News-Record.com

Congressman Howard Coble is among those calling for the Congress to confirm nominees to the Federal Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The nominees have generally been held up by Senate Democrats because they view the appointments - made by President Bush - as too ideologically committed in their rulings.

From a news release:

Today, 21 Republican Members of the U.S. House of Representatives called on Senate Democrats to schedule hearings for the Fourth Circuit judicial nominees. In a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, the House Members - who represent constituents in the Fourth Circuit - urged Senate Democrats to give the nominees an up-or-down vote.

According to the letter, the 21 Members believe that their constituents are paying the price for the judicial vacancies “as they see their cases delayed because there are not enough judges to handle the caseload on the Fourth Circuit.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has a current vacancy rate of 33 percent; the nonpartisan Judicial Conference has found three of these vacancies to be "judicial emergencies." One of the seats, based in North Carolina, has been vacant for over 13 years.

Statements from several of the Members are below:

[snip]

Representative Howard Coble (R-NC): "Chief Judge Robert Conrad, who was nominated to fill the vacancy in North Carolina, is a longtime friend of mine and extremely qualified to fill this position. To leave a seat vacant for more than 5,000 days is a travesty. The people of North Carolina and the Fourth Circuit deserve better. I urge the Senate to move on this and other vacancies expeditiously."

Other Republicans also weighed in:

Representative Walter Jones (R-NC): "Many people in North Carolina rely on our federal courts, yet the Fourth Circuit seat based in North Carolina has been vacant for more than 5,000 days. The Senate’s refusal to hold a vote on President Bush’s four nominees to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is completely unacceptable. Due to the Senate’s inaction, our citizens continue to suffer as cases get delayed because there are not enough judges to handle the Fourth Circuit caseload. My constituents deserve better."

Representative Patrick McHenry (R-NC): "By playing partisan politics with the judiciary, Senate Democrats are depriving the people of the Fourth Circuit their right to justice. They need to stop playing games and do their jobs."

Representative Sue Myrick (R-NC): "The people in North Carolina, who are served by the Fourth Circuit, deserve better. We need these judicial spots filled so that people can get justice; not a waiting line because we don't have enough judges to hear the cases."

Last year I wrote a couple times (here and here) about a scrape over the state's agricultural research stations. From one story:

But a proposal by state senators to transfer management of the 18 research stations from the Department of Agriculture to N.C. State has sparked an argument involving land conservation, government efficiency and the state’s $20 billion budget.

The provision was eventually booted from the budget, but is now apparently under study by the legislature's professional research staff. In particular, a new division designed to root out waste has taken aim. From columnist Scott Mooneyham:

A draft report already prepared by the division recommends closing seven of the 18 stations, selling the land for an estimated $54.7 million and generating $3.9 million in annual savings. The remaining stations would be operated by N.C. State and N.C. A&T State universities. Currently, the state Department of Agriculture operates most the stations.

The seven stations that would be closed encompass nearly 6,900 acres and have 55 full-time employees.

One key finding in the report: Only a couple of other states operate more agriculture research stations than North Carolina; California and Texas have fewer.

[snip]

But the issue is bigger than just the consolidation of agricultural research stations.

These recommendations are really a test case for this notion that the legislature can set aside cronyism and turf protection and the pork barrel mentality. Will these analysts provide independent, objective assessments that are heeded by legislators, or will they ultimately serve up justification for the political whims of their political masters?

Click here to read the whole column.

From today's paper: the race for the Democratic presidential nominations is affecting races lower down on both the Dem and GOP ballots.

Also: more hot air over the gas tax.

Meanwhile, early voting ended in Guilford County Saturday and Lorraine Ahearn ponders race and politics.

And in case you missed it, Obama and Clinton chatted up Dems in Raleigh on Friday night.

Still chewing over the primary? You can listen to editorial writers Doug Clark and Allen Johnson, columnist Jeri Rowe and staff writer Mark Binker chew over Guilford County and national primary results by clicking right here.

The podcast starts with a couple voices from election night: State Sen. Kay Hagan and Sheriff BJ Barnes. We get to talking after those clips and it takes us about 2 minutes to get really warmed up.

All indications are that Gov. Mike Easley will introduce his budget early next week, probably Monday. He gave folks a preview today by way of a news release. He focused on $31 million in additional spending for "those who often are overlooked by society but are the most in need."

Among the items:

• * $10.4 million to match federal child health insurance funding to serve an additional 10,683 children in need.
• * $9 million in federal block grant dollars to take 1,110 children off child care waiting lists.
• * $8.3 million to increase foster care and adoption payments to encourage quality care for more children.

Click here to read the whole thing.

Gov. Mike Easley gave an early look at his budget by way of a news release last week.

(Click here for the legislative preview story from the dead tree edition.)

(Update: Other legislative/budget previews from Charlotte, Raleigh and Fayetteville.)

Easley's budget advisor Dan Gerlach sat down with some of us scruffy media types on Friday to give a further glimpse. As he described it, Easley's budget would have three themes:

• * providing help to the less fortunate - "the least of these" in the in vogue parlance of Raleigh.
• * education. Expect Easley to make the case that his budget raises teacher salaries to the national average.
• * fiscal responsibility. You'll see him put more money in the rainy day fund and project a budget surplus at the end of the fiscal year. Basically, he aims to leave the next governor in better financial shape that was the case in 2000 when he took office.

For those who need it, here's the 90-second budget primer: The state writes a two-year budget in odd-number years. So in 2007, the state wrote a $20.7 billion budget. In even number years, the General Assembly gets to "tweak" the budget, making adjustments, adding new programs, perhaps phasing in or out a tax. Actually, the "tweak" can end up looking like a wholesale rewrite. This year, because of a cruddy economy, tax revenues are down and what gets done this summer is likely to be more in the mold of a tweak - if you can call a few-hundred-million-bucks a tweak.

At any rate, the tweaking begins on Monday when Gov. Mike Easley puts his budget on the table. Then the House goes to work, with the formal "short session" beginning on Tuesday. After the House writes its budget version, the Senate gets a crack. And finally, the House, Senate and governor sit down to negotiate a tax and spending plan that makes almost nobody completely happy.

One last note: technically, there's a budget in place until June 30, 2009 and there aren't any taxes expiring. Therefore, we don't have the prospect this summer of getting into one of those fabulous showdowns where everyone threatens to shut down state government and we have continuing resolutions and there's all that gnashing of teeth. However, the cities and counties who all have to have their budgets done by July 1 and depend a great deal on the state budget, would really like things to wrap up ASAP.

So what does the governor have in the offing? We'll find out in detail at 11 a.m. Monday. However, here are the notes from Gerlach's Friday briefing, in no particular order:

• * The overall budget will go up 4 percent, about half of the increase from the year before.
• * Even though the budget overall will increase, Gerlach said there will be "substantial" cuts in some departments. The reason for this is that the governor wants to do some things - like expand teacher pay - that will cost money. But tax revenues haven't grown fast enough to keep everything in state government as it is and do the expansions.
• * The cuts will not affect classrooms or social services, Gerlach said.
• * Agencies will be given some specific marching orders and in other cases just general guidelines on what to pare back.
• * It is business taxes and sales taxes that are projected to fall off the most.
• * Enrollment is expected to be up in public schools, universities and community colleges. Community college enrollment is particularly seen to be "spiking."
• * The governor will propose no changes to lottery distribution or policy.
• * There will be more funding for support programs that serve military families.
• * There will be a comprehensive package of mental health reforms and funding proposed. In addition to increases, the governor's budget anticipates reducing Medicaid funding for community support programs.
• * For years the state has transferred money from the Highway Transportation Trust Fund to the general fund, basically subsidizing state spending on education and social programs. With the highway fund in dire straights, the General Assembly last year said they were going to stop those transfers. The governor's budget will begin the phase out, meaning less money will go from the trust fund to the general fund this year. Gerlach did not say how much.
• * The governor will designate money that stays in the trust fund to build either urban loops or to jump start construction by the turnpike authority (read: build toll roads).
• * The governor does not plan to offer transportation or other big bond package.
• * There will be some borrowing in the governor's budget, all in non-voter-approved mechanisms and all aimed at finishing projects in process. ("We're trying to wrap things up and not start obligating future governors and legislatures to costs," Gerlach said.)
• * Teacher pay will go to the national average. State employees and community college workers will get pay raises - though it didn't sound like they would be as big.
• * There will be more staff for probation and parole.
• * The governor will propose a sales tax holiday for October on energy efficient appliances.

Now remember, none of this makes it into the final budget with out the legislature sticking it in there. Easley has had a fairly good record of getting his big ticket items in the final budget, but the tighter money gets the harder the honorables tend to scrap - and this year money seems to be on the tight side.

I'll have my own session/budget preview story up online in the morning (I think). (Click here for that.) For now, click on the jump for the Associated Press' budget preview.

Oh, woe is us, the Jordan Lake Rules are at hand.

Eh, not so much.

I've written about these things before (here / here / here / here) but it for those coming late to the story:

The Haw River sweeps through the Triad, taking leftovers from storm water runoff, sewage plants, bits of farm fertilizer, etc... with it. At the end of its run, the Haw feeds into the southern end of Jordan Lake.

Jordan Lake, which serves as a water supply in the Triangle area, has problems with pollution in the form of too much nitrogen and phosphorus that cause algae blooms and other problems.

So on Friday, the Environmental Review Commission approved new rules that would help curb pollution in the Haw River arm. From a news release sent out by DENR:

The approved nutrient management strategy is comprised of 11 rules that define the strategy’s goals and set requirements for nutrient management, agriculture, wastewater discharges and storm water management for new and existing development and government entities. The rules also address buffer protection and mitigation for buffer impacts and provide criteria for trading nutrient reduction requirements among different sources of nutrients to achieve more cost effective options. The goals for reducing nutrients are based on nutrient loads entering Jordan Lake between 1997 and 2001.

That all sounds fine and dandy, but there's significant cost attached to accomplishing all of that. Ballpark estimates say the City of Greensboro will spend a minimum of $70 million just to upgrade sewage plants. And the city could be forced to tear into existing neighborhoods to create storm water controls and developers are none to happy about the idea of doing all this either.

So are these rules going into effect right away? No.

Next stop is the Rules Review Commission, which will knock things about and then almost certainly enough people will write protest letters to knock things back to the General Assembly.

And because of all the moving pieces involved, most folks don't think the legislature is going to get it back before 2009. And once it's back in the General Assembly, expect both sides to release all their various hounds for a big ol' legislative showdown. My guess is we're looking at 11-monhts minimum before we know what the outcome of this will be.

Apropos of nothing 'round here, but:

Go Jays! Beat Navy!

So Gov. Mike Easley released his budget Monday and - surprise! - he wants to raise liquor and cigarette taxes.

The reason he gave for the sin tax hikes were:

• * the cigarette taxes were needed to pay for teacher raises.
  
• * the liquor taxes were needed to pay for mental health improvements.

Click here to listen to Easley talk about how he arrived at asking for the two taxes.

Okay...let's get it out of our systems: Yes, if enacted, teachers would have a conflict of interest when they told their students not to smoke. And sure, it's a little funny that alcohol taxes would fund mental health services, which include substance abuse services.

But seriously folks: Easley has sold them right. Who is going to argue that they can't afford to pay a few more cents for beer if it's going to help the mentally ill, right? And you sort of have a choice as to whether to smoke or drink, don't you?

Still, the smart money around Jones Street has been saying the taxes will have a hard time getting through the General Assembly. After chatting with folks all day, here is the short list of things that argue against the taxes getting into the final budget:

• * Legislators don't have a real good mechanism for earmarking revenue (see: Lottery). That means money from the taxes will just get dumped into the general fund. That sort of deconstructs the won't-someone-please-think-of-the-children/less fortunate argument for levying them.

• * Budget leaders aren't looking for a fight. And new taxes of any sort mean a fight will be a brewing. No, it doesn't matter that they're sin taxes. The honorables want this train to pull into the station on time (July 1) and that might not happen if there's a tax fight. (House Speaker Joe Hackney and Majority Leader Hugh Holliman both made variations of this point today.)

  Click here to listen to Hackney chat with reporters about the political realities of the taxes, as well as thoughts on other parts of the budget proposal.

• * Cigarette taxes mean taking on the tobacco industry. No, tobacco isn't king anymore, but it still knows its way around court. Just think about Lorillard in Guilford County, Reynolds in Forsyth County and tobacco farms throughout the state and you get an idea of the number of legislators with a dog in that fight.

• * You think the tobacco industry has some political clout? Go check your favorite politician's campaign finance report for beer and wine money, particularly money from wholesalers.

• * Easley designated his tobacco tax for education. A couple folks who would ordinarily like to do tobacco taxes say they're more logically apportioned to health programs. So Easley's proposal didn't pick up help from some of this idea's most likely supporters.

• * There secondary constituencies that would oppose the increases, such as retailers who sell cigarettes and alcohol.

• * It's an election year. People are already hacked off about gas prices. Voters across the state have just shot down sales taxes. You do the math.

• * There are a couple other places to get the money. Just as an example, the legislature could decide not to put $61 million into the rainy day fund and just about cover the mental health programs Easley wanted to fund.

Does this mean they absolutely won't be in the final budget? No. But they face some serious handicaps. More on this in Tuesday's paper.