The decision to delay consideration of casino expansion in Delaware until next session has removed the biggest wild card remaining on the General Assembly’s docket. With modestly-improving revenue forecasts, it looks like a relatively pro-forma denouement for the legislature this year. No doubt the House Rethugs will cry some more about not being appreciated, which is what happens after you’ve lost control of the House after 24 years, and you’ve come up pretty short on the recruitment end of things.
This, however, is no reason for people to stop paying attention to what’s going on. June, especially late June, is when a lot of legislation is hustled through the General Assembly w/o much in the way of public consideration. It is when the lobbyists and other Delaware Way denizens game the system to the public’s disadvantage. A lot of it takes place in JFC and Bond Bill Committee, making in-depth reporting of those meetings all the more important.
But plenty of it takes place in the last two weeks of session, when bills often are introduced and considered under ‘suspension of rules’. For the rest of session, rules apply requiring bills to be referred to committees and considered. But, in the last two weeks, far too many bills of dubious worth are considered w/o the normal rules applying. Which raises the obvious questions: (a) Why? and (b) If this bill is so damn important, why wasn’t it introduced until this late in session? The answer to both is the same: Because these are not the kind of bills that would pass the ‘smell’ test under ordinary legislative circumstances, and some powerful people/institutions, often armed with political contributions, want them passed.
Either or both chamber(s) would do the public a service by severely restricting those bills that could be considered under suspension of rules. I’ll not be holding my breath.
On to today’s agendas. Let’s start in the House, primarily b/c there’s a bill on that agenda that has me scratching my head. That bill is HB 384(Keeley), which, for purposes of reapportionment, would exclude from the count those incarcerated at Delaware prison facilities. Based on the bill’s sponsorship, this bill is being sought by the City of Wilmington.
First, let’s talk about the census and reapportionment. Following the once-a-decade national census, legislatures must reapportion to accurately reflect the population of their respective states. Since Delaware has only one U. S. representative, no Federal redistricting is required. Only a legislative reapportionment to allocate the 41 representative districts and 21 senatorial districts by current population. Reapportionment is based on population, not on registered voters. So, once the total population of the state is determined, you would divide that number by 41 to get the mean population by RD, and you divide the number by 21 to get the mean population by SD. The rule-of-thumb in the General Assembly over the past two redistrictings, at least, has been that a deviation of no more than plus or minus 5% from the mean is permissible. That’s still a lot of wiggle room, and it enabled Wayne Smith to optimize the number of rural Rethug RD’s in Kent and Sussex in 2002. Democratic Reps. DiLiberto and Brady were the principal victims of this plan.
The issue with HB 384 is that it’s not clear where these ‘residents’ will be counted. This is not an issue of their voting rights, it is an issue of an accurate counting and reapportionment. HB 384 states that: “The General Assembly…shall not count as part of the population in a given district boundary any incarcerated individual who:
(1) Was incarcerated in a State or Federal correctional facility, as determined by the decennial census; and
(2) Was not a resident of the State before the person’s incarceration.”
Here’s the problem. These people do exist, hence, by Federal law, they must be counted. Whether by choice or not, they are Delaware residents. If they are not to be counted here, then where are they to be counted? Must every state pass similar legislation regarding their prison populations in order to realize an accurate count nationwide? On the face of it, this appears potentially to violate Federal law. What say ye, barristers?
But that’s not all. HB 384 also provides that Delaware residents who are incarcerated shall be counted for redistricting purposes, “at the individual’s last known residence prior to incarceration.” Again, whether or not by choice, this bill counts based on someone’s previous address, not their current one, something I doubt jibes with Federal law.
I suspect that this bill is well-intentioned, and likely seeks to lessen the financial burden on a municipality that has so many non-taxable parcels within it. But, I question whether it would pass constitutional muster.
One other bill of interest that I’ve not previously discussed is HB 388(Hudson), which increases the penalty for vehicle owners who have not registered their vehicles here after establishing Delaware residency. The fine would go from $25(!) to $400 for a first offense. About bleepin’ time!
The Senate Agenda also has a couple of interesting bills. SB 254(Henry) provides the state flexibility to utilize fine $$’s from nursing facilities to improve access to community-based alternatives to long-term care, and to improve conditions in long-term care facilities. This is a big step forward from the Vince Meconi/Carol Ellis days of abandoning their public responsibilities to ensure the safety of nursing home residents. Gov. Markell’s got a good team in place here.
Sen. Henry is also the sponsor of SB 255, which would remove the prohibition against persons convicted of any drug felony from receiving federal food benefit assistance. Let’s see what kind of opposition this bill gins up.
I also like Sen. Hall-Long’s SB 242, which “require(s) DART to publish all route, schedule and fare information for public transit routes on a website maintained by the Corporation to be available for download by the public and third parties at no charge.” I swear, sometimes I think that DART’s mission is to make public transit as difficult as possible. The very fact that such legislation is necessary speaks to that.
Well, as Ken Kesey once said, “Either you’re on the bus, or you’re not on the bus.”
I’ll be gassed up (so what else is new?) and ready to go again tom’w. I, however, have no intention of posting my schedule. Just guarding against mechanical or mental breakdown…