General Assembly June 18 Post-Game Show: “Everything Falls Apart” Edition
Apparently taking their cues from Mitch McConnell, the Republican Caucus of the Delaware House of Representatives has decided to blow to smithereens any hope of addressing Delaware’s dire fiscal situation by June 30. Yesterday, the Rethugs, led by Minority Leader and Delaware State University bagman Dick Cathcart, defeated, on straight party line votes, three bills increasing taxes on cigarettes and alcohol. HBs 210, 211, and 212 each garnered 23 D votes and exactly zero R votes. Since a 3/5 majority is required, all three bills were defeated. You can find them under “Bills Defeated By the House of Representatives” here.
But that’s not nearly the worst of Cathcart and the Rethugs’ attempts to extract political gain from what should be a bipartisan effort to solve the state’s worst fiscal crisis in memory. Oh, and speaking of Cathcart, allow ‘bulo to take you on a trip down Memory Lane. From his highly acclaimed (by the Beast Who Slumbers, at least) series on the Top Ten Targets for 2010:
Cathcart has at least one other major potential issue, his job, which is, according to his legislative profile: Associate Vice President of University Operations, Delaware State University.
Just read that job title and ask yourself, is there any way that this is not a euphemism for what he appears to be?: “Bagman-Delaware State University”. BTW, El Somnambulo has it on good authority that Cathcart’s life ambition is to rise to the level of Assistant Vice President of University Operations, Delaware State University. Or is that the job that former Rep. Nancy Wagner already has there? Somehow ‘bag man’ seems more respectable than ‘bag lady’, but ‘bulo digresses.
This job should have been a major issue in 2008, and there’s no reason it shouldn’t be front and center in 2010, if Cathcart runs. People hate double-dipping, especially now. State employees really hate it when they see this as their friends are getting laid off.
So, Cathcart has done what any self-respecting bagman (in his case, that’s not a contradiction) facing a double-hit to his cushy state salaries would do. He’s refusing to let the Governor even talk to his Caucus. From yet another very strong piece by Ginger Gibson (anyone lamenting that they miss the ‘hard-hitting’ reporting that Celia Cohen used to provide is just not paying attention) in today’s News-Journal:
Voting as a bloc Thursday night, House Republicans defeated three proposed increases to alcohol and tobacco taxes, with House Minority Leader Richard Cathcart leading his caucus on the House floor.
The Governor has been turned away from a meeting with rank-and-file House Republicans, Cathcart said, because he won’t provide the numbers that back his plan to balance the budget. (‘Bulo Aside: Right. On this, Cathcart is every bit as plausible as the lobbyist from Harrington Raceway who cried crocodile tears that Markell hadn’t provided numbers showing how that golden fatted calf couldn’t stay in business if, gasp!, competition raised it’s ugly head.)
But Markell said he gave Cathcart updated numbers and tax proposals eight days ago and that he met with the minority leader to discuss them early in the week.
“I’m laying out the facts, and the facts are incredibly clear,” Markell said.
Cathcart said his caucus had not been obstructionist.
How many ways is this clearly a (in the interest of respectable discourse, allow ‘bulo to call this a) prevarication?
1. Unified Rethug Caucus voting against even the low-hanging fruit of liquor and cigarette tax increases? Check.
2. Rethug House Minority Leader refusing to allow the Governor to even meet with his Caucus? Check.
3. Digging their heels in with only 5 legislative days remaining and an historic $800 million budget shortfall staring them in the face? Check.
4. Not even a peep from a single one of the Rethug Sheep about wanting to hear what the Governor proposes (Greg Lavelle has an excuse, he’s too busy listening to and obeying the Catholic Diocese, what’s everyone else’s)? Check.
Senors y Senoras, that is the textbook definition of obstructionism.
‘Bulo will be back later with a more comprehensive wrap-up on what happened yesterday. However, as you can see, the lead story is what didn’t happen yesterday.
Tags: Delaware
I hope Markell is holding a really big hammer behind his back.
So, what does this mean? Does this mean the Assembly has to go into special session? What do the Republicans think they’re going to get out of this?
Don’t worry, FSP will be along to justify this any minute now.
The Rethugs seek to gain what they always seek to gain: political advantage. They’ve already demonstrated over and over that they couldn’t give two bleeps about responsible governing.
Good. They shouldn’t raise taxes before stepping on toes by cutting the budget. I applaud them by forcing the issue to cut spending instead of feeding off of sin taxes because they are sinful in nature, and thus easier to justify.
By standing up to the system they are demanding thrift, and I applaud their efforts to rein in spending.
THIS IS A TWO-PART COMMENT!!! Be patient and look for the follow-up! 🙂
I was waiting for this and saddened indeed.
You forgot some quotes, ‘bulo:
Rep. Helene Keeley, D-Wilmington West, told the House Revenue and Finance Committee last week that she and several other members of the Democratic caucus weren’t willing to vote for tax bills until the Joint Finance Committee made more cuts in the budget. She voted in favor, however, of the alcohol and tobacco taxes Thursday night.
What happened to the stand? Did they fall in-line?
Rep. John Kowalko, D-Newark, has said he won’t vote for the budget if it includes any pay cuts for state workers.
Eenteresting.
Cathcart said a packet they received from the Department of Finance on Thursday contained some of the information they were seeking, but it will take time to read through the thick sheaf of papers and discuss it in caucus.
Awesome. Here’s a mammouth binder, read it carefully and meet with us in a few…minutes.
Rein in spending?
Did Brian miss the Rethugs’ stated opposition to pay cuts for state employees? They’ve basically placed themselves in opposition to everything…except for raising taxes on those making less than $60K.
Right. I believe Cathcart. Because here’s one you didn’t include:
“But Markell said he gave Cathcart updated numbers and tax proposals eight days ago and that he met with the minority leader to discuss them early in the week.”
Eight days? You’re right. NO ONE should have to read vital budgetary numbers in a mere eight days.
And, Smitty, no one’s saying that anybody must accept the Governor’s proposals as presented. But to not even engage is irresponsible brinksmanship no matter how you dress it up.
Look, this whole dust up is made worse from people like us and the report that ran in the paper. No, I am not blaming anything, just observing.
What the minority is doing is worthwhile. El Som, you with the experience, should know, as I do, and some other pseudonym commenters here should know, is that this will get done. Yeah, it may end up being July 1, but it will get done. I know that Cathcart (not from direct discussion, but from knowing Cathcart) is wanting an opportunity to have the info they received on Thursday and THEN sit with Gov Markell and bring up concerns. They sure the hell aren’t going to have an opportunity to do all this on the same day. They will get it done and it will be done on or very damn near the 30th.
You should also acknowledge that it’s becoming quite clear that Markell and his admin do play very hard hardball as well. So does Cathcart. This is freaking great for government, because these two WILL get it done, and I GUARANTEE that will be the case.
Your anger went deep-end, El. You’ve been there long enough to know this is how you bring someone to the table and that is all this is. It won’t be torpedoed and something WILL come out of it. Watch.
The PACKET came Thursday, ‘bulo. In other words, it’s been spread out. Plus, I said I had a two-parter! You already turning the bottles upside down, ahead of me? Curse you!
Gosh, now ‘bulo owes Smitty, how many beers, 126 and counting, for stepping on his response?
No, Smitty, ‘bulo really disagrees with you this time b/c this year is not like, nor is it even close to, every other year.
It’s an $800-plus million hole in the budget. Every other year, each party gives a little here or there and either the surplus is addressed (through tax cuts and program increases), or the modest deficit is addressed (through modest increases, usually ‘sin’ taxes’ and modest program cutting). You’re right that ‘bulo has been down there a long time and has seen the budgets always work out in the end. BUT THIS YEAR IS SO UNLIKE ANY OTHER YEAR THAT IT’S DOWNRIGHT SCARY.
El Somnambulo has written for at least the past three months that this year is different. The legislators know it’s different, and that’s why Cathcart’s behavior is so inexcusable.
This one requires all hands on deck. The Republican Caucus is instead seemingly intent on playing the worst of political games at the most inopportune time.
Sorry, Smitty, but if you want to see ‘deep-end’, just take a gander at what will happen on June 30 if Cathcart doesn’t stop this game of fiscal chicken immediately. And even that might be too late.
So, is it worth it to go to Dover on June 30? Will there be fireworks or will it be a fizzle?
I think Smitty’s post on DP regarding the Markell, Cathcart dust up says it well.
David just stole my thunder. I’m going to employ a Protack-motive and go for the free plug:
My take on the chest puffery.
Yes, I did refer to this as chest puffing in my post.
Will there be fireworks or will it be a fizzle?
If this isn’t settled by the 30th, (using our new revenue source, which my funds will become a part of), I give 2:1 that we will see fireworks, but a typical end-of-session friendly handshake at the close in the early AM of July 1.
This from a remarkable press release last night from the House Minority Caucus:
“The three bill package is part of a much larger plan by the Markell administration to bridge the state’s projected $793 million budget gap. However, House Republicans say the governor has not shared all the details of his plan, asking lawmakers to pass his revenue-generating bills without seeing the larger picture.
“Rep. Cathcart says the standard protocol is for the governor to share his revenue and spending package with state lawmakers, then enter into a negotiation to achieve a workable plan. Rep. Cathcart points to the recently enacted sports-betting bill as an example of that process in action. He says the administration was willing to work with lawmakers of both parties to produce the final proposal that won approval. Rep. Cathcart says the same process should be followed with the budget.
“Although the cigarette tax and alcohol bills were defeated, it does not mean they’re dead. Rep. Cathcart says House Rules allow defeated bills to be restored for another vote. He notes the sports-betting bill was initially defeated, before being restored and winning passage. He said it’s likely the House will reconsider the bills prior to the end of the legislative session, which concludes in less than two weeks.”
So Cathcart is complaining about being ignored while saying he’d be willing to reconsider the bills.
You mean a Mike Protack, Leader of The Delaware Republican Party, motive.
Stop crushing my spirit, steaksauce! 😛
TW – Why do you see it that way? To me, I see it as while they don’t wholly disagree with it, they want their chance to critically review what they received YESTERDAY with the Governor and his team. What should they do? Approve first and ask questions later?
DSN’s Burcat a superior reporter to Gibson, who laces her prose w/ telltale judgmental adjectives and phrases.
I’m just summarizing what Cathcart and the GOP Caucus press flack sent out last night. I report, you decide.
I report, you decide.
Heeeeyyyy….isn’t that copyrighted? 😛
Well, then, I guess you and I each decided. I, for one, believe that you know the real impact of what you authorize before you sign the deal. You have to ask first, not later. Now, consider that this is a decision that affects an entire state’s populace.
Smitty – is it plausible that at the meeting earlier in the week, the Republicans asked for a huge amount of documentation that took days to compile? Thus is it took 8 days to get that to them, whose fault is it that they only had a day or two to review it?
“DSN’s Burcat a superior reporter to Gibson, who laces her prose w/ telltale judgmental adjectives and phrases.”
Oh dear. Mr. Delaware Way turns media critic.
The truth, for those interested in it, is that someone from the administration has been turned away from the caucus for nearly two weeks. He, and some of the commenters above, can spin that any way they want. I don’t give a rip about how they’ve always done it, and neither will 90% of the public.
Tommywonk and the GOP press release make it clear that there is transparent politcal grandstanding on the GOP side.
Shocking!
Smitty – is it plausible that at the meeting earlier in the week, the Republicans asked for a huge amount of documentation that took days to compile? Thus is it took 8 days to get that to them, whose fault is it that they only had a day or two to review it?
Who knows besides them (both sides)? If that’s what we’re going to base criticism on, then, well, we could argue unprovable points for years and that does no one any good.
My point is, Geezer, going off of what was in the paper, how are they going to critically review something for the past several days when the packet they requested was delivered yesterday? I’m using the paper as my source for this, not making conclusions or conjecture, as is apparently going on here.
This will get done, but not in the roll-over-good-dog you all seem to want it to be done.
Geek – you and I have both talked about the hardball tactics from above. How could you not expect this in return?
If the response from the Governors office was as large as Dick says it was, it didn’t print itself. If you want to make an assertion like
Awesome. Here’s a mammouth binder, read it carefully and meet with us in a few…minutes.
then let’s also allow that the R’s asked for a rundown of economic numbers that had to be crunched in order to accurately answer their questions. And that takes time.
I will give you that, Geek (#28), so then, how could we be all pissed off that what they did was defer for review? NONE of this is dead. It’s a freaking tactic to get to the table, PERIOD.
Jason, there is grandstanding on both sides. No one is immune. I like Jack, but I will tell you that if you think for a moment that his office doesn’t pull this shit, too, then I’d like to try on your rose-color glasses, too.
For an increase in the cigarette tax? What part of the cigarette tax was so mysterious that Dick and the R’s had to go back into caucus to discuss?
Oy. It’s the PACKAGE not each piece.
We can parse this, but it’s not the point I want to make, but here goes:
Rep. Helene Keeley, D-Wilmington West, told the House Revenue and Finance Committee last week that she and several other members of the Democratic caucus weren’t willing to vote for tax bills until the Joint Finance Committee made more cuts in the budget. She voted in favor, however, of the alcohol and tobacco taxes Thursday night.
Can we bitch about those so-called principles where they weren’t going to vote for it? They fell in line with the party, for crying out loud!
Rep. John Kowalko, D-Newark, has said he won’t vote for the budget if it includes any pay cuts for state workers.
If this happens, Geek, who will you criticize then?
They effectively hit an effing pause button and that’s all they did. Nothing was torpedoed, nothing is destroyed. You all effing act as if this never happens, but it does. This is so massive that there is nothing wrong with demanding further review, review that will get done before the 30th. If you want sheep, go to a farm.
Remember the R’s don’t want to make any difficult or unpopular decisions so they can stand up in the next election and say”I didn’t vote for that” and “I fought to protect the salaries of our valuable state employees” etc.
There is much to lament in the current First State of Journalism, brought home vividly this week when yet another limb, Channel 12, was amputated. In the halcyon 1970’s, a vigorous Delaware State News competed with huge News-Journal coverage of the State House. The Inquirer, the Bulletin, plus live microphones from ‘DEL, ‘DOV and ‘ILM broke more than their share of stories. Even Delaware Today had hard-hitting journalism. The unseen backbone of each was competent leadership from editors. None of those newspapers would have allowed this italicized piece of amateur political science to see publication, except maybe in Moyed’s column: “In lieu of pay cuts for state workers, House Republicans last month proposed, among other things, an income-tax hike for all residents, a move at odds with traditional fiscal conservativism. Markell’s original plan called for income tax hikes only for those making more than $60,000.”
What’s wrong? First, conservatives are not allergic to raising taxes on po’ folks. If you started counting the states where GOP administrations have recently raised taxes on lower incomes, you’d quickly run out of fingers. Second, there are as many definitions of “traditional fiscal conservativism” as there are names for Veale Road. Before the looney-birds locked up the GOP, raising taxes was not anathema to conservatives of either party. The fight would be over whether they would fall harder on Brookside Park or Wawaset Park. Read a Caro book on LBJ, or for that matter any other political history of the world before the 1984 GOP convention. Gibson is an eager reporter, but she betrays her stance too often, which undercuts her generally fine work, and portends trouble for her in the future. If there were editors, they would cut the phrase and work to improve her stuff. That work is not happening, whether the reporters are good, lazy or sometimes a bit of both.
Interesting take. However, Loudell was making the same points as Gibson when he spoke to Cathcart.
The bottom line seems to be that the GOP is trying to play Marlon Brando in “The Wild One”
so, you wanted sheep. Gotcha.
“a move at odds with traditional fiscal conservativism”
If that’s your example of bias, stick to whatever your day job is. And those of us who lived through those “halcyon days” when Christiana Securities owned the News Journal would agree with you on the size of the newspaper’s Dover contingent but disagree strongly on whether the coverage was better.
Smitty: No, I want people to stop playing games with the budget. If the new GOP strategy is to kiss state workers’ asses, just say so. If not, just pass the damn legislation. Fish or cut the effing bait. Is that too tough for the House GOP caucus? Too many choices?
Delaware fiscal problem is a problem with spending not taxes.
Watch a video explaining the problem.
http://delawarerepublican.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/delaware-spending-explained/
I suspect all Dems would vote against any tax cuts so why dump on R’s who vote against tax increases?
Mike Protack
Grouchy Geezer’s self-parody aside, I am referring to a time after Christiana Securities sold the papers [4/1/78], but of course only a grouchy, forgetful old coot would prefer a Gannett publication to the fine work of the News-Journal of the 1970’s.
The over/under line on how many people are going to watch the video posted Michael Protack, The Leader of the Delaware Republican Party is zero.
I have the under. Takers?
AARRRGGGHHH!!!
If the new GOP strategy is to kiss state workers’ asses, just say so
EVEN KOWALKO SAID HE WILL NOT APPROVE THE BUDGET IF THE CUTS ARE IN THERE!!!!
Sheesh, Geezer, not to mention that Cathcart has been state- and union-worker friendly on a fairly consistent basis, not when it’s convenient! Ask Mike Begatto!
Smitty – to your point of it being a package, I say “No”. Let’s take this bill:
http://legis.delaware.gov/LIS/LIS145.nsf/vwLegislation/3DAAA6FA278495A8852575D000489F45?open
This increases the tax on cigarettes. It was a discrete vote, not some omnibus tax bill. Is this some exotic tax that Republicans have never seen before? We can argue about the validity of sin taxes, but they don’t require a single question of the Governor or the Governor’s staff to vote on.
So why vote no, unless they are obstructing?
C’mon, G. These tax bills had no comparable cuts with them. That’s what they wanted to see. Just like what Keeley had said (twice copied and pasted by me in this thread). Yes, they have been said to be coming, but where are they?
here are your tax increases, but the cuts will come..er…uh…tomorrow…yeah…
Again, you question before signing it away. Once you approve it, you don’t get to take it back. You want to know why I think the cuts weren’t presented first? Either they don’t exist as promised, or they don’t trust the republicans, where I’m sure the feeling is reciprocal. Cathcart has a comment out there about the tax bills being separate from the cuts, whereas I believe that wasn’t the case before. That is a fair assessment and perspective. That being the case, they’ll consider the tax bills, yes, but will also consider the flip side right along with it.
Hey, look at how the gambling bills went. Same thing there. So much posturing there and here (the blogosphere) about grandstanding and currying favor, etc. A lot of accusations, most not applicable. Once all parties FINALLY got to the table after this same approach, minor changes were made, everyone was happy, and swoosh, it went through. That’s exactly what I see as going to happen here.
I call bullshit, Smitty. I know that your love of Dick is getting in the way of seeing clearly here. They vote on fee increases, taxes, etc. a dozen times per session. Why make a huge deal of it now?
Did the Republicans say, “I’m not voting on gambling and it’s associated revenue until there are spending cuts.”? No, they didn’t. If you point is that Dick wants an onmibus bill with everything in it (cuts and revenue), then we run the risk of other things getting shoved in there.
Sorry, I’m not buying it. The House Republicans (as led by Michael D Protack, leader of the Delaware Republican Party) need to grow up.
I know that your love of Dick is getting in the way of seeing clearly here.
Hey now.
The cuts have yet to even be presented, Geek. WTF are they to go on, a nod and a wink?!
So why not take the low-hanging fruit? If not to just be a bitch.
Face it, the party of NO is providing friction to an already difficult process.
Have they cut anything yet? Get back to me when they do, and we can talk.
Higher alcohol taxes affect people like Dogfish Head, who gets offers regularly to move out of state, and a number of small package store owners.
What did they do to deserve punishment?
Did they spend ungodly amounts of tax money with reckless abandon and no respect for the taxpayer?
Did they fail to recognize the difference between a check and a credit card?
Did they decide to pay 25% of the Department of Education $100K or more?
Then why should they foot the bill, even part of it, for those actions?
And I don’t care why the GOP voted no, just that they did.
The goal here is not to close the gap. It’s to do it properly, with respect for the tax dollar and the people who provide it.
And are they being unfairly discriminated against on a bill that taxes all alcohol, not just Dogfish? C’mon, you are being disingenuous.
Shorter Dave Burris: Just say NO.
“And are they being unfairly discriminated against on a bill that taxes all alcohol, not just Dogfish? C’mon, you are being disingenuous.”
The producers, sellers and consumers of alcohol are being singled out, yes, in a bill that raises taxes on alcohol.
And if those 100 jobs go to Maryland, will it matter?
“Shorter Dave Burris: Just say NO.”
Why should we continue to enable the state with a higher percentage of our sales, profits and paychecks, when the state shows no discipline or respect for those tax dollars?
Cue Aretha Franklin…
Did Brian miss the Rethugs’ stated opposition to pay cuts for state employees?
Yes, I did miss that. Never said they were above political pandering.
I would be against the paycuts too, if i were them. Why make ALL the state employees suffer a little when there are obvious efficiencies to take advantage of and spending habits that need to change and priorities to be made with taxpayer money.
Why make them all suffer when they are afraid to cut some budget because of political territorial differences and self protection. Where are the calls for those who are willing to fall on the sword to save the pay cuts from happening?
If I was a department head, I would try to strike a deal. Project X gets delayed one year if all my employees keep their 2.5%. Department Y loses three employees (we wanted to fire them anyway) and the rest of the department keeps their %. Where are those with the courage to stand up and take some heat? Give a little, get a little.
Why don’t we hear of any stories like that? Why isn’t it happening?
Dave, are you saying that Dogfishhead would move their operations to another state because the sales tax on their product rises? Really? This is your principled opposition to it?
Actually, since the tax is on the pour, not a percentage, it would impact low end beers more heavily. A $2 beer would be taxed another 1.5% whereas a $4 berr would effectively be taxed at 0.75%. Perhaps Dogfish will thank the legislature.
You are totally missing the point. Perhaps this is your intent.
Why should we continue to enable the state with a higher percentage of our sales, profits and paychecks, when the state shows no discipline or respect for those tax dollars?
Can we really tax ourselves into prosperity?
Will ‘soak the poor’ expansion of legalized gambling really balance the budget? When times are tight, the really wealthy do not feel the pinch and will lose their ‘chump change’ at some elegant foreign casino and not at a glorified slots parlor.
People in the middle will generally make prudent decisions about spending. This is generally why they are not at the bottom of the economic barrel. Most in this category who gamble are ‘social gamblers’ whose losings (while generally less than winnings) are affordable and taken out of disposable earnings. Mathematical literacy tends to discourage excessive gambling.
Yet at the bottom end of the spectrum are those whose dreams are centered on some big payoff and who may be lured by seductive advertising to spend a lot of money that should be earmarked for other expenditures on gambling.
Enough of this sort do hit the lottery and this encourages the other losers.
A few might augment their ‘system’ with a bit of prayer. Somehow I think of a song that contained the words:
“Lord, please send me a Mercedes-Benz
My friends all drive Porsches, I must make amends”
No, Dave. It is you that is missing the point, purposely I suspect. There will be cuts. There will be tax/fee increases. What you and Dick are arguing for is a big package to vote on that solves all of the problems. What I am suggesting is that we have a big freaking puzzle to put together here. Let’s get the sides and corners done first and then we have a place to start on the cuts.
And let me be clear, the cuts that we make this year will suck. They will not be the smart cuts that Markell promised. They will hurt Delawares economy further. The question is whether we will concentrate the pain on state workers or share it between state workers and state tax payers.
I only hope that we have a better freaking plan next year.