General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Thurs., June 3, 2010

Filed in National by on June 3, 2010

Good news. Rep. Barbieri’s bill reintroducing discretion to the reporting of incidents on school property sailed through the Senate yesterday. Which brings up an interesting point. While the Senate as a body could hardly be considered progressive, it tends to vote progressive more consistently than the House. Why? I think it’s b/c the D’s are in such strong control that R legislators no longer feel the need to vote ‘no’ in order to score political brownie points. Sorenson and Connor, and to a lesser extent, Cloutier and (sometimes) Simpson have been freed to vote as legislators, not as partisans. Only Bonini and Booth consistently wave the party flag.

By contrast, since the House is (arguably) in play, Dick Cathcart and Monsignor Lavelle have opted to take the Mitch McConnell approach, although nowhere near as starkly. House rules simply do not permit the kinds of impediments that are at the Rethugs’ disposal in the US Senate. Still, House R’s wave the Viagra bottle of mass opposition, if only to forestall their own impotence. Perhaps that explains why they back down after 4 hours.  Political prop-ism can be painful.

Enough tasteless metaphors until perhaps later.  The Senate also passed this year’s corporate law package. Nobody knew what was in it.

Here’s the entire outdated Session Report. I say outdated because the ‘Bills Introduced’ were introduced the previous legislative day. How do I know? Because crack blogger RSmitty has already considered the implications of HB 432. Smitty, I agree with you re HB 432’s intent. But, Smitty,  the bill says that “(T)here are many “high end” spirits that are more than 80 proof and the tasting of these products could possibly convince consumers that these products are worth their higher cost. The sampling of the spirit would still be limited to no more than ½ ounce”. What if 10 different high-end spirits are being sampled at the same tasting? Smitty? Smitty? Folks, I believe that Smitty’s silence speaks wretched volumes here. Many thanks to our porcelain pioneer!

Today’s Senate Agenda features a few relatively pro-forma Sunset bills. Rep. Kowalko’s bill designating the grey fox as Delaware’s wildlife animal is also on the docket.

The most noteworthy bill is SB 261(Sokola), which seeks to get parents more involved in their children’s education. I know that this bill is part of the initiative that led to Delaware being awarded “Race to the Top” funding, and the sentiment is good. I just don’t know how much ‘real world’ impact this will have. My experience is that either parents choose to be involved, or they don’t. Not sure that this will change that dynamic. Grudging involvement tends to revert to no involvement.

Today’s House Agenda is cause for musical inspiration:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKw8j7GLSdw&feature=related[/youtube]

“Muskrat Love”-The Captain & Tennille

Ain’t no love for the muskrat today in the General Assembly. Except, perhaps, as prepared for your culinary enjoyment. I think we need to elevate the muskrat to a more appropriate status. Accordingly, I beseech the Honorables to do the only fair thing: Designate the Muskrat as Delaware’s Official Wildlife Roadkill. Rubber, tar, and pavement lend a certain smoky piquant flavor to the fleshy aquatic rodent. Pair the musk glands with a fiery jalapeno sauce, and  serve over brown basmati rice. You, too, like Smitty, can be a Porcelain Pioneer!

Not much else floats my boat on today’s agenda.

Which leads me to ponder one of life’s eternal verities:

Q: Just what the bleep is “Muskrat Love” supposed to mean anyway? Tentative A: It’s supposed to mean whatever you think it means.

Right, Smitty?

Smitty?


Tags:

About the Author ()

Comments (6)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. RSmitty says:

    But, Smitty, the bill says that “(T)here are many “high end” spirits that are more than 80 proof and the tasting of these products could possibly convince consumers that these products are worth their higher cost. The sampling of the spirit would still be limited to no more than ½ ounce”. What if 10 different high-end spirits are being sampled at the same tasting? Smitty? Smitty? Folks, I believe that Smitty’s silence speaks wretched volumes here. Many thanks to our porcelain pioneer!

    I can’t believe you insult me like that! You stopped at TEN?!?!

    To your yesterday’s point about some vagueness within the synopsis, I believe (in case we disagree, but I can’t tell if we do) they are looking to allow the sampling of these spirits, as well, given they are currently prohibited.

    On a after-school-special-feel-good note, it is nice to know that there are some things in life that truly can bring us together.

    (the crowd ahhhs and oooohs)

  2. RSmitty says:

    Muskrat Love? Maybe it means the connection being made between cats and dogs over HB432.

    How do C & T know about Muskrats and Love, anyway? Even creepier, does this nod to the muskrat give them some connection to Delaware? Cripe, I need 20 samples from HB432 right now. Line ’em up!

  3. Why is this good?

  4. RSmitty says:

    David, I’m having fun.

    It more-or-less allows an almost-even playing field for samples and it is a good way to promote sales. I know not everyone sees beer, wine, and other spirits as socially acceptable. I and many, many others do. There absolutely have been times where currently-legal sampling has directed my purchase. There have also been times where I turned down a sampling opportunities. Despite the fun I am having, I don’t think people, myself included, should go scoping out where samples are being given and attempt to “line ’em up.” Also, I believe these are still limited to liquor stores and not in other adult-beverage-selling establishments, so the age-restriction to enter such a store is still very much enforced. To further this, if I were a liquor store owner/manager and someone was scarfing down samples, I’d forgo that business and send that person packing. I think others that would host sample-tables would be the same. It would be absolutely stupid to allow something like that to get carried away.

    Now, back to my fun. I wonder where El Som and I can meet up to put HB432 to the test, once it is in effect? El Som?

  5. SRC says:

    Now for something completely different:

    How long do you think it will take the so-called legislators to notice the alarming number of law offices that have physical therapy offices in the same building? Isn’t this close to when doctors & pharmacies were having an questionable relationship?

    The ambulance chasers fill out the accident forms, file in court, and direct the client to “Go ‘downstairs’ for your P.T.” As case in point I direct your attention to the office of that great dipsh*t Democrat Doroshow (across for the Elsmere F.H.). Also, the new ‘office building’at 4th & Union (Ritter’s Furniture) being renovated for law offices and a P.T. facility.

    Are we in Denmark or does it just smell that way………

  6. RSmitty says:

    So, Som, when are we going to have our samples fest?