General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Tues., May 10, 2011

The big news is that we can no longer pretend that Gov. Jack Markell has any concern for those who have struggled due to the prolonged economic downturn.

While proposing cuts for Medicaid recipients, cutting scholarship assistance to Delaware college students, squeezing state employees’ benefits by calling them ‘unsustainable’, Gov. Markell has relentlessly pushed for tax breaks for business, tax credits, and less regulation, as a means of supposedly attracting business and jobs to Delaware. Now, scant weeks after signing legislation weakening state employees’ health  and pension plans, Gov. Markell has proposed a tax cut for those taxed at the highest rate. He has proven himself to be as much of a true believer in trickle down economics as the Gipper himself. Cassandra has already given this topic a comprehensive and spot-on analysis, and it’s must reading. My response is more visceral. At a time when people have been permanently displaced from their jobs, their industries, and their careers, Jack Markell tosses out yet more bribe money to go with the millions in bribe money he has already tossed out for ‘economic development’, which heretofore has been close to jobless economic development, and he’s giving an additional $6.8 mill income tax cut to those in the top bracket. Not only is that misplaced money, it’s a big symbolic ‘Bleep You‘ to those who have dared to question the inherent inequity in Delaware’s income tax rates. We get the message, Governor. You have chosen your allies, and you have chosen to turn your back on many of your allies as well. Do not blame us if and when we return the favor.

It is also up to the legislators. I am prepared to go so far as to say that, anyone backing these cuts for the wealthy will neither receive my support for reelection nor for DL endorsement. Not a big deal, I know, but as one individual, that’s about all I can do. If you’re a Democrat claiming progressive credentials, act like one. Jack Markell may well be looking at political opportunities down the line, but as legislators you should be well aware that you will likely be here after he leaves. Please place your constituents’ interests above Markell’s long-term political aspirations. It’s in your political interests and…it’s the right thing to do.

The House did the right thing Thursday, more or less. SB 17, which legalizes medical marijuana in Delaware, passed by a 27-14 margin. John Atkins was able to narrowly squeeze two unnecessary amendments onto the bill, so it’ll go back to the Senate for a final vote. BTW, legislative sources in Dover have made it clear to me that Rep. Atkins never engaged in negotiations over these amendments, contrary to what both he and his sidekick, the ‘Dr. of Education’, have claimed.

Unless you consider a joint resolution declaring May 15 as Jimmie Johnson Day as newsworthy, SB 17 was the only newsworthy item considered in the House Thursday.

Before we look at the Senate, here’s the entire General Assembly Session Activity Report for Thursday.

On to the Senate. Tortellini Tony DeLuca got his Italian Cultural & Heritage Commission bill. Served best with a hearty barolo and a side dish of cynicism.

Large insurers got their ‘flexible’ economic development bill, although there was one ‘no’ and one ‘not voting’. The Senate will likely deign to let us know who these brave souls were later today, but I’m glad that at least two legislators opted not to give yet more carte blanche to these giants.

Finally, some seven years after the House started live streaming of its sessions, the Senate passed SR 14(Katz), expressing the intent of the Senate to begin live streaming. All 21 senators signed on to the resolution, and President Pro-Tem DeLuca has said that the Senate will begin the logistical work ASAP. Who knows? Maybe we can have both streams working by June 30. Me, I’m betting on the 2nd Tuesday of January 2012, as the debut. And, that is progress.

Today’s Senate Agenda features a bill that has a lot of opponents from among our readers. HB 11(Jaques) would allow ‘only members of a political party to seek that party’s nomination for an elected office in a primary or otherwise be nominated for office by that party’. This bill, by the way, is one reason why Brian McGlinchey’s Working Families Party has opposed Rep. Jaques. I support the bill, and I’ve read all the convoluted rationalizations against it. No doubt opponents will raise their concerns once again in our comments section. Have at it.

While I don’t think that any of the following,  HB 45(Walker); HB 68(Q. Johnson); or HB 67(Q. Johnson), will make one scintilla of difference in preventing another Dr. Bradley case, they all (a) appear to do no harm; (b) will look great on campaign brochures; and (c) will earn Beau Biden some political chits. I’ll repeat what I’ve said previously: Absence of requisite safeguards in law did not enable Dr. Bradley to perform his ungodly perversions, it was the failure of institutions and people within those institutions to carry out their duties and the law that enabled Bradley. These bills are merely fig leafs and even give some of those who failed to exercise responsibility some ‘plausible deniability’, something they don’t deserve.

Today’s House Agenda features HB 66, Gerald Brady’s latest speed enforcement bill, which now also sports four amendments and two amendments to the amendments. The amendments are the Keystone Kops in legislative form, too much fun not to share:

House Amendment 1:  Limits the use of a video speed enforcement program to municipally-owned streets and roads, and only within a work zone or school zone that has been duly marked. The amendment clarifies that the system must be capable of recording images of vehicles going at least 5 miles per hour above the applicable speed limit, rather than the posted speed limit, since a work zone may require a speed less than what would be posted on the permanent signs.

HA1 to HA1: Removes the requirement that the video speed monitoring system be capable of recording images of vehicles traveling in excess of 5 mph above the speed limit. The result of this amendment is that the system is required to be capable of recording images of vehicles traveling in excess of 11 mph above the speed limit. This amendment also eliminates the use of the system in work zones, leaving it only available for use in school zones. This amendment limits a municipality to using the monitoring program in 5 school zones for the first 2 years.

HA2: Mandates the approval of the video speed enforcement system by DELJIS and the Justice of the Peace Court for proper technology interface specifications. In addition, this amendment clarifies that the municipal appeal process must meet minimum guarantees of due process. Finally, this amendment adds the requirement that the law enforcement agency’s daily log also has a certification that the proper signs were in place.

HA3: Clarifies the authority of the government of New Castle County to utilize vehicle speed monitoring systems.

HA4: Limits the video speed monitoring program to the City of Wilmington and City of Dover.

HA1 to HA4:  Clarifies the authority of the government of New Castle County to utilize video speed monitoring systems.

For the record, both HA3 and HA1 to HB 4 are sponsored by ex-cop John Mitchell of Elsmere.

So, be aware, if those amendments and HB 66 pass, Wilmington, Dover and New Castle County would be subject to this, and all other parts of the state would be exempt. You see, that way Kent and Sussex legislators can vote for it knowing that their constituents are exempt. Sound fair to you? Time to kill this bill with a resounding no vote.

Two bills to protect those facing foreclosure have apparently had the legislative glitches worked out and are now ready for consideration. HS1/HB 57(Kowalko) and HS1/HB 56(Keeley). I expect swift confirmation, which these bills deserve.

I have serious concerns about SB 46 (Bushweller), which would purportedly eliminate ‘competitive disadvantages for Delaware insurers’. Written in a way that only a select few specialized attorneys could understand, this looks like yet more deregulation (aka less consumer protection) masquerading as economic development.  But  other states (11 so far) are doing this, we know better than you do, so we must do this ASAP. Stuff like this flies through the General Assembly every year without even a modicum of understanding on the part of the legislators. Campaign checks to follow. Just thought you’d like to know.

I think that’s about as far as they’ll get on the House Agenda today. But there are a lot of other interesting bills on it.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go scrape a bumper sticker off my car. Good thing I didn’t get a tattoo.