Monday night session.
That would give everyone a day or so to chew the thing over before debating and voting on Wednesday and Thursday next week.

I've heard some caution from folks involved in the process that any number of wrenches could fall into the works and mess up that schedule. But I can say there are some tired looking Appropriation Chairs wandering about.

And at a news conference this morning, the Republican leadership seemed to be girding themselves (and staking out their positions) in advance of running the budget next week.

A reminder of how the state budget process works for the uninitiated, after the jump:

The Republican leaders in the House and Senate held their weekly news conference Tuesday morning. In this edition, they obviously sharpening their knives to oppose pretty much any budget that House Democrats first, and then Senate Dems, are likely to come out with. A sampling:

• "These two temporary taxes do not need to be continued," said Rep. Paul "Skip" Stam, the House Republican leader. He was talking about the half percent "temporary" sales and income taxes adopted in 2001. They both dropped a quarter percent last year but Gov. Mike Easley and some House Dems have contemplated keeping the other quarter percent and dropping the "temporary."

  "I'm going to ask House Republicans to vote against any more extension of these taxes, even if those extensions are part of the budget," Stam said.

  Click here to listen to a longer take from Stam.

• Phil Berger played name that tax this morning.

  "The Democrats have come forward with what Ronald Reagan referred to as 'If it moves, tax it.' I guess the next would be the next step in that statement, 'If it continues to move, regulate it,'" Berger said. "We still have not had any serious effort on the part of the Democrats to address the spending side of the equation."

  Click here to listen to the full take from Berger.

The bill that would strip N.C. elected officials of retirement benefits if they get all corrupt in office passed the Senate today. The vote was 46-0 and the bill now goes to the House.

"This would say that those who violate the public trust would not benefit from the public service," said Sen. Tony Rand, the bill's sponsor. Yeah, they were thinking about folks like former Speaker Jim Black when they drafted this thing, although the bill is won't apply to him.

Click here to listen to the more amusing bit of the debate, including whether the statute would apply to certain acts of arson.

Once the governor signs it, North Carolina will have an official salute to the flag.

"If we can adopt an official state bullfrog we can certainly adopt an official salute to the North Carolina flag," said Rep. Melanie Wade Goodwin, a Democrat who represents Montgomery and Richmond counties.

Click here to listen to Goodwin explain the measure and execute the salute.

Rep. Hugh Holliman's anti-smoking bill is on tomorrow's House calendar. Stay tuned.

Former Rep. Michael Decker, who plead guilty to letting former Speaker Jim Black bribe him, will be in federal court Friday to hear how long the judge thinks he should spend in the pokey.

Judge James C. Dever III has made noises in a court filing like he might go hard on the disgraced legislator, who represented Forsyth County and, for part of his career, a slice of Guilford County.

Meanwhile, prosecutors say Decker has been a cooperative chap and asked the judge to go easy on him. Basically, from the court documents, it looks like the prosecutors in the case have Decker to thank for being able to land Black, who has now plead guilty to his own state and federal corruption charges.

(Click here for more background.)

Want to know more? How about some documents:

• Click here to read the criminal information against Decker, the report in which prosecutors explain what he did wrong. (Old, but good background.)

• Click here to read Dever's pre-sentencing order, which contains the phrase "contemplating variance above the guideline range." In other words, he's thinking about a harsher sentence.

• Click here to read Decker's response to that order, which basically says, and I paraphrase, Hey, I cooperated! Please don't throw the book at me.

• Click here to read prosecutors' first sentencing memo, which basically responds to the judge's request for more information and may explain - at least in part - why the IRS was involved in all this:

  "Based on the Government's review of copies of income tax returns provided by the defendant for the relevant tax years, the defendant did not report the $63,100 in checks and cash received from Speaker Black in exchange for his agreement to switch his political party and support Jim Black for Speaker."

  Exhibits to that filing: here, here and here.

• In a separate filing, prosecutors argue the court should go easy on Decker. Writing about Decker's help with Black's prosecution, prosecutors said:

  "In summary, Michael Decker substantially assisted in federal and state investigations and prosecutions of public investigation gained new momentum. Within two weeks, three chiropractors, who had been served with grand jury subpoenas, made known through counsel that they wished to cooperate with the investigation. The chiropractors were interviewed, pursuant to proffer agreements, and they disclosed cash payments to Jim Black. These disclosures, following further investigation, formed the basis of the federal charge against Jim Black, to which he pled guilty on February 15, 2007."

  You remember the chiropractors, don't you?

  Exhibits to that filing: here and here.

• And finally, prosecutors respond to Decker's pre-sentencing filing. (Pages got a bit shuffled on this one.)

  Exhibit here.

Bonus: Dever has issued a pre-sentencing order in Kevin Geddings' case. Geddings is a former lottery commissioner who failed to report his dealings with a potential lottery vendors. And, of course, there's ties to Black here. (Hat tip to Laura on the Geddings item.)

Rep. Lucy Allen held a news conference today to push the Land for Tomorrow bond. This is the $1 Billion (yes, with a B) bond package that would set aside land for agriculture and forests and what not.

(Click to enlarge.)

She enlisted help from the folks at Environment North Carolina, who put out a report showing that in the past 20 years North Carolina lost 2.37 million acres of crop and forest land.

In the eight-county triad area, that amount to 236,000 acres over that time.

Click here for the report.

Some audio and more thoughts:

• Click here to listen to Elizabeth Ouzts, of Environment North Carolina, summarize the report.

  "Development and loss of open space is happening most rapidly in our urban areas, but it's not confined to urban areas by any stretch," she said. More than a third of the land loss in the ENC report came from so-called rural counties.

• Click here to listen to Allen assess the bond's chances this year.

  "The conversation that's going on now really has increased the awareness of the need," Allen said.

• And click here to listen to Allen talk about how one might repay the bonds.

  "That has not been completely sorted out yet," she said.

That last bullet is the real sticking point. Lots of folks agree that we should set aside some land, but there's little agreement on how to go about paying for it.

One likely candidate, the transfer tax, is getting a lot of resistance from real estate types. But pretty much any method or raising money to do this is going to run into some resistance from someone.

Once the House budget comes out - maybe next week - we'll get a better sense for how well positioned these and other bonds are.

Ok, you know the drill. The bill to prohibit smoking in restaurants and let cities set their own smoking laws was on today's calendar.

And, despite some thought earlier it would get a vote today, Rep. Hugh Holliman has moved the legislation back to next week.

Why?

It's going to be a close vote and Holliman wants all hands on deck. He's missing some yes votes, so he's not running it.

"There's no reason I have to pull the trigger until I have the votes," Holliman said just before the House session gaveled in this afternoon.

He was asked whether he was considering another revision to the bill. A rumor has been floating about that they might weakening the restaurant provision.

"No," Holliman said. "I'm not changing the bill, at least not right now."

So, smoking fans, tune back in next week.

Rep. John Blust wandered into the press room here in the legislative building this afternoon, and he was pumped.

The Greensboro Republican had just seen his bill on zero based budgeting pass the Ways and Means Committee.

Zero-based budgeting is government speak for building a budget from the ground up rather than taking the prior year's budget and adding or subtracting a percentage. The bill would require that one third of the state government programs to get this kind of in-depth look every two years.

Why was this big for Blust? A couple reasons:

• This bill has been something he's pushed for a few years now. In fact, a lot of budget hawks of both political persuasions would like to see this done. But it's been largely ignored or killed out right.

• Blust has not had a lot of luck moving bills in recent years. Under House Speaker Jim Black, any measure that had his name on it as a primary sponsor was a dead duck.

Now, the zero-based budget bill will get heard by the Appropriations Committee before it is seen by the full House, so he's not all the way home yet.

"Now that it's moving, I've got to get the governor's office involved," Blust said.

For years, there has been Ayden Collard Festival.

Barring a veto, it will soon be designated as the state's official Collard Festival. The House passed the bill earlier this month, the Senate passed it today.

Click here for the Senate debate, including the recipe for a collard sandwich from Sen. Jean Preston. (About 4 minutes.)

Click here to read the bill.

Speaker Joe Hackney just gave his members a few notes on the calendar:

• The House will meet at noon on Thursday.
• The leadership is focused on getting the budget together.
• There "may or may not be" committee meetings and votes on the budget next week. A final decision on that, he said, would be made late Thursday or Friday.

Click here to hear it from the horse's mouth.

Update: Our friends at the Associated Press report:

BUDGET DELAYED: House Democratic leaders say the budget won't roll out as early as they had hoped. They had wanted to bring out the House's spending plan for the next two years Monday. Now House Speaker Joe Hackney said that won't happen in part because Democrats didn't want to rush and they would like another update on state tax figures after the April filing deadline. The senior budget-writer, Rep. Mickey Michaux, D-Durham, said it's unclear whether they'll vote on a budget later next week or the following week. The House and Senate are working to finalize and vote on a final budget before the current fiscal year ends June 30.

This Simon & Garfunkel moment brought to you by the House Appropriations process, which tapped the breaks Thursday afternoon.

Both Speaker Joe Hackney and House Majority Leader Rep. Hugh Holliman were talking earlier this afternoon like the House could roll out its budget Monday evening. Holliman said the hope was that the full bill could be distributed to members Monday evening at caucus meetings.

To get that done, the House Appropriations subcommittees were scheduled to meet late this afternoon. For the uninitiated, the Appropriations Committee divides its work between seven sub-committees. Each of those have to sign off - at least in theory - before the full budget bill can be presented.

While a couple subs, General Government and Transportation, had some sort of meeting, others were cancelled. For example, Rep. Verla Insko waved off the Health and Human Service subcommittee before they even started.

On their way out for the day, the big chairs (the highest ranking members of the Appropriations and Finance committees) said they were finished for the week.

Rep. Maggie Jeffus, an Appropriations chair, wouldn't say for absolute sure nothing would happen Friday, but she noted the committees were being released for members to go home.

"Once they've gone home, I don't know how we'd go about getting them back," Jeffus said.

The general impression seems to be that appropriators want more time to work and more time to see if any more money is going to be generated on the tax/revenue side of the equation.

As perilous as it may be to predict these things, the tentative schedule seems to run along the following:

• Democrats will caucus Monday evening to discuss their budget plans.
• Jeffus said that subcommittees could run on Tuesday.
• Given that schedule, it's would be possible to run the full budget bill later that week.

While all this caused a good deal of a stir among lobbyist and us scruffy press types today, this is only one step in a long hard slog. The governor has already released his work of fiction budget proposal, which the House has ignored. After the House gets done with its bill, the Senate will ignore their version and write their own. Then all three will get together and write the final bill.

Stay tuned.

The sentencing of former Rep. Michael Decker is in recess until 1:15 p.m.

Update: If you haven't seen our news frot: Decker got 48 months (four years) and a $50,000 fine. He will probably serve his time in Butner.

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

Update: Click here for audio of Decker talking to reporters outside the courthouse. It's a bit noisy because it was done near the street.

"There's no great reaction on my part, because I know I deserve it," Decker said.

Click here for audio of Decker's lawyer, David Freedman, talking with reporters.

"I do not believe there's any intention of appealing the sentence," Freedman said.

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

Click here for the AP bulletin and click here for a prior post that links to some of the court documents. (Update: Click here for a better AP update.)

As things sit right now, Judge James Dever says that Decker qualifies for the maximum possible sentence - 5 years - but has listened to arguments about revising that downward. The main argument there is that Decker came in and helped the government out, telling them things they otherwise would not have known and leading to a swift plea deal with former House Speaker Jim Black.

Some quotes from this morning's session:

Dever: "Mr. Decker and Mr. Black did not operate in shades of gray or merely out-maneuver their political opponents...Decker and Black duped all members of the General Assembly and swung control of the office of Speaker of the House to a corrupt official, Jim Black."

Dever: "One veteran legislator sold his office to another veteran legislature for cash and other benefits."

Assistant U.S. Attorney John Bruce: "We think the court should give him (Decker) credit for coming in early and disclosing things to the government that the government may never have found out."

Decker: "I just want to get this behind me. I'll have to live with it the rest of my life."

No cell phones are allowed in the federal courthouse, but we'll update as soon as we can once there is a verdict.

From the lede of a story I wrote for today's (Sunday's) Paper:

RALEIGH - The Haw River sweeps pollution from sewage plants and rainwater runoff in the Triad downstream to Jordan Lake near Raleigh. Critics say hundreds of millions in tax dollars will soon follow in an effort to clean the 26-year-old reservoir.

Environmental groups say the cost of proposed state regulations - about $70 million just to make called-for upgrades to Greensboro's sewage treatment plants - are worth it to restore the lake, a key drinking water supply, recreation area and home to wildlife.

Communities in Guilford, Rockingham, Alamance and Caswell counties are upstream from the lake, which regulators say is impaired by overdoses of nitrogen and phosphorus.

Click here to link to the full story.

I should acknowledge up front that while I have a fairly good layman's understanding of the science here, I'm by no means qualified to referee the fight and say which side has god or the numbers supporting their cause.

But I do know what it looks like when boys and girls start choosing up sides for a political street fight. And friends, if this were West Side Story, the Jets and Sharks would be snapping away right about now.

Some linkage to other resources on this topic:

• The Piedmont Triad Council of Governments doesn't seem to be a fan of the rules, but has a lot of information on their site.

• The Haw River Assembly is an environmental group who think the rules are needed.

• The state parks and rec division has lots of info on Jordan Lake, including a brief history.

• The Army Corps of Engineers has a big ol' picture of the dam on their site. More from the corps.

• I guess it shouldn't surprise me (but it did) that there's a Wikipedia page on the lake.

• The N.C. Division of Water Quality has lots of info on Jordan Lake, but you sort of have to hunt for it on their site. I'd look here for water quality data and here for some good info on nonpoint source pollution.

• The N.C. Conservation Network also has some Jordan Lake information.
  

As always, the comment lines are open.

There's an interesting document floating about Cap City today courtesy of the folks at Americans for Prosperity, a conservative foundation with funding in common to the John Locke, Civitas, etc...

It's a two page spreadsheet that appears to list the expansion items House budget writers are considering including in next year's budget. Part of it is scribbled on, like things might have been stricken from the list or reduced in their funding amount.

Click here for the first page, which has been scribbled upon. And then click here for the second page, which lacks scribbles.

I've spent a little bit of time today trying to establish the provenance of the document and can say that it appears genuine and jibes with what folks in the know have been saying about the budget. Still, not having it from the original source requires the caveat that it could be out of date or otherwise misleading. (I don't think so, otherwise it wouldn't be here.)

So this thing comes along after the House budget process hit the gas and then promptly hit the brakes at the end of last week. None of this stuff strikes me as deal breaker material, although one can well imagine the budget writers were hoping for more availability (read: better than expected tax revenue) so they could do these things AND something else.

A few notes about what the document shows mixed with what others have said about the budget process:

• It would appear that special projects, what some folks would derisively call pork, have returned to the budget, at least on the House side. (Remember, the Senate will get to compile its own budget after the House passes its version.) I don't think this is hugely surprising. The Associated Press wrote about this phenomena for the weekend papers.

• Special projects always get a good deal of attention but may get more this year. They were excluded from last year's budget and after the teapot museum the public is keenly aware of this spending.

• Not everything on that list is a special project or pork. Funds for the Rural Center or Smart Start or the Clean Water Management Trust fund, for example, don't really fit that definition.

• Everything on that list adds up to about $250 million for next year between recurring and nonrecurring spending. That sounds to me like a nice round target number.

• Some lines on this document are left blank. I don't know what that means.

• Rep. Alma Adams will tell you "every project is special to somebody. I think all projects are special projects." She favors these smaller grants to local nonprofits, but she did not sound completely confident that they'd make it into the final House version.

• What Speaker Joe Hackney has said is that special projects could be included but in a priority order. Ones with state-wide importance would get first crack, then regional projects, then local ones. The assumption here, I think, would be that by the time you'd get down to local projects, the budget writers would be out of money.

• The folks at AFP questioned whether the appropriators were really living up to their promise of more open government. They also likened all these projects to earmarks in the federal budget. "Add up all that money and there's your high risk pool," said Dallas Woodhouse, AFP's spokesman. He was referring to a program meant to get health insurance to those without.

• The AFP folks also complained to me that a lot of the items didn't have bill numbers attached to them. (At least if a bill's filed, you know where an item has come from, whose asking for it, etc...) That's weird, because several of the items without bill numbers attached have been filed as bills.

House budget writers say they hope to release the thing tomorrow (Tuesday) and run the bill through by the end of the week. But I wouldn't fall out of my chair if they move things a day or two.

Of local (Guilford County) note: The International Civil Rights Museum is on the list, as is the United Arts Council and money for the nanotechnology school.

Perhaps relevant to my last post, the Associated Press reports tonight:

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - Legislative leaders received more good news about North Carolina's financial picture Monday, learning the state has $260 million more than had been expected in its coffers from April tax filings.

The extra money means North Carolina has brought in $1.1 billion more than anticipated through the first 10 months of the fiscal year, giving budget-writers more breathing room in forming a two-year spending plan that begins July 1.

The honorables in the House debated creating a high risk insurance pool, which would help give health insurance to folks who don't have it.

Rep. Paul Stam, a Wake County Republican, offered an amendment that would shift how the pool would be funded. As the bill was drafted, it would be paid for by a per-head fee on those who hold health insurance. Stam wanted to fund the bill out of general tax revenue. It failed on a 49-64 vote.

The bill itself passed on a 102-12 vote. Because it involves the creation of a new fee and spending money, the House will have to vote on the bill again tomorrow.