General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Thursday, March 12, 2026

YES!  President Pro-Tem Dave Sokola apparently read the same report on scofflaw Allen Harim’s serial and ongoing environmental violations as we did. He has placed HB 222 (Lambert) on today’s Senate Agenda. You will recall that objections from downstate agriculture interests had impelled Lambert to remove the poultry firms from his bill that increased fines on serial polluters.  So, he introduced this separate bill, which passed the House 24-15 (Bill Bush and Lumpy Carson were the only D’s to vote no).  The Senate Executive Committee has released the bill to the floor, and now the bill will be considered before the entire Senate.  Here’s hoping…

I’ve gotten ahead of myself.  Here is yesterday’s Session Activity Report.  One note of interest perhaps only to me–Stephanie Bolden’s Incumbency Protection bill did not make it out of the Senate Executive Committee.  BTW, guess who introduced an amendment to make the bill even worse.  Give up?  None other than Nicole ‘No Longer’ Poore.  Check this out.  So.  If Delaware once again tried to make our Presidential Primary the first in the nation (and we’ve tried to do it in the past), the statewide primary could take place as early as February.  Bolden and Poore=negative political synergy.

Ho-kay.  Here’s today’s House Agenda.  We could have 18-year-old bartenders in our future, thanks to HB 195 (K. Williams).  The bill:

…changes the age at which a person can bartend from 21 years old to 18 years old, and requires that a bartender who is 18, 19, or 20 years old be directly supervised by a person who is 21 years of age or older and who is working behind the bar with the 18-, 19-, or 20-year-old. This Act also increases the frequency of statutorily mandated alcoholic beverage server training from every 4 years to every 2 years. To ensure that 18–20-year-olds are protected from sexually oriented content by virtue of being permitted to bartend, this Act prohibits anyone under the age of 21 from entering into or working in any capacity in a tavern or taproom that offers sexually oriented entertainment.

My only question is–who requested this legislation?  Guess I’ll just have to dive back into those campaign finance reports.  Doubt the request came from 18-21 year-old would-be bartenders.

I share the intent behind this bill.  But are we setting up a situation that lends itself to overcharging?:

…creates the new crime of “interference with reproductive health services or exercise of religion”, which is based on a substantially similar federal law (18 U.S.C. § 248). The Superior Court is vested with jurisdiction over criminal prosecutions of this offense.

Here is today’s Senate Agenda.  I can’t get past the first item without a question.  SCR 143 (Brown) ‘establishes the Blockchain and Digital Innovation Task Force, established for the purpose of examining opportunities to maintain and enhance Delaware’s position as a leader in blockchain and digital innovation, and identifying how to attract and retain businesses engaged in digital assets and related technologies, while developing appropriate consumer protections and regulatory clarity.’ 

First of all, ‘blockchain’ is not inherently ‘good’.  Yet, the bolded disclaimer notwithstanding, this Task Force is designed to put Delaware in a position to become a ‘leader in blockchain’.  Second, lest you have doubts of what the intent is, check out the proposed composition of the Task Force:

(2) ‎Two members of the Senate: 1 member of the majority party who is appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and who shall serve as Co-Chair, and 1 member of the minority party who is appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

(3) Two members of the House of Representatives: 1 member of the majority party who is appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and who shall serve as Co-Chair, and 1 member of the minority party who is appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

(4) The State Bank Commissioner, or the Commissioner’s designee.

(5) The Secretary of Finance, or the Secretary’s designee.

(6) The Attorney General, or the Attorney General’s designee.

(7) The State Treasurer, or the State Treasurer’s designee.

(8) The Secretary of Labor, or the Secretary’s designee.

(9) Three members from the blockchain, cryptocurrency, digital assets, or financial technology industry, appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

(10) Three members from the blockchain, cryptocurrency, digital assets, or financial technology industry, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

In other words, no cautionary notes shall be heard.  This is garbage in, garbage out.  No good can come of it.

Hey, at least we have HB 222.  I hope.

Seeya next week.