General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Thurs., June 23, 2022
I’m guilty of false advertising. I apologize.
I promised the following in yesterday’s legislative piece:
One legislator in particular will not be happy. (Hint: They killed an exceedingly-popular bill despite being the prime House sponsor on it. Oh, and despite the fact that it passed the Senate.) It’s what happens when you are owned by the special interests.
Everything in that statement is true. Except, I’m not gonna pursue it. Today. I’ve got the story. It’s air-tight. We’re talking the officially-filed records of lobbyists for some of Delaware’s most powerful interests. But it also depresses me. Al and I have talked a little bit off the blog about how good people who run for office to serve the public good can get sucked into the Delaware Way primordial ooze once in office. I’m convinced that that’s the case here. I might well write that article. Not today, though.
Speaker Pete’s HB 451 once again was not considered in the Senate. Third consecutive day. The bill raising the age to purchase firearms from 18 to 21. I expected to find it on today’s Senate Agenda, but it’s not. Yes, it could be brought up under a Motion To Suspend Rules. I think it’s going to eventually pass, and I doubt that the Senate will be able to improve on the bill. But something’s going on. I will also note that none of the gun bills sent from the Senate over to the House are on today’s House Agenda. Maybe it means something, maybe it doesn’t. But I think it’s likely that there are some real battles going on between the respective leaderships of the Senate and the House as to which bills will and should be considered before the end of Session.
Here is yesterday’s Session Activity Report. As predicted by Yours Truly, same-day registration and voting passed the Senate on a straight party line vote of 14-7. Somewhere, Colin Bonini weeps for the future of democracy. Although they’re not on today’s House Agenda, SB 302 (Townsend) and SB 8 (Sokola) both cleared committee, so these gun bills are ready for full House consideration. So did vote-by-mail. Will Rep. Collins ‘pull a Bonini’ and introduce 27 amendments to it? We shall see. He’s pretty much the only one who would do that.
The key bill on today’s Senate Agenda is HB 455 (Minor-Brown). The bill:
makes clear that physicians, physician assistants and nurses who perform, recommend, or provide reproductive health services, if such services are lawful in this State, do not engage in unprofessional conduct and cannot be disciplined for such services even if such services are illegal or considered to be unprofessional conduct or the unauthorized practice of medicine or nursing in another state. This section also authorizes the following to terminate pregnancy before viability: (1) A physician assistant with a collaborative agreement with an appropriately training physician; and (2) A certified nurse midwife or certified nurse practitioner who demonstrates knowledge and competency, including successful completion of a training or certification approved by the Board of Nursing.
Wow, I checked out the House roll call. Both Ramone and Mike Smith ‘took walks’ on that bill. Joint Profiles in Cowardice. Look for a 14-7 vote in the Senate unless Ernie Lopez relocates his conscience.
Will the Senate rubber-stamp a tax break for the Riverfront Development Corporation’s properties, assets worth around $84 mill? Hoping no, betting yes.
Mayor Mike’s Eminent Domain bill is at the top of today’s House Agenda. I’ve heard an argument that out-of-state property owners who ignore their properties is the key target of this bill. OK, I could buy that–if the bill wasn’t so much broader than addressing that narrowly-focused problem. The bill is an atomic bomb where a fly swatter would do. Maybe the scope of the bill will be narrowed, but I wouldn’t hold my breath. A better idea–come back in January with a bill that addresses the issue at hand.
That’s sage advice for a raft of dubious bills sneaking in under the deadline. Won’t happen, though. Never does.
BREAKING:
Legislators and Wilmington city officials have agreed to delay consideration of proposed Eminent Domain legislation until next year.
What about the Inspector General bill?
Speaker Pete already ‘took care’ of that one. Reassigned it to the Appropriations Committee, where it won’t see the light of day.
Come on El Som, as a longtime Leg Hall staffer, you know there’s an actual House rule requiring bills with fiscal notes to go through Appropriations. It’s been there forever.
This isn’t some arbitrary bill-killing move — though I agree that bills that aren’t funded in the budget that are sent there often do die there.
RULE 20 – ASSIGNMENT TO APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
Each bill or joint resolution, whether emanating from the House or the Senate, containing an appropriation or which may involve any net financial loss or obligation on the part of the State, including Transportation Trust Funds, if any, of $100,000 or more in any one (1) of the next three (3) fiscal years (which has been previously referred by the Speaker under the Rules to any committee of the House other than the Committee on Appropriations) shall, after the same has been reported back to the House, be referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
This is horseshit and you ought to know it. EVERY bill has a fiscal effect. Every single one. And not every one is subjected to this.
Glad people come here to have thoughtful, rational discussions about issues. I point to a literal rule that’s been in effect for decades, and your retort is “horseshit.”
And your argument that every bill has a “fiscal effect” isn’t a good-faith one. It’s just some false equivalency to back up a faulty position.
Yes, it’s been in effect for decades, and it’s ignored when convenient and applied when convenient.
How hard is it to calculate the expenses involved in establishing the position? And I don’t say this as a supporter of the bill; I think it will do exactly as much good as the position of Public Advocate, which was supposed to do exactly the same thing.
My position is rational, and yours — hiding behind procedure when it’s pretty clear foot-dragging is going on — is horseshit. I say that in good faith. And you have yet to demonstrate any fault in my position.
Look, I’m just making the point that there’s a constant “this is an arbitrary decision to screw people over” when it’s really a long-standing rule that’s been applied evenly to all bills with fiscal notes.
You’ve produced no examples of a bill with a large fiscal note skipping Appropriations and just continue to lob insults, which says a lot.
Bottom line for me: Readers should know that when this blog says bills are always sent to Appropriations to die, that’s not true and ignores the facts — there’s an existing rule that’s followed pretty consistently, no matter what the writers here say.
Have a nice day.
No, I’m saying that lots of bills don’t have fiscal notes at all. And this one does not have a “large fiscal note.” My understanding is that they asked for $500,000.
Nobody wrote that all bills are sent there to die. Just this one. And I didn’t insult you. I said your argument was horseshit. Doesn’t mean you are.
Hello, is this mic on? The funding had ALREADY been provided in the Budget Bill.
Just as it was for the Renters’ Protection Bill. No assignment to Appropriations is required under those circumstances.
I grant you—what Pete did wasn’t arbitrary. He did it specifically to kill the bill. And succeeded.
Would you like me to enumerate all the bills that had costs associated with them that bypassed the Appropriations Committee? No, because you’re being disingenuous here and you know it. You’re carrying someone’s water here.