General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Thurs., Jan. 19, 2012

A busy and typical legislative committee day: Some progress and some setbacks. Mostly progress.

The key setback was the tabling of HB 55(Rep. D. E. Williams) in the Senate Elections/Administrative Services Committee. The bill would essentially replace the Electoral College as the method for electing the President with a National Popular Vote once states with more than 50% of the national electoral votes ratify the compact proposed in the bill. Sen. Michael Katz’ tabling of the bill likely means that there simply weren’t enough votes on the committee to get it to the Senate floor. The other committee members are Senators Blevins, Booth, Lawson, Marshall and Sokola. It’s odd to have an even number of committee members, but it means that you need 4 affirmative votes to get HB 55 to the Senate floor. Whether or not you support HB 55, there is one argument against HB 55 worthy of demolition. From Chad Livengood’s News-Journal article (and, yes, the News-Journal was all over Leg Hall yesterday):

“Why would a presidential candidate spend any time in Delaware when they could be in New York, California, Indiana or Pennsylvania?” (R national committeeeman Laird)Stabler asked.

Uh, Laird, why would they  spend time in any solidly red or blue state under the current system? Well, of course, there’s money. Which is why Rethugs visit Chateau Country regularly. But, in an increasingly divided red/blue dynamic, only a group of swing states will get attention from the candidates down the stretch now. Delaware, at least, has the advantage of reaching media markets in Pa., N. J., and Maryland,  so, if anything we get disproportionate attention, since we’re sort-of a media center. Well, that and, you know, Joe Biden.

The House Administration Committee defeated two attempts at voter intimidation by Rethug Reps. Deborah Hudson and Monsignor Greg Lavelle. The intellectual bankruptcy of this effort was made clear to all by Speaker of the House Bob Gilligan during this exchange:

“A lot of times, we need to say to the public that we’re doing something so we don’t have a problem,” said Hudson, R-Fairthorne.But Hudson couldn’t name a particular incident of alleged voter fraud in Delaware, which House Speaker Robert Gilligan seized upon.

“If you can’t tell me one problem we’ve had in Delaware or in your district, … [then] why would we pass the legislation?” Gilligan asked Hudson.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is exactly the same legislation that Rethugs are passing throughout the country with only one purpose: Disenfranchise voters who are not likely to support them. That is why they’re Rethuglicans.

Other notable results from yesterday’s House committee meetings show up on today’s House Agenda. The bill banning bath salts tops the agenda.

I can’t wait to see the roll call on HB 222(Jaques), which would require the Department of Labor to ‘publish the names of employers who have violated the Workplace Fraud Act, by misclassifying an employee as an independent contractor or otherwise.’ My highly-sophisticated analysis of the bill suggests that a ‘yes’ vote is good, and a ‘no’ vote is ee-e-e-vil. And I suspect there will be ‘no’ votes.

Brad Bennett’s bill adding a $100 fine on all crimes committed against seniors is also on the fast track. While I don’t think it really will amount to much, as even the bill’s sponsor claims that it will only raise between $2-300,000 annually, it will be one of the most-cited items on campaign brochures this fall. Which, after all, is its principal purpose. Incumbency protection.

I don’t know whether the House will get to these bills today, because the highlight of the day, and often of the legislative session, is the Governor’s Annual State of the State Address to the General Assembly. In addition to proclaiming the ‘state of the state’ (“The groundhog has seen his shadow!”), the address serves as the official unveiling of the Governor’s legislative priorities. Sometimes it’s a laundry list of specifics, sometimes it’s more an articulation of the principles that the Governor believes the General Assembly should embrace, usually it’s some combination of both.

Governor Markell is by far the best orator we’ve had as governor during my time in state government. He’s at his best when he speaks, or writes, from the heart. As he did on civil unions. And as he did on the Gattis decision. However, he tends to lose that human connection when he embraces the policy wonk side of his personality. We already know, based on this story, that the Governor intends to seek ‘savings’ (meaning cuts) from Medicaid. Just so there’s no mistake, Medicaid=Health Care for the Poor. Last year, the Governor proposed a $92/month cut to services to the medically-indigent. I sure hope he has learned from that kamikaze mission that that’s both horrible policy and a political non-starter. If this governor once again insists on balancing the budget on the backs of those least able to sacrifice while giving aid and comfort to the plutocrats, he’ll once again have a political fight on his hands. Because screwing the defenseless is class warfare, and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous. It’s real simple, ‘shared sacrifice’ means that everybody shares in the sacrifice. State employees sacrificed last year. The plutocrats did not. A humane governor should not expect those with nothing to sacrifice to ‘sacrifice’ while enabling the greediest among us to rake in yet more blood money . Governor, since your misguided and politically tone-deaf Medicaid proposals last year, Occupy Wall Street has happened. We now understand, and can articulate, the fact that the system has been rigged to benefit the 1% to the detriment of the rest of us. That has ever been thus in Delaware. We know it, you know it, and the plutocrats know it. I hope that your speech today reflects what’s in the best interest of the 99%, not just yet another sop to the 1%.

In other words, we’ll be listening. Critically.