Document Actions
Tuesday: Talk amongst yourselves
posted at 2008-06-24 23:59 | Last modified 2008-06-25 08:48
This is going to be short tonight, since I have to work on my prop for Wed. night’s press skits. Two words: gold glitter. That’s all I’m giving up.
Budget update
House negotiators were anxiously awaiting a Senate counteroffer this afternoon. Senate Maj Leader Tony Rand (D-Cumberland) conceded things are moving “slowly,” especially in regards to mental health funding. He also says talks haven’t even gotten to capital projects yet, but he’s certain things “will work themselves out as they always do.”
House Finance co-chair Paul Luebke (D-Durham) was a bit more forthcoming about what's in contention, at least in finance:
- House priorities: EITC increase, disabled vets’ homestead exemption, health care credits for business owners, and the Star Energy tax holiday.
- Senate priorities: gift tax cut, home heating oil tax break, and retroactive tax refunds for small businesses "persecuted" by NCDOR.
Speed bumps notwithstanding, both sides say they’re optimistic about finishing up before July’s calendar hits double digits.
Trucks and kids
The House votes tomorrow on a proposal by Cary Dem Jennifer Weiss to ban kids under 16 from riding in the back of pickup trucks.
Current law allows children 12 and over to ride in the back of a truck, as well as kids of any age accompanied by their parents, with exemptions for a few rural counties. Weiss’s bill, recommended by the Child Fatality Task Force, would raise the age limits everywhere, even if the parents are supervising,
“...Because having a parent there doesn’t keep you from flying out of the truck. And it also removes the exclusion for smaller counties. Because it doesn’t matter where you live – you should still be safe from falling out of a pickup truck when the truck goes over a pothole.”
Weiss's bill doesn’t have many opponents, but what few it has are pretty vocal. Like Cherokee Republican Roger West, who says it infringes on parental rights:
“We just keep on taking rights away from people. There ain’t no stoppin’ point. You know, the next thing you know, you won’t be able to sit in the front of a pickup. ”
The measure's up for a floor vote Wednesday. It’s expected to win big.
Big Brother in town
The Dept. of Homeland Security’s Mike Mayhew put on a demonstration of the Feds’ “E-Verify” database in the auditorium today. The program matches up names with social security numbers, DOBs, etc to check whether people are eligible to be employed in the US.
Some lawmakers want to require all employers, public and private, to use the system to check out new hires. Buncombe Republican Charles Thomas and Jackson Democrat John Snow are handling the measure in the House and Senate, respectively. It would penalize employers who use unauthorized workers by rescinding their business licenses after a couple of violations.
Anti-illegal-immigration groups are hailing it as the latest self-deportation solution: if illegal immigrants can’t get a job, they’ll leave. Which almost makes sense, except that they said the same thing about driver’s licenses, and stricter laws on that don’t seem to be making much difference. Plus, it’s already illegal to hire unauthorized workers. Seen any slowdown?
Opponents of E-Verify say its self-deportation potential is the least of its problems. Far more pressing is the issue of accuracy. Even defenders of the system concede its error rate is unacceptably high - about 4 percent.
That translates to millions of legally employable Americans who could lose their jobs because of a misplaced keystroke at the Social Security data center. Sure, errors are fixable – theoretically -- but that could take years under current staffing levels. And the new bill doesn’t include more money for additional E-Verify staff. In the meantime, who’s paying the rent for that 4 percent of workers?
It's unclear whether the proposal's going anywhere this sessions. The House measure is in the committee on Homeland Security, where chair Grier Martin isn’t sure if it’ll get a hearing. The companion Senate proposal went to Approps, so it’s still in play – sort of. It’s worth noting that its cosponsor list includes Dem statewide candidates Kay Hagan (US Sen) and Walter Dalton (Lt Gov.), both of whom have taken heat on the campaign trail for immigration issues. So I'm not counting it out just yet.
Mea culpa
I totally miscalled a concurrence vote in last night’s post. The Senate voted to approve House changes to a gang prevention measure. I mistook today’s prevention and intervention money bill for its companion bill, H274, which criminalizes a variety of behaviors that may or may not be indicative of gang behavior. The latter’s the controversial one. The former (which passed easily today) has no known enemies. Sorry about that!
Comments? Drop me a line.
