DL Open Thread: Saturday, June 18, 2022

Filed in Featured, Open Thread by on June 18, 2022

Lead Rethug Senator Walks Out On Gun Negotiations.  Dog bites man.  He was just waiting for the right moment:

Senators say disagreements remain over incentives for states to enact so-called red flag laws, which allow police to seize guns from people deemed dangerous. Talks are also ongoing to close the “boyfriend loophole”, which permits abusive partners to buy guns.

Those are the table scraps they’re cutting up even more.  Here’s a screed I like, and subscribe to completely:

Democratic leaders in Congress, seriously, WTF is wrong with you? You let Republicans who oppose every single gun reform drive the “bi-partisan” gun reform bill. Genius idea. Put the guys who oppose every single gun reform measure in driver’s seat to create a bill that does absolutely nothing to prevent gun violence and gives them political cover to stand up with a straight face and say they did something about gun violence, negating a key talking point that moves the electorate toward voting for Democrats. What in the hell is wrong with you???

But of course Republicans can’t even bring themselves to do even the bare minimum window dressing of a bi-partisan gun reform bill. Seems they object to threatening boyfriends, mentally ill, and people who present a threat to others from having their God given second amendment rights even possibly slightly restricted in a weak sauce law that has more loopholes then Swiss cheese. Instead, Repubicans have delayed any action for weeks and now walked away from the bi-partisan bill, playing you Democratic leaders like a cheap fiddle once again…

Democracy, Chris Coons-style.

Another Tax Scam The Lobbyists Make Sure Doesn’t Die.  Welcome to the arcane world of ‘syndicated conservation easements’:

The government is targeting a tax deduction that goes by the cumbersome name “syndicated conservation easement,” which exploits a charitable tax break that Congress established to encourage preservation of open land. Under standard conservation easements, landowners who give up development rights for their acreage, usually by donating those rights to a nonprofit land trust, get a charitable deduction in return. When conservation easements are used as intended, both the public and the owner of the property benefit. A piece of pristine land is preserved, sometimes as a park that the public can use, and the donor gets a tax break.

The syndicated versions are different. Instead of seeking to protect a bucolic reserve for wildlife or humans, profit-seeking intermediaries have turned the likes of abandoned golf courses or remote scrubland into high-return investment vehicles. These promoters snatch up vacant land that till then was worth little. Then they hire an appraiser willing to declare that it has huge, previously unrecognized development value — perhaps for luxury vacation homes or a solar farm — and thus is really worth many times its purchase price. The promoters sell stakes in the donation to individuals, who claim charitable deductions that are four or five times their investment. The promoters reap millions in fees.

Reform might have passed if not for, wait for it:

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, the enigmatic Arizona Democrat, who represented a potentially decisive vote in her 50-50 chamber, put an end to that, telling the White House the syndication-killer language was among the provisions she wanted out of the bill, according to press reports. It was removed. That prompted 13 conservation groups to write Sinema on Dec. 7, pleading with her to “stand with us” to “curb abuse and restore the integrity of this cherished and worthy conservation program.”

Sinema, whose objections to the measure remain unclear, was unmoved. “All efforts to persuade the AZ Senator to reconsider her position have failed,” one advocate for the measure told ProPublica in an email. (Sinema’s staff did not respond to ProPublica’s requests for comment.)

Cryptocurrency Losers Blame Everyone But Themselves.  I’m sorry.  I blame people who got way too greedy.  Not that I care:

Given the millions poured into promoting crypto – often with celebrity endorsements – legal action after the crash was inevitable. Class-action lawsuits are already in the works. Kim Kardashian and the boxer Floyd “Money” Mayweather Jr are being sued for alleged false statements promoting the minor cryptocurrency EthereumMax.

Kids, if you invest in something b/c Kim Kardashian told you to, you fit the definition of an idiot.  Caveat Emptor.

Colin Bonini’s Long Day’s Journey Into Night.  How Bonini wasted everybody’s time, and only got a ‘pity’ amendment out of it.  Look up ‘asshole’ in the dictionary…

What do you want to talk about?

About the Author ()

Comments (6)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. bamboozer says:

    Some things you can see coming from a great distance, crashing Cryptocurrency is a prime example. Be honest, it’s a scam that P.T. Barnum would have loved.

  2. GeoBumm says:

    I don’t know all the parliamentary procedures, but unless there is non-flashy ‘good’ things happening on the side, I would think it is time for the Dems to frog march a couple if Dinos who over played their hands right out of the party. Let them go caucus with the GQP and see how it goes being a RINO with a party that no longer needs them. It may be cutting a nose off and shallow, but anything seems better than this death by a thousand cuts a couple of hold outs are inflicting. Seriously, just how many people does these folks represent? And they get to effectively make law for all of us? Bounce-‘‘em out and hang everything around the GQPs neck.

  3. john kowalko says:

    I have posted the following letter that I have sent to Connor Perry (Fiscal and Policy Analyst Delaware Office of Auditor) in response to the unfounded and false attempt to misrepresent HB 405 and its creation of an Independent Inspector General’s Office in Delaware by the Auditor’s Office. I find it quite shocking that the recent events in the Auditor’s Office, (some perpetrated by the Auditor herself) would ignore the alleged cronyism, nepotism and fraudulent activities currently being investigated by Delaware’s DOJ and that Mr. Perry and that office would dare to portray themselves as a legitimate and responsible watchdog agency that somehow negates the need for an independent and apolitical office of Inspector General. I will make a copy of Mr. Perry’s letter available to this site if requested.
    Representative John Kowalko

    Dear Mr. Perry,

    This is the response to your allegations that deliberately distort the differences in responsibilities, obligations and authority between the Auditor General Office and the proposed Inspector General’s Office being created by HB 405.

    The Delaware Office of Auditor of Accounts is a government agency controlled by a partisan elected official whose statutory duties are solely defined as financial audits and postaudits, as provided in Title 29, Chapter 29, § 2906, “Duties of the Auditor of Accounts”.
    While the elected state auditor may sometimes voluntarily choose to expend the office’s budgeted funding for more extensive investigations during financial audits, the statutory language regarding the state auditor is clear regarding the required scope of their audits:
    Title 29, Chapter 29, § 2907, “Scope of audits”.
    (a) The audits shall be sufficiently comprehensive to provide, but not limited to, assurance that reasonable efforts have been made to collect all moneys due the State, that all moneys collected or received by any employee or official have been deposited to the credit of the State and that all expenditures have been legal and proper and made only for the purposes contemplated in the funding acts or other pertinent regulations.
    (b) The audits shall be made in conformity with generally accepted auditing principles and practices.

    HB 405 provides for an independent and, importantly, nonpartisan Inspector General who is selected by an independent blue-ribbon panel of various community stakeholders. The claims by the Auditor of Accounts that “potential auditees or subjects of investigations” and “members of the political class” would “hand select the individual responsible for their oversight” is simply false and patently ignores the members of the public who represent the majority of the positions on the Selection Panel.
    There are other significant differences between the Delaware Auditor of Accounts and the proposed Inspector General under HB 405.
    Unlike the State Auditor, the Inspector General under HB 405 would be:
    • A nonpartisan office that does not engage in partisan elections.
    • Limited to three 5-years terms.
    • Required to remain neutral and impartial during investigations.
    • Able to be removed from office for misconduct and other statutorily defined cause for removal. The Governor must recommend the removal and it must be approved by two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and Senate.
    • Able to conduct independent and nonpartisan investigations of the General Assembly, the Department of Justice, and the Auditor of Accounts. The Inspector General would also be empowered to conduct investigations of a broader set of state agencies as well as individuals and entities that have a business relationship with any state agency.
    • Required to have demonstrated experience in oversight and investigations and to hire qualified staff who must undergo relevant training within 3 years of their hiring.
    • Required to investigate state agencies for “fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, corruption, or any other conduct that harms the public interest.” The Inspector General is not limited to financial audits and postaudits or other investigations that relate to fraud or financial expenditures. The broad scope of the Inspector General’s investigations would be required by statute rather than based on the voluntary interpretation of an elected official.
    • Required to maintain a telephone number, website, email address and mailing address to receive complaints. The Inspector General would be required by statute to implement these measures, rather than the voluntary process followed by the Auditor of Accounts for its financial auditing responsibilities.
    • Required to respond to every complaint received alleging fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, corruption, or any other conduct that harms the public interest.
    • Required to issue a public decision at the conclusion of every investigation it performs. The Inspector General could issue any recommendations relevant to its investigation.
    • Required to keep investigative documents confidential and protect the identity of whistleblowers and anyone else who files a complaint.
    Numerous instances of official misconduct, abuse of power, and lack of effective oversight of government agencies have plagued Delaware in recent years. Both current and former elected officials have been indicted on felony criminal charges for their leadership roles at government agencies in just the past few years, and longstanding issues in the state’s criminal justice and prison systems as well as environmental enforcement have gone unaddressed despite the existence of an elected Auditor of Accounts.

    For the limited scope and statutory requirements of the Auditor of Accounts, please see: https://delcode.delaware.gov/title29/c029/index.html

    The fact is that a State Auditor and an Inspector General need to be separate entities because they have significantly different responsibilities and purposes. Routine financial auditing and investigations relating to financial abuse or fraud are important functions that are properly in the domain of the Auditor of Accounts. An Inspector General is needed to provide oversight–and investigations, when necessary–of state agencies beyond their financial performance. These functions require very different skills than financial audits performed by the State Auditor and staff. Changing the statutory language for the Auditor of Accounts to conform to the extensive differences in the proposed Inspector General under HB 405 would create an entirely new entity and undermine the importance of the state auditor’s current role. In addition, without amending the Delaware Constitution, no statutory changes would be able to transform the Auditor of Accounts into the independent and nonpartisan Inspector General proposed by HB 405.

    Representative John Kowalko
    25th District

  4. john kowalko says:

    This appears to be the letter writer, “Richard Perry”. Rehoboth Beach Mayor Stan Mills has decided to not reappoint Planning Commission Chair Rick Perry. Curiously Kathy McGuiness was some type of Rehoboth Beach commissioner. Passing ships in the night? Who knows? I have my suspicions but I don’t know if this is another familial connection in this troubled office. I will have a response published in the Cape Gazette rebutting the Auditors letter I believe.
    Rep. Kowalko

  5. That letter from Perry simply reinforces why we need an IG.

    I admit I was initially a skeptic. But the lack of performance and more-than-dubious ethics of the last two auditors make clear that we need an office that will not simply run interference for Delaware Way miscreants by covering up their misdeeds, or refusing to conduct honest investigations.

    Unfortunately, I think this letter was designed to provide a fig leaf to the worst of the worst in the House to give them cover for votes against the bill. I say, put it on an agenda, and let’s see where everybody stands.