General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Weds., June 26, 2019

Whoa. Talk about lack of notice. Check this out from Legislative Council:

The Joint Finance Committee will meet Sunday, June 30 in the JFC Hearing room to draft the grant-in-aid bill.

Sunday, June 30? The last day of session? That means that the public will not see what goodies are being tucked into this bill until it’s already been signed into law. How much money will go to the PAL run by Val Longhurst? How much money will go to Jobs For Delaware Graduates run by Nicole Poore?  By the time we find out, all the legislators will have left town. This is a disgrace. Perhaps the final disgrace of this misbegotten session. Which reminds me, where’s the Bond Bill?  According to the Session Activity Report, it hasn’t been introduced yet.

Looks like it was quite the choppy session in the House yesterday. Some good news: HB 184, the Drastic Plastic Act, was not worked in the House. Somewhere, corporate lobbyists are hammering out even more obfuscatory language to create the illusion of harmlessness. It no doubt will be back. 

Did I say ‘choppy’? HB 77, which ‘aims to make the burglary section of Delaware’s Criminal Code simpler and fairer’, survived by a 23-16 margin.  D’s voting no: Bennett, Bush and Carson. R’s voting yes: Nobody. BTW, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen this before, HB 77 had been released from the Public Safety & Homeland Security Committee by a vote of 6 unfavorable. Hey, at least they let it out. A similar fate awaited HB 78, which ‘aims to make the robbery section of Delaware’s Criminal Code simpler and fairer’. Only Bill Bush, who, other than ‘Dr.’ Mark Brainard, is nobody’s idea of a D, voted no. All Rethugs followed suit with Bush.

It looks, though, that the choppiest of the choppy was reserved for HB 180 (Longhurst), a bill that stinks to high heaven. How does it stink? First, it’s sponsored by the General Assembly’s two least ethical legislators, our PAL Val and Nicole ‘No Longer’ Poore.  It has all the earmarks of being special interest legislation being pushed by someone who would realize financial gain out of its passage.  Read the synopsis and let me know who you think is behind the bill:

This Act creates the Professional Athlete Funding Act which authorizes and establishes regulations pertaining to player brand agreements. A player brand agreement is an agreement between a professional athlete and an investor whereby in exchange for payment to the professional athlete, the athlete commits to pay a specified percentage of the athlete’s future income or earnings. The purpose of this Act is to protect the professional athlete from unscrupulous investors by codifying best practices. Such practices include setting forth requirements that must be satisfied in order that a player brand agreement is valid, binding and enforceable including: (1) the agreement being written in the athlete’s native language; (2) specifying the percentage of income or earning the athlete will have to pay; (3) identifying the income or earnings used to calculate the obligation; (3) not requiring the athlete to pay more than 30% of his or her future income; (4) requiring that the shared percentage lasts no more than 30 years; and (5) identifying specific criteria for the signing and executing of the agreement. This Act also authorizes the Division of Consumer Protection of the Department of Justice to enforce such agreements and to investigate and prosecute violations.

Gee, we’re doing this in little ol’ Delaware?  I wonder if this is Melanie George Smith’s latest business venture. After all, Mike Ramone voted ‘yes’. Anyway, the roll call was all over the place. Yes, the bill passed by a 29-12 vote, but check out the nos: Bentz, Bolden, Bush, Carson, Collins, D. Short, Dukes, Jaques, Kowalko, Postles, Seigfried, Vanderwende. Until yesterday, I couldn’t have imagined a roll call where these 12 legislators would have found common cause. Can someone please tell me what the story is behind this bill?

A little good news from the Senate. The latest horseshit handout to the breeders was not run yesterday. It will be, though, probably under a Motion To Suspend Rules.

Which reminds me. Some guy who used to blog here (‘Bernie Can Go Fuck Himself’) rewrote my story about Speaker Pete’s burying of the ‘Do Your Fucking Job, Kathy’ story today.  He’s been doing that a lot lately. Without attribution. So, if you’d like to read my stories, but don’t like the way I write them, you can head on over to his moribund blog a day or two after I write them to read his prosaic take on what I wrote. But, I digress. There is still hope for SB 159 yet.  If the Senate places it on a ‘Must List’ (bills that one body wants the other body to consider before the end of session), it could resurface, possibly under a Motion To Suspend Rules. I wouldn’t be surprised if that happens.

The Senate has an amazingly short agenda today. The only real bill of interest to me is SB 173 (Sturgeon),  which ‘establishes the Universal Pre-K Consortium to recommend a comprehensive plan for the implementation of a mixed-delivery, non-compulsory public pre-kindergarten program for all 4 year olds in this State.’  Seriously, why such a short agenda? Do McBride and Poore have a joint fundraiser tonight? One last chance to pick the lobbyists’ pockets before the lobbyists pick our pockets?

Today’s House Agenda is lengthier and more substantive. First, a brief teaching opportunity. You will note that the first bill on the Agenda is a bill that passed both the House and Senate, but needs to be voted on again b/c the Senate placed an amendment onto the bill.  In the House, bills that have been amended by the Senate often will be the first ones on an agenda.

Highlights on today’s agenda include HB 134 (Baumbach), which ‘changes the term of a school board member from 5 years to 3 years’; HB 138 (Ramone), which is special interest legislation benefiting somebody, likely with Pike Creek ties; HB 220 (Bentz), which ‘adds coverage for Medication Assisted Treatment (“MAT”) for drug and alcohol dependencies to the mental health parity laws for health insurance’; and HB 222 (Chukwuocha), which ‘allows the State Board of Education to change or alter boundaries of reorganized school districts. It allows the State Board of Education to do so based upon redistricting recommendations from the newly formed Redding Consortium for Educational Equity’.  BTW, does anybody else remember Room 222? Is the bill number referential or coincidental?

There are a few Senate committee meetings today. Of note, the Senate Executive Committee will consider the nomination of Claire DeMatteis Marquardt to be the Commissioner Of Correction.

The House will hold a couple of committee meetings as well.  Hmmm, this bill in the Business Lapdog Committee has an odor to it. Just check out this synopsis::

Delaware is currently ranked highest in the nation for form filing fees. This Act ensures that Delaware stays competitive as an insurer domicile by preventing the Insurance Commissioner from charging more than $2000 per filing for form filing fees.

Because, of course, charging more than $2000 per filing will destroy our status. I call bullshit, and I wonder what the Insurance Commissioner did to piss off the Dover duo of Bush and Paradee.

Finally, the ‘some guy who used to blog here’ expressed distrust in SB 163 (Poore), which establishes a working group to consider dividing up the Department of Health & Social Services. I do as well.

Here’s why: Sen. Poore would run the working group, as the President Pro-Tempore has the power to name the chair in the bill. He ain’t naming anyone but Poore.  The Pro-Tem also has the power to appoint several other members, according to the bill. We know that indeed it will be Poore who signs off on those nominations. Oh, and Val Longhurst will sign off on the House nominations. The Delaware City duo are the bill’s prime sponsors.  One of the dirty secrets of creating these types of task forces is that those who control the naming of the members control the results of the task force. That’s why Jack Markell stacked his economic development task forces with chamber lackeys. That’s why I disagree with Sen. Townsend, who says in this News-Journal article, “”My assumption is that if the data supports restructuring we will restructure,” Townsend said. “And my assumption is if the data does not support restructuring, then we will not restructure.”

Nope. This task force will be skewed towards those who share Poore’s desire to split that agency.  They will invariably issue a report urging the splitting of the agencies.  Until or unless the bill is amended to ensure an impartial process, it does not deserve consideration.