Let’s talk about the $51 million dog that didn’t bark. Namely HB 265(Schwartzkopf). Was on Tuesday’s House Agenda. Would ‘increase(s) the annual tax assessed on partnerships, limited partnerships and limited liability companies on file with the Secretary of State from $250 to $300 and increases the corporation franchise tax by $100 for those corporations that file on the authorized shares method”. $51 mill, just like that. So, why didn’t it happen? I think that Gary Myers, one of our commenters, identified the reason. He asked why wasn’t this a supermajority bill since it raises revenue. Enter House Amendment 1. Adds a supermajority (3/5) enactment clause. Makes 25 the magic number of votes needed, not 21. It’s possible that Pete has the votes. However, the bill isn’t on today’s agenda. So, I’m guessing he doesn’t have the votes right now. I’m honestly not sure how he could possibly have tried to push this bill through as one requiring only a simple majority. Things are just not flowing smoothly in the House right now.
Here are the entire Session activity reports for Tuesday and Wednesday.
Hmm, the Senate R’s (and Bob Venables, D-Mars) are getting kinda feisty. Two bills that unanimously passed the House ran into partisan opposition from the R’s in the Senate. Both passed. SB 115(Henry) permits the temporary suspension of certain occupational and professional licenses “if the activity of the licensee presents a clear and immediate danger to the public health”. Not sure why this bill would be deemed controversial.
This one I get a bit more. HB 159(Jaques) “prohibits a person from running as a candidate for more than one state, county or municipal office in the same election”. To me, it’s common sense. But to some of the nutsos out there, it infringes on their right to be stupid, I guess. Passed unanimously in the House, but only 11-8 in the Senate (one absent, one not voting). A dog whistle vote for those who hear things that others do not (second dog reference this column, I feel a musical coda coming on).
I’m sure that some schoolkids had something to do with this bill, which is the only scheduled item on today’s Senate Agenda. I’m sure that the shell of the channeled whelk is a mighty good shell, and is as deserving of the title as the Official Shell of Delaware as any other good shell, but I…just…can’t…resist…a…rant. The reason why these bills get done is usually to teach students a great civics lesson in how they can impact the legislative process. The problem, of course, is that they are learning a lesson that does not apply, except in stuff like this. Where is the corporate money, the closed door deals, the quid pro quo, the Solomoronic cutting the baby in half? It’s not there, because the message the legislators wish to impart is one of civic participation leading to ‘good’ policy. That, of course, is generally a lie. But it’s great PR, which is no substitute for a General Assembly that genuinely reflects the concerns of its citizens, and not just its corporate citizens.
Today’s House Agenda has a couple of bills of note. HB 229(Baumbach) “allows for a conditional (driver’s) license for the purpose of attending school or job training for anyone who has had their license revoked for conviction of a drug offense. This bill adds these two classifications for a conditional license to the existing classification of purpose of employment, treatment, and probation appointments”. Makes sense to me as it’s likely to lessen recidivism.
The next bill illustrates why it’s virtually impossible to stem the tide of special vanity plates in Delaware. HB 247(Viola) “creates a special license plate identifying members of the Cancer Support Community. The special plates will be available upon 100 applicants submitting applications, and continued membership must be shown by members to maintain possession of their plate”. I give up. All I’ve ever asked for is a “Nobody In Particular” vanity plate. I’d even agree to terms that require me to return the plate if I ever become famous. What about the rest of us? Where is OUR plate?? Admittedly, that dawg won’t hunt. Which reminds me: