News-Record.com

Gov. Mike Easley has a presser to talk about home foreclosures today, backing a bill that will help people in trouble with sub-prime mortgages stay in their homes. (You can click here to read that press release.)

More fun was the off-topic Q & A portion which covered two topics: his wife's travel habits and the budget.

He got a little testy with reporters asking about the travel expenses, saying that the trips have value and help recruit foreign travelers and investment to North Carolina. Click here to listen to some of that. (The audio is audible although not the best because my recorder wasn't mic'd up properly.)

On the budget, Easley said he didn't want to get into what would or would not prompt a veto. But then he said, "Certainly, very troublesome to me are the tax cuts for the wealthy." Easley's was referring there, I believe, to a proposed elimination of the gift tax. Click here to listen to two questions in that arena.

House Speaker Joe Hackney and Senate Pro Tempore Marc Basnight spent a couple hours with each other and budget staff this evening. I was told going in that they were going to work on the education and capital sections of the budget, which is where House and Senate negotiators have their biggest differences. (For those coming late to this party, the House and Senate and Governor's office are in the last stages of negotiating an update to the state's $21.4 billion budget.)

Hackney emerged from that meeting at 7 p.m. and I asked if there was anything new with the budget.

"No, not really. We're just tossing around some scenarios," he said. I asked if there was going to be a deal worked out, even in principle, tonight.

"No."

Basnight was a little more effusive on his way down to the legislative building's garage.

"We have to reduce the budget by $45 million in recurring and $70 million one time," he said. "So you can see, we're given a very enormous task."

The state budget is funded by two pots of money: recurring revenue such as tax collections that come in every year and one-time money that is essentially windfalls from under-spending or legal settlements. Recurring money is more valuable in legislative land because it can be used for things like salaries, but reductions in either.

Of interest here: the governor has been asking the legislature to revise down the revenue estimates in just this way. Legislators had been resisting that because less money to spend makes a deal all that much harder to reach.

But as Easley said earlier today, the numbers are what the numbers are.

"My biggest concern here is revenues ... the budget has to be balanced. I can't sign an unbalanced budget, I want to make that clear to everybody."

Basnight said that the professional staff had been instructed to work on some compromises tonight and that he and the Speaker would meet again in the morning.

It sounds like they're going to look for ways to save money that don't throw the meat of the agreement out of whack. Easley would like them to not do about $50 million in tax cuts the two chambers have agreeed to, but I'm pretty sure some members would scream about whacking what few tax cuts can be offered up this election year.

At any rate, there's no agreement tonight. Maybe tomorrow.

Planning-wise, Rep. Hugh Holliman told me earlier that if the budget is read-in (legislative talk for formally introduced) Wednesday evening that we may see it debated and voted on Thursday and then again 12:01 a.m. Friday morning, at least on the House side.

For those following the video poker issue here's where things stand as of Tuesday evening:

It has passed the House Judiciary I Committee on a unanimous vote. House leaders have decided it must go through the Finance Committee. My guess is they are thinking the bill is going to be a bit controversial and want to make sure it has a fiscal note. (Bills that spend or potentially spend money need to have cost estimates attached to them, or certain members of the House and Senate can kill them by fiat by pointing out that said cost estimate has not been done. Running a bill through Finance can sometimes assuage the worries of money-minded folks and seems to get a fiscal note done as a byproduct.)

I have heard from members that there is more than one lobbyist looking at this bill and I'm told by Rep. Hugh Holliman that some with an interest in the video slot devices complained they didn't have a chance to get heard on the bill. Apparently these folks will get a chance in Finance.

I don't know when that Finance hearing will be. From what I can gather, this isn't in the top tier of bills that the House Democrats will push to get done, but it's considered fairly important and they'll make a go at getting it over the Senate before the end of the legislative session.

A couple folks have called frustrated they can't find the video slot language online. That's because the House gutted a senate bill and substituted what was there. Take a look at the latest edition of S 180 now and you should be able to see what we're talking about.

The bill creates two new offenses: one for possessing video slot machines and another for promoting and selling the service. (Basically, it's aimed at getting you whether you're in retail or wholesale.) It does not criminalize the act of playing one of these machines. And it goes into effect on Dec. 1, so presumably people would have time to cash out and get rid of them.

From what I've been able to discern, House leaders aren't interested in having anything that resembles video poker hanging about the state. Part of this, I'm sure, has to do with hangover from the Jim Black era, when video poker was involved in one of many scandals culminated in the former House Speaker go to jail.

Some quotes from today's Judiciary I hearing:

"I would characterize this as whack-a-mole," said Rep. Ray Rapp, a Madison County Democrat. "Just when we think we've gotten it taken care of in terms of video poker and gaming, it pops up again."

.....

"When I met them a couple months ago, I'll be honest with you, I first thought these people are video poker reincarnated. And they're not, they just got unlucky," said Theresa Kostrzewa, a lobbyist for Hest Technology, who asked the committee to delay making a decision on the bill. Video poker was part of a string of scandals that plagued former House Speaker Jim Black, who was later convicted on corruption charges.

"I told them, you're going to be guilty by association, but I know you're no breaking the video poker law," Kostrzewa said. "They're playing a legal sweepstakes game."

Sunday night: Rep. Hugh Holliman, majority leader and one of the House budget negotiators says that enrolment growth in the UNC system is a major difference between the House and Senate.

Monday night: Rep. Mickey Michaux, the senior budget chair in the House, says that enrolment growth in the UNC system is a major difference between the House and Senate.

Wednesday, about 45 minutes ago: House Speaker Joe Hackney says, "The enrolment hasn't been an issue for at least a week."

I'm so confused.

For those following the video slot discussion: The bill has been put off until Monday's floor calendar.

Last night, Rep. Hugh Holliman and others I spoke with were saying the bill needed to go to Finance. At some point since then, a decision was made that the thing could hit the floor as is. Then someone realized that they didn't have an incarceration note, something that accounts for the cost of jailing folks who are prosecuted under the new crimes the law would create. To allow time for that report to be generated, it is put off until next week.

Confused? Good. So were lots of other people following the bill today.

It was gently suggested to me today that this could have been a lottery-initiated action. The state-sanctioned gambling enterprise, the logic goes, would want to eliminate any potential competition.

"We were not involved in the bill. We didn't even know about it," said Alice Garland, a lobbyist for the lottery.

Garland said that the lottery has not studied if or how much money they might lose to video slots and pointed out that sales of lottery tickets jumped last year to $1.087 billion.

"We're aware of these games but we just haven't gotten involved at all," she continued. "Our focus is on increasing our own sales."

Speaker Joe Hackney spoke a few minutes ago to the full House, which is holding session this afternoon.

"With respect to the budget ... we have reached agreement with the Senate on almost everything. There are a few items remaining. It is hoped that will be concluded by the end of the day."

Click here for more from the AP.

If all that holds, look for a budget vote next week. After that, the race to adjournment will begin.

Click here to listen to Sen. Phil Berger, Republican of Rockingham, reflect on the Senate floor today about the meaning of the nation's birthday. He concludes:

"From then until today, we have struggled to live up to those principles. And in many ways we have fallen short. In many ways, we disagree on details. But as we go forward to picnics, parades, time with our families, and as we celebrate, we can all agree that we should continue to strive to fulfill the promise of that summer day in 1776."

Members have been signing off on the conference report for the budget this afternoon. Although I'm told there are still a few remaining straggling items, the compromise is largely brokered.

Rep. Paul Luebke, a chairman of the House Finance Committee, told reporters about the finance package. The state will eliminate the gift tax and raise the Earned Income Tax Credit to 5 percent starting in the 2010 tax year. Essentially, those two items were originally due to go into affect for the 2009 tax year, but the two sides put them off in order to ensure the budget doesn't go into deficit. Delaying the two tax cuts a year will create $30 million in budget availability.

Speaker Joe Hackney and Senate Leader Marc Basnight are due to brief reporters at 4:15 p.m.

House Speaker Joe Hackney and Senate leader Marc Basnight briefed reporters on the budget deal the two chambers brokered earlier today. Here is video of their opening remarks.

Basnight talked about the $90 million set aside for teacher bonuses - causing Hackney to chuckle - and Hackney discussed funds for the mental health system:

Gov. Mike Easley had asked for $45 million in recurring cuts to the budget, trimming from spending targets that had been in place a month ago. The legislature came up with $30 million by delaying two tax cuts - one the elimination of the gift tax and the other an expansion of the EITC.

Hackney and Basnight said that the $45 million in cuts were unnecessary but that they were trying to make Easley happy. Except they came $15 million short of what Easley wanted. Here's the discussion on that piece:

Teachers got a 3 percent average raise in the budget. Teachers at the lowest three rungs of the salary scale will get a $1,100 bump in salary. Teacher salaries have been been a major emphasis for Easley and the legislature didn't give him exactly what he asked for. Also, fuel costs have been a concern. More on that:

The budget will authorize about $850 million in borrowing over the next four years and spend another $109 million in cash to build buildings around the state. Much of that will go toward the university system. If you're into public financing discussion, this is the video for you:

Two terms you may or may not know from that discussion:

COPS: Certificates of Participation. Government borrowing that does not require voter approval.

2/3 Bonds: When a government in North Carolina pays back a bond, it can (within two years) go out and borrow again 2/3 (two-thirds) of the amount it has repaid.

Word comes from Gerry Cohen that the budget bill is now online. (Very large PDF.) The money report (the other half that has a lot of the information in terms of spending increases and cuts) should be online sometime today, he says.

Also: Here's my early budget story from today's paper.

Happy 4th of July.

I can add very little to what is being written and said about Jesse Helms, the former U.S. Senator from North Carolina who died today. I met him exactly once when I was at the very beginning of my career in Washington and the interaction lasted no longer than the subway ride from one of the Senate office buildings to the Capitol. I can say that growing up in Maryland, Jesse Helms is about all I knew of North Carolina politics. By the time I moved to North Carolina, Helms was serving the last year of his last term as Senator.

My boss has this remembrance:

Sometimes things in the state budget just catch my attention. They don't have to be earth shattering or all that expensive, just odd bits included in the major statement of fiscal policy statement for the year. To wit:

• * For those who remember Gov. Mike Easley's proposal to have a sales tax holiday for Energy Star rated appliances, it's in the final budget. It will be in effect from "12:01 A.M. on the first Friday of November and 11:59 P.M. the following Sunday." Qualified items include Clothes washers, Freezers and refrigerators, Central air conditioners and room air conditioners, Air-source heat pumps and geothermal heat pumps, Ceiling fans, Dehumidifiers and Programmable thermostats. The exemption doesn't apply to products purchased by a business or rentals.

• * The Lorax got his: There is a $1 million per year earmark over the next five years in the DOT budget for planting seedlings along the roads. "The Department shall consult with and use the expertise of the United States Forest Service and the Division of Forest Resources of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources in the development and implementation of the plan. The plan shall include the planting of trees, shrubs, and other vegetation that (i) are native to the various regions and areas of the State in which they are being planted, (ii) will provide clean air and otherwise benefit the State's environment, (iii) are appropriately placed for the safety of those traveling on the roads and highways, and (iv) reduce the costs of mowing and maintaining the rights-of-way along the State's roads and highways."

• * The problems associated with illegal immigration have been at the center of several political races this year, including the U.S. Senate race between Republican Elizabeth Dole and Democrat Kay Hagan. And there is, in the budget, at least two mentions of immigration.

  One is in the section expanding Health Choice/Kids Care, the state/federal health insurance program for children. One of the enrolment requirements is that a child must "Be a resident of this State, meet applicable federal citizenship and immigration requirements, and be eligible under federal law."
  
  The second immigration mention is in a section that concerns money the state is spending to help sheriffs participating in the 287(g) program, the federal partnership that allows local law enforcement to identify and help deport illegal immigrants. The honorables have ordered a report on how those funds are used "Recommendations on ways that federal, State, and local resources can be used to further improve the effectiveness of the Illegal Immigration Project and other immigration enforcement initiatives."

• * Back when the Senate wrote its budget, Pro Tempore Marc Basnight inserted a section that would require the state to use biodegradable water bottles. That appears to have been toned down to a study that requires "The University of North Carolina, in collaboration with the Division of Waste Management of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources shall study the current state, usage, and recycling of plastics (including, but not limited to, beverage bottles and plastic bags) in North Carolina." Note that plastic bags were a concern for Rep. Pricey Harrison.

My colleague Taft Wireback has been writing about the tires again:

An effort to reform North Carolina's method of buying retreaded tires is moving haltingly through the General Assembly amid disagreement over techniques used by the current contract holder.

A bill introduced by state Rep. Nelson Cole of Rockingham County would block the state from paying White's Tire Service of Wilson for controversial "spot repairs" to about $3.4 million a year in recycled tires.

Cole's bill also bans removing the original manufacturer's trademark and other identification from retreaded tires. It's a step White calls critical to its process, but critics say it is unnecessary and voids important warranties.

"Being unable to readily identify tires that might be involved in a recall just doesn’t make sense," said Cole, a retired auto dealer and vice chairman of the House Transportation Committee. "Granted, their tire looks better, but I don't know what that has to do with safety or saving money."

Forgive the cliché, but this issue has been going around and around the General Assembly all session long. It's unclear whether it will be resolved before the honorables make tracks out of town.

Cross-posted from Decision 2008.

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

I wrote back in February is the about a Bob Crumley commercial that seemed as if it might have some campaign implications.

Crumley is a Republican Greensboro-area lawyer running for Attorney General against Roy Cooper, the Democratic incumbent.

I noticed this weekend that Crumley is running a new ad. The tag line refers people to his law firm's web page. But you tell me: does the ad seem more like a commercial one might use in a campaign?

Any state budget can be read on a couple of levels. One, of course, involves the statewide spending priorities and policies it sets. Another way, of course, is to see what's in it for your parochial interests.

Because funds were limited this year, the number of "special projects," money for nonprofits and projects local to one community or another, was limited. Still, you don't have to look all that hard to find funding of particular interest to certain communities.

Looking for things of interest to Greensboro and the Triad, here's my running list (after the jump):

From a story in Sunday's paper:

A measure aimed at preventing shootings like the one that claimed more than 30 lives at Virginia Tech in 2007 has sat in a legislative committee but will move forward before the end of the year, its sponsor said.

“If your mental condition has deteriorated to the point where you have to be ordered into treatment, society has a right to protect itself,” said Sen. Tony Rand, a Fayetteville Democrat and majority leader in the Senate.

The bill, which is backed by Attorney General Roy Cooper, has cleared a Judiciary Committee but has sat in Senate Appropriations since June 12.

Rand said that senators have been distracted trying to compile the state’s $21.3 billion budget but that he would work to get it passed before the General Assembly adjourns, likely later this month.

Under the bill, if a court orders someone into mental treatment, that person will be entered into a nationwide database used for criminal records checks. That person would be unable to buy a gun legally in North Carolina.

Click here for the whole story.

The bill, (S2081) is opposed by Grass Roots North Carolina, a gun owner's rights group. My suspicion is you will almost certainly see it move out of the Senate in the next week, but I don't have a good read on what its prospects may be in the House.

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 former U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms who passed away on July 4. Flags will be flown at half-staff from Monday July 7 until sunset on Tuesday July 8.

In addition, a condolence book will be available for North Carolinians to sign in memory of Helms, who represented North Carolina in the Senate from 1973 to 2003. Citizens can sign the book from Monday morning through the close of business on Tuesday. The condolence book
will be sent to the Jesse Helms Center at Wingate University.

I've asked where the condolence book will be, but don't know the answer yet.

Update: AP says the book will be available in the state Capitol.

The U.S. Senate race here in North Carolina officially has the third with the addition of Libertarian Chris Cole.

Cross-posted from Decision 2008.

-=-=-=-=-

Update: From a story in today's paper:

"If I had never done advertising before and all of a sudden came up with television ads, you might have an argument there," Crumley said. "But I'm not doing anything that I didn't do before."

[snip]

"You can't watch that thing without thinking it's an ad for someone running for office," said Bob Phillips, who heads the North Carolina branch of Common Cause, a public-interest advocacy group that has lobbied for more stringent campaign finance rules.

Click here for the whole thing.

-=-=-=-=-=-

Related to Bob Crumley's image ad, the state Democratic Party has filed a complaint against Crumley. The complaint, filed with the SBOE and signed by the party's executive director, reads in part:

Without disclosure of who is paying for the advertisements and how much is being spent, voters will have no information regarding the sponsorship of this apparent effort to influence the 2008 election.

Clearly, the sponsoring entity is violating the law, and I ask that the Board investigate these advertisements and any other communications for which disclosure is required.

Click here for the full letter.

More in tomorrow's paper.

For those who haven't seen it, here's the ad:

The $21.3 billion state budget passed both the House and Senate Monday night. They'll both give it a final vote Tuesday before sending it on to the governor.

Local votes in the House include:

For: Democrats Alma Adams, Pricey Harrison, Maggie Jeffus and Earl Jones of Greensboro, Nelson Cole of Rockingham County, Hugh Holliman of Davidson County. Republicans Harold Brubaker and Pat Hurley of Randolph, Laura Wiley of High Point.

Against: Republicans John Blust of Greensboro, Bryan Holloway of Randolph and Stokes.

Total vote: 97-21 with one excused vote (Paul "Skip" Stam of Wake County) and one member not voting (Speaker Joe Hackney).

Local votes in the Senate include:

For: Democrats Katie Dorsett and Kay Hagan of Greensboro, Republican Stan Bingham of Davidson County,

Against: Republicans Jerry Tillman of Randolph and Phil Berger of Rockingham.

Total vote: 34-16.

From today's paper:

RALEIGH - The House and Senate gave tentative approval to a $21.3 billion state budget Monday night despite objections that it borrows too much without voter approval and may overestimate how much money the state will take in next year.

Both chambers are due to vote a second and final time today. The bill will then go to Gov. Mike Easley for his review.

If Easley signs the budget into law, North Carolina will spend 3.5 percent more than in the previous year. Opponents, mainly Republicans, say there's increasing evidence that the slowing economy will mean less revenue to spend than budget writers expect.

"What we're doing is setting ourselves up, or rather we're setting up next year's legislature for a serious problem," said Phil Berger, a Rockingham County Republican and the Senate minority leader. He likened the pending budget to one passed in 2000 that plunged the state into deficit just as Easley took office.

"Those memories are still pretty vivid to me," Berger said.

Click here for the whole thing.

Also: Local votes.
Local items.
Other bits.
Earlier.

Update: After the jump, the AP's long list of items in the state budget:

For those following the video slot issue, the House voted 115-2 to ban those sweepstakes-based machines.

One of the two votes against: Greensboro's own Rep. Earl Jones. He even objected to third reading, forcing the House to vote again Wednesday.

Update: Whoever had initially sided with Jones jumped ship. The final vote was 116-1. Jones stood alone.

More on this in the paper tomorrow.

For those following the bill to restrict gun sales to those involuntarily committed, the measure is scheduled to heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Wednesday morning. That's 8:30 a.m. in 643 LOB. It looks like Rand means what he says about moving the thing by the end of the session.

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

Update: The AP reports the bill has cleared Appropriations and is headed to the Senate floor.

Update: Click here for the story from today's paper.

-=-=-=-=-=-

So Rep. Earl Jones was the "1" in a 116-1 vote in the House today. The bill in question would ban a video slot system that is becoming more prevalent in the state that some folks liken to video poker.

(You can click here to listen to Reps. Melanie Goodwin and Ray Rapp give the rationale for outlawing the machines.)

Jones has cut against the grain at the General Assembly since getting elected up here.

Of banning video poker, he said in 2006:

"Just to ban it straight out when we just passed the lottery is kind of hypocritical."

and

"I don't see any difference between video poker and the lottery," said Rep. Earl Jones , a Greensboro Democrat.

Of payday lending, another industry the state has outlawed, he said in 2005:

State Rep. Earl Jones , D-Guilford, said that payday lending fills a financial services gap not covered by banks.

"If they're shut down, there will be no mechanism that will develop to meet that need," Jones said.

And remember, Jones is the guy who filed the medical marijuana and the stem cell bill, which both provoked some controversy.

So when Jones was on the short end of a 116-1 vote over video slot machines, I can't say I was shocked.

"I think people really just want to be left alone," Jones said. "If a person wants to play cards or play the lottery or participate in this activity...it just seems to be overreaching relative to government telling people what to do."

While he said there's probably no way he'll make up the vote difference Wednesday, Jones objected to third reading so the House has to vote again before sending the bill to the Senate. Jones said he wasn't sure what he would say Wednesday. But, he added this:

"I guarantee you, a year from now, two years from now, I'm going to end up being right,'' Jones said, "and the General Assembly's actions are going to end up being wrong because I think there's a fundamental issue of businesses being treated fairly."

You can click here to listen to part of my conversation with Jones, where we discuss some of those points and argue over a few facts. (More audio from that conversation.)

Of course, I will be taking a gander at Jones' campaign finance report for this quarter when he files it, just to see if anything interesting might be there.

Every year, the Department of Agriculture comes down to the legislature and holds what they bill as a "milk chugging contest." But the contestants used straws to slurp their milk, making the show more soda shop social than frat house showdown.

At any rate, the Senate team - Sens. Ed Jone, Don East and Andrew Brock - triumphed over their counterparts in the House, lead by Rep. Dewey Hill. Hill seemed to lose track of his place in the sipping order and had a delay in picking up his second container of milk, which cost his team valuable seconds.

Yes, there's actual legislating going on today, I think, maybe. But here are some pictures:

Brock anchored the Senate team.


Don East: man of determination.

Ed Jones gets off to a fast start.

Dewey Hill drinks in the scene.

Not only did Brock chug his two containers, he snagged a left-over carton that the House team didn't finish for his victory toast.

I wrote last weekend about S2081, a bill that would ban those who are ordered by a court into psychiatric treatment from purchasing guns.

That debate hit the Senate floor today, after a big lobbying push by Grass Roots North Carolina, which opposes the bill. The bill didn't die, but it got a bit weaker today in the mind of its sponsors.

First, if you need background on the bill, click here to listen to its sponsor, Sen. Tony Rand, explain the thing.

Here's the run down on what happened next: the bill got three amendments. Two were fairly technical and there was pretty much no disagreement.

But Amendment #1 by Sen. Phil Berger of Rockingham changed the measure substantially. If you're a gun rights activist, you'd say it stopped an over-reach. Rand said it left a big loophole.

The debate centers on this: people in North Carolina can be ordered by a court into outpatient treatment. Gun rights folks, including Berger, said that if someone isn't committed to a hospital they're not dangerous to themselves or others.

Rand argued that court-ordered mental treatment is a pretty good indication that something is wrong enough with someone they shouldn't be buying a weapon.

Click here for Berger's opening salvo on the amendment.

And click here for Rand's answer.

There was more debate, but things eventually rolled back around to Berger, who answered back to Rand.

"I think throwing around the concept mentally ill in an effort to try to create an emotional fear with reference to what's going on here is a very easy thing to do. But mental illness can be a very broad term, and it doesn't necessarily deal with things that result in people acting in a dangerous manner. It doesn't," Berger said. Click here for more.

Of course, Rand had an answer, including: "I quite smoking. I probably had a nicotine disorder. The only thing I was dangerous too was a cigarette or a cigar ... Or I might be dangerous to a Twinkie, but not to any of you. But this is a deadly serious matter as we talk about someone who has a mental illness, they have to be found to have a mental illness and it has to rise to a point where action is taken by others to make sure they get treated."

Then things got wonky.

Sen. Doug Berger, no relation to Phil, one of the Senate's more liberal members, made a libertarian argument for adopting the amendment - saying that the state shouldn't infringe on a constitutional right. Click here to listen to the other Berger.

It went on like that for quite a while. Click here for the end of the amendment on the debate, which features Doug Berger and Tony Rand going at it pretty good.

The Senate voted to adopt the amendment 30-19.

Notable yes votes (local and otherwise): Stan Bingham of Davidson, U.S. Senate candidate Kay Hagan of Greensboro, Dan Clodfelter of Charlotte, David Hoyle of Gaston, and R.C. Soles of Tabor City.

Notable no votes: President Pro Tempore Marc Basnight, Katie Dorsett of Greensboro, and Treasurer candidate Janet Cowell and Lt. Gov. candidate Walter Dalton.

Click here for the full vote on the amendment.

The bill itself passed unanimously and it has crossed over to the House.

Reps. Pricey Harrison and Rick Glaizer are handling the bill on the House side. Harrison told me that she thought the House might make an effort to change the bill back. Look for action on that next week.

Update: Click here for a release AG Roy Cooper sent out on the day's action.

After the jump, AP's take on things.

For those following the video slot issue, it has been put on the Senate calendar for Monday night.

From today's paper:

• * The latest installment of as the state tire contract turns.

• * Talking with the animals, or at least their keeps, at the zoo.

• * We've got some crazy weed(s), dude.

Back in the 1970s, former White House spokesman Tony Snow worked for one of the two papers that merged to become the News & Record. He died Saturday.

Click here for the wire story, and here for my boss's thoughts.

(President Bush and Tony Snow in September. Credit: Associated Press)

From today's paper:

• * I had 10 questions for Rep. Pricey Harrison, including paper or plastic. Answer: neither.

• * It used to be if the honorables wanted to borrow money in your name, they'd ask first. Not so much anymore:

  According to a debt study by the state treasurer's office, North Carolina did not issue debt without voter approval until 2001. And although voter-approved bonds are still the bulk of the state's borrowing, the process has changed substantially.

  North Carolina now owes about $940 million in loans that voters did not get to approve. If signed by Gov. Mike Easley, the budget legislators passed last week would nearly double that amount.

  For many taxpayers, the difference between a general obligation bond that voters approve and so-called "certificates of participation" that the state can issue without a vote is the stuff of minutiae.

  But an increasing number of state legislators and observers on the political left and right say that voters should be looking askance at the state running up its borrowing without seeking permission.

  Click here to read the whole thing.

  I figure that when the conservative Locke folks and the liberal Budget and Tax Center are in the same groove, it's a concept worth paying some attention.

So Jack Betts and I were on Legislative Week in Review this weekend yakking about hogs, legislative process, guns and the mentally ill and "the end of the legislative session."

With regard to that last bit: the conventional wisdom says that the honorable will wrap up things sometime on Friday. Guesses vary as to whether that will be Friday in the wee hours of the morning, middle of the day or maybe bleeding over into Saturday. And five days out, I'd be a fool to hazard a prediction. Things have a weird way of getting gummed up at the end of session.

For those who are newcomers to the legislative process, here's what we're talking about: The General Assembly meets over the course of two years. In odd number years, it begins its session in January and typically ends during the summer - usually the end of July or August. Then it goes home - barring a special session - until May of the even number year.

In 2008, we picked up the honorables in May after the Thomas Wright affair and after the primary elections. This legislative "short" session is primarily aimed at taking care of a budget revision (basically an update of the two-year spending plan passed in 2007) as well as cleaning up legislation left hanging last year and taking on some pressing issues.

Now, those who have been paying attention might have notice Gov. Mike Easley hasn't signed the budget revision yet. That's the case as of 12:01 a.m. this morning, unless he's made a decision and not sent word about it yet.

Don't expect the honorables to decamp until that budget is signed into law, has gone into effect on its own or we have a veto showdown on our hands.

What now?

Well, the most straightforward way for a bill to become law is for the governor to sign it. But if the governor neither signs nor vetoes the thing, it goes into effect 10 days after it hits his desk. So here are two dates to look at this week:

• * The fun-sized CR put in place when a budget deal wasn't done on schedule runs out on July 15 - Tuesday. I would expect - expect but not guarantee - something to happen by then. It would just seem silly to let the items in the CR slide just over an inter-branch wrasslin' matching.

• * If Easley does just let the bill sit without veto or signature, the 10 day clock runs out late on Friday night.

There's been no clear sign or signal out of the governor's office that would allow me to divine exactly he's planning on doing. Certainly, his rhetoric over the bill cooled off some when it was sent his way, but that's just reading tea leaves. I'm not going write right now about the possibility of a veto, because we'd be diving into a whole different kettle of fish there - all of them with big pointy teeth and bad dispositions.

Aside from last-minute jostling over the budget, what can you expect to see this week? If it truly is the last week of session, things will run at a mad-cap pace. You'll almost certainly see some drought legislation pass, along with a whole lot of bills that have gotten close enough to completion it would be silly to leave them on the table. And there will be some folks who get up and complain that their pet bill that passed one chamber didn't get a hearing in the other - such as the annexation moratorium.

When the session finally is over, the honorables will adjourn Sine Die. It's a fancy Latin term that means "without any future date being designated," but a better translation of its common usage is "done permanently." Basically, the General Assembly adjourns Sine Die when it's done with its work for the whole two-year session. It would only come back to Raleigh for special sessions, such as to talk about a veto over-ride or at the call of the governor to handle some pressing bit of business, such as the session that created an economic incentive package for Dell. The honoralbes can also call themselves back, although I've never heard tell of that happening in modern times.

So, is this really the last week of the legislative session?

The honorables in the House just ran an extension of their mini continuing resolution that will keep things in government working as they should until whichever of the following comes first: July 25 or the moment the budget passes into law.

According to Rep. Mickey Michaux, the senior budget chair in the House, they have no word from the governor what he might ultimately do with the budget. The options are sign, veto or let it pass into law without his signature.

When asked if he was confident the governor would sign the budget, Michaux said, “I'm not confident about anything he's going to do.”

Michaux did allow as to how the governor was lobbying for three changes to the budget, one of which could be handled in one of the big technical corrections bills and two others which would need to be separate legislation. All, he said, had to do with More at Four, the pre-kindergarten program, or Learn and Earn, Easley's high school-to-college initiative.

“We'll be out of here Friday,” Michaux said confidently.

If they're going to start monkeying with the budget, color me slightly less confident.

From our friends at the Associated Press:

RALEIGH, N.C (AP) _ A plan proponents say will increase compliance with the state's public records law has been approved by the Senate.

The chamber unanimously approved the open government bill on Monday.

Under the proposal, citizens and groups that challenge government officials for access to public records would be guaranteed compensation for their legal bills if they win.

The bill also would create a special unit to mediate open records disputes between government officials and record-seekers. The program would charge users fees for the service.

The measure now heads to the House, which needs to approve the proposal before it can be sent to Gov. Mike Easley.

A word about the "guaranteed compensation" line.

Right now, government bodies can get out of paying the bill for court costs if they rely on the advice of their lawyers. That essentially takes any sting out of losing a public records case.

Under this bill, there would be some sting even if the government body in question thought it was right in denying a request. So before going to trial there would be some economic incentive to make sure their lawyer is right.

For those following the video slot / sweepstakes machine issue:

The Senate has refused to concur in the House bill and it has been sent to a conference committee.

According to Sen. Tony Rand, this delay comes at the request of the Attorney General, who wants the legislature to make the bill even more stringent. I'll try to dig out more on what “more stringent” means tomorrow.

Back in May, I wrote about Rep. Nelson Cole's desire to rebel against federal REAL ID regulation.

Just today, that bill got a hearing and passed out of the House Transportation Committee. I'm not sure how far it's going to get, seeing as how the legislative session is quickly winding down but consider the sabers rattled on the issue.

Rep. Joe Boylan apologized for his behavior over the past year during a point of personal privilege offered on the House Floor today. Click over to Isaac Hunter's Tavern for the audio.

From today's paper:

• * Officials in Rockingham County's school district give credit for rising math test scores to help they received from the budget.

• * The gas isn't half price, it just may look that way.

• * The SBI opened a new crime lab in Guilford County Tuesday.

• * You're driver's license could be going grey.

For those following the Video Slot bill, S180, it is still in conference committee where differences between the House and Senate are being worked out.

Rep. Melanie Wade Goodwin tells me that a compromise bill is being drafted. That bill will likely include language requested by the Attorney General, she said. As well, it will reference the statute that allows the Cherokees to run their casino out west. That language for the Cherokees was left out of the original drafts, which is sort of a boo-boo since the bill could have accidentally outlawed their casino operation.

There still seems to be the expectation from both chambers that a conference report will be produced and this bill will pass by the end of session.

From Rep. Brad Miller's office up in D.C.:

Washington D.C. – Congressman Brad Miller (D-NC) today introduced legislation to allow Congress to ask for a special prosecutor for criminal Contempt of Congress charges against executive branch officials.

“The law explicitly requires the Justice Department to present Contempt of Congress charges to the grand jury, but the Bush Administration claims Congress can not compel a U.S. attorney to prosecute contempt cases where the White House claims executive privilege,” said Rep. Miller. “Other presidents have made bodacious claims about their powers, but always compromised in the end. No president, not even Nixon, has gone this far before.”

In February, the House approved contempt citations against White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers for ignoring subpoenas in the investigations into the firings of U.S. attorneys for political reasons. However, the U.S. Attorney, at the direction of the President, refused to prosecute the contempt citation. More recently, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) issued a subpoena to former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove for testimony about politically motivated prosecution of prominent Democrats.

Under Congressman Miller’s bill, the Special Criminal Contempt of Congress Procedures Act, a federal court can appoint an independent “Special Advocate” to investigate and prosecute alleged Contempt of Congress charges passed by the House of Representatives against current and former executive branch employees, when the Justice Department fails to do so. Like the expired Independent Counsel statute, the Special Advocate established by Miller’s bill would technically work for the Attorney General, and thus be an employee of the executive branch. In practice, the Special Advocate would be largely independent from both the executive and legislative branches and not subject to undue political influences. Unlike the former Office of Independent Counsel, the Special Advocate would have a specific mandate, a finite budget, and a fixed two-year term of office.

“Congress has to protect its powers under the Constitution to hold the President accountable whether Bush, McCain or Obama is in the oval office,” added Miller. “This bill gives Congress a way to enforce contempt in the future and restores constitutional checks and balances when the Justice Department refuses to act.”

Congressman Miller’s bill is co-sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee; Rep. Linda T. Sanchez, Chairwoman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law; and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Chairman of the Constitution Subcommittee.

Our editorial writers made a case for local governments to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles. So they might have liked this bill, to require the state motor fleet to do the same.

Well, they'd going to be disappointed, according to a release from Environment North Carolina:

Senate lawmakers appear to have killed a measure that would require new purchases of state government vehicles to be cleaner and more fuel-efficient. The House passed the before the July 4 weekend by a vote of 62 to 46. But the bill has stalled in the Senate in the face of pressure from automobile dealers and auto manufacturers.

“Instead of investing in gas guzzlers, the state should be leading the way in purchasing the most efficient and cleanest vehicles available,” said Elizabeth Ouzts, State Director of Environment North Carolina.

Last week, the Senate Commerce committee severely weakened House Bill 2720 by requiring that new state government vehicle purchases be only in the top 50% of efficiency for their size class, rather than in the top 15 percent. The bill was scheduled for a vote on the floor of the Senate on Monday night, but was mysteriously referred to the Finance committee instead. The bill received a discussion, but no vote in the Finance Committee this morning.

The state purchases about 1,000 new vehicles each year—the vast majority of which would be required to be more fuel efficient if the version of the bill, as passed by the House two weeks ago, becomes law.

“In the legislature’s final days, lawmakers could make the state’s fleet of vehicles more fuel efficient and cleaner—saving taxpayer money and reducing pollution.” said Ouzts. “I’m still hopeful they’ll take that common sense step.”

From Gov. Mike Easley's office:

RALEIGH – Gov. Mike Easley today signed House Bill 2436, “An act to modify the current Operations and Capital Appropriations Act of 2007, to authorize indebtedness for capital projects, and to make various tax law and fee changes.”

The following is a statement from the Governor’s Office:

“The governor has signed the budget and thanks legislators for their hard work. He looks forward to the General Assembly finishing work on important remaining issues including legislation on drought, home foreclosure and mental health.”

For anyone following the mess with the anti-bullying bill, we have some dueling polls for your consideration.

First up, the folks at PPP says you, the voters, like it. From their blog:

There is currently a proposal in the General Assembly that specifies the need to protect children from bullying based on their sexual orientation. Do you think this provision should be passed into law?

Yes 72%
No 28%

North Carolinians overwhelmingly support a controversial provision in a bullying bill to specifically name sexual orientation as something children need to be protected from bullying based on.

Support for that provision comes from across party lines. 84% of Democrats are for it, as are 72% of independents, and 58% of Republicans.

But the folks at Civitas say you don't like it.

Provisions of House Bill 1366, better known as the Anti-Bullying Bill, have not enjoyed widespread popularity among North Carolina according to a May poll released by the Civitas Institute.

When asked: Do you think public schools in North Carolina should implement an anti-bullying policy that requires students be taught that homosexuality, bisexuality, cross-dressing and other behaviors are normal and acceptable? North Carolina voters responded:
Yes 24%
No 66%
Not sure 10%

The bill’s language identifies bullying or harassing as acts perceived to be motivated by race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, gender identity or expression, physical appearance, sexual orientation, or mental, physical, or sensory disabilities. The bill goes on to state that the information regarding implementation of HB 1366 will be included in every school’s employee training program, a defined description of the bullying by the school, and the official school publications, such as the student handbook.

“Obviously there is an agenda behind the bill, it seeks the power of the public school system to expose young children to lifestyles in a way that a majority of North Carolinians clearly say they are against,” concluded De Luca.

My take, both polling firms have political agendas here. PPP works for mainly liberal causes, Civitas is a conservative outfit. However, I will say Civitas's poll question seemed loaded to get the result they wanted.

At any rate, the honorables could ignore the polls and vote their consciences, right?

For those following the bill that would prevent people with mental illness from buying guns, it sailed through the House Judiciary II Committee this morning.

You may remember the Senate watered down the bill some. As originally written, anyone committed to in-patient or out-patient treatment would have had their name entered into the NICS system, a national database used to determine folks who shouldn't be able to buy firearms. The Senate changed that to say that if you're committed by the court to out-patient treatment, there has to be an additional finding that you're dangerous to self or others.

That point was hugely controversial on the House floor, but not so much this morning.

Rep. Rick Glazier, who is handling the bill on the House side, didn't seem to think that was such a big change and said the bill should ride as is. Grassroots North Carolina, a gun-rights advocacy group that opposed the original bill, said they were neutral on it in its current form.

My guess is this thing will still draw some fire on the floor but will probably pass here in the final days of session.

Update: The bill passed the House with virtually no debate. Because there was no change from the version passed by the Senate, it now heads to the governor.

From our friends at the Associated Press

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) _ North Carolina state budget director David McCoy will be the next state controller.

The House on Thursday unanimously confirmed his nomination to the post. He is charged with keeping the state's books, monitoring cash flow and managing state payroll. The Senate confirmed Gov. Mike Easley's choice in May.

McCoy will replace Robert Powell, who has served since 2001. Controllers serve terms of seven years.

McCoy has served as budget director during Easley's two terms in office. He previously was transportation secretary under Gov. Jim Hunt and directed the state's recovery donations program following Hurricane Fran in 1996.

Controller is one of those jobs in state government that most folks normally hear about, unless something goes wrong. Although, if you get a check from the state, the controller is the guy who signs it.

For those craving another source of state government news, go get "In the Loop," the blog from Freedom Newspaper's Barry Smith.

* The General Assembly is scheduled to meet from 9 a.m. to noon on Friday. If all goes according to plan (yeah, right) they'll adjourn sine die by noon.

* Lt. Gov. Bev Perdue says she's done for the year presiding over the Senate. Basnight praised her service as serving "with distinction, honor and an incredible respect for all people" and asked the body to give her a round of applause.

Perdue said thanks this way:

Thank you very much. I just said to Sen. Basnight, regardless of those wonderful words, which I deeply, deeply appreciate, I wanted to remind Sen. Hoyle that I will never forget when I was trying to get the appropriations chairmanship and he told Sen. Basnight not to let me have it. So I want to thank all of you all for the friendship and for the privilege of serving with you and for you and God speed to all of you and good luck and god bless all of North Carolina.

That bit about Hoyle was something of an inside joke, or ribbing, or something - but it didn't seem meant to be mean.

For those following the video slot machine debate, the conference committee has reached an agreement. Already, the House has approved that final draft. Once the Senate does, the bill will head to the governor for his approval.

As reported earlier, the bill makes sure that the Cherokee Indian Tribe can keep its casino open. It also tightens language so that the sweepstakes loophole as well as any close relatives are wiped out.

“We hope it will put an end to video poker once and for all,” said Rep. Melanie Wade Goodwin, one of the prime movers behind the bill.

Update: The Senate has passed the bill, it is headed to the governor.

Update 2: A little more information on what went down:

The state will ban a kind of video slot machine that has proliferated since legislators passed a ban on video poker in 2006.

The new games use terminals connected to remote computer servers and are based on a sweepstakes scheme. They take advantage of what legislators say was an unintentional loophole in the earlier law.

A bill the General Assembly passed Thursday afternoon, with only two dissenting votes in the House, closes that loophole and is on its way to the governor for his signature.

"We hope it will put an end to video poker once and for all," said Melanie Wade Goodwin, a Richmond County Democrat who was on of the measure's primary supporters.

The bill has been in a conference committee for much of this week as legislators tried to work out final touches. The final draft makes ensures that it does not accidentally outlaw the casinos operate by the Cherokee Indian Tribe. It also broadens the prohibition to include and sort of promotion, not just sweepstakes, that would use such computers.

Possessing or distributing the video slot games will become a crime on Dec. 1.

S685, which increases the penalties for burning crosses, using nooses to intimidate people and otherwise doing things along the lines of ethnic intimidation has passed the House and Senate and is heading to Gov. Mike Easley's desk.

Only one member of the House, Republican leader Skip Stam, voted against the measure. Rep. Alma Adams, a Greensboro Democrat and chairwoman of the Legislative Black Caucus, took the unusually step of taking her colleague to task in writing today. From a release:

The members of the North Carolina Legislative Black Caucus are utterly shocked, saddened and disappointed in Rep. Skip Stam’s lone vote AGAINST increasing the penalties for cross burnings and noose hangings (Senate Bill 685). The bill passed in the House by a vote of (113 to 1).

Rep. Stam, the House Minority Leader, has taken a position that flies in the face of the forward progress being made in our communities, our state and nation. Further still, Rep. Stam has offered no explanation or apology for the only vote to keep these gross actions from occurring in the future. The LBC hopes Rep. Stam fully understands the implications of his vote on the millions of African Americans and minorities across this state. Representative Alma Adams, legislative Black Caucus chairwoman comments:

“Numerous noose episodes and other instances of hatred throughout our state and nation have been consistent with a kind of terrorism in America that all people should dispel. This legislation is therefore necessary and appropriate for our state to have passed.”

The honorables are winding down their work for the year today. Presumably they'll adjourn sine die before the calendar page turns, although the exact time is in doubt. It doesn't sound like they'll hit their goal of getting out of here by noon, but the list of pending bills is relatively short.

An appropriations technical corrections bill, a measure that deals with ticket scalping, a bill that would expand the payments available for the funerals of state troopers and rewrite of the state ethics act are still in the offing.

As well, the honorables as of this hour are still trying to figure out what, if anything, they will do with a shortfall in the state employee health plan.

Up in Washington, Congress is considering HR 1108, which would give the FDA to regulate additives in cigarettes. This is of particular concern to Greensboro’s hometown tobacco company, Lorillard. From an AP story on the bill:

The House of Representatives could vote before month's end on a bill giving the Food and Drug Administration power to regulate tobacco. If signed into law, the government would gain new power to restrict ingredients used in cigarettes and crack down on advertising directed at children. Currently, additives found in cigarettes, chew and other tobacco products are not regulated by the government.

Despite wide support for the effort in Congress, debate over whether and how to restrict use of menthol flavoring is threatening to derail the bill. No company has more at stake in the outcome than Greensboro-based Lorillard, which relies on menthol cigarettes for 90 percent of its sales.

The current bill exempts menthol from an immediate ban applied to other tobacco-masking flavors used in cigarettes, such as orange, strawberry and cherry. Instead the bill gives regulators power to ban or limit menthol at a later date, if they can show scientific evidence it threatens public health.

Click here to read the full story and here for a related story from the NY Times.

Okay, I have the plead ignorance here, having tried exactly one puff of one cigarette in my entire life. For you smokers: does the menthol make that big of a difference? At any rate, this seems to be a measure folks in Greensboro will be keeping watch over.

By the way, the AP story quotes Sen. Richard Burr as saying he'll use his influence to block the measure if at all possible.

Four items:

• * Big money is placing its bet on Guilford County legislative races. Stop me if you've heard this one before, but incumbents and those who enjoy a registration advantage in their districts are getting most of the bucks.

• * I'll see your registration advantage and raise you an historic pattern of apathy and an historically unpredictable election cycle.

• * Not one of mine, but hands down the best election piece out there this weekend: Asheboro is wrastlin' over whether to remain dry or to let folks wet their whistles with something stronger than sarsaparilla. Apparently, the polar bears want them some polar beer, because the zoo society is a big contributor to the cause.

• * Not a news item, but by way of answering some questions that have come my way: No, the end of the legislative session didn't melt my brain...my computer, that's another story. The bosses are getting me the hook-up with some new technology this week and I should be back to making with the multi-media and blogging and whatnot.

Update: Late with this, but here's Tuesday's newspaper story on Save-A-Watt.

-=-=-=-=-

I spent a little time this afternoon at the NC Utilities Commission’s hearings on Duke's Save-A-Watt program.

For those who haven't tuned into this thus far, basically Duke Energy has proposed a program aimed at curbing power use. Because it's something that rate-payers would have to pay extra for - residential customers would pay whether they directly participate or not - they have a case before the utilities commission.

Those inclined to tip-toe through the paperwork, should click here and brew yourself a big ol' pot of coffee. This case was first filed in May of 2007 and Duke as well as advocates on all sides (including Wal-Mart) have been filing briefs and testimony ever since.

Now, saving energy sounds like a good thing, but this program proposal has put environmental and consumer advocates at odds with Duke. The crux of the conflict is this:

The power company says its program will help it make energy efficiency a fifth fuel and let them recoup the costs of helping people cut back on their power usage.

Consumer advocates say that the company will charge customers too much for the privilege of not buying power. In fact, the way Duke conceptualized the way it will be paid back is by way of recouping 90 percent of the cost for a power plant it will never build.

Environmental types say that other energy efficiency programs in other states have produced more savings than what Duke projects.

A story on all this is coming for Tuesday's paper.

Interesting side-note: Duke Power CEO Jim Rogers was the subject of a rather slurpy New York Times Magazine profile last month. It focused mainly on his carbon cap and trade efforts but included this graph on Save-a-Watt:

Interestingly, the one green initiative Rogers says he hopes will emerge most quickly is focused not on generating power but on conserving it. Last year, he concocted the Save-a-Watt plan, which would let Duke profit from helping its customers drastically cut their energy use. Like roughly half the utilities in the United States, Duke is regulated; it can charge more for power only if it builds a new power plant and persuades the regulator to approve a rate increase to pay for it. But the fastest way to reduce a carbon footprint is by improving efficiency. Under Save-a-Watt, Duke would, for example, distribute “smart” meters that automatically turn off customers’ appliances during periods of peak power use. For its first experiment, Duke plans to cut the consumption of its customers in the Carolinas by 1,800 megawatts, which is equal to the output of two new coal-fired plants. The regulator would then let Duke charge higher rates for the electricity its customers do use to pay for all the efficiency technology. Save-a-Watt thus turns the power business on its head: rather than charge customers more to build plants, Duke will effectively charge them not to do so.

Beyond that, the story doesn't really explore the Save-A-Watt idea, or the objections to it, very much. But toward the end, with things re-focused on carbon cap and trade, there's a graph I found really interesting. It speaks to Rogers wanting to craft this image as the power company CEO that environmentalists should love, but who is spurned:

Yet many local environmentalists no longer believe Rogers, and they have precisely the opposite view of how the future should unfold. They view the Lieberman-Warner bill not as too strong but as too weak. They point out, correctly, that Duke stands to reap tens of billions in free allowances, even under the existing bill, money that will subsidize the burning of coal. “This bill gives huge windfall profits to a company that buys a lot of coal, like Duke,” says Frank O’Donnell, the head of Clean Air Watch, an environmental group. “I happen to think that it’s immoral. In a sense, you’re paying the polluter. You’re rewarding the very companies that are the source of the problem.” He says he doesn’t believe that coal-dependent companies will move fast enough unless they feel the tighter pressure of even more aggressive carbon caps. Rogers is simply “greenwashing” his company, saying all the right things so he can wear the mantle of the revolutionary without having to make the hard sacrifices.

That same sort of dynamic seems to be at play with Save-A-Watt, with Duke claiming that they're going to be the more environmentally friendly power company that environmentalists should like, and the environmental side being skeptical.

As the AP Reports, Gov. Mike Easley signed 25 bills into law today. Among them was the video slot ban, which goes into effect Dec. 1.

For the full list of bills that became law today, click here.

By the way, the governor's office reports Easley came through his surgery just fine. Here's the verbiage from the release:

Raleigh - Gov. Mike Easley underwent successful arthroscopic surgery on his right shoulder this morning. Dr. Bill Garrett and Dr. Dean Taylor “removed spurs, excised a bursa, and debrided the cuff tendons.” The governor will be in a sling for several weeks and then can progress through rehabilitation.

The governor was not sedated, watched the procedure, and is back at work. He joked with the surgeon during the procedure and was in good humor. But Garrett cautioned: “I expect the governor’s mood to change when the nerve block wears off.”

Update: Here's my story from Thursday's paper.

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

Updating the menthol story: The U.S. House passed HR 1108, a bill to give the FDA power to regulate tobacco.

But in the final version of the bill that got approval Wednesday afternoon contained this language:

(A) SPECIAL RULE FOR CIGARETTES- Beginning 3 months after the date of enactment of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, a cigarette or any of its component parts (including the tobacco, filter, or paper) shall not contain, as a constituent (including a smoke constituent) or additive, an artificial or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol) or an herb or spice, including strawberry, grape, orange, clove, cinnamon, pineapple, vanilla, coconut, licorice, cocoa, chocolate, cherry, or coffee, that is a characterizing flavor of the tobacco product or tobacco smoke. Nothing in this subparagraph shall be construed to limit the Secretary's authority to take action under this section or other sections of this Act applicable to menthol or any artificial or natural flavor, herb, or spice not specified in this subparagraph. For purposes of this section, a cigarette or any of its component parts has a characterizing flavor if the cigarette, its tobacco smoke, or the component part imparts a distinguishable taste or aroma other than tobacco or menthol either prior to consumption or during consumption, or is advertised or marketed as having or producing a flavor, taste, or aroma other than tobacco or menthol.

Translation: the bill outlaws cherry, vanilla and other flavors but not menthol. If this bill were passed into law, the FDA could regulate menthol in cigarettes but only after scientific study and a federal rulemaking process - and we all know how fun and straightforward THAT is.

Why is menthol regulation a big deal? Well, if you're Greensboro-based Lorillard or a company like Commonwealth Brands and a bunch of your sales is tied up in Menthol sales, it's a big honking deal. Lorillard owns about a third of the U.S. mentholated cigarette market.

There are a lot of backers of the bill who say that the menthol exception is just fine and worth the tradeoff to get some sort of tobacco regulation rolling. Others take exception.

"More than 80 percent of the smokers in the African American community smoke mentholated products," said William Robinson of the National African American Tobacco Prevention Network. His group initially backed HR 1108 but withdrew its support over the menthol issue. "Why set menthol aside and not immediately ban it like all the candy and fruit flavors?"

Click here to see votes on the bill.
No votes from North Carolina: Greensboro's Howard Coble (R), Virginia Foxx (R), Heath Shuler (D).

Coble offered these prepared remarks during the floor debate:

“During my tenure in Congress I have consistently opposed granting the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate tobacco. I do so based upon my philosophical beliefs and the ramifications this legislation would have upon my congressional district and state.

“As I have stated on many occasions, I believe allowing FDA to regulate tobacco in any capacity would inevitably lead to FDA regulating the family farm.

“Permitting FDA on the farm creates uncertainty and adds another burden to the already overwhelmed FDA. Let’s be honest, should the FDA spend its time regulating tobacco on the farm and in manufacturing facilities, despite the warning on cigarettes which alerts users to their danger, or should it focus on the core mission of ensuring the safety and soundness of our food, drugs, and cosmetics.

“I also have concerns with the impact this legislation would have upon tobacco manufacturers and their employees. These companies employ many hard-working North Carolinians, and I believe FDA regulation of tobacco could negatively affect these manufacturing jobs.

“Finally, taxing tobacco companies to fund additional regulation and avoid pay-go problems is ill conceived and will create an incentive for black market activity such as counterfeiting and smuggling.

“Madam Speaker, this legislation is misguided, and in my opinion will not achieve the goals identified by proponents. Instead, I believe it will further exacerbate an already stretched FDA, negatively impact manufacturers and farmers, and create a strain on federal revenues to the Treasury. I adamantly oppose this measure and urge my colleagues to do the same.

“Madam Speaker, tobacco is a product that is lawfully grown, lawfully marketed, lawfully manufactured, and lawfully consumed. We don’t need the FDA inserting its oars into these waters.”

And despite getting the menthol exemption, Lorillard wasn't completely happy with the bill. The company put out the following after the vote:

GREENSBORO, N.C. – July 30, 2008 – The Lorillard Tobacco Company (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lorillard, Inc. (NYSE: LO)) said that it is disappointed with today’s vote by the House of Representatives to approve a bill that would require the FDA to regulate tobacco. The Company also said that while it fully supports reasonable federal regulation of the tobacco industry, that the FDA is already overburdened and is the wrong agency to carry out this enormous task.

The Company also said that it welcomes the provision in this bill that calls for a scientific review of menthol in cigarettes. While the scientific studies to date do not support a conclusion that menthol cigarettes are more hazardous or addictive than non-menthol cigarettes, the Energy and Commerce Committee noted the importance of ensuring the FDA has the “scientific evidence necessary to make the best decision to protect the public health” for all cigarette additives and constituents.

Lorillard agrees that a proper scientific review based on “sound information and scientific evidence and data,” as the Energy and Commerce Committee report states, with involvement by all interested parties as required under federal rulemaking procedures, will be informative in addressing the questions that are being raised about menthol cigarettes.

The Company said the current challenges facing FDA are well documented. It believes that the addition of a new multi-billion dollar a year industry for the FDA to oversee, when the agency is already struggling to fulfill its core mission, is misguided. The Company said that it is understandable why 82 percent of those surveyed in a February 2008 Zogby poll say they are concerned that regulating tobacco would interfere with FDA’s principle mission to oversee pharmaceutical drugs and the nation’s food supply.

In October 2007, FDA Commissioner Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach, in written testimony before the House Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Health, made it clear that the FDA could play a role in the regulation of tobacco, but that the FDA should not be the responsible agency. Last week, HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt echoed those concerns when he wrote, “The regulatory obligations created by [the FDA] bill would be a significant added responsibility for the Food and Drug Administration and one that is inconsistent with FDA’s mission of ensuring food safety and the safety and effectiveness of drugs, biologics, and medical devices.”

The Company noted that some advocates have characterized this legislation as an important tool to reduce youth smoking. Lorillard firmly believes that cigarette smoking is an adult choice and that children should not smoke. According to government surveys, youth smoking rates are at the lowest levels since the government began studying youth smoking rates more than 30 years ago. Furthermore, for the second consecutive year, all 50 states are in compliance with federal legislation aimed at decreasing youth access to tobacco with the overall rate of compliance at its highest level. The Company added that while more needs to be done to reduce the rate of youth smoking, this specific bill is, in fact, principally focused on adult smokers.

The Company believes the FDA is overburdened and the wrong agency to regulate tobacco – and looks to the Senate for its leadership to find an effective regulatory solution.

There is a companion bill in the Senate that has begun to move through committee over there, although Sen. Richard Burr, R-NC, has expressed some major dislike for the bill.

Update:The Libertarian Party weighs in:

Washington, D.C. – Tobacco regulations that just passed the House "should carry a warning label about their dangerous effects on liberty," says Libertarian Party spokesperson Andrew Davis.

The bill, sponsored by California Democrat Rep. Henry Waxman, would give new powers to the Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco ingredients and advertising, as well as the introduction of new products into the market. The bill passed the House 326 to 102 after less than an hour of debate.

"Freedom is going up in smoke," says Davis. "The issue isn't about public health. It is about giving the FDA new powers to regulate a private industry when really we should be moving to privatize the FDA."

Davis says that giving the FDA authority to regulate cigarettes "undermines the notion of individual liberty" for citizens who make informed decisions to smoke. Davis also adds that this regulation will create an artificial monopoly in the tobacco industry by Philip Morris USA--the only major company in the tobacco industry that supports the bill.

Critics have said that only Philip Morris is able to easily adapt to the new regulations, giving it a distinct advantage in the cigarette market over its competitors in what Davis says is "government creating monopolies."

However, "tobacco education is not a problem in the United States," says Davis. "Both private advocacy groups and cigarette manufacturers spend millions on educational programs. We don't need the government obtaining new powers to regulate a personal choice by millions of Americans to light up a cigarette when the risk is clearly known. Yes, smoking is dangerous, but government power is even more dangerous."

Davis says that individuals make a personal choice to smoke, and "government should have no role in helping to make that decision."

"It's a personal choice," says Davis, "and one that an individual should make for himself, as well as pay for the consequences himself."

The Libertarian Party is America's third largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party by visiting www.LP.org. The Libertarian Party proudly stands for smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

H 2499, a bill aimed at letting the state government better manage through a drought, became law today. Gov. Mike Easley signed the thing during a news conference this morning. (Click here for the release.)

The new law gives the state more powers to tell local communities to create drought management plans and use them should it look like the state is hitting a dry spell – like the one we’re in right now.

Easley was asked if he would have liked to have seen anything else in the bill or if there are additional steps the state ought to be saying. He said no, he had gotten what he wanted out of it.

But House Speaker Joe Hackney weighed in: “I just want to say this is a good first step, but there’s a lot of water wasted in North Carolina and we need to do something about that as we go forward. An example, are our leaky pipes in almost every municipality or water system in the state.”

Click here for audio from that.

-=-=-=-

As the drought bill was going through the General Assembly, there was a lot of discussion over private wells and what exactly the state could or should do to encourage the owners of those wells to conserve. So what changed in the final bill, Easley was asked.

Not much, Easley said. The state really can’t do anything now that it couldn’t do a day ago.

Click here for audio from that.

-=-=-=-

After the drought talk, Easley went off topic for a while. He was asked about national independent expenditure groups spending money in North Carolina gubernatorial campaign between Lt. Gov. Bev Perdue and Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory. The state, Easley said, had done it’s best to keep 527s at bay, but the courts have ruled you can shut them out entirely.

“The truth of the matter is the squirrel always finds a way into the bird feeder.”

Click here for audio from that.

-=-=-=-

At the end of the news conference, Easley was asked about his shoulder and why it wasn’t in a sling.

“There’s always some specific moment you remember that really made one of the shoulders hurt,”

Pray tell?

“When Barack Obama came, and I welcomed him, he came up on the stage and we did the little fist bump…”

Ah, so it didn’t just look awkward…go on:

“…and then he wanted go up high with that right arm, his left and my right, and he was grabbing that right shoulder. I was smiling but I was saying you know, I got to get this fixed.”

Click here for audio from that.