General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Thurs., June 9, 2011

Cue the music:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi6wNGwd84g[/youtube]

Here’s something I’ve never seen before in all my years in Dover:

DOVER – State Sen. Michael Katz caused a stir in Legislative Hall on Tuesday after he accused Rep. Bryon Short of plagiarizing his legislation related to the accreditation of medical facilities.

After Katz issued a press release and called for an ethics investigation, Short returned fire to his fellow northern Delaware Democrat by accusing Katz, an anesthesiologist, of attempting to protect doctors with “watered down” legislation that “weakened” protections for patients.

Katz, D-Centreville, claimed Short “essentially stole” word-for-word language of a bill he had filed on May 12. Short, D-Highland Woods, introduced a similar bill with matching key passages on May 26.

“People take ideas or parts of bills, but this was word-for-word,” Katz said. “This is just the tip of the iceberg of the low standard of ethics in the General Assembly.”

Now, don’t get me wrong. Stealing bills is a time-dishonored tradition in Dover. Rep. Jane Maroney was notorious for it. Legislation developed by Senate Republicans either met the same fate or was sent over to House R’s when they controlled the chamber. But this verbal feud between Sen. Michael Katz and Rep. Bryon Short, both Democrats, is exceptional for the vitriol of the charges and responses.

After reading the article, I can only conclude that Senator Katz is more than a little way-y-y-y over the top here. While I’ve had some differences, acknowledged here, with Rep. Short, there is no way that he plagiarized this bill. When you stop to think of it, which Sen. Katz should have done but didn’t, the ‘identical language’ charge doesn’t hold water. The two bills had some significant differences.  And the ‘language’ in question didn’t come from either Sen. Katz or Rep. Short:

Short denied he ripped off Katz’s bill, saying the language came from the same source Katz got it from: state health department officials and lobbyists for doctors and medical facilities. The House passed Short’s House Bill 144 on a 40-1 vote Tuesday; Katz’s Senate Bill 90 remains stalled in a Senate committee.

Short acknowledges it wasn’t his language. Katz never actually claims that it was his. It seems pretty apparent that the language indeed came from resources who were working with legislators on this. So where, exactly does plagiarism even figure into the equation? It doesn’t.

And Katz’ calls for an ethics committee investigation is, to put it charitably, a disproportionate response. While I’ve admired Katz for his willingness to take on the Delaware Way in the Senate, I would respectfully suggest that Katz needs to act in a more circumspect manner.  No good can or will come from this intemperate outburst. I was not aware of any tension between the two legislators, but it must have been there. Otherwise, they no doubt would have teamed up on a bill.  I find this whole thing very strange. Would love to get the rest of the story (hint, hint).

The big news from yesterday is that the Joint Finance Committee wrapped up its deliberations. Not a whole lot of surprises. State employees will have to wait until January 1st for their raises; already well-remunerated judges will get their raises; $95 monthly assistance checks to Delaware’s poorest will continue (Was it really worth it, Governor, to push so hard to screw Delaware’s neediest?); and Yrene Waldron, who represents the greedy for-profit nursing home industry, is unhappy, which makes me happy.

No report on the budget would be complete without the laudatory comments from the Delaware Chamber of Commerce:

“They’ve done a good job,” said Richard Heffron, who represents the Delaware State Chamber of Commerce. “It’s tough. They may have additional money, but the economy is not moving forward as much as we’d like. There is a lot of uncertainty about next year. … You don’t want to go back into a dip and all of a sudden be back in a hole again.”

Explain again to me how cutting taxes on Delaware’s wealthiest makes sense if we’re suddenly back in a hole again. Rhetorical question, the game is fixed.

The Senate also approved the nomination of Shailen Bhatt to be DELDOT Secretary. Not only must Bhatt restore credibility to this tarnished agency, he must also address the ingrained agency culture that secretaries come and go, but powerful long-time employees really run the agency. The two tasks are inextricably intertwined. I will be fascinated to see how this experiment proceeds.

If it’s June, it must be multiple House agendas. They make their first appearance today. It appears that House Agenda I will be first on the docket, although the floor general, usually the House Majority Leader, can and, later on in session, will shift from agenda to agenda. Sometimes they do it based on which representatives are on the floor, as those reps who serve on the money committees are often meeting elsewhere while floor deliberations are going on. A House Consent Agenda is generally an agenda composed of bills that are considered non-controversial. If any member of the House objects to any bill being on that agenda, House rules require that it be removed from the Consent Agenda.

The one bill that intrigues me on House Agenda I is HB 157 (Bennett), which would “authorize new motor vehicle dealers to inspect motor vehicles, 5 model years old or newer, and owned by that dealership.” What could possibly be wrong with that. Uh, does a dealership really want to fail a car that it sold? Does a dealership really want to piss off an existing customer? Is it in the State’s best interests to have a dealership rubber-stamp vehicle inspections? No, no and no. The bill’s got 15 House sponsors though, and you could argue it’s good for business (as long as the inspections really are pro forma), so public be damned. Of course, you could argue that, if the inspections are merely pro forma, why bother doing them at all. For these deep philosophical questions, I turn, per usual, to The O’Jays:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O8gTib5rnw&feature=related[/youtube]

The Senate Agenda features SB 25 (Marshall) which would establish community firearms recovery programs using legislators’ Community Transportation Funds. Not sure how funds designated for capital improvements could be designated for that purpose, and I’m not sure the legislators are sure.

Another bill supports one of my Political Laws: The longer the synopsis of the bill, the more likely that it will be worked in June, when legislators have neither the patience nor time to understand what’s really in the bill. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Synopsis of the Day. If you think you understand the bill, please provide a (much shorter) synopsis, just to prove it can be done. BTW, you can’t spill synopsis w/o synapses, and mine are fried.

See you on Al’s show this morning at 10 on WDEL-1150 on your AM dial. Lots to discuss, PLUS El Somnambulo whining about the challenges of wrestling under a mask, especially during the summer.