HB1 Update
Heard from Rebecca who is in Dover with her band of Green Shirts and she says that the House went into session right at 2PM, but promptly recessed for caucus meetings. She hears that they ought to emerge from these meetings between 3:30 and 4PM to take up HB1. Rebecca speculates that they went to their caucus meetings to talk about Markell’s budget.
Will provide more when she calls again.
Tags: Open Government
The house just went back into session.
They are trying to attach a fiscal note saying it would take a person to take care of all the FOIA requests
quoting “the caucus was confused about the fiscal note too.”
“We hear over and over again from agencies that they needed to spend more and more time to satisfy FOIA requests”
Comptroller: “We can probably find someone somewhere…..that is going to be tied up to take care of this”
“the current law allows us to charge for that service…..but only one agency does”
Gilligan questions the fiscal note since the comptroller had not seen the final bill.
Gilligan: “We need to suspend the rules to show that we care about the public”
Gilligan made a motion to suspend the rules. Rep. Cathcart disagrees.
Gilligan thinks they will send the wrong message to the people of Delaware if there is no vote on HB1 tonight.
Gilligan: It is what the people of Delaware want. We need to work on it and move it forward.
Cathcart: we want to work the bill today, but we want to abide by the house rules and send it to the appropriations committee.
Gilligan goes forward with his motion. He wants a vote to suspend rules.
role call….
atkins yes
barbieri yes
bennett yes
blakey no
booth no
brady yes
karey no
carson yes
cathcart no
gilligan yes
hocker no
hudson no
jakes yes
j johnson yes
q johnson yes
keeley yes
kowack no
kowalko yes
lavelle no
lee no
longhurst yes
manolakous no
marshall yes
miro absent
mitchell yes
mullroney yes
oberle no
outten no
plant yes
ramone no
schooley yes
schwartzkopf yes
scott yes
b short yes
d short no
thornburg no
viola yes
walls yes
de williams yes
wilson no
24 yes, 16 no
Rules suspended
gotta go, more later
As ‘bulo has said many times, the fiscal note is a sham. Both the CG’s office and the professional solitaire players in Legislative Council have more than enough time/manpower to handle this.
They can deny it all they want, but this is Controller General Russ Larsen carrying the water for his sugarmommy Nancy Cook.
If the bill is sent to the House Appropriations Committee, which is simply comprised of the same House members who sit on JFC, the bill could sit there until the budget is resolved in June, leaving it no time to be considered in the Senate. And, if the roll call is correct, not a single ‘reform-minded’ R voted for it. As ‘bulo has said, Rethugs just look for political leverage, they have no real interest in actually governing.
And, if it passes the House, just watch this thing get slow-walked in the Senate due to Cook’s behind-the-scenes maneuvering. This is one year especially where they don’t want the public prying into their dealmaking.
Thanks alot, H&W!
That was great Live-Blogging!
Wow H&W@W, good work.
Thanks.
now discussing amendments to exclude emails legislature to legislature and legislature to constituents
Schwartzkopf – back in the 1970s when FOIA was crafted emails were not in existence. Should every email fall under it, probably not, but I don’t want to take a chance on that. ….Back in the 1970s most communications where done by phone, ….since emails have come about they have pretty much taken on the role of telephone conservations.
lots of back and forth for now
they are trying to pin point down EXACTLy what communications are excluded/included…if i call my wife, will that be included…..sheeesh
women’s cacus, kids caucus, etc….
yeah..if you cal her on behalf of a constituent – what don’t they get?
Now they are hung up on what’s a committee and what is not
HA2 being read in – the one about the emails being excluded
schwartzkopf: we have already beat this one to death
HA1 to HA2 to HB 1
Can I buy a vowel?
someone called it an unfriendly amendment
An unfriendly amendment is an amendment that the floor manager (usually the sponsor) of the bill opposes.
they are back in caucus for now
My green shirts and I left around 4:30 — nothing happening and people were just bored, bored, bored. Couldn’t hold them any longer. Lots of discussion in the group about how awful Schwartzkof’s amendment was. He lost a lot of points for this.
AFSCME had a huge presence at Leg Hall today. They seemed very unhappy with Gov. Markell’s budget proposals.
Meanwhile, the legislative staffers were trying to put on a brave face but you could tell that morale is not good.
I didn’t get to ask anyone about the Meconi deal so I’m still in the dark on that, but everyone I talked to was outraged.
Thanks to H&W@W for great reporting.
Thanks for going to support this, Rebecca, and thanks for calling me to start this thread!
Oh, the whole point of pre-filing the amendments was so that they could study them ahead of time and work out the kinks. HAH! Sounds like Pete Schwartzkopf had other plans. Sussex County’s lone progressive voice just jumped ship. I hope his liberal constituents are watching.
Question – when does the bill go into effect?
Retroactive once the Governor signs it
Question – in effect automatically for next General Assembly?
No, it will have to be put it into the rules or a constitutional amendment.
VOTE
40 yes, 1 absent – HB1 with HA 1 and HA 1 and 2 and 3 to HA 1 to HB 1 – PASSED the house
that’s all folks
Thanks, H&W@w!
Thanks alot H&W@W!
That was damn fine live blogging, for which we owe you many beverages of your choice at the next Drinking Liberally…..
After reading the story today in the News-Journal, ‘bulo is PO’d that the so-called ‘Big Head’ committee is off-limits. In ‘bulo’s opinion, there shouldn’t even BE a Big Head committee (which, of course, if not an official committee, but a place where the alleged grownups go to cut the deals to finalize the budget) b/c it keeps some significant budget deliberations hidden.
The bill pass, but what amendments were added?
The so called Big Head Committee may be the most representative of them all; it is negotiations between the caucuses. No real action takes place there. Anything they agree to has to go to a real committee, committee of the whole, or come up under suspension of the rules. It is nothing to worry about.
It would be a sever mistake to try to ban people from talking. It is ok to have people of good will try to get beyond public posturing and partisanship and find out what is the real bottom line. I support the concept. I reserve my right to reject specifics.
UI – check my blog – you can see the changes to FOIA there.