This Old State

Take a look at Rocky Knob Blog

2011-09-01T08:59:00.000-04:00

Those who have spent time here over the past five years may like to take a look at my new blog, Rocky Knob Blog, (http://rockyknobblog.blogspot.com/) abut life on the mountain.
Hope to see you there!

End of the ride

2011-05-23T06:44:00.000-04:00

Thanks for meeting me here over the years and letting me know what you thought. See you in the hills.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/05/21/2315345/a-grand-life-in-newspapers.html

Ode to a rotary grater

2011-05-16T09:44:00.000-04:00

Kathleen Purvis' story last Wednesday on five essential kitchen tools ("5 tools, 5 books, 5 do's and 5 don'ts for new cooks setting up their first real workspace" is a model of what we've come to expect from her writings on food over the years. It's always good, always helpful, always to the point.

And it reminded me how much we depend on favorite kitchen tools, every bit as much as woodworkers depend upon their favorite woodworking tools. And how much I hated it when a house fire burned up a tool bag with one of my favorite ratcheting screwdrivers. It had a spherical plastic handle about the size of a tennis ball with square holes on each side, into which a four-inch rod with a choice of Phillips or straight slot screwdriver tips could be inserted; depending on which side the rod was inserted in, the gizmo would drive screws or remove them. It was cheap, easy to use and with the large round handle, fast. I was sorry to find they're no longer made, or at least no longer available in stores where I've looked and websites I've tried to Google.

And so it goes with the venerable Mouli Grater, one of my favorite kitchen tools. Sad to say it's no longer made, but you can find them on E-bay and at flea markets in many places. A French company now called Moulinex once made them and we wore out a couple of them making the world's best pimento cheese for family and friends. It was a simple tool made of lightweight tin -- sort of a tong with a cylindrical rotary grater turned by a little crank on one end. We used it mostly to grate sharp cheddar cheese into the thinnest of shreds, which is essential in getting the cheese to meld properly with the Chinese hot sauce, mayonnaise, pickle relish and red and green peppers my wife puts into the cheese. My job is to grate the cheese; hers is to work her wonders on the blend until it's ready to try out with a handful of wheat crackers. More hot sauce? A few more spoonfuls of relish? I doubt that she ever made it exactly the same way as all the other times, but our friends have come to expect a tub of it when they visit. I took at tub with me last week on an annual college-pal fishing trip. I had barely walked into the house on Beaufort's front street before one of my buddies looked up and asked, "Where's Martha's pimento cheese?"

The Mouli Grater image atop this blogpost is from thekitchn.com (yep: no second 'i' in kitchen.) Here's a link: http://www.thekitchn.com/thekitchn/french-vintage-the-mouli-grater-128464

So it's a shame they're no longer made like they once were. I've read that the availability of electronic gadgets crowded the Mouli out of the market. Some folks didn't like the way the tin would discolor; stainless steel looks better and sells better, I guess.

I know, I know: There are a lot of rotary graters on the market, and we've tried a handful of them. But none compares with the Mouli Grater for ease of use and quality of the cut. We've been nursing our last one along for years, and soon we'll probably be hunting for another one at a flea market somewhere. If you see one before I do, my advice is grab it and hoard it.

Alcoa still on hold

2011-05-03T14:44:00.002-04:00

A federal court has denied a request from Alcoa Power Generating Inc. to rule that the state of North Carolina had effectively waived its authority over a permit Alcoa needs to renew its federal license to generate electricity at dams it owns on the Yadkin River. It's another setback for Alcoa, which until a couple of years ago appeared to be on the verge of getting a new license to operate the hydroelectric plants.

Alcoa once employed about 1,000 workers at its Badin smelter, which consumed much of the electricity it generates from the river's power. But the smelter has been closed down for years, Alcoa has only a relative handful of workers, and after years of supporting Alcoa, North Carolina has lately opposed another federal license for Alcoa. The state wants to recover the license, though it must depend upon Congress to do that. It's allowed under federal law, but that hasn't happened before. So it's probably a long shot for North Carolina to "recapture" the license, to use the legal term. But the Perdue administration believes the river is a public resources that belongs to the people and that without the jobs that once earned Alcoa the state's support, the power of the river and its earning power should be held by the state.(A;coa continues to operate the dams under an annual license.)

Curiously to those not familiar with the complicated proceedings, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources had appeared to support issuing something called a 401 certification, which Alcoa must have to get its federal license renewed. But last year the state withdrew its permit after concluding, based on some emails made public in an administrative law proceeding, that Alcoa had withheld important information from the state about water guality in the river. Alcoa quickly announced it would fight the permit revocation and petitioned the U.S. court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Alcoa wanted the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to go ahead and grant the license. The appeals court rejected Alcoa's argument and said FERC cannot issue the license pending completion of litigation over the permit.

Here's more background:

The state had revoked the water quality permit after concluding that Alcoa “intentionally withheld information material to determining the project’s ability to meet the State’s water quality standards for dissolved oxygen.”

The House's 'War on voting'

2011-05-03T09:43:00.002-04:00

The executive director of a non partisan, non profit organization devoted to expanding education about statewide elections raises a good question about what's going on in the legislature. In a column about an apparent "war on voting" in the legislature based on bills that would make it harder to vote by requiring photo ID cards and reducing the opportunity for early voting, Damon Circosta notes that it's not unusual for the majority party to try to lock in its electoral gains in various ways. The Democrats nearly perfected that process during the century-plus that they ran the legislature, except for a couple of sessions when Republicans ran the House.

But, Circosta argues, voters elected the new Republican majority in hopes they wouldn't do the same things Democrats did. As he put it, "But lost in all of this partisan warfare is the notion that we did not elect this new crop of leadership to act like those who came before them. We elected them precisely because they told us that they would be different."

Because it isn't, the likely result is "voter discontent" and less involvement in politics.

Here's Circosta's column:

By Damon Circosta

RALEIGH - Perhaps the most overused rhetorical ploy is when politicians declare a "war" on something.

Formal declarations of real war -- the kind with tanks, missiles and opposing nations -- are thankfully exceedingly rare. But lawmakers often declare war to attract attention to their cause. Think Lyndon Johnson¹s "war on poverty" or Richard Nixon's "war on drugs." When a problem is so insidious that it merits a declaration of war, people take notice.

Given some of the recent bills proposed in the N.C. General Assembly, there seems to be a "war on voting."

So far this session we have seen proposals that would eliminate a popular program allowing people to register to vote during early voting; decrease the days and times early voting is accessible; limit the verification methods used on Election Day to only certain types of photo identification; and require ballot instructions to be in English only. As if that wasn't enough, the war on voting also includes a steep reduction in funding to our State Board of Elections and the end to programs that reduce corporate, union and other special-interest influence in elections.

I doubt we will see any lawmaker hold a press conference explaining why there are so many bills aimed at making it harder to vote while also making it easier for special-interest dollars to find their way into our political system. It's much more popular to declare wars on societal ills like poverty and drugs than to declare war on civic participation and voting.

Telling people that you prefer they don't participate in democracy won't win you a lot of friends. But make no mistake. If these proposals find their way into law, people will have a more difficult time getting involved with elections, and those who wish to use big money to tilt things in their favor will have a much easier time.

On some level, we should expect to see a slew of election-related legislation. In 2010, for the first time in over a century, we saw control of both chambers of the General Assembly switch political parties. When that happens there is a natural inclination by the new crowd to lock in their electoral gains by making it more difficult for voters who they think may not agree with them.

Democrats, when they were in charge, were not immune to such shenanigans and Republicans appear to be operating from the same playbook. But lost in all of this partisan warfare is the notion that we did not elect this new crop of leadership to act like those who came before them. We elected them precisely because they told us that they would be different.

Over the last decade we have seen a sharp increase in voter frustration.

Part of this frustration certainly stems from disenchantment with how our elected officials comport themselves when they are tasked with setting up the rules for elections.

By trying to shape election law for short-term partisan gain, our politicians fuel voter discontent. Fewer and fewer of us feel inclined to participate in a process we see as tainted. And when only a handful of us get involved with politics, then our representative democracy doesn¹t really represent us at all.

No lawmaker would be so foolish as to come out and openly declare a war on voting, but it would be refreshingly honest to at least hear our elected officials say that they are in fact making these changes for their own electoral gain. At least then we citizens would be on notice that our democracy is under assault.

###

(Damon Circosta is the executive director of the N.C. Center for Voter Education, a Raleigh-based nonprofit and nonpartisan organization, dedicated to helping citizens more fully participate in democracy.)

McCrory still leading Perdue in Civitas Poll

2011-04-26T09:18:00.001-04:00

The lastest SurveyUSA News Poll conducted for the conservative J.W. Pope Civitas Institute finds the same kinds of results that other polls lately have shown: Former charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory, a Republican, leads Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue by 12 points. The poll asked, If the election were held today, would you vote for McCrory or Perdue? Overall, 51 percent of the 500 registered voters said they supported McCrory while 39 percent liked Perdue. 58 percent of males chose McCrory and 37 percent chose Perdue: 45 percent of females chose McCrory while 41 percent chose Perdue.

As to party affiliation, 88 percent of Republicans prefered McCrory; 64 percent of Democrats would vote for Perdue, and independent voters preferred McCrory 53 percent to Perdue's 42 percent. Among those who identified themselves as Tea Party supporters, 86 percent liked McCrory and 13 percent opposed him; 7 percent liked Perdue and 79 percent opposed her..

Perdue's job rating was still negative in the poll. 40 percent approved of the way Perdue was doing her job while 52 percent disapproved. For more on these poll results, click this link.

Analyst: Dem's best hope is Repubs

2011-04-25T08:58:00.000-04:00

I asked John Davis, a Raleigh political consultant and editor of the John Davis Political Report, what would have to happen for Republicans to lose their advantage in the N.C. General Assembly to Democrats in the next election. Like me, John doesn't see that happening, but he also sees that it could happen if the GOP squanders its standing with voters. That's the best hope Democrats have for the next elections, he says, though a lot depends on who raises big money. He also thinks Republicans will take the U.S. Senate in 2012 as well, and Pat McCrory may win the governorship.

Here's what he had to say:

Republicans could fritter away their advantage with one of their classic internal feuds between disgruntled conservatives who demand instant gratification and party pragmatists with a long term view. It's a delicate balance.

On one hand, if the leadership does not handle the conservatives carefully, it could rekindle the Tea Party, leading to costly primaries and a divided base. On the other hand, if the leaders go out of their way to appease conservatives as a preemptive tactic to keep them in the fold, then they risk the loss of independent voters ... especially urban moderates.

Very delicate.

Republicans must think long term if they want to govern long term.

The other thing to look for is the money. Democrats raided GOP territory for years because they had the extra money to compete for and win Republican districts like those held at one time by Democratic Senators Snow, Queen, Goss, Foriest, Boseman, Hoyle and Soles. In other words, the money mattered more than the way the districts were drawn.

The big question mark flashing in my mind is the money. Can Democrats go back to the same well that has been their bottomless source of campaign financing for decades and get enough money to be competitive in the swing districts? A lot of that will be determined by Obama and whether his campaign will target NC for another win in the fall of 2012.

If Obama raises his $1 billion goal, he will likely reinvest in NC ... HQs and paid staff to manage thousands of vols who are seasoned at registering and turning out their voters. If that begins to unfold next Summer, then the political investment community will hedge their bets, thereby giving Dems a fighting chance.

My sense is that the eco is breaking favorably for the establishment and that the likely outcome is a status quo year. Obama wins easily, the US House tightens back up and the Rs take the US Senate just because of the way the deck is stacked in 2012 in their favor.

The Rs may take the NC Gov mansion because Perdue is not a strong candidate. Watch her fund-raising closely. The Rs are likely to hold both chambers in NC ... unless their blow their opportunity as they have many times in the past.

Bottom line: The best hope for Perdue and the Democrats is Republicans.

Say it ain't so, Woody!

2011-04-20T08:36:00.002-04:00

Woody Durham, the durable voice of the UNC Tar Heels' football and men's basketball programs since the surface of the Earth cooled, is hanging it up -- and a lot of us dyed in the (Rameses') wool fans are wondering how we're going to spend Saturday afternoons in the fall and icy winter evenings without the voice of the man who has called more than 1,800 games since he took the mic in 1971.

In a world beset by economic turmoil, budget shortfalls, earthquake and tsunami damage and tornadoes that raked the southeast and took the lives of many North Carolinians, the question of who tells Tar Heel fans what's going on is a small one. Point taken. But for those who follow college sports closely and who become accustomed to the voices as well as the personalities of play-by-play officials and color analysts, it's an important thing. I still miss Gary Dornburg, the N.C. State announcer for whom a lunchtime favorite was named at the Mecca restaurant in downtown Raleigh: The Gary Dornburger.

I've been addicted to listening to Carolina sports since at least the days of Bill Currie ~~Curry~~, the announcer that Sports Illustrated once called The Mouth of the South, but Woody Durham has been a regular visitor in our home and cars for most of my career. I graduated from UNC in 1968, soon went into the Army and wound up in the Washington D.C. area. There were no internet streaming broadcasts in those days, but a Maryland lawyer friend quickly clued me in to the fact that on certain evenings when the stars were lined up right, you could hear Tar Heel basketball broadcasts on Charlotte's WBT radio flowing up the Shenandoah Valley. Some evenings we'd hop in the car, drive northwest from D.C. towards Frederick Md. and when the wind was right, pick up Woody.

Years later after moving to Raleigh, I sometimes helped Gene Wang of UPI keep score at Tar Heel home games. One winter night after Wake Forest beat the stuffing out of the Tar Heels at Carmichael Auditorium in Chapel Hill, Woody wearily wound up his post-game show, flipped off the switch on his mic, swiveled in his chair and pronounced, "That was an old-fashioned ass-whuppin'." Indeed it was.

Some phrases have long stuck with me. Sometimes he'd sign on this way: "The Tar Heel Sports Network is on the air!" At times when the Tar Heels were rolling or making another improbable comeback, you hear him bellow: "Go to war, Miss Agnes!" And when a timeout came when things were tight and the Tar Heels were trying to hang on to squeak out another win, he'd advise listeners they had just enough time to "Go where you go and do what you do" because this one was going down to the wire. And we can never forget how he loved to introduce a favorite player, Al Wood in the late 1970s: "The Gray, Georgia junior." It rolled off the tongue so easily that my wife still wonders how the "Gray, Georgia junior" is getting along.

It's hard to imagine Tar Heels sports -- football and men's basketball, anyway -- without the Woodyisms, his clear affection for the players, and his sometimes frank assessment of how badly the Heels were playing. Everything changes, sooner or later, and we'll be telling Woody Durham stories a long time. But we'll be spending autumn afternoons and winter evenings with some other voice in our living room. I hope they pick half as well as when they chose ol' Woody.

Legislature would be a tossup, poll suggests.

2011-04-19T16:12:00.002-04:00

A new Public Policy Polling survey indicates trouble ahead for legislative Republicans. The latest poll finds that North Carolinians don't like the education cuts in the new GOP budget and that Republicans have lost ground to Democrats. Republicans won't like this finding and will blame PPP, a Democratic firm, for skewing the results. Problem is that PPP has a good record for accurate polls -- and concludes that if there were an election today, it would be a tossup. PPP foresaw the big Republican gains in the legislature last fall, with a finding that 51 percent of voters preferred Republicans and 40 percent Democrats, but since then there has been a shift back toward Democrats. Now it would be a 45-all tie. "If things continue on this path, GOP control of the legislature may be a short lived experiment," PPP said in a news release.

It's hard to imagine Republicans giving up the gains they have waited so long to make in the legislature. But the recent ill-advised ploy coupling a budget to a badly needed unemployment benefit extension indicates that wiser heads among the Grand Old Party may not be able to get their voices heard in the Republican caucus. On the other hand, Republicans may just be having too much fun to worry about consequences down the road. The next election is more than a year away, and that is, as they say in politics, a couple of lifetimes away. But someone in the GOP ought to be wondering if they're overplaying their hand.

Here's what PPP has to say:

North Carolinians are strongly opposed to the cuts in education that legislative Republicans have proposed and as a result the new GOP majority is now less popular with the voters than the Democrats they replaced just a few months ago.

40% of voters have a favorable opinion of the Democrats in the General Assembly now compared to only 34% who view the Republicans positively. 43% have an unfavorable opinion of both the Democrats and the Republicans. The GOP's favorability is down a net 8 points from March when it broke down 38% positive and 39% negative. Since then the party's grown more unpopular with independents, going from a 37% unfavorable rating to 47% while holding steady at a 26% positive rating. And even some Republican voters are starting to have their doubts- the favorable number with the GOP base has declined from 73% to 66%.

There are any number of reasons that could be responsible for the declining popularity of the new majority but one thing that's definitely contributing is strong public opposition to the proposed GOP education cuts. Only 22% of voters support an 8.8% cut to the K12 system with 64% opposed. Just 29% support a 10% cut to the community colleges, with 58% opposed. And only an equal 29% support a 15.5% cut to the UNC system with 44% opposed.

Opposition to those cuts in education extends well beyond the Democratic base. Although a plurality of Republican voters does support the proposed UNC cuts, they oppose the K12 cuts by a 47/37 margin and they oppose the community college cuts by a 42/40 margin. With the independents whose strong support for Republican candidates last fall fueled the new GOP majority there is considerably stronger opposition- 68/18 against the K12 cuts, 65/28 against the community college cuts, and 42/35 against the UNC cuts.

The end result of this disintegrating popularity for the Republican majority is that if we had a legislative election today it would be an extremely close fought battle for control. The generic ballot is a tie with 45% of voters saying they'd choose a Democrat right now and 45% saying they'd go with a Republican. That represents an 11 point shift toward the Democrats since last fall's election- PPP's final generic ballot measure last fall came out at 51% of voters planning to go Republican to only 40% who supported Democrats. If things continue on this path GOP control of the legislature may be a short lived experiment.

This analysis is also available on our blog:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/04/nc-republicans-falling-out-of-favor.html

Craig Phillips, 88, worried about NC schools

2011-04-14T15:55:00.002-04:00

A. Craig Phillips, 88, former N.C. Superintendent of Public Instruction and former superintendent of public schools in Forsyth County and Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools, died early Tuesday in Wilmington. He came from a distinguished family of educators and was related to former Gov. Locke Craig (1913-17). Phillips oversaw state education, including the shift to integrated schools in many districts, from 1969 to 1989.

Years after he left Raleigh, Phillips became superintendent of Vance County schools up on the N.C.-Virginia border. I dropped in on him one afternoon to talk about his time in Raleigh, where he was known as something of a bulldog. "You know, my whole record was in pushing people. I never really learned to work with the General Assembly. I was more inclined to push 'em than to play their games," he told me.

Phillips wasn't universally popular, but he did what he thought was right -- and spoke out when he thought others were wrong. I was looking at a copy of a 1995 column I wrote about him, and was struck by a warning he issued about how this state's schools were changing. He didn't believe in decentralization of schools for most districts. It might work well in Charlotte-Mecklenburg, he thought, but not in smaller counties with fewer resources. He feared it might lead to two kinds of schools in this state -- elite ones for white kids and poor ones for everyone else. "We're going to end up with a private school problem," Phillips said. "What'll be left is the public schools mostly for the poor, largely black kids who can't go anywhere else."

Here's a copy of the N&O story on Phillips

Hunt, Hayes, Wilson now allies, of sorts

2011-04-12T09:33:00.001-04:00

The fascinating thing about politics is how folks who are adversaries one day might turn out to be allies on another occasion -- sometimes even on the same issue.

Case in point: Smart Start, then-Gov. Jim Hunt's signature children's initiative that he proposed in 1993 during his third term in office. Among the state House members who fought Hunt's original plan and who raised questions about the program were then-Rep. Robin Hayes, R-Cabarrus, and Rep. Connie Wilson, R-Mecklenburg. Hayes raised questions about the lack of accountability in the original proposal to create a private nonprofit corporation that would use public and private money to provide a number of services to children, including but not limited to day care. The proposal first sailed through the House before Hayes and others pointed out that it was not subject to open meetings laws or public records laws.

And Wilson raised questions about what she feared would be the program's intrusive nature, worred that it "could threaten a church day care's right to teach the song Jesus Loves Me," and warned that the program would turn out to be "Jim Hunt's downfall."

Questions and objections raised by Hayes, Wilson and others led to some significant changes in the proposed program and helped bring about legislative approval of the bill. Hayes later challenged Hunt for governor, but lost the 1996 race. Hunt went on to serve a record fourth term as governor.

So guess who's trying to help save the Smart Start program now that Republicans run the General Assembly for the first time in more than a century? State Republican Chairman Robin Hayes and registered lobbyist Connie Wilson.

Hunt has been working hard to save the program. Hayes, reports Dome in The News & Observer, warmed to the Smart Start program after then-Speaker of the House Dan Blue named him to a board overseeing the program. He recently gave what he said was a "limited testimonial" about the program, and said "there are some things Smart Start has done that are very constructive," according to Dome. The paper also said that Wilson had been hired to help try to save Smart Start from coming budget cuts.

Read more here:

Rebirth at 3,200 feet

2011-04-11T15:39:00.002-04:00

Rebirth at 3,200 feet

Three Saturdays ago the 15 acres of hayfields just few hundred feet from the Blue Ridge escarpment were still gray. Two Saturdays ago there was a hint of color. Last week you could tell what that color would be. And two days ago it was verifiably if not thoroughly green. The daffodils down by the old homeplace -- shedding its skin on the southeast corner where a winter wind had gnawed away at its weathered siding -- were in full bloom; 150 feet up the hill on the site of a long-gone dairy barn, the first asparagus tips were peeking through the ground. By the end of this week Fran Strickland, 88 years old an a veteran gardener, will have to cut it every day. If you've ever grown asparagus in a fertile garden, you know what I mean. It'll practically jump out of the ground. You have to keep up with it.

There are 23 bushes in Hal Strickland's blueberry patch, and for the first season in more than 40 years he won't be around to tend them. He passed away in December at age 97, barely four weeks after he had shoveled more mulch around the 18 veterans and the five younger plants he had cared for. A few years ago we all pitched in and put up a complicated angle-iron frame work and spread black plastic netting over it to keep the birds and other small critters from eating the berries. A single ice storm two Thanksgivings ago brought down the whole shebang; last year we just shared with the birds.

I cranked up the tractor and scooped up 15 bucketloads of mulch, dropped it into an aging 4x8 trailer and trundled it down one hill and up the other to provide another layer of mulch. It's still cool at night up there in the blueberry patch, but young green shoots of weeds and something that looks like spring onions are already poking through.

Up there at 3,200 feet, spring rolls in a good six weeks after it slides up through Raleigh and Greensboro. I've yet to see the first firepinks, but the may apples are starting to show, and somebody pointed out the other day where the bloodroots are coming up along a path we were hiking.

We're keeping an eye out to see what comes back this year. After a big fire last June, a forester told us we'd probably lose the big poplar on one side and the big maple on the other, even if they came back the first year. Those old sentinels had become family friends, acquiring names in a quaint Southern Appalachian tradition. Archy and Mehitabel, we called them, after characters created a century or so ago by a New York newspaperman named Don Marquis. Mehitabel looks like it's showing buds up there near the top; Archy is still sleeping in. We're holding our breath, and watching for the green.

Senate Skulker unmasked -- and has a bright future

2011-04-08T08:17:00.004-04:00

So: It turns out that an aide to a state House member -- now a former aide, that is -- was responsible for putting printed information critical of former Gov. W.W. Holden, who was impeached, convicted and removed from office by the Senate in 1871, on the desks of state Senators recently. Carlton Huffman, a Republican Party enthusiast who worked for an evidently uninvolved legislator from western N.C., said he and he alone was responsible for putting the materials on senators' desks. It's against Senate rules for a non-senator to put any materials on Senate desks, but for a while no one knew who did it. Senate Majority Leader Tom Apodaca, R-Henderson, sheepishly told his colleagues that the Senate's security cameras were on the blink at the time. Huffman took responsibility a few days ago and is no longer employed at the legislature. But I predict he will have a bright future in politics.

The Senate had been about to consider a bipartisan bill to pardon Gov. Holden for the way in which he tried to quell violence by the Ku Klux Klan and others, but Huffman's ploy distributing critical information about Holden worked like a charm. Nervous senators sent the bill back to committee, and it's not entirely clear if or when the resolution might reappear on the Senate floor. There has been talk of a resurrection of the bill, however. Update: April 12, in the Capitol.

While Huffman has lost his job, his reputation probably won't suffer. After all, politics ain't beanbag, as author Finley Peter Dunne wrote around the turn of the century. It's hardball. And any legislative staffer who can singlehandedly figure out how to derail legislation, get it sent back to committee and put the leadership of the N.C. Senate to rout likely will have his choice of jobs in the future. No telling how high he might rise, whether as a candidate, lobbyist or strategist.

Appeals Court: state grants to Johnson and Wales ok

2011-04-05T09:38:00.001-04:00

The N.C. Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court ruling rejecting a challenge filed by Jason Saine and Donald Reid to state aid for Johnson and Wales University in Charlotte. Reid, former Charlotte city council member, had asked the courts to make the university refund millions of dollars the state gave it for moving to Charlotte. Former House Speaker Jim Black and former Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight had promised the university to seek millions if the school would come to North Carolina.

A three-judge panel affirmed a 2010 trial court ruling dismissing the argument that the state had violated the N.C. Constitution on a number of occasions by giving tax funds to Johnson and Wales. The state had allocated $7.5 million in several different appropriations from the One North Carolina Fund for Johnson and Wales, a private nonprofit university which had moved to Charlotte to provide instruction in cooking and other skills.

Saine and Reid had argued, among other things, that the appropriations violated the Constitution because there was a private financial benefit that represented an exclusive and separate emolument. They also argued that the appropriations did not constitute a valid public purpose and asked that any other grants to the university be declared unconstitutional. Judge Michael Morgan of Wake Superior Court rejected the claims in March 2010 after a hearing on the claims.

Court of Appeals Judge Robert Hunter of Marion, writing for the panel which included Chief Judge John Martin and Judge Cressie Thigpen, said there was a direct connection between education and economic prosperity of the state and that the appropriations furthered the goal of an improved economy, as allowed by the N.C. Supreme Court in prior cases. He wrote that the constitutional challenges were "without merit."

A copy of the decision can be found online here.

Rucho: No GOP steamroller in Senate

2011-04-04T09:58:00.002-04:00

State Sen. Bob Rucho, R-Mecklenburg, took issues with last week's blogpost about the majority running over the minority in the legislature.
Not so, not this year, he says:

Jack:
Your quote is not accurate: "But each side gets a certain amount of time during debates; in Raleigh, the majority gets all the time if it wants it and can pretty much ignore the minority -- and often does."
Every bill or issue has been and will be open for debate and amendments under Senate Republican leadership. At no time on the floor of the Senate have we “called the question” or “asked that the bill lie upon the table “as our democrat colleagues have done frequently in the past. This was a very effective tool to stifle and stop republican debate , yet I do not recall you condemning that behavior when the democrats abused the system. You should recognize and applaud our implementing a transparent and open policy.

I do enjoy reading your OP EDs’and blog and will continue to do so in the future.

Best regards,

Bob.

My response: After 34 years of covering the legislature, one thing I can say with certainty is that the majority gets the time it wants and can ignore the minority. Sen. Rucho's point is Republicans in the Senate this year have not done that. That's good. The new Republican majority gets credit for making openness and transparency a goal for the 2011 legislature, and that would bring many benefits to policymaking in North Carolina. I hope they succeed. Already we see some committees that limit debate

As for condemning Democrats: yes, I've described their actions in the past, in columns and editorials, as ugly, sleazy, observed that some legislative actions following political contributions looked like retail sales, and pointed out how they've treated governors, too, including ignoring Gov. Jim Martin.

Shouldn't party leaders appoint committee members?

2011-04-01T15:42:00.001-04:00

Readers may have gotten a kick out of Sen. Bob Rucho's declaration the other day in Jim Morrill's story about redistricting that Rucho didn't want more lawyers on his Senate redistricting committee -- only "normal people." Well, lawyers do take beating sometimes, sort of like journalists and used car salesman, too.

But Senate Minority Leader Martin Nesbitt's request to name two different Democrats to the committee (Dan Clodfelter of Charlotte and Dan Blue of Wake) in exchange for his and Charlie Dannelly's dropping off the committee raises another point. Why shouldn't each party name its own members? Rucho has refused to replace them. And it's no surprise. Clodfelter and Blue are smart legislators, and the last thing Republicans such as Rucho want is even tougher political adversaries on the redistricting committee.

But I've always thought that the N.C. General Assembly was sticking to a curious way to name committees -- where those in the majority not only decide which committees to have, but also which minority party members serve on it. Democrats maintained tight control over the legislature for the last century-plus by controlling such things, but it has always seemed to me the U.S. Senate had a better way: The parties negotiate how many people will serve on committees, and then each party names its own members to the seats on that committee. Of course, many things are different in Washington, including a seniority system that has its traditions, customs and exceptions. But each side gets a certain amount of time during debates; in Raleigh, the majority gets all the time if it wants it and can pretty much ignore the minority -- and often does.

Rucho: Only 'normal people' on committee

2011-03-31T11:33:00.002-04:00

The Observer's Jim Morrill had a great story today on the launching of North Carolina's congressional and legislative redistricting efforts Wednesday. The process is always difficult, and it's not unusual to have lawsuits still pending over the shape of one district or another almost until it's time to redistrict again. The decennial U.S. Census shows population changes that require redrawing political districts every 10 years.

This year is different because for the first time in this state, Republicans will be in charge. And state Sen. Bob Rucho of Mecklenburg, an energetic, passionate and outspoken legislator, is running the Senate redistricting committee. I've always liked Rucho because, if you ask him a question, he won't beat around the bush. You get what he thinks, usually unvarnished and with the bark still on it.

Rucho has resisted entreaties from Senate Minority Leader Martin Nesbitt, an Asheville Democrat, to add two Democrats to the committee -- Rucho's Mecklenburg Delegation colleague Sen. Dan Clodfelter, and Wake Sen. Dan Blue, former Speaker of the House. Nesbitt said he and Sen. Charlie Dannelly, D-Mecklenburg, would drop off the panel if Rucho would agree to name Clodfelter and Blue to the committee, but Rucho declined, saying he wanted "normal people" on the committee, not more lawyers:

"For the first time in a long time, we're going to try to have normal people lead this," Rucho said. "The last thing I want to do is replace non-attorneys in this process."

Nesbitt, of course, is a lawyer. Dannelly is not. (His resignation from the committee was announced at mid-morning Thursday, so there's a vacancy.) Both Clodfelter and Blue are lawyers, and they are regarded as among the best legislative technicians.

Rucho's reasoning for not putting them on the committee shows you just how far North Carolina has come in the last half-century. When a Massachusetts-born dentist with a New England accent such as Bob Rucho can get away with saying he wanted "normal people" on the committee, you know that we have grown in many ways to accommodate views, political and otherwise, that once would have been regarded in some precincts of the Tar Heel state as either outlandish or, as they say Down East, not from around here.

You may or you may not like what the Republicans are doing in the General Assembly, but by golly they have livened the place up and given folks something to talk about.

Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/31/2184599/disputes-mark-redistricting-process.html#ixzz1IBV6X6ES.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/31/2184599/disputes-mark-redistricting-process.html

Charter school funding, and grammar

2011-03-29T16:39:00.000-04:00

Sunday's column reflecting on how Democrats might have avoided some of the steamrollering in the 2011 session of the General Assembly included some background on legislation to lift the cap on charter schools and make other changes, including making charters eligible for some kinds of funding that public schools get.

The sentence read:

“So when Wake Republican Sen. Richard Stevens sponsored his charter school bill this year in the Senate to do away with the charter cap entirely and make a number of other changes, including making charters eligible for more public funds that traditional schools also get, Democrats were aghast.”

Amy Auth of Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger's office emailed to say that some people evidently had read that sentence to say that charters would be eligible for more money THAN traditional public schools, and suggested a clarification to clear up any confusion. As she noted, "Counties would have the option under Senate Bill 8 to allocate funds for equipment and buildings. However, that does not mean a charter school would get more than a regular public school."

There is, of course, a distinction between that and than. Charter schools are public schools, but they don't get all the funding that public schools get. Charter advocates say they receive about 70 percent of the funding that traditional public schools receive, and the bill would make them eligible -- if counties approve -- for more of the funding sources that traditional public schools get -- not more THAN they get.

Bury him in Madison County

2011-03-28T10:16:00.002-04:00

Sunday's column mentioned a bill in the state House to require voters to show photo I.D. cards in order to cast ballots at the polls. One periodic correspondent with significant Washington experience e-mailed me with a suggestion: Require all those voters who attempt to vote in the names of the deceased to produce a valid death certificate before they can vote.

Dark humor, yes, but North Carolina does have some lamentable experience with votes cast in the names of the dead, particularly up in the mountains. I've heard or read about this joke being told by a number of politicians, including former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley, who at a speech in Asheville was reported to have said, "When I die I want to be buried in Madison County so I can remain active in politics."

The Senate Skulker and nickel bags of weed

2011-03-25T12:19:00.001-04:00

Tongues were wagging in Raleigh this week as legislators and staff alike wondered who it was who placed material on senators' desks that sharply criticized former Gov. W.W. Holden -- the first governor in America to be impeached, convicted and removed from office -- and at least temporarily foiled a bipartisan plan to pardon Holden for his crimes. Holden has sought to counter violence by the Ku Klux Klan and had ordered the arrest of a number of people he held responsible. The House in ~~1971~~ 1871 impeached Holden for high crimes and misdemeanors and the Senate convicted and removed him from office. LINK HERE

Three state senators -- including Republican Sen. Neal Hunt and Democratic Sen. Dan Blue, both of Raleigh, plus Sen. Doug Berger, a Democrat from Franklin county -- were sponsoring the bill to pardon him.

But the plan fell apart and the bill was sent back to the Senate Rules Committee after someone broke Senate rules and left material criticizing Holden and the pardon attempt on Senators desks. Mark Binker of the Greensboro News Record traced the material to a blogger, but who got into the Senate to distribute the information now one knows. WRAL's Laura Leslie has more on the mystery, too. A Senate security camera was on the blink and does not show who it might have been.
The Senate rule against leaving material on senator's desks is a curious one. I found out about it back in the 1980s when, as editor of North Carolina Insight magazine at the N.C. Center for Public Policy Research, I thought it would be helpful to legislators to have a copy of some research we had done on a pressing legislative issue. It might have been prison policy but I don't recall. Our plan was to put a copy of the magazine on each senator's desk in the Senate chamber, but we quickly found out about the legislative rules against that -- and why.

I'll say at the outset this story may be apocryphal. Gerry Cohen, a legislative staffer who has been there very nearly forever, says he had never heard it before. And Gerry hears quite a lot, so maybe someone was pulling our legs.

But according to the story we were told by legislative staffers in the clerk's offices maybe 25 year ago, the rule was adopted in the 1970s when there was a bill to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana. And some supporters of that proposal had thoughtfully prepared cellophane bags with a small amount of marijuana in them, and place one on each legislators' desk. When word got around, many lawmakers feared the public would perceive that as lawmakers possessing marijuana, and, the story goes, a rule against putting materials on desks was quickly adopted.

Poll finds McCrory leading Perdue, other Dems

2011-03-22T12:01:00.000-04:00

Former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory ought to be feeling pretty good about his chances in the 2012 governor's race. McCrory lost to Gov. Bev Perdue in 2008, but in current polling matchups with Perdue or any of three other potential contenders for the Democratic nomination, McCrory still is in the lead.

Public Policy Polling, a Democratic firm that has tracked Perdue's weak popularity numbers since taking office, says regardless of whether it's Democratic Attorney General Roy Cooper, Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton or state Sen. Dan Blue, McCrory leads from the outset. The upshot is that Democrats have a lot of overcoming to do in the next year, though after the legislative session things may look a bit different and Perdue may be in much better shape to capture a second term. For Republicans, the question is whether rank-and-file GOP members will coalesce enthusiastically behind McCrory. If they do, he's in an excellent position to win the nomination next year and to take the governorship for his party for the first time since Jim Martin last held the post from 1985-1993 (he won election in 1984 and reelection in 1988, of course, but governors take office in January).

Here's what PPP has to say:

Democrats' problems in next year's race for Governor of North Carolina go well beyond Bev Perdue. PPP's newest statewide survey finds that a trio of potential Democratic candidates in the event of a Perdue retirement- Attorney General Roy Cooper, Lieutenant Governor Walter Dalton, and state senator Dan Blue- would all start out trailing presumptive Republican nominee Pat McCrory by a significant margin. This is not a situation where if Perdue decided to step aside her party would all the sudden be even money to hold the Governor's office- the GOP will start out ahead in this race regardless of who the Democratic candidate ends up being.

After hitting a high point in December Perdue's numbers continue to slide back in the wrong direction. 30% of voters now approve of her with 52% disapproving, the worst her numbers have been since posting identical figures last August. Perdue's decline since December is across the board rather than coming primarily with one voter bloc- with Democrats she's down from 55% to 50% approval, with Republicans she's gone from 15% to 10%, and with independents her drop is from 26% to 21%. We're seeing Gubernatorial approval ratings across the country plummet in the first part of this year- budget time just does not tend to win Governors a whole lot of friends.

Perdue trails Pat McCrory 50-36 this month in a hypothetical rematch of their 2008 contest. Because Perdue's numbers are so poor there's been a lot of speculation about whether she might decide not to run again or whether another Democrat might take her out in the primary. We tested some alternate nominees for the party this month but their prospects don't look great either. Cooper does better than Perdue, trailing by only an 8 point margin at 43-35. But Dalton and Blue each do worse, trailing by 20 point margins at 47-27 and 48-28 respectively. Democrats would be facing an uphill battle with any candidate.

Cooper is mostly unknown statewide- 56% of voters have no opinion about him- but his numbers with the folks that do know him are impressive. 27% have a favorable opinion of him to 18% with an unfavorable one and that includes positive numbers with both Democrats (32/17) and Republicans (26/18). Cooper is probably the only politician in the state who has more voters across party lines that like him than dislike him. That appeal to GOP voters is also the biggest reason why Cooper performs better than Perdue against McCrory- he trails by 63 points with Republicans at 75-12 but that's a lot better than her 75 point deficit at 83-8.

Cooper might not be terribly well known but he's a celebrity at this point compared to Blue and Dalton. Only 33% of voters know Blue well enough to have an opinion about him and Dalton's even lower at 31%. That low name recognition means that their poll deficits are artificially high. 28% of Democrats are undecided in a Blue/McCrory match while only 14% of Republicans are and that gap is even wider for the Dalton match up with 32% of Democrats undecided to only 13% of Republicans. If either of those folks were to become the party nominee the base would likely rally around them and bring these margins a lot closer but make no mistake, they'd still be starting out double digits behind.

Right now North Carolinians are ready to elect a Republican Governor for the first time in more than two decades. Democrats' greatest ally is time- there's a long way to go and depending on how the new GOP legislative majority conducts itself over the next 20 months voters may change their minds about whether Republican control of state government is a particularly desirable outcome. If we voted today though there's little doubt McCrory would be elected Governor against anyone the Democrats put forward.
This analysis is also available on our blog:
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/03/perdue-or-no-perdue-dems-would-lose-nc.html

Perdue wants new way to hold schools accountable

2011-03-21T10:52:00.000-04:00

In the Friday rush I somehow missed Gov. Bev Perdue's announcement that she wouldn't sign House Bill 48, to eliminate public school testing, but she said she wouldn't veto it, either. She's obviously trying to avoid an excessive number of confrontations with the Republican-dominated General Assembly, after vetoing two bills (including one that she first said she would not sign but wouldn't veto, either, before she did). Perdue said she would urge the legislature to work with the State Board of Education to create a new way to hold schools accountable for their performance.

Wake Superior Court Judge Howard Manning, who oversees the ongoing improvement that is supposed to come under the N.C. Supreme Court's decision in the Leandro case requiring that every child have the opportunity for a sound education, is also troubled about the legislature's decision to end end-of-course testing. As noted in an earlier blogpost, Manning says that testing is constitutionally mandated because it's a critical part of assessing where the troubled schools are and figuring out whether they are making progress. A few weeks ago I spoke with Manning briefly asking him what he was going to do. At the time, he was planning to sit back and think about his options. He may be thinking harder now.

Here's Perdue's statement.

"Personally, I believe the tests now used in school systems are due for change. I've talked to many teachers, and heard from education leaders across the state. It's clear that current testing does not accomplish our shared goal of excellent teachers in every classroom and the best schools for our children in every community.
"But let me be very clear: I do not support simply eliminating testing. This state must have some process in place for identifying areas in need of improvement.

"For those reasons, I will not sign this bill, nor will I veto it. Instead, I urge the General Assembly to work aggressively and deliberately with the State Board of Education to develop a new method of holding schools accountable to the people. This is the only way to ensure we meet the state's Constitutional obligation of a sound, basic education for our children."

2011-03-18T18:44:00.001-04:00

Rep. Bradley has done Raleigh a service

2011-03-18T08:53:00.000-04:00

Freshman Republican Rep. Glen Bradley of Youngsville in Franklin County has been taking a derisive beating among those who have found his proposal absurd for North Carolina to adopt a new currency backed by gold and silver. Some have called it wacky. Some say it's outlandish.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to defend Rep. Bradley. The 2011 General Assembly session so far has been overly serious and without sufficient humor to release widespread stress over a huge shortfall in the state budget, not to mention some political tensions from a change in the balance of power. Rep. Bradley's proposal has provided other members, lobbyists, reporters, clerks, legislative staff and indeed the larger populace of downtown Raleigh with something to enjoy talking about. You can't walk across the Capitol grounds or down Fayetteville Street without being stopped by someone who wants to talk about it.

Why, just the other day a distinguished lawyer of long acquaintance beseeched me to write an editorial not only backing Rep. Bradley's plan, but also to endorse the lawyer for a newly created state job: Commissioner of Precious Metals, a post whose salary would be paid in gold, of course.

Shoot, I'm thinking of applying for a job myself in the new administration. I think the title of Deputy Commissioner for Sterling Silver and German Nickel would be just dandy.

Rep. Bradley, we owe you a debt of gratitude.

More trivia about Gov. W.W. Holden

2011-03-15T08:57:00.003-04:00

Sunday's column on Gov. W.W. Holden -- the first governor in the United States to be impeached, convicted and removed from office, reminded several folks that his 19th century home in Raleigh stood at the corner of Hargett and McDowell Streets, hardly a stone's toss from my office in the building of the News & Observer.

Holden began his career as a Democrat, supporting the same things many Southerners did including slavery, and wound up helping found the Republican Party, which opposed slavery. The founder of the News & Observer was Josephus Daniels, who at the end of the ~~20th~~ 19th century (Thanks to reader Marc Barnes for pointing out this 100-year mistake) worked in consort with Democrats and other newspapers, especially the Charlotte Observer, in the White Supremacy Movement that overthrew a legally elected government in Wilmington that had included black Republicans. The Daniels' family view of black people would change dramatically over the years and his descendants strongly supported reforms in the Civil Rights Era.

One other historical note that will make good trivia: that house that Holden lived in in downtown Raleigh contained, according to biographer Horace Raper, "one of the first bathtubs" in the Capital City. He also had a sunken garden, said to be unique at the time. Holden died in 1892 and is buried in old Oakwood Cemetery on the northeast side of downtown.

How did Sen. John "Chicken" Stephens die? Shot or stabbed?

2011-03-14T15:28:00.001-04:00

I read up on some ancient history last week and wrote about the resolution pending in the state Senate to pardon former Gov. William Woods Holden, convicted March 22, 1871of high crimes and misdeanors. He was the first governor in the United State to be impeached and removed from office.

One of the things he was impeached for was trying to rein in violence by the Ki Ku Klux Klan. The column quoted from Edgar E. Folk and Bynum Shaw's "W.W. Holden: A Political Biography," that a state senator from Caswell County was shot and killed by the Klan while he was trying to help Holden gather information on the Klan. Specifically, they wrote, "the Klan ... in broad daylight in the Caswell County Courthhouse, before numerous witnesses, shot Republican State Senator John W. Stephens to death."

Sharp-eyed reader David Kinney, a student of history as well as editor in chief of Business North Carolina, sent a note point out that Stephens was assassinated by knife. "The ku-kluxers did lure John “Chicken” Stephens into the courthouse’s basement during the county Democratic convention, but they killed him by putting a noose around his neck and stabbing him with a pocket knife," Kinney wrote.

Online accounts support that version. Another interesting question: How did John "Chicken" Stephens get his nickname? Well, of course, accounts vary, but they usually have to do with an altercation after he shot a chicken on his own property.

Read Wikipedia's version abou it here.

David Broder, gentleman of the press

2011-03-10T10:41:00.000-05:00

In the rarified atmosphere that nationally syndicated columnists and talk show commentators breathe every day, I imagine it's hard to avoid getting an over-inflated view of your importance. We've heard about the big salaries and huge speaking fees some of them command, and we've seen puffed-up egos on TV, heard them on the radio and read their thoughts in print. It's fascinating to see how highly some of them value their own voices.

And then there was David Broder, the veteran columnist for The Washington Post who remained, at heart and in practice, a shoe-leather reporter all of his days in this business. Broder died at 81 Wednesday, and the world of journalism will miss his presence.

The soft-spoken Broder, a son of the Midwest, looked at both sides of issues and often empathized with the arguments of each. But more important, he listened. He knocked on doors, asked questions of ordinary Americans about what they saw going on in national and state politics and wrote thoughtful pieces about what he heard. On Sunday talk shows he seemed less inclined to shoot from the lip and more interested in understanding context and explaining it to folks who sometimes wanted only yes-or-no, good-or-bad, win-or-lose answers.

But Broder also wrote tough columns that raked politicians over the coals and sometimes called his own profession to account for its lapses. One memorable column was his Aug. 29, 2001 piece after N.C. Republican Sen. Jesse Helms announced his decision not to run for re-election. His column began:

"Those who believe that the "liberal press" always has its knives sharpened for Republicans and conservatives must have been flummoxed by the coverage of Sen. Jesse Helms's announcement last week that he will not run for reelection next year in North Carolina. The reporting on his retirement was circumspect to the point of pussyfooting.

"On the day his decision became known, the New York Times described him as "a conservative stalwart for nearly 30 years," the Boston Globe as "an unyielding icon of conservatives and an archenemy of liberals." The Washington Post identified Helms as "one of the most powerful conservatives on Capitol Hill for three decades."

"Those were accurate descriptions. But they skirted the point. There are plenty of powerful conservatives in government. A few, such as Don Rumsfeld and Henry Hyde, have been around as long as Helms and have their own significant roles in 20th century political history. What really sets Jesse Helms apart is that he is the last prominent unabashed white racist politician in this country -- a title that one hopes will now be permanently retired. A few editorials and columns came close to saying that. But the squeamishness of much of the press in characterizing Helms for what he is suggests an unwillingness to confront the reality of race in our national life."

I didn't know Broder well but spent a little time with him now and then, thanks to Walt DeVries, the political scientist from Wilmington who for years ran the N.C. Institute of Political Leadership. It was DeVries' vision that created a program that would train those interested in running and serving in political office in the technical details and creative art of campaigning and serving. His graduates include Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and independents -- and he frequently got his old friend David Broder to come to North Carolina to speak at training sessions or give a graduation address. He also helped other N.C. nonprofits who wanted Broder to appear at a seminar or make a speech.

On of them was the N.C. Center for Public Policy Research, and DeVries arranged for Broder to make a visit to a session on political changes in North Carolina during the '80s. As editor of the center's quarterly, North Carolina Insight, it was my job to pick Broder up at RDU and make sure he was settled in at his hotel and got to where he needed to be. I expected a Very Important Person consumed in his own profound thoughts. But the man I picked up insisted on carrying his own bags, was interested in knowing my background, was already conversant in what was going on in Tar Heel politics but asked good questions about the nuances of our closely split electorate. He, too, liked to talk about baseball. In 10 minutes it was as if we had known one another a long time.

I'd run into Broder from time to time as he breezed through the state on the trail of one story or another, watched him question businessmen, college presidents and those who might know something he needed to know. His interviews always seemed more like conversations than interrogations.

In a business where the press corps is sometimes derided as a pack of hyenas on the trail of blood, and where the term Gentlemen of the Press most often sparks a round of derisive laughter, David Broder was a rare figure who lived up to the image. He was a gentleman of the press.

Manning considering his options on school tests

2011-03-09T11:12:00.001-05:00

The N.C. General Assembly has pretty much ignored Wake Superior Court Judge Howard Manning's 22-page memo urging legislators not to do away with four standardized end-of-course tests in high schools. The legislature overwhelmingly passed the bill meaning both Republicans and Democrats strongly supported the end to these tests. Gov. Bev Perdue, who has vetoed two bills approved by the legislature so far, says she won't veto this one.

Manning isn't saying what he might do about it, but he surely is considering his options. In a brief conversation the other day, I asked him what his plans were. He said, "We try to avoid a constitutional confrontation when it's possible. Right now I'm just going to think about it."

Manning had sent the Feb. 21 memo to Speaker of the House Thom Tillis and Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger because he wanted to make sure legislators understood the value of the tests. Manning has supervised, if that's the right word, the state's response to the N.C. Supreme Court's landmark Leandro ruling that ordered the state to provide a competent principal in every school, a competent teacher in every classroom, and adequate resources in every class so students can get a sound education. Manning has used test scores to help identify schools that are failing (and succeeding) and has pushed state education officials to respond more aggressively to failing schools.

In his memo, he told the legislative leaders that end of course testing in core Leando subjects "is constitutionally mandated as part of the accountability process and therefore, not subject to elimination by House Bill 48 or other legislative action."

No telling how this turns out, but since the Leandro case was filed nearly 17 years ago, it has provided a lot of work for litigators. I expect we'll see more.

New poll shows McCrory leading Perdue in a rematch of '08

2011-03-03T13:29:00.000-05:00

A new poll taken for the N.C. Center for Voter Education and the national non-partisan advocacy group Justice at Stake shows former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory leading Gov. Bev Perdue by a 51-38 percent margin in a rematch of their 2008 campaign. The poll also shows President Barack Obama leading former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin by 47-45, but Obama trails former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney 49-43 in a head-to-head match.

The poll was taken for the groups by the firm 20/20 Insight Polling and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent.

The groups are especially interested in judicial elections, and the poll found that half the voters polled would be disinclined to support a legislative candidate who wanted to do away with North Carolina's system of publicly funded campaigns for appellate judicial races. The program has proved popular with candidates from both parties because it frees judges from the potential conflict of interests inherent in having to ask lawyers who may appear in their courtrooms for political contributions to finance their campaigns.

The finding in the potential governor's race mirror what other polls have shown -- that Perdue is in some trouble -- but the more interesting poll results will come later this year, after the 2011 General Assembly has done its work and when voters can assess what kind of job the new Republican majority in the House and Senate have done. While Perdue only proposes a state budget, legislators have to adopt it, and voters' opinions will be shaped not only by legislation that passes this year but also by what services legislators cut in order to balance the budget and cover a shortfall.

Here's a link to the website. Here's the text of what the two groups said about the poll results:

RALEIGH – More than six in 10 North Carolina voters say the country is on the wrong track, according to a poll exploring attitudes on money, courts and politics, commissioned by the Justice at Stake Campaign and the N.C. Center for Voter Education.

That feeling is especially prominent among Republicans and independents, with 88 percent and 62 percent, respectively, saying the country is moving in the wrong direction. Just 35 percent of Democratic voters believe the country is on the wrong track.

Voters are evenly split on their feelings about the outcome of the 2010 legislative and congressional elections, with 46 percent satisfied with the results and 46 percent dissatisfied.

Not surprisingly, party affiliation greatly influences voter attitudes about last year’s election outcomes, with 82 percent of Democrats not satisfied and 83 percent of Republicans satisfied with November’s results. Among independent voters, 44 percent are satisfied and 42 percent are dissatisfied.

Looking ahead to potential 2012 match ups, the poll finds that voters favor Democratic President Barack Obama over Republican Sarah Palin, 47-45 percent. Republican Mitt Romney fares better, leading Obama 49-43 percent.

In a hypothetical gubernatorial rematch from 2008, Republican Pat McCrory leads Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue 51-38 percent. Among the key demographic of independent voters, McCrory leads 47-30 percent.

Likely Republican presidential primary voters are yet to throw their support behind a clear favorite, with 19 percent supporting Palin, 15 percent supporting Mike Huckabee and 13 percent supporting Romney. Twenty-eight percent say they are unsure of which candidate will get their vote.

These questions were part of a poll examining voter attitudes about the influence of political money on North Carolina’s courts. Released last week, those results found that 94 percent of state voters believe campaign contributions have some sway on a judge’s decision, including 43 percent who say campaign donations can greatly affect a ruling.

The poll also shows that when it comes to North Carolina’s first-in-the-nation system of public financing for judicial elections, 49 percent of voters say they would be less likely to support a legislative candidate who wants to eliminate the program. Only 20 percent of voters say they would be more likely to favor a candidate who sought to end the program.

Conducted Feb. 8-10 by 20/20 Insight Polling, the statewide poll of 600 registered North Carolina voters has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent. Questions asked of 229 likely 2012 Republican primary voters have a margin of error of plus or minus 6.5 percent.

McCrory vulnerable to primary challenge?

2011-03-01T14:20:00.002-05:00

Not long ago pollsters found evidence that Gov. Bev Perdue might be vulnerable to a challenge from within her party in the 2012 Democratic primary. Blogger Gary Pearce says he hears of at least two Democrats who might be considering a run against the state's first woman governor in the primary: State Sens. Dan Blue and Josh Stein of Wake County.

Now Public Policy Polling also detects a potential vulnerability for the presumed Republican nominee, former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory, who ran in 2008 but lost to Perdue because, among other things of a strong pull from Barack Obama's presidential campaign.

PPP said more than four out of 10 GOP voters want a candidate more conservative than McCrory, while about three in 10 voters ay they'd support him. It certainly appears that McCrory is aware of the potential problem. For more than a year he has worked to strengthen his conservative image. He has been outspoken about the Affordable Care Act and has spoken to conservative groups. If McCrory is successful in building stronger ties to Republicans, he would be in better position to win the Republican nomination again. But whether that will help him win the governorship is a question that turns on other factors, including Obama's popularity, who the Democratic nominee is (I'd still find it hard to image Democrats turning out a governor, but in politics anything can happen) and, if it's Perdue again, whether her popularity numbers improve significantly.

Also: Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee appears to be the top choice of Republicans for the presidential nomination next year, PPP says. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin remains popular but is running fourth.

Here's what Public Policy Polling has to say:

It's being treated as almost inevitable that Pat McCrory will be the Republican nominee for Governor of North Carolina next year but there's one thing that could trip him up: a Tea Party challenger. 43% of Republican voters in the state say they'd like their nominee next year to be someone more conservative than McCrory to only 29% who say they'd firmly support him for the nomination. It would take a strong well funded opponent to do it but McCrory is definitely vulnerable to a challenge from the right.

That shouldn't come as any great surprise. McCrory earned less than 50% of the primary vote in 2008 against a weak field of opponents and the reason he didn't get a majority of the votes was concern that he was too liberal, particularly on issues like bringing light rail to Charlotte and building the Bobcats Arena without taxpayer approval. He's tried to build up his conservative credentials over the last couple years by appearing frequently at events for Americans for Prosperity and speaking out against the health care bill but there's still a sense among a lot of GOP voters that they could get someone else more in tune with them ideologically.

McCrory's popular at this point with Republican voters- 47% have a favorable opinion of him to 12% with an unfavorable one. But the 41% with no opinion of him leaves a lot of voters an opponent could define McCrory in a negative light with. And McCrory's numbers aren't nearly as strong as Lisa Murkowski's were in Alaska and Mike Castle's were in Delaware before they were defeated by further right primary challengers last year. It'll be interesting to see whether a serious one pops up or not.

Mike Huckabee continues to be the top choice of Republicans in North Carolina to be their Presidential candidate next year at 24%. Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are tied for second at 18%, and Sarah Palin comes in fourth at 16%. Leading the second tier of candidates at 6% is Ron Paul, followed by Tim Pawlenty at 5%, Mitch Daniels at 2%, and the now departed from the race John Thune at 1%.

The North Carolina numbers show one of the major perils ahead for Sarah Palin if she ends up deciding to run. She has the highest favorability of the Republicans in the state at 69%, followed by Huckabee at 68%, Romney at 56%, and Gingrich at 55%. But she's fourth place for Presidential preference anyway, indicating a significant disconnect between her popularity and the willingness of the folks who like her to support for President. Getting voters to take that next step from liking her to thinking she's White House material is going to be a big challenge if she jumps in the race.

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/03/tea-party-problem-for-mccrory.html

The battle of the beaches, 2011

2011-02-18T15:00:00.000-05:00

The N.C. Coastal Federation, one of several institutions that have worked to prevent manmade damage along the N.C. coastline, is worried about legislation in the 2011 General Assembly to allow the use of terminal groins or other hardened structures in an attempt to stabilize inlets. Groins, jetties and seawalls have long been banned because of the damage they can create to adjoining property along the coast, often as the result of scouring away of adjacent beachfronts.

Todd Miller, the founder and executive director of the federation, sent the following letter to legislators Friday:

February 18, 2011

RE: Please Protect Our Beaches

Dear Senator,

Don’t succumb to demands to radically change 25 years of coastal policy that have made our barrier island beaches the envy of the nation.

Some oceanfront property owners built in dangerous places, and now they want to build rock walls to protect their risky investments. They are asking you to weaken the state’s longstanding ban on jetties, groins and seawalls to allow “terminal groins.” This will put the fate of our beaches into the hands of agencies and judges rather than the legislature.

Allowing terminal groins will ultimately force taxpayers to foot the bill to protect risky coastal investments. Weakening this prohibition commits taxpayers to a never-ending and escalating fight against the sea. Those who built too close to the sea will keep asking for more destructive remedies when terminal groins don’t work. Attached is a fact sheet that explains why terminal groins are bad for our beaches and pocketbooks.

Take a moment before you cast your vote, and read a portion of our state Constitution you swore to uphold upon taking office. Article XIV, Section 5, reads:

It shall be the policy of this State to conserve and protect its lands and waters for the benefit of all its citizenry, and to this end it shall be a proper function of the State of North Carolina and its political subdivisions to acquire and preserve park, recreational, and scenic areas, to control and limit the pollution of our air and water, to control excessive noise, and in every other appropriate way to preserve as a part of the common heritage of this State its forests, wetlands, estuaries, beaches, historical sites, open lands, and places of beauty.

How does marring our beaches with walls of rock that will destroy them meet that constitutional mandate?

We hope you will bring wisdom and conservatism to this debate, and exercise extreme caution and skepticism about claims by high-priced consultants and their paid lobbyists that more government management of our beaches will result in quick, inexpensive fixes to erosion problems. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or comments or would like to talk more about this.

Battle of the ex-chiefs on med mal

2011-02-16T08:26:00.000-05:00

Last week former N.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Bev Lake, a Republican, weighed in on a cap on medical malpractice claims. A monetary cap such as Senate Republicans are considering would be unconstitutional, he said. Here's a link to Lake's letter to lawmakers:
But this week another former chief justice, Democrat Burley Mitchell, took an opposite view. Under the Dome reports that in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee chair Pete Brunstetter, R-Forsyth, Mitchell wrote, "We are aware of no binding legal authority that should give the General Assembly any pause in enacting a statutory cap on recovery of noneconomic damages in medical malpractice actions." In fact, he went on, "the law of North Carolina...indicates that the North Carolina Supreme Court would follow the majority of courts that have addressed this issue and hold that such a statute is constitutional."

Here's a link to the Dome report:

The proposed cap on jury awards, Senate Bill 33, will be discussed in a public hearing Thursday at 10 a.m. in room 1027 of the Legislative Building on Jones Street in Raleigh.

Will Guv's State of the State be a Valentine? Doubt it

2011-02-11T16:52:00.002-05:00

The General Assembly has invited Gov. Bev Perdue to deliver her biennial State of the State message on Monday night -- Valentines Day. But given the verbal scuffling of the past week, no one expects the governor to deliver a Valentine to the honorables. Both sides are engaged in some interesting maneuvering as Republicans have begun running the General Assembly for the first time in more than 100 years and as Perdue considers how to make the most of her second legislature as governor leading up to next year's reelection campaign.

Perdue and the Republican legislative leadership have made nice a few times and worked together on a couple of matters, but things got tense when, after agreeing to run a bill giving the governor more authority to order spending cuts worth $400 million, Republican leaders also added in $140 million or so worth of additional cuts. These included trimming more than $8 million in spending under two of the state's economic development funds that are used to seal the deal and persuade industries to create new jobs here.

Democrats objected, saying that the Republican cut would hurt the state's job recovery. Republicans responded that they were only trimming spending in funds where there was still a hefty balance, and that in any case there was other money to recruit companies and in a pinch the Perdue administration could always ask Republicans to sponsor a bill for a really big project. Democrats responded by criticizing Republicans' "job-killing" budget bill. (Sound familiar?) Republicans threw back some barbs. And so it went, back and forth.

Here's my view: The Republican initiative was a reasonable way to get a head start on the job of cutting several billion from the 2011 budget that begins July 1. Perdue might have spoken up earlier to give Republicans time to find another place to cut the $8 million before their plan was announced. But even after Perdue raised objections, I believe Republicans could have found a place to trim what they needed. Surely a compromise could have been worked out. I think one almost was, but someone balked at the last moment.

Now both sides are staked out, and the question is whether Perdue will veto the spending cut the legislature just passed. It certainly appears that both sides are making a statement they consider important.

Republicans are saying Look here: We worked fast, took on the tough job of finding cuts, picked some trims that aren't popular but represent the sort of hard work we have to do this year to balance next year's budget and get the state's finances back in good shape.

And if Perdue vetoes the bill, which is plausible because Republicans don't have enough GOP voter to override, she'll be saying this is all about jobs and neither party should tie her hands when she's trying to make up for the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs that disappeared in recent years, so lawmakers should find another place to cut.

Valentines Day might not be a time when many folks would willingly tune in to a political speech, but this one might be worth the time to watch. It's a great opportunity for Perdue. And sure enough, Republican leaders Phil Berger, the Senate President Pro Tem, will respond to her speech right after, and House Speaker Thom Tillis will be standing by for further comment.

Former GOP chief justice says cap on medical claims "unconstitutional"

2011-02-09T14:23:00.000-05:00

Former GOP Chief Justice says cap on awards "unconstitutional"

Former Republican Chief Justice Bev Lake, a one-time GOP nominee for governor, has told state Senate leaders that a proposed cap on jury awards would be unconstitutional. Lake's letter comes at an awkward time for the new Republican majority running the legislature for the first time in more than a century. The majority wants to impose a $250.000 limit on non-economic jury awards in medical malpractice cases, as a way to hold down medical insurance costs, and no doubt won't welcome Lake's conclusions about the proposal.

Lake told Sen. Pete Brunstetter, R-Forsyth, chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, that such a cap is "unnecessary as well as unconstitutional." The bill in question is S 33.
Lake said 'North Carolina citizens have a “sacred and inviolable” right to have a jury determine the amount of compensatory damages, including non-economic damages, under our Constitution. The right to have a jury make that decision cannot be eliminated or restricted by the General Assembly.'

Lake has been a Democrat as well as Republican during his carrer. He served in the state Senate and as a depty attorney general, and was elected chief justice of the state Supreme Court in 2000.

Here's the text of Lake's letter to Brunstetter:

Dear Senator Brunstetter:

I understand that the Senate Judiciary I Committee will soon be considering Senate Bill 33, which would implement several medical liability reforms. In my opinion, Section 3 of the bill – the proposed cap on non-economic damages – is unconstitutional.

I served on the North Carolina Supreme Court for 12 years, and was Chief Justice from 2000 to 2006. I previously served as a Superior Court Judge for six years, was a State Senator for two terms, and was Deputy Attorney General for seven years. Throughout my legal career, which has spanned over 50 years, I have sought to uphold the North Carolina Constitution, the foundation of our laws.

For over 200 years, Article I, Section 25 of the North Carolina Constitution has provided that, in “matters respecting property,” the right to trial by jury is “sacred and inviolable.” Our Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that, “under the North Carolina Constitution, a party has a right to a jury trial in ‘all controversies at law respecting property.’” Dockery v. Hocutt, 357 N.C. 210, 217, 581 S.E.2d 431, 436 (2003) (quoting N.C. Const. art I, § 25). The Court has also long recognized that compensatory damages is a form of “property” protected by the constitutional right to a trial by jury.

In Osborn v. Leach, 135 N.C. 628, 633, 47 S.E. 811, 813 (1904), the Court determined that a libel law was constitutional, even though it abolished a plaintiff’s right to recover punitive damages. Id. at 632-33, 47 S.E. at 813. The Court noted, however, that if the law had restricted the recovery of actual or compensatory damages, it would have been unconstitutional. Id. at 640, 47 S.E. at 815. In drawing this distinction, the Court stated: “The right to have punitive damages assessed is . . . not property. The right to recover actual or compensatory damages is property.” Id. at 633, 47 S.E. at 813 (emphasis in original). The Court elaborated:

The plaintiff is entitled to recover compensation for mental and physical pain and injury to reputation. These are actual damages, and these are property. The right to recover damages for an injury is a species of property and vests in the injured party immediately on the commission of the wrong. . . . Being property, it is protected by the ordinary constitutional guarantees. . . . It cannot be extinguished except by act of the parties or by operation of the statute of limitation.

Id. (emphasis in original).

When I served as Chief Justice, a unanimous Court reaffirmed this principle in Rhyne v. K-Mart Corp., 358 N.C. 160, 594 S.E.2d 1 (2004). We stated that compensatory damages “represent a type of property interest vesting in plaintiffs,” while punitive damages are not a vested property interest. Id. at 177, 594 S.E.2d at 12; see also id. at 179, 594 S.E.2d at 14 (concluding that N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1D-25 did not violate Article I, Section 25 because the statute restricted only punitive damages).

The clear import of Osborn and Rhyne is that Section 3 of SB 33 is unconstitutional. North Carolina citizens have a “sacred and inviolable” right to have a jury determine the amount of compensatory damages, including non-economic damages, under our Constitution. The right to have a jury make that decision cannot be eliminated or restricted by the General Assembly.

The Georgia Supreme Court recently reached the same conclusion, striking down a similar law in Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C. v. Nestlehutt, 691 S.E.2d 218 (Ga. 2010). In 2005, the Georgia legislature enacted a $350,000 cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases. Georgia’s state constitution protects the right to a jury trial, as does ours, stating “[t]he right to trial by jury shall remain inviolate.” Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. I, Sec. I, Par. XI (a). Because the determination of damages has always been the jury’s province, and non-economic damages have always been a component of compensatory damages, the damages cap unconstitutionally infringed on the right to a jury trial. Id. at 223. The Court concluded: “The very existence of the caps, in any amount, is violative of the right to trial by jury.” Id.

Finally, the cap on non-economic damages is unnecessary as well as unconstitutional. As a Superior Court Judge, I presided over many civil jury trials. If a verdict is excessive, the trial judge has the well-established power and duty to offer the plaintiff the choice between a remittitur (decreased damages award) and a new trial. The trial judge, unlike the legislature, has actually heard the evidence and can make a sound judgment about whether the verdict is excessive. In doing so, the judge operates within the Constitution; instead of imposing his own view of the proper amount of the verdict, he must instead give the plaintiff the choice of a reduced verdict or a new trial.

The legislature has the responsibility to enact laws that are constitutional. With that duty in mind, I hope that your committee will remove Section 3 from SB 33.

Thank you for your consideration.

With kindest personal regards, I am, cordially,

I. Beverly Lake, Jr.

Cc: Members of the Senate

--

More pulling for UNC than Duke, poll says

2011-02-08T09:22:00.000-05:00

Proving that you can poll on anything and get folks to read it, Public Policy Polling reports than more than a third of North Carolinians will be pulling for the UNC Tar Heels in Wednesday's matchup with Duke's Blue Devils in men's basketball at Cameron Indoor Stadium while a little less than one-fourth will be pulling for the Blue Devils. Well, UNC has graduated a lot more people than Duke over the years. But what in the world are the other 40 percent or so of residents who don't favor either one thinking?

PPP, a firm that does a lot of work for Democrats and which throws in questions about other pressing issues of worldwide importance -- such as ACC basketball from time to time -- also found that Tar Heel fans have a better impression of Duke Coach Mike Krzyzewski than Blue Devil fans have of Roy Williams -- and that Coach K has better overall popularity numbers.

There's plenty of fodder here to hash over, so have at it. But as a former Carolina cheerleader (1965-67) I've got to say: Go Heels!

From PPP's news release this morning:

PPP's annual poll in conjunction with the first Carolina-Duke game finds that 37% of North Carolinians will be rooting for the Tar Heels tomorrow night compared to 22% in the Blue Devils' corner. The largest group of people in the state, at 41%, is indifferent.

The numbers show that Duke has not received any bounce in popularity from winning the national championship last year. The 2010 version of this poll found UNC favored by a 35-21 margin so things have basically remained exactly the same. Every demographic subgroup of the population we poll by ideology, gender, party, race, age, and region is rooting for UNC. There are some disparities though that match the conventional wisdom about each school's fan base. For instance Democrats prefer UNC by a greater than 2:1 margin at 43-21, but Republicans do so only narrowly at 31-26.

Mike Krzyzewski and Roy Williams both remain overwhelmingly popular with the North Carolinians who have an opinion about them. Krzyzewski is viewed favorably by 47% of voters in the state to 14% with a negative opinion. That's a very slight improvement from a 44/13 spread a year ago. 38% of voters have a positive view of Williams to just 10% with an unfavorable one, numbers nearly identical to the 39/10 he posted last year.

Contrary to what you would expect most respondents describing themselves as UNC fans have a favorable opinion of Krzyzewski- 45% see him favorably to 25% with a negative view. Even among those describing themselves as hardcore Carolina fans Coach K's favorability is 45/38. It's a relatively small segment of the UNC fan base- although in the interest of full disclosure that small segment includes me- that truly hates Krzyzewski.

Duke fans are not as charitable toward Williams. Overall Blue Devils are pretty evenly divided on the UNC coach with 32% holding a favorable opinion of him and 33% with a negative one. Self described 'hardcore' Duke fans are not friendly to Roy at all though- just 27% rate him positively while 51% say they don't like him.

The other interesting thing to look at within this poll is how Tar Heel fans feel toward Williams. This poll was conducted two weeks ago, before the team's impressive recent stretch against Miami, NC State, Boston College, and Florida State. 64% of Carolina fans at that time said they had a favorable opinion of Williams to only 3% with an unfavorable one. Among 'hardcore' UNC fans 90% expressed support for Williams with 1%- literally a single respondent- saying they had an unfavorable opinion of him. I can guarantee you Barack Obama would love it if 90% of Democrats were behind him. There may be some folks on message boards and calling in to radio talk shows who are UNC fans and unhappy with Williams but they account for a very, very meager portion of the overall fan base.

This analysis is also available on our blog:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/02/annual-carolinaduke-poll.html

Wind energy initiative coming to North Carolina

2011-02-07T13:47:00.000-05:00

The U.S. Departments of the Interior and Energy have announced a $50 million strategic plan to encourage development of wind energy in offshore areas of the Mid-Atlantic -- and it targets seven Wind Energy Areas, including offshore North Carolina, where environnmental studies and approval processes will be sped up.

Four of those areas -- Delaware, New Jersey, Maryland and 165 square miles off Virginia's coast -- will get early enviornmental reviews, reducing the time it takes to get approval of offshore wind turbine facilities, the departments said.

In March, the departments expect to add Wind Energy Areas offshore of Massachusetts and Rhode island, and in the South Atlantic region, "namely North Carolina, this spring."

You can read more about these initiatives at www.boemre.gov/offshore/RenewableEnergy/index.htm.

The $50 million in research and development funding is meant to help reach the president's goal of generating 80 percent of the country's electricity from clean sources by 2035. The list includes up to $25 million over 5 years to support technology development, including innovative wind turbine design tools; up to $18 million over 3 years for environmental studies and research as well as wind market analysis; and up to $7.5 million over three years to develop the next generation of wind turbine drivetrains, a technology considered critical to produce cost-effective power from wind turbines offshore.

Meanwhile, Pete Danko at the Wedsite Earth Techling writes that a Spanish company is proposing a 15O turbine wind farm on flat farmland in the northeastern part of the state:

Much of the attention regarding wind power generation in North Carolina has been focused offshore, but the world’s biggest wind-power developer has other ideas: Iberdrola Renewables, part of the Spanish company Iberdrola Renovables, said that after two years of laying the ground work it had officially applied to build the state’s first utility-scale plant.

Iberdrola has in mind a 150-turbine, 300-megawatt capacity plant on a 20,000-acre swath of private, flat farmland in the northeast corner of the state, but it struck a cautious tone in announcing the filing of an application with the North Carolina Utilities Commission. “The filing today represents the first step of many regulatory reviews that must be completed before Iberdrola Renewables makes a final decision on the project, which could begin construction as early as late 2011,” the company said.

http://www.earthtechling.com/2011/02/wind-power-may-blow-in-north-carolina/
.

Perdue: 'Senate cuts go too far'

2011-02-02T15:47:00.002-05:00

For weeks the new Republican majority and Gov. Bev Perdue have been making nice about the upcoming job of trimming the 2011-12 budget by billions of dollars to cover a projected $3.7 billion shortfall. Yesterday the Senate announced it was moving toward giving Perdue authority to wrest $400 million in savings in the current fiscal year to get a head start on next year's savings. Senate leaders really wanted $800 million in savings, but Perdue wanted to wait to see how the $400 million cut would affect this year's budget.

Meanwhile, the Senate Appropriations Committee this afternoon announced a plan for more cuts -- including taking $67 million ~~billion~~ from the money coming to the Golden LEAF Foundation (it still has $555 million) from a national tobacco settlement, $11.7 million from the Health and Wellness Trust Fund, $3 million from the Job Development Investment Grants, various unspent funds such as from IT funds ($13.6 million) and the Parks and Recreation Trust Fund (8.5 million). Sponsors including Sen. Richard Stevens, R-Wake, said the cuts would get the projected starting deficit down nearly a billion to about $2.7 billion.

Perdue said Wednesday afternoon the cuts would make it hard to recruit jobs and expand businesses. In a statement this afternoon, she said:

“The proposed cuts to North Carolina’s jobs and economic development funds will damage our ability to recruit new jobs and to expand existing businesses in the state. Other Southern states, notably Virginia, have called for an increase in similar funds so they can take our jobs away.

"I am truly surprised that Senate leadership is considering taking North Carolina’s jobs money as a way to balance the budget. It won’t work – and what’s more, our people won’t work if we can’t bring new companies and new industries to our state. We have many hundreds of new jobs in the pipeline right now, and they depend on that money. If we don’t win those projects, those jobs go somewhere else. It’s that simple.”

The legislature is off to a very fast start, and it is moving to make whatever cuts it can now to get a handle on the worse budget shortfall in memory. No one disputes that covering the shortfall is going to cause some pain. The governor's reaction today to the advance cuts is just the first of a number of reactions to various cuts from those directly affected as lawmakers and the governor try to find the right formula to cut the budget. It's worth noting that Perdue did not say she was against all the cuts -- just the ones she thinks will affect the state's ability to recruit jobs. Many Republicans, on the other hand, are doubtful that spending tax money on economic development is all that effective in recruiting jobs.

4:20 p.m. update from Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger's office:

“We are actively tackling next year’s budget shortfall through savings and reductions in the current fiscal year,” said Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger (R-Rockingham.) “These cuts represent immediate steps to help close the gap between spending and revenue. While everything remains on the table, it is our belief these measures will minimize negative impacts to our classroom teachers and state employees.”

Senate moving fast to give Gov more budget power

2011-02-01T09:30:00.004-05:00

Sen. Phil Berger, president pro tem of the state Senate, has his colleagues in the Republican majority concentrating on state budget issues, beginning with a bill giving Gov. Bev Perdue more power to manage a budget expected to be about $3.7 billion short for the new fiscal year.

The Senate Appropriations Committee is in session this morning working on the Balanced Budget Act granting Perdue one-time authority to cut spending the remainder of this year. The bill is sponsored by Sens. Pete Brunstetter (R-Forsyth), Neal Hunt (R-Wake), and Richard Stevens (R-Wake). The aim is to cut spending between now and June 30 by another $400 million. Perdue had already cut the budget significantly, but she evidently had gone as far as her budget powers allowed.

Berger's office released a statement quoting Berger as saying, “We are pleased that the governor requested additional powers to join us in our efforts to rein-in out of control spending and get our state’s fiscal house in order. We are giving Gov. Perdue these emergency powers in good faith and trust that she will continue to work with us in a bipartisan manner to help solve our state’s budget problems.”

Berger's official also announced a joint Finance Committee meeting Wednesday to "review the state’s existing tax structure, revenue forecast and economic climate."

Mecklenburg Sen. Bob Rucho is co-chairman of that committee, and in the release he said, the early joint session will help members "take on the challenge of reforming North Carolina’s tax system. This will help stimulate the economy, grow small business and create new jobs so that we can put the people of North Carolina back to work.”

The Senate and House are wise to put the focus quickly on the budget, the state's economy and doing what it can to attract jobs, and so far Speaker Thom Tillis, Berger and Perdue have cooperated on how to approach the shortfall -- ad encouraging sign after the first couple of days when other issues have gotten in the way of job one. I expect the legislature and the governor will have plenty of opportunities to fall out later on -- possibly over keeping temporary taxes that would help avoid teacher layoffs. We'll see.

Tillis hails Florida decision on health care law

2011-01-31T17:00:00.007-05:00

Speaker of the House Thom Tillis, R-Mecklenburg, hailed today's decision by a federal judge in Florida that the new federal health care law is unconstitutional. The law, Tillis said, "is bad for business in North Carolina" and said people expect the legislature to protect their right to make their own health care decisons "and protect North Carolina's economy in the process." His remarks provide support for a House committee that wants to prevent the federal government from forcing people to purchase health care.

The new Republican majority campaigned last year on jobs and the economy, but the House's first committee action of the session, on the health care bill, suggested a different priority. It was not so surprising that the bill came up; what was surprising was how fast the committee moved, without a public hearing or more deliberation.

The House Judiciary Committee last week approved a bill that in effect would exempt North Carolina residents from the mandate to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty. It also directed the N.C. attorney general to represent North Carolinians in court if needed to enforce the bill. That bill could come up for a vote on the House floor this week.

Tillis's office released the following statement about the court decision:

"In the House of Representatives, we have no higher priority than to balance our budget and work to foster an environment that encourages job development. The Federal Health Care bill is bad for business in North Carolina. For over a year, North Carolinians have clearly expressed their displeasure with the Federal legislation, and as recently as this afternoon, a Federal judge in Florida expressed his concern by ruling the entire law unconstitutional. We will not stand idly and watch an unconstitutional usurpation of authority by the Federal government. North Carolinians expect us to act to protect their right to make their own health care decisions; we plan to do just that, and protect North Carolina’s economy in the process."

Readers: Give Republicans more time

2011-01-31T09:18:00.000-05:00

Some readers of Sunday's column questioning whether anything in the legislature has changed have fired back, saying the column was too quick to judge the new Republican majority and that the proof will be what happens in the long run.

A Charlotte reader wrote:

Enjoy reading your insights about Raleigh, as always.

I would think the new Republican leaders would have gotten more than a week before the honeymoon was declared 'over' after 112 years of wandering in the Wilderness like Moses and the people of Israel.

Any time these is a transition in power in Washington or Raleigh or Charlotte, the new leaders bring with them a new vision of how they are going to run things.

'Appointing a parliamentarian' who is an expert at legislative process as Thomas Jefferson and Madison wrote about seems to be a step in the right direction, not the wrong one. How can a duly-elected politician really be an unbiased arbiter of 'parliamentary procedure' in any setting? When I was chief of staff for Senator Dole in Washington, we had TWO former parliamentarians come in to brief us on Senate procedures and I can promise you, there is NO WAY in the world that any mere mortal or politician can know and the rule on all points of order without such help on a minute-by-minute basis.

The best advice though, they gave us? 'Remember this, if you remember nothing else...In the US Senate, the ONLY rule is....there are NO RULES! Majority rules...so figure out how to get to 50%+1 and you will win every time!'

That is the essence of our democratic republic.

I think it is far too soon to hang it up on these new leaders and a tad bit 'unfair' to judge them based on their first week of organization and all that.

Give Thom Tillis and Phil Berger and the others 6 months. If they start passing bills in the dead of night and bring in people strapped in a gurney straight from the hospital to vote; or change the legislative day in the middle of a regular session ! (Saw it once with mine own 4 eyes when Jim Wright did it in Congress circa 1989!); or start burning down opponent's tobacco-curing sheds to intimidate them somehow, well, then you can write whatever you want about the 'NEW Republicans being as bad as the 'Old Democrats' all you want.

But these guys are different.....let them work their magic for awhile before judging.
Another reader wrote:

Will the Republicans govern "behind closed doors, riding roughshod over the opposition and building the kinds of power structure they have complained about Democrats doing for years?" I noticed that you said "they" because the Observer certainly has not complained about it too much. The Observer has enhanced this way of governing by their overwhelming endorsements and cheerleading of Democrat candidates, to the point of sounding like an actual appendage of the Democratic Party.

Your lamentation is no doubt sincere; however, it has the appearance of crocodile tears, much as the Democrats calling for a non-partisan committee to handle redistricting after a century of their doing so unilaterally. Only two days after Republicans assumed control Opinion was criticizing the priority of joining the Repeal Healthcare suit before initiating legislation on jobs. Surely, time was somewhat critical in joining this suit before it went to court?

In summary, I too hope the Republicans demonstrate how it should be done. But surely they deserve some leeway here after more than 100 years of Democrat's cramdowns? Our state's image has been badly tarnished by the Democrat's corruption, brought on no doubt by absolute power, which again has been significantly assisted by Observer support.

Another wrote:

I'm sorry sir, but we must have seen two different campaigns from the Republicans. Addressing the health care debacle was one of the big planks that conservatives across the country clamoured for. I am highly pleased to see them attempting to fulfill their pledge. I wish them success! Rep. Mel Watt mailed me a summary of the health care bill that Congress used. It is a nightmare! I strongly recommend you attempt to secure a copy of it. Just look at how fast one of the Dems favorite supporters, the unions, are attempting to get out of it.

There is, as you are no doubt aware, little that government can do to create jobs. Since they don't manufacture anything. The only artillery they have available is to lower taxes, less regulation, and low union meddling to lure jobs.

We need to get rid of corporate taxes. No company pays them. You must know this. It is simply added to the price of the good or service, and becomes a hidden tax on all of us.

Navy again suspends work on Outlying Landing Field

2011-01-27T18:01:00.001-05:00

For the second time in the past three years, the U.S. Navy has suspended its plans to try to place an Outlying Landing Field in northeastern North Carolina so jet pilots can practice aircraft carrier landings. In 2008, after citizens groups fought the Navy over plans to put the SuperHornet landing field near the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge in Washington County and politicians eventually weighed in against putting the field so near large migratory waterfowl nesting grounds, the Navy abandoned the Washington/Beaufort counties site and looked elsewhere.

Two of those new sites were in other parts of North Carolina -- Sandbanks in Gates County and Hales Lake in Camden/Currituck counties. The Navy said it was suspending work on the N.C. sites and in Virginia while it focuses on locating the Joint Strike Force on the West Coast.

Jeff Hampton of the Virginian Pilot in Norfolk reports that the Navy has notified local officials about the suspension.

“This email is to provide your office notice of the Navy's decision to suspend release and stop work on the OLF DEIS for construction and operation of an outlying landing field,” according to the Navy notice. The Navy plans to locate new squadrons of the Joint Strike Fighter on the West Coast first and would not consider East Coast facilities until at least 2014, the notice said.

Local officials were glad to hear it.

“I think all of our persistence has paid off,” he said.

It was welcomed news to opponents of the project who have protested at public meetings, created websites to decry the project, lobbied state and national officials and posted "No OLF" signs along yards and road sides. As an acronym for outlying landing field, a bad word in parts of northeastern North Carolina.

“We’re cautiously optimistic,” said Laura Dickerson, president of Citizens Against OLF in Gates County. “We’d rather see it canceled.”

In January 2008, the Navy announced plans to build an airfield where jets could safely practice aircraft carrier landings. Possible sites named were in Surry, Sussex and Southampton counties in Virginia and Gates and Camden counties in North Carolina. Opposition immediately got active. Citizen groups created No OLF websites, local governments passed resolutions against the plans, hired lobbyists to oppose them and convinced elected officials to pass bills that could either stop or delay them.

PPP: Perdue gains, still behind McCrory

2011-01-26T15:57:00.000-05:00

Public Policy Polling reports in its latest poll that Gov. Bev Perdue is pulling closer to Republican Pat McCrory, the former Charlotte mayor who's probably running for governor again. Perdue's numbers -- found to be weak in the Democratic primary in a Civitas poll yesterday -- are better in a head-to-head contest with McCrory. She's behind him by 7 points, but she has recently gained 5 points, PPP's Tom Jensen reports, but she'd still lose if the election were today. But the election isn't today, and it's a long time until next year's election -- about 22 months, but in politics that's several lifetimes away.

Jensen notes, "If she's gained five points on McCrory in two months, well out from the election, then it's certainly possible that she could make up the other seven in the next 21 months. It's not going to be easy by any means but it's too early to write her off."

Here's what PPP said in a news release:

Bev Perdue continues to trail Pat McCrory in a hypothetical reelection contest, but as her approval numbers have improved over the last few months she's beginning to close the gap a little bit. McCrory leads by 7 points at 47-40. That represents a five point gain for Perdue since she trailed by 12 in a November PPP poll at 49-37.

The biggest key to Perdue's improvement is a resurgence with independents. Where she trailed McCrory by 31 points with them a couple months ago that margin is now down to 10 points. Independents were strongly supportive of the government reorganization plans that Perdue put forward to much attention a month ago and the Governor is also probably benefiting from a general warming toward Democrats from those voters since the beginning of the year. Numerous recent polls have found Barack Obama with his best numbers among independents since early in his Presidency.

Perdue's 10 point deficit with independents is actually almost identical to the 7 point loss with them we found on our final North Carolina poll in 2008. The main reason Perdue is running poorly compared to the last election is mediocre numbers with Democrats. She leads only 65-21 with them right now where she had an 80-17 advantage the last time around. Perdue's lackluster approval numbers since she took office can be blamed more than anything else on her relatively poor standing with Democrats. Finding a way to keep the party base in line over the next 21 months is probably the key to her winning a second term.

Meanwhile McCrory continues to be well liked at least with the voters that still know who he is. A plurality in the state at 45% have no opinion of him either way but among those who do 33% rate him favorably to 22% who see him unfavorably. His favorability runs 4:1 positive with Republicans at 43/11 and impressively there are almost as many Democrats- 26%- with a positive opinion of him as a negative one- 27%. A few rounds of negative advertising would likely plunge his favorability numbers across party lines pretty darn quick, but at least for now he's doing well on that front.

If the election was today Perdue would lose, pretty much no doubt about that. But it's not and I think some folks have been a little quick to write her political obituary. If she's gained five points on McCrory in two months, well out from the election, then it's certainly possible that she could make up the other seven in the next 21 months. It's not going to be easy by any means but it's too early to write her off.

For more, see:
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/01/perdue-pulls-closer-to-mccrory.html

More on 'The Great State of Meck':

2011-01-26T09:10:00.001-05:00

Former state Rep. Lane Brown, a Democrat who represented Stanly County in the legislature and who now lives in Cheraw S.C., recalls the Great State of Mecklenburg debates in the House going back to the early 1970s -- fostered by Eastern N.C. legislators, as Brown recalls:

Enjoyed reading your piece in yesterday's Charlotte Observer ("Charlotte vs. Raleigh, again', Jan. 16), which brought back some
memories of an "exchange" on the floor during the 1971 session (my House District was the 32nd,
Stanly County):

Billy Culpepper rose from the Honorables to speak on a bill one of those short calendar days, making
some comment about "the Great State of Mecklenburg" as compared to his "Little State of Chowan"!

Holding his "fire" until the sponsor finished his remarks, "Cousin" Jim Vogler as he was affectionally
called, rose to propound a question to Culpepper, which went something like this: "Mr. Culpepper,
don't you think it unfair that my district (Mecklenburg) sends more tax dollars - sales tax, income
tax, inheritance tax - to Raleigh than all of your counties combined on the Albemarle Sound send
to the capitol?....that Mecklenburg is a 'donor county' while your little counties are 'donee' counties?"
Culpepper, caught off guard, quickly recovered, replying: "If you Mecklenburg people think you are
so ***/** big, why not just set up your own state?" Vogler, not to be outdone by the rep from down
East, finished the argument by saying: "We have this under continued consideration....". The debate
closed and the question was called.

I can recall many other occasions when the Mecklenburg quip was mentioned on the floor. Perhaps
Jimmy Greene, later as Speaker, often said when presiding: "For what purpose this time does the
Great State of Mecklenburg desire to be recognized?" The reply from some member of the delegation:
"To suspend the rules so that the Speaker might have a smoke!" So it went, session after session.

Keep bringing us some of this good Tar Heel history and lore!

Best Regards,
Lane Brown

Let the fun begin in Raleigh

2011-01-26T06:02:00.000-05:00

RALEIGH -- The 2011 N.C. General Assembly convenes today in Raleigh with an entirely new cast of characters in charge of the crushed marble, brass and walnut edifice on Jones Street a block north of the Capital. This marks the 35th year I have walked across Union Square and down to the Legislative Building, and begins the 18th biennial session I've covered at least part of the time since we moved to Raleigh in 1977, including a couple years writing editorials back in Greensboro.

Had I known it would be that long, I would have worn better shoes and sat down a lot more.

Those cold, hard terrazzo floors in the Legislative Building are tough on old feet and bad knees, and though I've never walked into one of the fountains that dominate courtyards inside the legislative building, as some unfortunate freshman member or unwary lobbyist does from time to time, I've found the building to be a hazard to creaky joints and aging bones.

On the other hand, the people who work there -- the clerks of the House and Senate, the serving crew in the cafeteria, the researchers in bill drafting and fiscal research, the 170 members and their staffs, the hundreds of lobbyists and the dozen or so regular members of the Capital Press Corps -- year in and year out are some of the most interesting people in this Vale of Humility Between Two Mountains of Conceit.

But this year, it changes in dramatic ways. Perhaps my great grandfather, the Rev. A.D. Betts, who preached at occasional political events round this town near the end of his long and colorful career, would have remembered the 1898 session, when Sydenham B. Alexander represented Mecklenburg in the Senate and Walter P. Craven, R.M. Ransom and J. Solomon Reid represented it in the House. It has been said that's the last time Republicans controlled the legislature, though others argue the date goes back to 1870. There are days when it feels like I've been covering the place at least that long.

But my days as a Raleigh correspondent began in the reign of James 1, when Jim Hunt had just been sworn in as governor for the first of his four terms. The town belonged to Democrats despite Republican gains a few years earlier in 1972, when voters put Republicans in the governorship (Jim Holshouser) and the U.S. Senate (Jesse Helms) for the first time in the 20th century. But in 1977, three years after the disastrous Watergate election of 1974 wiped out most Republican legislators in Raleigh, it was largely a Democratic government.

The governor was a Democrat, the lieutenant governor was a Democrat, the entire Council of State was Democratic, the courts system was headed by a Democrat and the legislature was heavily Democratic. In the Senate there were 4 Republicans and 46 Democrats; in the House there were 6 Republicans and 114 Democrats. There were 6 legislators of African American descent -- two in the Senate, four in the House, and there were 23 women -- 4 in the Senate, 19 in the House. Most but not all were Democrats.

The fortunes of Democrats and Republicans have ebbed and flowed since then. Republican Gov. Jim Martin served two terms in the 1980s and early 1990s, but otherwise Democrats have hung onto the governor's mansion. Republicans ran the House for two terms in the mid-1990s before Democrats won it back. Then in 2003 Republicans appeared to have won the House back, but a change in party by one legislator produced a deadlock and joint Democrat-Republican management in the House for two years.

Since then Democrats have run the show -- until voters put an end to that, at least temporarily and maybe for a long time, last fall. A lot depends on whether Republicans do unto Democrats what the Democrats used to do unto Republicans when it came to the decennial redistricting.

For the first time since the 19th century, Republicans will run the House and Senate. They control 99 of the 170 legislative seats, with 31 members in the 50-member Senate and 67 members, plus one independent who will likely vote regularly with them, in the House. By the way, the changes include the fact that there will be five fewer black legislators in the 2011 session and five fewer women legislators in 2011. Most of the women lawmakers are still Democrats, but one-third are Republicans.

Gov. Bev Perdue, of course, is a Democrat, as is Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton. Perdue gets to propose the budget. Dalton gets to preside over the Senate. But the Republicans who run the House and Senate get to decide what passes and what fails, and for anyone who wonders what difference elections make, we're fixing to find out.

So what we have in North Carolina is genuine mixed government -- with Republicans in charge of legislating and Democrats mostly in charge of executing. Republicans who have longed for this moment -- and who yearn to win the governor’s mansion in next year’s election -- have an opportunity not only to change the direction of how North Carolina taxes its people and spends its money, but also to change how a major government institution performs. Will it be behind closed doors, riding roughshod over the opposition and building the kinds of power structures they have complained about Democrats doing for years?

The NC Coalition of Lobbying and Government reform has a list of the sort that Republicans in past years have embraced. It includes such things as no more secret meetings on the budget, making the budget public for three days before any vote is taken, no more "blank bills" to be filled in later, no more non budgetary amendments called "special provisions" allowed in the budget bill and 24 hours notice before a committee substitute can be sprung on the membership.

What I know from covering politics and government for more than four decades is that it’s hard work, no matter who’s in charge, and doing that work ethically and in a transparent fashion that lets taxpayers see what they’re doing, is harder than it sounds. It’s a lot easier to talk about reforms that create more openness and that give every legislator the chance to have his or her ideas heard on the floor or propose amendments, than it is to allow it.

But if the new Republican majority can carry through on its promises of opening up the legislature and taking better care of the public’s money and its main institutions of education and public safety, they will have earned the public’s gratitude and the right to keep running the Legislative Building on Jones Street. If they opt for manipulating the rules to squelch dissent and remain in power, if they create slush funds to help their friends and punish their enemies, as they accuse Democrats of doing, and if they act unethically in the dispatch of the public’s business, they can count on a short stay in positions of power in Raleigh.

Likewise, Gov Bev Perdue has opportunities and challenges. If she can work with the new Republican majority to balance the budget, reduce taxes, improve tax fairness and protect classrooms and provide for public safety, she will be in an excellent position for re-election -- the campaign for which, mind you, is already under way if not visibly so to the public. She may not have the choice. She has one veto to Republicans' 99 votes. But it's hard to imagine Perdue not standing up for the things Democratic governors always support: public schools, community colleges and the university system, promoting jobs, and better mental health and health care for those who cannot help themselves. Her popularity numbers haven't improved dramatically, but Republicans have yet to run the legislature for a full year. We don't know yet whether they're do a great job or make a hash of it. What Perdue and the new Republican majority do in 2011 will be major factors in who runs the joint after the 2012 election. Let the fun begin.

Obama's numbers looking better in N.C.

2011-01-25T16:26:00.000-05:00

President Barack Obama's number are better in North Carolina, Public Policy Polling says, with more approving of his performance than disapproving. His numbers have been up elsewhere in the nation, but just now have arrived here, the company said in a news release today. It all means that Obama is in a good position for the next presidential campaign in this state even as Civitas' poll (see previous blogpost) finds that Gov. Bev Perdue, who was elected in 2008 with help from Obama's coattails, isn't doing so well among potential Democratic primary voters in 2012.

"For the first time since December of 2009 PPP finds more voters in the state approving than disapproving of him, at a 49/47 spread.

"Increased optimism about the economy in the state is helping Obama's revival. Last March a majority of voters in the state at 51% felt their personal economic situation had gotten worse since Obama took office compared to only 10% who thought it had improved. Now the portion feeling things have gotten worse for them is down to 47% and the one thinking things have gotten better is up to 16% with 37% expressing the sentiment that there's been no change for them since the President was inaugurated."

PPP also said, "Obama's gain in popularity has been fueled by voters in the center. A year ago his approval rating with moderates was 59%. Now it's up to 69%. This improvement in his standing, along with the lukewarm reaction of voters in the state to the leading 2012 Republican Presidential contenders, has him in position to repeat his surprise North Carolina victory from 2008. He leads the four most likely GOP contenders at this point by margins ranging anywhere from 3 to 9 points in this month's poll."

For more, see http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/01/obama-on-positive-turf-in-north.html

Is Perdue vulnerable to a primary challenge?

2011-01-25T10:33:00.001-05:00

Since last fall's election a lot of attention has focused on whether Gov. Bev Perdue's popularity numbers would improve significantly and whether they would be sufficient to win reelection in 2012 especially if she faced another challenge from former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory.

Now the conservative Civitas Institute, which like the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling has a good record for its polling accuracy over the past couple of years, suggests Perdue may even have a hard time winning the Democratic primary for reelection.

Civitas sent out a news release this morning saying that fewer than a third of Democratic and unaffiliated voters would support her in a primary.

The group said, "29 percent said they would vote for Perdue if the Democratic Primary election for Governor of North Carolina were held today. Thirty percent said they would vote for a totally different Democrat, and 35 percent said they are undecided."

“'Governor Perdue may be in trouble if she ends up with a credible primary challenger,”' said Civitas Institute President Francis De Luca. '“Support among Democratic and unaffiliated voters has dropped as unemployment stays high and job creation remains stalled.”"

Civitas also said voters are evenly split "45 percent approving and 45 percent disapproving of her job performance. This is up over her previous December 2010 job approval number of 44 percent approve-47 percent disapprove."

For more information on Civitas polling see www.nccivitas.org/media/poll-results/.

Of course, it's hard to imagine that a Democratic incumbent with as much experience as Perdue would lose in a primary for the party's nomination. For one thing, there would have to be well-financed challengers willing to take on the governor in a primary fight. There probably will be some other Democrats in the race but so far no big-name candidates have been willing to get into the contest. And voters will have plenty of time to watch how the new Republican majority does in running the legislature for the first time since the late 1800s.

NC has 3 of South's '10 most endangered' environmental sites

2011-01-18T09:00:00.000-05:00

The Southern Environmental Law Center rates three sites in North Carolina and one in South Carolina among the South's top 10 endangered places and at risk of "irreversible damage" in 2011. The N.C. sites include the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge on the Outer Banks, the Cape Fear River Basin in Southeastern N.C. and the Snowbird Mountains in Western N.C. In South Carolina, the group named the Santee River Basin as one of the 10 most threatened places.

"Our region is headed down a path that threatens to overwhelm the Southern landscapes we love -- our mountains, rivers, coast, and rural countryside," Marie Hawthorne, SELC's Director of Development, said in a news release Tuesday morning. "Decisions made today about how we extract and produce energy will have consequences for decades to come. The key message behind our Top Ten list is that there is still time to save these special places — but we need to act now."

For more information, click here.

Here's the SELC's list:

Alabama's Coast: SELC is leading legal efforts to strengthen oversight and regulation of offshore drilling, and to ensure that nothing like the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico is allowed to happen again.

Georgia's Cypress Forests: Fueled by an increase in demand for cypress mulch, timber companies are chopping down Georgia's iconic wetland forests faster than they can recover.

Oconee River, Georgia: A proposed coal-fired power plant would siphon an average of 13.5 million gallons a day from the Oconee River, robbing downstream farms and communities that depend on this resource.

Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge, North Carolina: A short-sighted bridge replacement plan would turn one of the nation's most important havens for waterfowl into a permanent highway construction zone.

Snowbird Mountains, North Carolina: An outdated highway expansion plan from the 1960s would cut four lanes of asphalt through stunning mountain terrain and would expose trout streams to acid-laden pollution.

Cape Fear Basin, North Carolina: A proposed cement plant near Wilmington would destroy 1,000 acres of wetland habitat and further pollute the Northeast Cape Fear River, which already suffers from mercury levels harmful to people and wildlife.

Santee River Basin, South Carolina: Despite available remedies, an old system of hydroelectric dams could be allowed to perpetuate decades of degradation to wetlands and wildlife habitat.

Cumberland Plateau, Tennessee: Mountaintop removal and other destructive coal mining practices threaten an ecosystem that is world-renowned for its rich biological diversity and rare species.

George Washington National Forest, Virginia: The film Gasland has exposed the impacts of hydraulic fracturing (or "fracking"), a method of natural gas extraction linked to the contamination of water supplies; fracking could be on its way to the Southeast's largest public forest and the source of clean water for many Shenandoah Valley communities.

The Chesapeake Bay: SELC is assisting in overseeing the state and federal agencies charged with developing and implementing restoration plans for the Bay, which continues to suffer from pollution from air, land, and water.

Mac Smith, lawmaker, dies at 92

2011-01-16T17:23:00.006-05:00

J. McNeill Smith, one of the most remarkable lawyers and legislators the state has produced, died Saturday in Greensboro at age 92. He defended unpopular people, helped desegregate Greensboro in the 1960s when the sit-in movement began to change the South, helped students challenging the state's unconstitutional speaker ban on college campuses and had more fun legislating than just about anyone I ever covered in four decades of writing about N.C. politics.

You can read his obit here.

Smith was a state senator from Greensboro in the 1970s when he ran for the right to challenge then-U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms in the 1978 election, but failed to survive a hotly contested primary. I had grown up in Greensboro, attended the same downtown church (West Market Street Methodist) and knew his family from the early 1950s, but got to know him better in that 1978 campaign. I learned among other things that Smith had an enormous appetite. We went to lunch one day so I could interview him about the campaign. He ate like a starving horse as I asked questions and tried to keep up with his answers. Trouble was, he asked me more questions than I asked him, and I fell behind on the barbecue. At one point he reached for my banana pudding as he asked, "You're not going to eat this are you?" I don't thing he gave me the chance.

He was more than just a good lawyer. He had a sharp wit, seemed to be interested in everything and was a lively conversationalist. It often seemed to me he was thinking about three sentences ahead of what he was saying.

In the 1970s he stayed with a relative who lived near the legislature, and Mac rode his bicycle back and forth to the Senate each day when the honorables were in session. He collected old typewriters -- at one point had a garage full of them, he told me -- and when one of his daughters was about to be married, he dubbed the preparations just as expensive and almost as complicated as Operation Overlord in World War II, in which he served in North Africa and Asia.

Once at a dance in Greensboro he asked my mother-in-law, Fran Strickland, to dance. "But Mac," she said, "the music isn't playing right now." Mac glanced around, saw that she was right and then smiled: "Evidently you are right, but can I get credit for asking?"

Harlan Boyles warned of cuts to schools, higher ed

2011-01-14T11:48:00.001-05:00

While looking for some old clips on the long-running war of words between Charlotte and Raleigh, I came across a short piece I once wrote about State Treasurer Harlan Boyles.

A moderately conservative Democrat of the old school, Boyles worried in 1998 about the ultimate impact of cutting taxes and raising spending on state programs, as the legislature was doing that year. Democrats held the Senate, Republicans the House, and Boyles thought the conflicting ideas each chamber was pushing might one day lead to big problems for public schools, community colleges and the university system. The House wanted to cut taxes sharply and the Senate wanted to raise spending sharply, even though leaders of each knew there would one day be a reckoning.

Boyles said it reminded him of "voodoo" economics" that President George H.W. Bush had warned about. "My premise is not to debate the purpose for the money, but to raise the question how we could anticipate its repayment without signaling a very large tax increase, or large reductions in state programs as they now exist. If it's the latter, the programs most likely to be affected in the future] are public education, the community college system and higher education."

His words were prescient, though it has taken 13 years to bring us to the point where there's a $3.7 billion state budget shortfall and public schools and higher education both are anticipating huge cuts in state appropriations.

Boyles was a careful man, and a smart one. And he was right. Here's the text of that 1998 column:

HOW WILL WE PAY OFF THE STATE'S DEBT DOWN THE ROAD?

It took state Treasurer Harlan Boyles only an instant when I asked him if the N.C. General Assembly's current boost-spending and cut-taxes fervor reminded him of what George Bush once said about Ronald Reagan's economic proposals.
"Voodoo, " said Boyles. "This is fiscal policy that is totally uncharacteristic of North Carolina."

Boyles is concerned by this mindless obsession on the part of the General Assembly to (a) cut taxes in the House, and the consequences be damned, and (b) raise spending on critically needed state programs in the Senate, and the consequences be damned. And both chambers have already approved a huge new bond issue that would increase the state's indebtedness significantly.

"I find it extremely difficult to explain how we can be so aggressive in reducing taxes, and at the same time so aggressive in increasing our indebtedness, because the two do not mesh, " he said.

Boyles has been keeping track of income and the outgo for a long time. When he came to state government in the early 1950s, the state budget was about $500 million. It did not exceed $1 billion until the administration of Gov. Terry Sanford in the 1960s, and didn't hit $10 billion until the first administration of Gov. Jim Hunt.

The last biennial budget, for 1995-97, topped $37 billion. If the current General Assembly ever finishes its business and comes to an agreement on a supplementary state budget, the biennial budget from all sources (general fund, highway funds, federal funds and institutional receipts such as tuition) will top $41 billion - a $4 billion increase in just two years.

Not only that, but the state's indebtedness is zooming, too. Prior to 1993, state indebtedness from bond issues was $750 million. Since 1993, the legislature has approved and the voters have passed another $3.5 billion in bond issues. If the $1 billion clean water bond issue passes, total debt will exceed $5 billion - and the annual debt service would approach $500 million. It makes Boyles' head swim to note that's twice as much money, at least in raw dollars if not adjusted for inflation, as the annual budget when he went to work for the state.

Boyles isn't arguing that there aren't critical needs, or that the public doesn't deserve a tax cut. "My premise is not to debate the purpose for the money, but to raise the question how we could anticipate its repayment without signaling a very large tax increase, or large reductions in state programs as they now exist, " says Boyles. "If it's the latter, the programs most likely to be affected in the future] are public education, the community college system and higher education."

Every member of the N.C. General Assembly knows this. If voodoo economics does for North Carolina what it did for the federal budget deficit, we're in for a bumpy ride. But only a few are willing to stand up and squawk about it.

Among them is Rep. Jim Black, D-Mecklenburg, who calls the cut-taxes-at-any-cost drive the most irresponsible thing he's seen.

And there's Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight, D-Dare, who has warned that an economic downturn will cause the legislature huge problems, akin to those of the 1990-91 legislature that faced a $1.2 billion shortfall. "With all certainty, there's going to be a downturn, and that's . . . where we'll look back and say this was a poor decision, " he says

Everybody loves tax cuts. Me too. But is it wise to keep on cutting state taxes - over $1 billion by the year 2001 - at a time when the state is trying, for instance, to bring its school system up to the the national average in teacher pay and student achievement? Can that be done by cutting future state revenue that will be needed to finance it all?

The House doesn't seem to have a problem with this contradiction. Speaker Harold Brubaker, who has pushed for repeal of the state inheritance tax because it's part of "the American Dream" to be able to pass what you've earned on to your heir without losing a chunk of it in taxation, has kept the legislature in session overlong to force the Senate to agree.

He's winning. The Senate, pushing hard for funding of Gov. Hunt's Smart Start initiative, blinked. Basnight says he didn't like it one bit, but did so to move the budget discussion along in the state's longest and least productive General Assembly session in memory. "Somebody has got to be the one to concede, " he told The News & Observer. "I hate to be the one to do it."

So the story of the 1998 General Assembly is likely to be this: It was the legislature that set the stage for huge upheavals the next time there's an economic downturn - and maybe even sooner.

Not long ago, state Sen. Tony Rand said he was reminded of what Oliver Cromwell said about the Rump Parliament in the 17th century: "You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing lately . . . Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!"

J

Your constitutional right to cuss is safe

2011-01-10T14:52:00.000-05:00

As the N&O's Anne Blythe reports here, your first amendment right to cuss has been upheld.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Allen Baddour ruled that a 98 year-old state law banning cursing, which specifically exempted Pitt and Swain counties (and prompted a legendary speech in the legislature in the 1970s) is unconstitutional, or it is in Orange County, anyway. Baddour may have never known Herbert Hyde, the wise fellow who delivered that speech, but the two would have agreed on the constitutionality of the law.

Blythe reports:

"The case stems from an incident that took place in Chapel Hill last February on Franklin Street, the college town's main drag.

"Samantha Elabanjo, a 44-year-old woman familiar to police officers, was having a conversation near a bus stop and stepped into the street as a squad car approached. The officers in the car told her to move along, according to lawyers involved with the case, and she used a bit of profanity while calling their car 'dirty.'
"
Then, Elabanjo stepped back onto the sidewalk, waved her arms wildly and uttered another curse word to describe the officers.

"Officers initially charged Elabanjo with disorderly conduct and using 'indecent or profane language' in a 'loud and boisterous manner' within earshot of two or more people on any public road or highway - a misdemeanor in North Carolina.

"At Elabanjo's trial in July, an Orange District Court judge dismissed the disorderly conduct charge, but found her guilty of using profanity in the street, not the sidewalk.

"Elabanjo appealed the conviction to Superior Court, and Judge Allen Baddour heard the case Monday. He dismissed the charge and on Wednesday issued a three-page ruling, a document that arrived in the mail at the ACLU late Friday."

The state law exempting Pitt and Swain counties from the cussing ban was the topic of an impassioned 1973 speech by then-Rep. Herbert Hyde, D-Buncombe, a noted orator who could quote the King James version of the Bible, Shakespeare and his Great Uncle Fide Hyde to make an often colorful point. The writer Thad Stem once said Hyde had the eyes of Will Rogers and the tongue of Mark Twain.

Hyde ran unsuccessfully for lieutenant governor in 1976 and later served in the state Senate. But his speech -- often known as the "Mr. Speaker, there oughta be somewhere a person can cuss without breaking the law" speech -- will go down in state political history as a marvel of restraint. Hyde was arguing against a bill that would include Pitt and Swain counties in the law that made it a crime to cuss in public. After his speech, the House agreed and left Pitt and Swain as sanctuaries of strong speech.

In that 1973 speech to the House, Hyde conceded what Baddour would conclude this year: The law itself was unconstitutional. "But the folks in Swain wouldn't want me to stand on that kind of technicality and I'm not going to do that," Hyde told the House.

"But there ought to be a refuge somewhere a man could go and when he really is provoked that he can say something with impunity. There's only two places left Pitt and Swain. One in the East and one in the West. I think it's most appropriate."

The last time I saw Herb Hyde was at a dinner organized by former House Rules Chair Jack Hunt and his wife Ruby, of Lattimore in Cleveland County. Hyde always looked to me like one of the founding fathers -- a wise man who had seen some of everything there was to see, and could still make an entertaining speech out of it. My guess is if he were around today, he'd endorse Judge Baddour's ruling, proclaim victory and light up a cigar.

Conservative icon critical of GOP freshmen, including N.C.'s Ellmers

2011-01-06T14:20:00.000-05:00

Richard Viguerie, who often sets the standard for conservative thought in the United States, is critical of a group of freshmen Republican lawmakers, including North Carolina Rep. Renee Ellmers, for getting off on the wrong foot at the start of the new congressional session. Viguerie pioneered in direct mail fund-raising and campaigning and founded Conservative Digest in 1976. .

Writing on his Web site http://www.conservativehq.com/node/793, Viguerie said Ellmers and 10 other GOP first-termers "may be prone to old thinking" by concentrating on fundraising instead of doing the business voters sent them to Washington to handle. Fundraising is a necessary part of politics, but providing leadership is even more important, he said.

Ellmers, who campaigned against the kinds of logrolling in Washington that involve fund-raising from special interests, attended a $2,500 per head reception for her and her colleagues Tuesday night, and later told a reporter she didn't like having to raise money, but that's part of staying in politics. She's right, but after campaigning against the practice (she accused Etheridge of receiving $500,000 in special interest PAC money), she was quick to engage in it herself. She'll have a hard time living that down..

Here's part of what Viguerie said:

Some Freshmen GOP Off on the Wrong Foot
By Richard A. Viguerie

Conservatives and Tea Partiers are looking forward to the accomplishments of the new Republican House, but some new members just seem to be looking forward to campaign cash.

One of incoming freshman Rep. Jeff Denham’s (R-Calif.) first moves upon arriving in Washington in these austere times was to throw a rather lavish fundraising party—before even casting his first vote as a congressman.

We conservatives gave the Democrats a “shellacking” and elected new Republicans to change the culture in Washington, but the timing of this fundraising party shows that some of the young blood in Congress may already be prone to old thinking.

The new Republican Congress’s primary focus should be the business of restoring constitutionally limited small government, reducing the national debt and getting the government off our backs, but instead Denham and some other freshmen Republicans seem more concerned about holding onto their seats of power.

While Speaker Boehner wisely declined to attend this gathering, about a dozen incoming Republicans, some of whom had Tea Party support during their campaign, committed to attending—including Scott DesJarlais (R-Tenn.), Robert Dold (R-Ill.), Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.), Jeff Landry (R-La.), Tom Marino (R-Pa.), Tom Reed (R-N.Y.), David Rivera (R-Fla.), Jon Runyan (R-N.J.), Steve Southerland (R-Fla.), Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) and Kevin Yoder (R-Kan.).

Fundraising is a necessary part of politics, but providing leadership is even more important.

Republicans who received the support of grassroots conservatives and Tea Party groups did so because of their promises to take action on behalf of the people and address our concerns. We need to know that these politicians are serious about those promises, and not just looking to win elections.

Bowles: 'Ain't nobody listening'

2011-01-03T16:08:00.000-05:00

Former UNC President and Charlotte businessman Erskine Bowles marked his first day of retirement -- thought to be an exceedingly short retirement by those who know him well -- by speaking to hundreds of people at the 9th Annual Economic Forecast Forum sponsored by the North Carolina Chamber and the N.C. Bankers Association.

Bowles said new UNC President Tom Ross, former President of Davidson College, asked him recently what it was like to be president of the 17-campus UNC system.

Bowles said it was like being "CEO of a cemetery.... You've got lots of people beneath you, but ain't nobody listening."

Bowles can surely be forgiven the graveyard humor. He has just finished months of work with former U.S. Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming figuring out a plan for dealing with huge federal debt, and so far the plan has drawn a lot of detractors who seem more interested in preserving their turf and their entitlements than in dealing with what Bowles warned is a crippling burden -- a cancer that will "destroy our country from within."

Rucho snags another plum committee in 2011 Senate

2011-01-03T11:57:00.000-05:00

Mecklenburg state Sen. Bob Rucho of Charlotte has picked up another plum assignment in the upcoming General Assembly. He will cochair, with Cabarrus Sen. Fletcher Hartsell, the Senate Finance Committee, which handles tax legislation. It's an important post, one that reflects the 2011 Senate leadership's confidence in both Hartsell, a veteran legislator beginning his 11th term in the Senate, and Rucho, who is beginning his seventh term, including a portion of a term served when he was appointed to a vacancy.

Rucho will also chair the Senate Redistricting Committee in the 2011 session.

Sen. Phil Berger, who will be the Senate president pro tem in the first Senate session that Republicans have controlled in more than a century, made the appointments Monday morning.

“Senators Rucho and Hartsell are both capable, experienced legislators ready to lead the Senate Finance Committee with a clear vision for putting our state’s economy back on firm footing,” he said.

Berger has named experienced legislators who have had good ideas in the Senate to run key committees, and the pairing of Rucho and Hartsell to chair the Finance Committee is interesting. Rucho has strong conservative credentials with a reputation for energy and passion on issues. Hartsell is one of the Senate's best lawyers who managed to get legislation passed regularly when Democrats were in charge.

No surprise: Thigpen goes back on Court of Appeals

2011-01-03T11:37:00.000-05:00

Gov. Bev Perdue has reappointed Raleigh lawyer Cressie Thigpen to the N.C. Court of Appeals, as expected. She first appointed Thigpen to the court last summer to fill a vacancy created when Court of Appeals Judge Jim Wynn was confirmed to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond. But Thigpen lost the seat in the fall election in a 13-candidate free-for-all race in the first statewide contest to be determined by the Instant Runoff Voting process. Voters could vote for their first, second and third choices for the job, and though Thigpen led the balloting on the first round, he had only 20 percent of the vote. When the second and third choices were tabulated, former Appeals Court Judge Doug McCullough, who had lost in the 2008 election, won the seat.

But another vacancy occurred when Court of Appeals Judge Barbara Jackson won the N.C. Supreme Court seat vacated by Justice Ed Brady, who chose not to run for reelection. Perdue named Thigpen, a former law partner of former N.C. Speaker of the House Dan Blue, to the Jackson seat Monday.

In a news release Perdue said, "I am pleased to reappoint Judge Thigpen to the Court of Appeals. He’s earned the respect of his colleagues at the court and his distinguished career both as a judge and an attorney will continue to be of great benefit to this state.''

Poll: NC voters don't like Repubs -- or Dems, either

2010-12-28T10:24:00.000-05:00

Here's a poll that confirms what many knew instinctively: One reason that Tar Heel voters in November chose Republicans to run the N.C. General Assembly for the first time in more than a century is that they didn't much care for Democrats in the General Assembly. But voters aren't all that wild about the new Republicans in the legislature, either -- perhaps putting the GOP on notice that the party needs to perform a lot better than their predecessors in the session that begins Jan. 26 if they hope to win the governorship next time and retain legislative control.

They've got a tough enough job as it is: Finding a way to cover a $3.7 billion shortfall, protecting public schools and higher education from the worst of cuts, maintaining roads and public safety while also dealing with continued high unemployment.

Public Policy Polling finds that voters have mixed feelings about whether things will be any better in 2011 than they have been recently. Here's what PPP, a Democratic polling firm with a reputation for accuracy, has to say about the new majority:

North Carolina voters don't have a particularly favorable view of the legislative Republicans who will take power next month. But they don't like legislative Democrats either, which is why the Republicans were able to gain control last month despite not being popular themselves. Against that backdrop it should come as no surprise that voters have mixed feelings about whether things in the state will be any better with the shift in legislative power.

41% of voters think the state will be better off with Republicans in charge while 37% think things will be worse and 20% see it as about a wash. GOP voters unsurprisingly are pretty enthusiastic- 82% of them think the state of the state will improve with their party in charge. Democrats are pessimistic, although not to the extent Republicans are optimistic- 64% of them think the state will be worse off. And independents are split three ways with 34% thinking things will be better, 31% that they'll be worse, and 30% that they'll stay basically the same.

The ambivalence about whether North Carolina will be better off with Republicans in control of the General Assembly is probably a function of the fact that neither party is seen very favorably by voters in the state. 45% have an unfavorable opinion of legislative Democrats to only 38% with a positive one. The numbers for Republicans aren't much different- 41% see them in a negative light to just 33% with a favorable opinion. Democrats like their party but not the Republicans, Republicans like their party but not the Democrats, and independents don't like either of them.

When you combine the feelings North Carolinians have about both parties in the legislature with the persistent negative feelings toward Bev Perdue, the main thing you can take away is that North Carolina voters just don't like their state government and that cuts across party lines.

Former First Lady Jessie Rae Scott dies

2010-12-26T09:57:00.000-05:00

Former North Carolina First Lady Jessie Rae Scott, spouse of former Gov. Bob Scott, died this morning at age 81. Gov. Scott died in 2009 at age 79.

Meg Scott Phipps, her daughter, sent the following email to friends earlier this morning:

Dear friends,

I just want to let you know that Mom passed away this morning at Hillcrest Convalescent Center in Durham. She had been failing over the past couple of weeks and the family recognizes this as a blessing. I will let you know when funeral arrangements have been made. Thank you for all your prayers and comments over the past few months.

Meg Phipps

Perdue's number are improving, thanks to reorg plan

2010-12-21T15:30:00.000-05:00

While Civitas' latest polls shows Pat McCrory with a lede in a potential 2012 matchup with the governor, Gov. Bev Perdue's numbers are improving, thanks partly to her recently proposed reorganization plan. Tom Jensen of Public Policy Polling says Perdue's numbers aren't great but they're a lot better than they were -- "a major improvement" in the past year. She was at a 27 percent approval level last year at this time, but is up around 35 percent approval now.

Here's what Jensen had to say:

There's strong bipartisan support for Bev Perdue's proposed reorganization of state government and partially as a result of that her approval numbers are now at their best level since April of 2009, shortly after she took office.

50% of voters support Perdue's plans for reducing the size of state government with only 23% opposed. There's little difference across party lines in support for her proposal- 52% of Republicans, 50% of Democrats, and 45% of independents say they support what she wants to do on that front.

Being in the spotlight with a popular policy proposal will tend to help your approval rating and 35% of voters in the state now approve of Perdue with just 44% disapproving of her. The last time PPP found Perdue's disapproval as low as the 44% mark was three months after she took office in April of 2009, when her approval was a positive 41/40 spread. The next month she saw a precipitous drop to 34/51 and she hasn't been back on positive ground since.

Although she remains unpopular Perdue has at least seen a major improvement in her approval numbers over the course of 2010. Last December Perdue's approval rating was only 27% with 53% of voters giving her bad marks. Perdue's net approval rating now of -9 represents a 17 point improvement from her -26 spread a year ago at this time.

Comparing Perdue's numbers now to where they were at the beginning of the year, the most marked improvement is with her party base. 55% of Democrats now approve of the job she's doing where only 41% did earlier. She's also seen a good amount of improvement with Republicans. Although she remains largely unpopular with them her approval has nearly doubled from 8% to 15%. The most worrisome group for Perdue remains independents. She was at 28/56 with them in December of 2009 and her numbers now are pretty identical at 26/49. A PPP poll last month showed Perdue losing independents by 31 points in a hypothetical contest with Pat McCrory and it's clear that's the group she most needs to improve her standing with if she hopes to win a second term.

McCrory lead over Perdue growing, poll says

2010-12-21T13:04:00.000-05:00

With barely two years before the next election, former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory has a 15 percent lead in a poll by the conservative Civitas Institute. That's up from a 6 percent lead in a June poll, the Institute said. It found that 51 percent of voters would vote for McCrory, a Republican, if the governor's race were today, while 36 percent would support the governor. Twelve percent identified themselves as undecided.

Here's part of a Civitas news release:

"Support for Perdue is low as voters see job creation and economic recovery remaining flat,” said Civitas Institute Francis De Luca. “Despite press releases heralding new jobs and incentive giveaways, voters are not seeing improvement in the employment picture.”

McCrory leads among Republicans by an 83 percent-8 percent margin and among unaffiliated voters (53 percent-23 percent). Democratic voters support Perdue by a 64 percent-29 percent margin.

“Perdue has an uphill climb in light of the recent midterm elections, bleak jobs picture and the challenging state budget situation,” added De Luca. “In the next few months, the public will see whether she works with the new Republican leadership to balance the budget and improve the employment picture. If successful, that may prove critical to her reelection plans.”

Perdue: Not interested in talking to Alcoa

2010-12-16T16:29:00.001-05:00

If you've kept up with a long-running dispute over whether Alcoa Power Generating Inc. will get another federal license to operate hydroelectric power plants on the Yadkin River in central North Carolina, you know that a water quality permit hearing suddenly stopped a few weeks ago when lawyers for Stanly County opponents asked about some e-mails they found indicating that company officials and consultants knew about water quality problems at one of Alcoa's dams but did not tell the state. A few days later the state withdrew its water quality certification for the relicensing, which Alcoa needs to get another federal license, saying Alcoa had deliberately hidden important information.

My colleague Lynn Bonner of the N&O and I met with two Alcoa officials Wednesday to hear what they had to say. You can read her story here. Alcoa Vice President Kevin Anton said he was visiting North Carolina because "We didn't like where things were progressing here in North Carolina" and added, "It was time for a new approach." Anton said he hoped to talk with Secretary of Commerce Keith Crisco, who once headed a group opposed to Alcoa before he took his post in the Perdue administration, among other N.C. leaders.

Anton and Mike Belwood, Alcoa's director of media and corporate relations, came to see whether there's a way to resolve the dispute, and they're talking to a lot of folks and doing a lot of listening. For a long time North Carolina worked with Alcoa to relicense the dam, but late in Gov. Mike Easley's administration, he decided to oppose the new license, and Gov. Bev Perdue has followed the same approach. I thought Alcoa's conciliatory approach after several years of some hard-nosed verbal punching from both sides might resonate with some state officials, but Gov. Bev Perdue doesn't appear to be one of them.

Reporters met with Perdue at the Executive Mansion today to talk about a number of issues, and I asked whether she'd be open to a settlement of some kind. It doesn't sound like it. Perdue said her stance on Alcoa and the river came from her gut; she believes that the 1958 license Alcoa won with the state's support was based in large measure on the big workforce Alcoa had here at that time. At one point Alcoa employed 1,000 workers at its aluminum works here. Now the smelter is closed for good, almost all the jobs are gone, and giving the company another license to control the river's waters, without a corresponding economic benefit such as a large employment base, is wrong, she said. She wasn't interested in talking to Alcoa, and didn't think her Secretary of Commerce would be, either, she said.

Perdue: Nobody asked me about a 2001 redistricting commission

2010-12-15T11:51:00.003-05:00

Gov. Bev Perdue made a rare appearance before a legislative committee Wednesday morning and asked for three non-budgetary things, WRAL-TV reports, including creating a bipartisan panel to draw new congressional and legislative districts

The station reported on its Website that Perdue said nobody sought such a commission when she was presiding over the Senate in 2001. But in fact Republicans sought it that year -- and the Observer editorially backed the idea.

(4:35 p.m. Update: Chrissy Peason, the governor's spokeswoman, says Perdue didn't say no one mentioned it that year. She said the governor said that no one asked her about it that year.)

WRAL wrote:

"Republicans have sought such a panel for years, but the Democratic legislative majority never took up the issue. The GOP now controls both the House and Senate, following major victories in last month's election.

"Perdue oversaw the Senate 10 years ago as lieutenant governor during the last redistricting, but she never asked for a bipartisan group to assist that process. She said Wednesday that no one suggested the idea in 2001.

But our Raleigh reporter Mark Johnson -- who now works for Perdue in her communications office -- wrote a story on Feb. 28, 2001 that included the following:

"A coalition of Republican senators and nonpartisan government watchdog groups on Tuesday proposed legislation that would create an independent commission to redraw the boundaries of the state's political districts.

Every 10 years census population data is used to redraw districts for state legislators and members of Congress so that each district has a roughly equal number of people in it. In North Carolina, the General Assembly does the redistricting. Historically, the party in power can draw the lines to benefit its members, giving them safe districts and stuffing opposing party members into districts that are difficult to win in an election.

The Republican-led coalition said creating an independent commission would end the practice of drawing district lines for partisan gain and could end the decade-long litigation over drawing districts that benefit minority candidates.

A commission would "establish districts where voters choose their representatives instead of representatives choosing their voters, " said Sen. Hamilton Horton, R-Forsyth, a sponsor of the legislation. The nine members of the commission would be chosen by the governor, chief justice of the N.C. Supreme Court, speaker of the House and Senate president pro tem.

Horton and other GOP senators were joined by representatives of such nonpartisan groups as Democracy South and the League of Women Voters."

And on March 2, 2001, the Observer's editorial page opined:

Enough is enough. The House and Senate should embrace the recommendation of the 1997 Legislative Research Commission to create a redistricting commission to draw districts without regard for party politics or residency of incumbents. One such proposal, offered by Sen. Ham Horton, R-Forsyth, contemplates a nine-member commission, with three members appointed by the governor, two by the chief justice, two by the House speaker and two by the Senate president pro tem. At least one of each appointing official's appointees would have to come from the opposing political party, insuring political parity on the panel.

Nothing will take all the partisan politics out of redrawing districts, but an independent commission could eliminate much of the log-rolling and back-scratching that characterized North Carolina's problem-plagued redistricting efforts of the last 20 years. It's time to try a better way.

The Matter Of Wrap-Cooking A Country Ham

2010-12-10T08:03:00.001-05:00

For my money the Observer's Kathleen Purvis is tops in the food-writing field. If you read her story on the art of curing hams a few years back, you know that she has a reverence for doing things the right way -- both in her reporting and her appreciation for the many gifts of Southern cooking.

But when Barnie K. Day sent me his piece on how to "wrap-cook" a country ham, I thought it was too good to keep under, um, wraps. Barnie himself freely admits he stole it, so I'm passing it along with full credit to Barnie and to the man from whom he got the story, Robert Crumpton Sr., a government tobacco grader in Roxboro and later Oxford, who refined this process.

I should add that Barnie is a neighbor of mine in Patrick County, Va., up on Belcher Mountain in the Blue Ridge. Barnie's a Tar Heel boy who grew up in Person County, earned degrees at UNC Chapel Hill and Duke, and went on to be Patrick County manager, a Virginia state legislator and writer of terrific newspaper columns when he's not out tending to his farm up in the headwaters of the Dan River. Barnie theorizes, by the way, that this method of curing a ham might have something to do with the original "pig in a blanket." Read on and see what you think.

Herewith:

This is the world’s best way to cook a country ham. Guaranteed. Period. Scout’s honor. Cross my heart and hope to die. And it’s not original. Of course, I stole it. And, as luck would have it, it is also the easiest. Often the case. We overcomplicate a lot of things. Cooking a ham is one of them.

Let’s start with the ham itself, and how it was cured.

There are lots of run-of-the-mill brands, some of them old and famous but still run-of-the-mill, brands that owe their reputations more to glossy catalogues and clever and expensive marketing campaigns than they do to judge-by-eating juries.

Many of these hams are cured “inside out,” needle-embalmed with nitrate injections. They are not the best hams -- often more expensive -- but not the best.

Still, these hams eat okay -- unless you’ve eaten ham cured like your granddaddy cured it, ham cured the old way.

He cured his hams “outside in.” He didn’t know about nitrate injections. (And if he had, he wouldn’t have done it to his hams!) He simply packed his fresh in plain salt for six to eight weeks, took them up, washed and dried them, maybe smoked them a little, maybe not, probably peppered them, hung them in cotton sacking in a cool place, out of reach of the dogs, and aged them for several months.

A note here: don’t be flummoxed by the term “sugar cured.” Often salt is mixed with sugar, with pepper, with molasses, with honey -- all kinds of stuff -- and labeled some fancy “cure,” or another, but these things -- including smoke -- be it apple wood, hickory, whatever -- only flavor hams. What cures, or preserves, a ham is the salt that it absorbs during the curing process.

Buy whatever brand you want. For my money, the best country ham in this part of the world, the one closest to what your granddaddy cured, is a Clifty Farm ham, processed for 60 years or so by the Murphey Family, in Paris, Tennessee. They’re usually available, and reasonably priced, across Southside Virginia around Christmastime. ($1.79 a pound at the Piggly Wiggly in Danville.)

Okay, now let’s cook that bad boy!

Unwrap the ham and wash it. Yeah, they all have a little mold. No big deal. Really. It would cause me some concern if it didn’t have mold on it. Just palm it off with a little warm water. Two minutes, tops.

Put the ham in a pot that you have a top for. I always have to cut the hock off so it will fit the pot I use. They’ll cut the hock off for you at the grocery store. If I have to tell you what that hock is good for, stop reading this and move on. You got no business with a country ham. Either that, or you’re a Yankee, and threw the ham out when you saw the mold.

Fill the pot with water until the ham is covered with 3-4 inches, put the top on, and bring it to a boil.

Now here is the trick to this: As soon as it begins to boil, you take it off the stove. That’s right. Off the stove when it begins to boil. Set it somewhere where it will be out of your way.

Now we’re going to wrap that puppy up. Pot and all. You can use most anything -- towels, an old blanket, a quilt, a sleeping bag. The patio lounge cushion works well. That’s what I use. The idea is to insulate the pot so that it holds the heat.

I put an inch or so of newspaper under the pot, the same amount on top, wrap the patio cushion around it, and tie the cushion in place with baling twine. This doesn’t take five minutes. Just make sure it’s insulated good.

When you get it wrapped, leave it alone. Walk away from it. Forget about it for 12 hours. Just let it sit.

After 12 hours, remove the wrap, and take the ham out of the pot and put it on a baking pan. Careful here—even after sitting 12 hours, the water will be too hot for you to put your hands in.

Trim the skin off, score a diamond pattern on the thin layer of encasing fat, rub into it a cup of white sugar, put the ham -- uncovered -- in the oven and bake it for 2 hours at 275 degrees. And that’s it. You’re done. Let it cool before slicing.

Merry Christmas. And best to you and yourn

Barnie K. Day
Meadows of Dan, VA

LaHood pulled the wool over NC eyes on rail

2010-12-09T17:35:00.000-05:00

Remember when Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood spoke in Charlotte last month and dangled the possibility of big bucks for NC rail projects because Ohio's and Wisconsin's new GOP leaders didn't want it?
The only thing LaHood was dangling was his own credibility, it turns out. Of more than $1 billion up for grabs, North Carolina is getting $1.5 million, Bruce Siceloff of the News & Observer reports:

Dashing hopes he had kindled, LaHood gives N.C. a tiny share of rail money

North Carolina will get just $1.5 million of the high-speed rail money recently spurned by new Republican leaders in Ohio and Wisconsin, Ray LaHood, the U.S. transportation secretary, said today.

Most of the $1.195 billion originally designated for the two midwestern states will be spent instead on the nation's three most ambitious passenger rail projects -- two in California ($624 million) and one in Florida ($342 million). The remaining 11 states receiving shares range from Washington state ($162 million) and Illinois ($42 million) to Indiana ($365,000), with North Carolina third from the bottom.

Read more here:

Further evidence, as if we needed it, of indecency

2010-12-09T10:25:00.000-05:00

The N&O is reporting this morning that Westboro Baptist Church will picket Elizabeth Edwards' funeral Saturday. It's one more sign, in a world that doesn't need it, of indecency during a time of sorrow. Whether you liked or disliked former Sen. John Edwards or his wife, who died of cancer earlier this week, this group's protests at the funerals of American soldiers and of such public figures as Edwards or Jerry Falwell are the sorts of things that give free expression a bad name.

Yes, you can argue that for the 1st Amendment to mean anything, it must allow even the expression of things we find distasteful. I don't argue that the 1st Amendment should be reined in, but I do observe that it's a sad thing to see such a high principle used to compound the sorrow of the families of those who have died.

The N&O website reports:

Westboro Baptist Church, a group with a history of staging protests at funerals and issuing anti-gay statements, is planning to picket the Saturday funeral of Elizabeth Edwards.

The group said it will picket outside Edenton Street United Methodist Church in Raleigh from 12:15 until 1 p.m. when the funeral is scheduled to begin.

The group, based in Topeka, Kan., travels nationally to picket funerals.

The group came into the national spotlight when members picketed the funeral of Matthew Shepard, a young man from Wyoming who was beaten to death by two men because of his homosexuality. Westboro has protested at the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan and well-known people such as Fred Rogers, Coretta Scott King and Jerry Falwell.

Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/09/852759/kansas-group-to-picket-edwards.html#ixzz17cwPajqP

Rucho to oversee Senate'redistricting panel

2010-12-06T10:12:00.000-05:00

As expected, Sen. Bob Rucho, R-Mecklenburg, will chair the Senate Redistricting Committee in the 2011 legislative session. President Pro Tem-elect Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, announced Monday that Rucho will have the job of overseeing the 2011 redistricting process when the legislature convenes in January. Rucho is on Berger's Senate transition team as Republicans take over the state Senate from Democrats for the first time in more than a century.

That's a key leadership assignment for Rucho, because the drawing of districts will have much to do with who controls the Senate, the state House, and the state's congressional delegation over the next decade.

In a news release, Berger said,

“Senator Rucho has previous experience with the redistricting process and is a good listener and evenhanded. These attributes make him the right person to guide the Senate in navigating the redistricting process in the next legislative session.”

The release also quoted Rucho as saying, “I look forward to leading the Senate efforts during the redistricting process. We will work prudently and deliberately to draw fair and legal lines for districts across the state that will uphold the right of the people of North Carolina to choose their representatives.”

NC. agency revokes Alcoa water permit over withheld data

2010-12-01T13:25:00.004-05:00

4:30 pm UPDATE: Gov. Bev Perdue issues statement on revocation of Alcoa permit:
We have learned through legal proceedings that Alcoa misled the state. Alcoa owes it to the people of North Carolina to provide accurate and complete information in order to protect the public’s health and safety. The justification for Alcoa’s license was the jobs that the company provided. Nearly all of those jobs are gone, as is the rationale for Alcoa’s original license. This is about the Yadkin River, a vital resource that belongs to the people of North Carolina.

Here's the original post from early this afternoon:

The key state agency regulating N.C. water quality says it is revoking a critical permit that Alcoa Power Generating INC needs in its bid for a federal license to continue operating hydroelectric power plants on the Yadkin River. Alcoa immediately announced it would fight the revocation. Where this leaves Alcoa's bid for another license like the one it has held for 50 years to operate four hydro generators on the river is unclear, but by law Alcoa cannot get a federal license from FERC without the permit, called a 401 certification.

The state's action came after some startling developments in an N.C. Office of Administrative Hearings procedure, when an Alcoa official evidently conceded there was information about dissolved oxygen content readings that the state did not know about.

The Department of Environment and Natural Resources released this, in part, early this afternoon:

Officials with the N.C. Division of Water Quality today notified Alcoa Power Generating Inc. of the revocation of the company’s 401 water quality certification, issued in May 2009 for APGI’s Yadkin Hydroelectric Project in Stanly County.

This action is being taken after DWQ officials learned APGI submitted an incorrect application and supporting materials for the 401 water quality certification, in that the company intentionally withheld information on the project’s ability to meet the state’s water quality standards for dissolved oxygen. This intentional omission came to light after company e-mails were recently entered into evidence during a hearing before an administrative law judge involving Stanly County’s challenge to the issuance of the 401 water quality certification.

The Yadkin Hydroelectric Project includes High Rock, Tuckertown, Narrows – also known as Badin – and Falls reservoirs. DWQ officials believed at the time the certification was issued that APGI’s application for the certification and supporting documentation provided adequate assurance that the proposed activities would not result in a violation of state water quality standards and discharge guidelines.

(Alcoa can surrender the permit, or it can resubmit the application within 60 days with the errors corrected.)

Alcoa responded about the same time. Here's an excerpt:

New York, NY, Dec. 1, 2010 – Alcoa Power Generating Inc. is disappointed and surprised by the state’s plans to start proceedings to revoke the Yadkin Project’s 401 Water Quality Certificate and will immediately challenge the state’s effort, the company announced today.

The certificate, which lays out a plan for APGI’s Yadkin Project to meet water standards, was issued in 2009 by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality and is currently under appeal by APGI and other parties.

“Our team of experts developed a comprehensive plan to improve water quality and we are already seeing improvement,” said Rick Bowen, president of Alcoa Energy. “We do not believe the state’s decision is justified or appropriate.

“We believe that rather than continue litigation, it would be better to work together toward an outcome that protects the environment and promotes economic development and jobs for residents of North Carolina.”

N.C. a 'prime location' for offshore wind energy?

2010-12-01T11:17:00.002-05:00

A report from the National Wildlife Federation identifies North Carolina as a "prime location" for offshore wind turbines that produce electricity -- amounting to about one-fifth the East Coast's potential wind energy production. The report says the region's relatively shallow waters make it a prime spot for wind energy, and offers the opinion that wind projects on our coast could create up to 20,000 manufacturing jobs.

But, and this is a very big but, there are data gaps in the potential environmental impact that must be researched. The experience with offshore wind farms in Europe suggest few long-term environmental impacts, but more needs to be known to determine whether the same would prevail on the East Coast. Here's a link to the report:
The report, Offshore Wind in the Atlantic: Growing Momentum for Jobs, Energy Independence, Clean Air, and Wildlife Protection, makes these observations:

Every state with significant offshore wind resources from Maine to Georgia has some taken some steps forward on offshore wind. Northern states (Maine to Maryland) have the most advanced projects while Southern states (Virginia to Georgia) are quickly mobilizing on a series of projects. See detailed chart and state profiles.

The Atlantic’s shallow water characteristics combined with excellent wind speed make it an ideal location for offshore wind farms. 93 percent of offshore wind projects worldwide are in shallow waters (zero to 30 meters deep). Close to half of the United States’ shallow water offshore wind is along the Atlantic coast.

While the most extensive European study concluded that offshore wind farms do not appear to have long-term or large-scale ecological impacts, major data gaps for the Atlantic Ocean still exist and site-specific impacts need to be evaluated. A coordinated, comprehensive, and well-funded effort is needed to address these gaps and improve the permitting process.

The report was released along the coast today in conjunction with many national and state partners including environmental, sportsmen, labor, and business organizations. These groups call on the federal government to take the following steps:

--Improve the offshore wind permitting process,

--Identify ideal, high priority sites with limited resource conflicts off of the Atlantic for quick and thorough permitting,

--Invest in and speed research of offshore wind technology and environmental impacts,

--Coordinate planning with existing infrastructure and industries such as ports and fishing.

Fortune mag on 'the Great North Carolina Power Grab'

2010-11-30T11:46:00.000-05:00

North Carolina's bid to recapture the Yadkin River and the power plants operated by Alcoa Power Generating Inc. has stirred up huge controversy over the past couple of years, and it won't be decided until sometime in 2011 at the earliest. A state water permit is tied up in an N.C. Office of Administrative Hearings procedure, and Gov. Bev Perdue's administration continues to hope for a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decision rejecting a new license for Alcoa to operate the hydroelectric plants on the Yadkin.

In the current issue (Dec. 6, 2010) of Fortune magazine, journalist Ken Otterbourg, a former Raleigh correspondent and managing editor of the Winston-Salem Journal, writes through the power struggle in a seven-page text-and-photo spread under the headline "Alcoa and the Great North Carolina Power Grab." Here's a link.

In part, Otterbourg writes,
Alcoa bristles when its opponents say that the company acts as though it owns the river and the water. It doesn't, but the license gives it substantial water rights and a powerful negotiating position for changes to those rights. State officials can imagine a time during the life of the next license when North Carolina might need to use the Yadkin as a major water source, and they don't relish having to possibly pay Alcoa for revenue lost when water is diverted from the turbines.

Water rights were just one part of a 2007 settlement agreement that Alcoa hammered out after five years of meetings with property owners and governments. The state of North Carolina, which is now fighting to strip Alcoa of its license, signed the agreement. Twice. Stanly County didn't sign and has sued the state. It says Alcoa's industrial legacy has left the land and water polluted, and that state regulators looked past that record when granting the company a key permit. Alcoa disputes those allegations and is assisting the state in its defense, helping one North Carolina agency while it fights others.

And for Perdue and her team, there is this slightly inconvenient truth: Federal regulators have never taken back, or recaptured, a license. The Federal Power Act contains a brief section that addresses the process, which requires congressional approval, but there's no precedent for how it might actually work.

Alcoa's opponents say that regulatory complexities aside, the morality of their argument couldn't be clearer. Alcoa, they say, had a deal with Stanly County and by extension the state of North Carolina when the license was granted in 1958. It got to use the river to make power to provide local jobs. And with the jobs gone, the company doesn't deserve the license.

Perdue trails McCrory by 12 in first poll of 2012 race

2010-11-29T16:49:00.001-05:00

Former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory leads Gov. Bev Perdue in a head-to-head matchup in a new poll by Public Policy Polling. Here's a link.

PPP analyst Tom Jensen says this first poll in the potential 2012 race puts McCrory "well ahead" of Perdue by 12 points, partly because of Perdue's weak approval ratings. Perdue also would trail Republican chairman Tom Fetzer, but it would be a lot closer.

Here's text of what Jensen has to say:

PPP's first poll of the 2012 Governor's race in North Carolina finds Pat McCrory well ahead of Bev Perdue in a hypothetical rematch of their 2008 contest, 49-37. Perdue also trails NC GOP chair Tom Fetzer in a possible contest, although only by a 42-40 margin.

Part of the reason for Perdue's dicey early standing is her continued poor approval ratings. Only 33% of voters in the state approve of the job she's doing while 49% disapprove. But the other part is that Pat McCrory is a pretty well liked politician. Although a lot of folks have already forgotten who he is- 45% of voters in the state have no opinion of him- those who do remember him from 2 years ago generally look upon him fondly. 34% have a favorable view of him to only 20% with a negative one. Republicans (49/11 spread) and independents (34/18) are pretty overwhelmingly positive toward him and even with Democrats there are almost as many- 24%- with a positive opinion of him as there are- 27% with a negative one.

McCrory leads Perdue 58-27 with independents. By comparison PPP's final 2008 poll found him up just 7 points on Perdue with them. McCrory is also getting 25% of Democrats, compared to 17% we found him with on our final 2008 poll. And McCrory also does a good job of keeping Republicans in line- Perdue gets only 5% of the GOP vote at this point in time, compared to 10% she was receiving at the end of the last election.

There's not a lot of doubt that McCrory would defeat Perdue if the election was held today. But of course it's not. Earlier this month the Governor of Arizona, who had trailed by a good deal in polling throughout much of 2009, and the Governor of Illinois, who trailed by a good deal in polling throughout pretty much all of 2010, were both reelected. Perdue has a lot of work to do with Democrats and independents between now and November of 2012, but it's not impossible for someone in her current position to win reelection.

The most interesting thing about Fetzer's numbers might be that as many press conferences as he held this year, 70% of voters across the state don't know who he is. And when you get outside the Triangle that number rises closer to 80%. Democrats dislike Fetzer more strongly (8/27) than Republicans like him (16/9). Independents have a dim view of Fetzer as well at 9/16. Given McCrory's strength Fetzer's electoral prospects in 2012 might look brighter in a race for Lieutenant Governor than the big office.

Poll finds wide support for redistricting commission

2010-11-22T14:38:00.000-05:00

You might have seen where the leaders of the 2011 General Assembly -- don't plan to do what they once urged the legislature to do when it was controlled by Democrats: give the job of drawing new legislative and congressional districts to an independent, nonpartisan commission. Always seemed like a good idea to me, despite the new problems it might well bring. Legislators have made such a hash of it over the years that giving the job to an independent panel made some sense. But Republican point out that there's no way to amend the Constitution and delegate the job to an independent organization before the legislature has to come up with its own maps in mid-2011.

They're right to that extent, but nothing prevents them, as a number of folks have pointed out, from naming an advisory panel to propose maps for the upcoming redistricting process.

Anyway, Public Policy Polling wondered what the people think. And they found out that Democrats, Republicans and Independents all support the idea -- independents most especially. Here's analysis from Tom Jensen at PPP:

Democrats, Republicans, and independents in North Carolina don't all agree on much these days but there is one thing: they all think the state would be better served by an independent commission in charge of redistricting than continuing to have the Legislature draw up the lines.

49% of voters in the state think an independent commission is the way to go compared to only 21% who want legislators to continue doing it. 30% express no opinion one way or the other. The desire to reduce the influence of politics in redistricting is held by Democrats by a 47/24 margin and by Republicans by a 41/20 margin. The most overwhelming support for such a measure comes from independents, who favor it 69/15.

Phil Berger has historically supported an independent commission but now says there won't be time to create one in 2011 when Republicans will take control of the legislature. A plurality of voters in the state support a solution to Berger's concern about timing- having a special session of the legislature before the end of this year to create the commission and get the process rolling. 40% of voters in the state say they'd support calling the legislators back to deal with the issue to only 27% who are opposed and 33% who don't offer an opinion one way or the other. Democrats (44/24) and independents (46/29) are both pretty strongly in support of that action while Republicans divide evenly (31/31) on it.

North Carolinians want an independent redistricting commission and they're open to taking some unusual steps to get one in place before the next round of line drawing- December could be a whole lot more interesting on the political calendar this year than it usually is.

For more: http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/11/nc-support-special-session-on.html

Former Congressional candidate says Tillis likely next speaker

2010-11-18T10:23:00.002-05:00

Carl Mumpower, an Asheville Republican who ran unsuccessfully for Congress against Democrat Health Shuler, has kept up his commentary on American and N.C. politics regularly -- and how he's attacking Republican Rep. Thom Tillis of Mecklenburg as a "RINO" (Republican In Name Only) although he also says he thinks Tillis is going to become the next speaker of the N.C. House of Representatives. Mumpower is a family psychologist whose site is called The Candid Conservative.

Mumpower says Tillis first won his House seat with the help of former House Co-Speakers Jim Black, a Democrat, and Richard Morgan, a Republican, and defeating former Republican Rep. John Rhodes of Mecklenburg, an early critic of Black who was the first (or at least among the very first) to call for Black's resignation.

But the problem for many House Republicans is that they owe a lot to Tillis, a pro-business, no-nonsense lawmaker who quit his job in order to devote full time to raising money and campaigning for a Republican majority in the legislature. They won's the General Assembly for the first time in more than a century in large measure thanks to Tillis's organizational skills, his salesmanship and his hard work on the campaign trail. He differs from Rhodes in many respects, including his ability to get things done. If Tillis wins the speakership, it will be because of that, not how he got to Raleigh or with whose help.

Here's what Mumpower is saying on his Podomatic podcast site:

North Carolina Republicans have just achieved their first legislative majority in 100 years. Following a long-standing Democrat tradition of institutional graft, tarheel elephants have a golden opportunity to return the state to sanity.

Instead, there are early indications that power, popularity, and profit are, once again, moving to trump principle. Charlotte Representative Thom Tillis has stepped into the batter's box for the Speaker of the House position - he's favored to win.

Conservatives with a hand on NC's heart may remember this gentleman was plugged into office by Democrat Speaker Jim Black and a coalition of big pocket RINO's. In a primary, Tillis helped rid future jailbird Black of his nemesis, Representative John Rhodes, a stalwart conservative with a courage button.

It is telling that Tillis rose in the Republican ranks while an authentic conservative was discarded by the Party. The fact that RINO Tillis is likely to win the seat of power, tells us even more about what we can expect from NC's new elephant majority...

GOP lawmaker suggests House rules changes first

2010-11-18T10:18:00.002-05:00

State Rep. John Blust, a Guilford County Republican, has been pushing for House rules changes for years that would open up the process, give minority legislators as well as those in the majority a better chance to have their amendments heard and give legislators more time to consider appropriations bills before they have to cast a yea or nay vote.

From where I sit in the press gallery, they've looked like good ideas to boost democracy and make sure every legislator gets a chance to have his or her ideas at least aired. But they probably don't look so good to those who have to run the sometimes fractious 120-member House, where party discipline is an important factor in moving the chamber's work along, making sure the majority rules in an efficient way and passing a budget before the end of the fiscal year.

Now, with an important Republican caucus coming up Saturday to in effect choose those who will run the House the next two years, Blust is asking his GOP colleagues to change the rules first.

In an email to those elected to the 2011 House , Blust said,
"I propose that we adopt the changes I outline in the attachment prior to proceeding to a vote on our leadership positions. I hope all those seeking a leadership position will provide the caucus with their reaction to these proposals before Saturday’s caucus. All caucus member should feel free to provide me your feedback on these. They are not written in stone. Each of the proposed changes can be backed up by a specific abuse or a multitude of abuses which I have personally witnessed while serving in the legislature."

It'll be interesting to see if Blust's party is any more interested in his proposed changes than Democrats were; many of his ideas were ignored by most Democrats in past sessions, but that doesn't mean they weren't good ideas.
For those who have the time for a long read, here's what Blust has in mind:
Proposed Rules Changes for Republican House Caucus

Republicans will control the North Carolina legislature for the first time in more than a century when the legislature convenes on January 26. This control comes about as the State is facing its most difficult budget challenge in over 75 years. Decades of Democrat mismanagement and obstruction of sound, common-sense proposals to address problems facing this State have created a backlog of needed legislation. Democrat corruption has run rampant and the people’s trust in government has fallen precipitously. Our voters elected us to address these pressing matters because the Democrats refused to act. Much of this deplorable situation has its roots in the hegemony that a select few have had over the NC House and NC Senate. We must act quickly to chart a new course. The first thing we must do as a caucus is to restore the North Carolina House as a deliberative body in which the will of the majority, rather than the compulsive power of a few, is what controls the outcome of the legislative process.

We have many fine members seeking leadership positions. Those seeking these positions need to be the servants and facilitators of the caucus members. We are 68 in number and none of us has superior knowledge over all the other 67 combined. I do not think any of our members would abuse power to the extent of the past Democrat leaders; nevertheless, it is important to guarantee that this will not happen through a deliberative process based on rules. Those seeking leadership can guarantee this by supporting proposed changes that will devolve power.

I therefore propose that before we proceed to elect leadership, we as a caucus agree to certain matters which our elected leaders can then be elected with the commitment to observe. These entail the following changes to the House Rules and operations we can agree to adopt:

1. The caucus will control the appointment of committee chairmen and the committee assignments of its members. We can have a select committee of our leadership to take the requests of our members and prepare a proposed committee set-up to bring back to the next caucus meeting for approval. Committee chairmen and committee members can thereafter only be removed and replaced by a vote for the caucus for cause. This makes clear that committees work for the caucus, not one person. This will help ensure that committee chairmanship is based on merit, not favoritism based upon who a member backed for Speaker.

2. House office assignments will be made by choice of the caucus members in the order of seniority, subject to some special assignments based on committee chairmanships. This will mean no member owes his/her office to one person and will eliminate the possibility of deal-making for office space.

3. Seating in the chamber will be by choice of the members in the order of seniority.

4. Allow it to be possible for a House member to move bills that have majority support from a committee so that one person cannot block the flow of legislation. Allow a discharge petition, which brings a bill to the House floor, if 61 members sign it. Allow rule 39 to actually work in which a member can move the House for removal of a bill from a committee. Allow a committee to vote to put a bill on its agenda. Republicans should have a two-vote majority on all but the Ethics Committee. Require that a committee hold a vote on any bill that meets a certain threshold of support – say, 30 co-sponsors.

5. Ensure that the rules and the calendar control the flow of legislation, rather than the will of one or two members. The calendar should be followed except by leave of the House to vary the order.

6. Provide that the budget will actually be prepared by the Appropriations subcommittees, not in a back room somewhere. Allow transparency by allowing a minimum time for members to review a proposed budget bill. At least 72 hours should be allowed before a vote on the conference report on the budget can be held. Require approval of the full House before any new rules on budget debate can be imposed. Allow some minimum of debt and proposed amendments to the budget. Prohibit the budget from containing substantive law changes which should be in stand-alone bills.

7. Require some minimum debate be allowed before the question on a matter can be called.

8. Do away with the prohibition on floor amendments that change the long title of a bill, which has prevented members not on a committee which passes out a bill from being able to influence the provisions of that bill. The germaneness rule will still cover proposed amendments.

9. Make clear in Rule 6 that the Speaker’s "general direction of the hall" does not override the need for the Speaker to observe the House Rules. Require the Speaker to recognize House members for business that is in order under the rules. Require the Speaker to state the precise reason when the Speaker rules a member’s proposal out of order. Allow a majority, rather than two-thirds, to overrule the ruling of the chair (We will have 68 votes anyway).

10. (This is not a House Rule but should be a caucus rule.) Allow the caucus to approve hirings of the Speaker. (Remember Black’s secret hiring of a House historian in a make-work position to silence a crony. Also remember the bloated staff and outrageous salaries of Hackney. Remember the secret bonuses of Basnight in a year state employees had salary freezes.)

These proposals should not be interpreted as a slap at anyone running for our leadership. Perhaps none of our candidates would do some of the untoward things we have seen in the past. But these proposals will provide us with a guarantee, not just a promise. They will also send a strong signal to the public that we intend to be different – to be better and provide better government than North Carolina has seen in the past several years. These changes will also prevent the pay-to-play regimen of the Democrats which we pledged to end in our ten-point plan.

I therefore move the adoption of a caucus resolution that we approve the above-listed ten items before we elect our leadership and that our elected leaders accept the positions to which they may be elected subject to these proposed ten points. If we agree to these changes, who we elect as Speaker will not be as critical as it has been in the past when it has literally been the whole ball game. It will make it easier to unify around our leadership, because no member will have to worry about having backed a non-prevailing candidate. The rights and privileges we all were awarded by our voters at the ballot box will be protected.

A Queen City compliment from Richmond

2010-11-17T12:06:00.002-05:00

When about 200 people attended a Southeast High Speed Rail Conference Tuesday in Richmond, Va.'s Greater Richmond Convention Center, they were given a welcome by City Council President Kathy Graziano -- and heard her pass along a nice compliment about Charlotte. Graziano was reciting the value of, among other things, good transit systems in growing cities and mentioned the role of public transportation in improving the quality of life in a number of places in the southeast. That's one of the factors, she said, that has "changed Charlotte from a very nice city to a great city."

The meeting at the convention center featured updates on the progress of turning long-neglected rail corridors into popular rail links between population centers. When Virginia recently contracted with Amtrak to restore passenger rail service between Lynchburg and Washington, the public response far exceeded expectations. That reflected, said Thelma Drake, Virginia Director of the Department of Rail and Public Transportation, a recognition that the fastest way to get into the traffic-choked Northern Virginia area and the District of Columbia is a rail car, not a passenger car.

Virginia's experience mirrors -- and exceeds -- North Carolina's experience with rail traffic between the capitals of government and commerce. The Raleigh-Charlotte route has long been popular and rates among Amtrak's best -- and when the state introduced this summer a third set of trains making daily round-trips in the middle of the workday, ridership increased yet again. What surprised rail planners, says Patrick Simmons of the N.C. Department of Transportation's Rail Division, is that many college students along the route have begun using the train service to commute to some of the 13 campuses along the Raleigh-Charlotte route.

Don't cut, but increase school funding, Justice Center argues

2010-11-15T13:14:00.000-05:00

With a $3.6 billion budget shortfall facing the upcoming 2011 General Assembly, the worst-kept secret in Raleigh -- make that the Western Hemisphere -- is that the legislature will be making significant cuts. Republicans won both the House and Senate for the first time in more than a century in the Nov. 2 election, and they'll be looking at every part of the budget to make necessary cuts, they say.

But the N.C. Justice Center argues in a new report that not only should legislators not cut the public schools' budget, they ought to increase funding for schools. The center's Education & Law Project says in a news release that the state's education system is "one of the worst-funded in America" and that the state's school funding formula "is one of the most complex and least effective at aiding needy students." And the report says this state lags behind its immediate neighbors: South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee and Virginia.

To be found online at www.ncjustice.org, the report, "North Carolina's Public School Funding System: Underfunded, Unclear, and Unfair," argues that the state needs an increase in overall funding, says Matthew Ellinwood, a Justice Center policy analyst.

Specifically, the report says Census data show North Carolina to be "45th in the nation in per‐pupil spending and 43rd in the nation in per‐pupil expenditure as a share of personal income. North Carolina ranks behind other southern states including South Carolina, Virginia, Georgia and Kentucky. "

1984 Senate race's see-saw polling

2010-11-05T13:17:00.001-04:00

Last week's column about negative campaign ads in North Carolina mentioned some ugliness in the 1984 U.S. Senate campaign between Gov. Jim Hunt and U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms. Among the topics were the Hunt campaign's tough ad on Helms' friend Roberto D'Aubuisson in El Salvador, Helms' "White Hands" ad and that episode when quirky newspaper editor Bob Windsor printed unsubstantiated rumors about Hunt, which Windsor later retracted and apologized for.

Former Helms strategist Carter Wrenn, whose latest success is Renee Ellmers' apparent upset win of 2nd Congressional District U.S. Rep. Bobby Etheridge (there's to be a recount, evidently), sent an e-mail with some interesting information about those 1984 events.

"I read your column 'First in Fights: NC's scurrilous campaign ads,' and here's a footnote to history: We polled just before Bob Windsor called Jim Hunt gay, and Jesse was even with Hunt (for the first time). We polled again after and Jesse trailed Hunt by ten points. (Windsor's smear didn't tarnish Hunt's image, it hurt Jesse.) Then Hunt put on his 'dead bodies' ad and we polled again and Jesse was even."

The election that could not quit: Court of Appeals

2010-11-04T14:56:00.001-04:00

And you thought the election was over Tuesday night? Nope. In one race for the N.C. Court of Appeals seat once held by now-U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jim Wynn, the only thing Tuesday's election determined is that current incumbent Cressie Thigpen of Raleigh got more votes than the 12 other candidates, but not enough to win the seat. It could be weeks -- maybe after Thanksgiving -- before we know.

This is the race, you may recall, that had 13 candidates vying for the seat in the United States' first statewide use of something called Instant Runoff Voting. Instead of determining a winner by whichever candidate got the most votes, or by having a runoff that might not have been held until December, the appeals court seat contest allowed voters to cast ballots for their first, second and third choices on the court. If no one got enough to win (50 percent on the first tally), then the second and third choices would be computed to determine the winner.

The worry was that a lot of voters would have a hard time casting ballots in this kind of election. And because there's usually a significant dropoff of voters from the highest-ranked contest on the ballot, such as president or governor or senator, down to the statewide judicial races, some expected that as many as half of N.C. voters would not bother to cast ballots in this race.

That fear was misplaced. While there was indeed a falloff of voters from the 2,642,527 in the U.S. Senate contest, as shown on the State Board of Elections website Thursday, to 1,931,382 in the Instant Runoff Voting race with 13 candidates, the fact is that that race drew more voters than two other contests for Court of Appeals. The race between incumbent Judge Rick Elmore and law clerk Steven Walker, which Elmore won, drew 1,767,451 voters, while the race between incumbent Judge Martha Geer and challenger Dean Poirier, which Geer won, drew 1,863,016. One other race, between incumbent Judge Ann Marie Calabria and District Judge Jane Gray, which Calabria won, drew 1,939,616.

One reason the Instant Runoff Voting race drew more voters, rather than much fewer as some had feared, is probably the fact that there were so many choices. Rather than discouraging voters entirely, it may have made voters look for someone they knew -- or at least had heard of. Thigpen led with about 20 percent of the vote; former Court of Appeals Judge Doug McCullough drew about 15 percent; and lawyer Chris Dillon came in third with about 10 percent of the vote.

Tar Heel "Flying Bishop" remembered in Alaska

2010-11-02T15:16:00.001-04:00

The Rev. William Jones Gordon Jr., a native of Spray in Rockingham County that's now part of a town called Eden, was known for many things. He was an Episcopal priest, UNC graduate and, at age 29, became the young bishop of Alaska -- said to be the youngest bishop in the church. At first he served his flock via dogsled and riverboat, but in time gave it up to reach them faster and farther by flying. So in time he became known as the "Flying Bishop," flying his canary yellow Piper PA-20 into remote places to bring cargo, provisions and the Word of God to folks in the back country.

They celebrated Gordon's life last week in Fairbanks, where they hung a Piper from the ceiling at the Morris Thompson Visitors and Cultural Center. Above is a picture by Sam Harrel, captured from the newsminer.com's website. Mary Beth Smetzer of the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner has the story here.

Often when the Piper would come flying in to a village, the children would come running to greet the bishop, one speaker said at the celebration. But it usually wasn't their eagerness for religious services, he said; they were clamoring for the doughnuts the bishop would bring with him as a treat.

Gordon, who died in 1994, is buried at Point Hope, Alaska, but his family had strong ties to the Tar Heel state. His father was a well known priest for whom a bridge in Rockingham County is named. His great grandfather was a governor of North Carolina during the Civil War -- Henry Toole Clark. Jone's son, William Jones "Bill" Gordon III, a classmate of mine at UNC Chapel Hill (Class of 1968) was master of ceremonies.

South of the Border ad across the line?

2010-11-01T15:40:00.000-04:00

Just when you thought you'd seen everything in politics comes a mailer from the N.C. Republican Party Executive Committee that portrays Democratic legislative candidate Chris Heagarty of Raleigh wearing a sombrero and supposedly mouthing the words "mucho taxo." It's evidently meant as a play -- a crude one -- on the Pedro character from South Carolina's South of the Border complex just off I-95. A headline says, "Bucky sez Heagarty loves high taxes!" and "We're giving a huge advantage to our neighbors South of the Border."

You can see a copy of the mailer on the Independent's website here.

It sad to think that the party of Jim Holshouser and Jim Martin has to resort to this kind of base, racist, emotional appeal, especially in an election when the party has so many other things going for it. I think the Republican Party is about to win a lot of legislative seats and may take over both houses of the legislature; why the party's elders would allow that potential success to be tainted by this kind of mailer is beyond my understanding, other than to recognize that this has become par for the course in Tar Heel politics. Sad.

The Coker connection, arboretum and forest

2010-10-27T13:55:00.000-04:00

If you've spent any appreciable time on the campus at UNC Chapel Hill, you've probably strolled through the Coker Arboretum just east and a little north of The Old Well. It was created early in the 20th century by a campus botany professor named William C. Coker, who turned a swampy area on what was then the eastern edge of the UNC campus into a peaceful, quiet oasis of plant life for botany students and a place where students, alumni and anyone who wants to take a stroll can get away from the pressures of academic life for a little while.

So as I drove to work Monday morning while listening to WUNC radio news about a 56-acre protected research forest that Elon University has created on the edge of its campus, my ears caught a familiar name. According to a transcript on WUNC's public radio website, the report went on:

"Biology professor Jeffrey Coker says he's thrilled about the decision.

(Jeffrey Coker:) 'Although Elon Forest itself is small, in terms of where it is, it's actually very significant, and very large even, compared to the types of natural resources that you might find around a lot of bigger schools in North Carolina and across the country.'"

I wondered right away if Jeffrey Coker was kin to the Professor Coker whose work created Coker Arboretum. Elon spokesman Eric Townsend sent my question to Jeffrey Coker, who responded:

"That is an excellent question. I have been asked this many times and it has drawn the interest of historians at UNC Chapel Hill. The short answer is that I’m not sure. Here is what we know for sure...

The Coker at UNC was William Chambers Coker. Our families both originate in South Carolina. Our fathers were both employed by the pulp and paper industry. We both earned PhDs in Botany. We were both professors at N.C. universities. We both helped to create natural preserves at our universities. We both place(d) great value on teaching and educational innovation. He served as the Editor of the Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society, which later became the Journal of the N.C. Academy of Science, and I serve on the Board of the N.C. Academy of Science and am the Chair of its Education Committee. And so on and so on. So we certainly have a great deal in common. I didn’t know most of this until Bill Burk (historian at UNC) sent me materials about William Chambers Coker, and so the whole thing is incredibly ironic.

Nevertheless, William Chambers Coker had no children, and thus I cannot be his direct descendent. My attempts to figure out my family history have led me to the South Carolina archive, where I was told that Sherman’s march led to the burning of the records that would help me trace my “Coker” roots. It seems very likely that we are related by a common ancestor in the 1700’s or 1800’s, but I can’t be sure.

Best wishes,

Jeffrey

Professor Coker taught my father botany at UNC sometime in the late 1920s. As a boy I recall flipping through a notebook my father had kept of Prof. Coker's lectures, and his drawings of the plant life Coker lectured about.

I was also interested to know that there was one more well-known Coker academician born in South Carolina who became a mainstay at a North Carolina university: Zoologist Robert Ervin Coker, who taught zoology for years at Chapel Hill and whom then-UNC President Frank Porter Graham tapped in 1946 to organize the Institute of Fisheries Research in Morehead City. It's now known as the UNC Institute of Marine Sciences. According to William Powell's Dictionary of North Carolina Biography, Robert Ervin Coker and William Chambers Coker were both from Society Hill, S.C., and were cousins.

Tar Heel high school phenoms in the big show

2010-10-26T10:40:00.003-04:00

If you didn't catch it earlier, here's a link to Tim Stevens' story today on local-boy-made-good Josh Hamilton, who leads the Texas Rangers against the San Francisco Giants tomorrow in the 2010 World Series. Stevens is a fine reporter who has spent a lot of time with Hamilton over the years, recording the ups-and-downs of a career that has, at times, been a sad story and, lately, a storybook tale of determination and redemption. He was once called the best high school baseball player in America. He once was addicted to alcohol and cocaine, his life a total wreck. And now he's sober, walloping the hide off the baseball and leading Najor League Baseball in hitting.

Hamilton was a high school phenom at Athens Drive High School on Raleigh's west side, and folks around here have been pulling for him to straighten out his life and make full use of his talents. He has excelled this year, winning the American League batting title with an .359 average and becoming Most Valuable Player of the American League Championship Series. His career stats: .311 batting average, 93 homers, 331 RBIs, 553 hits. He hits left, throws left and plays left field.

Hamilton's comeback is an inspiring story, especially to those who once had dreams of diamond glory and now have aging knees that sometimes seem to pop like a fastball planting itself in a catcher's mitt. I have found it hard to forgive the Texas Rangers for moving the old Washington Senators out of D.C. in 1971 when I was stationed at the Pentagon. But Josh Hamilton has done something I didn't think possible: He has not only become a great baseball player and by all accounts a first-rate person, but he's also made me a Texas Rangers fan. Play ball!

Update: A reader reminds me I ought to have said something about the other Tar Heel in the World Series: Madison Bumgardner from Lenoir's South Caldwell High (not Lenoir County, as this blog first and incorrectly said). Here's what the reader suggested mentioning:

-          Second youngest pitcher to start a game for the Giants since they left NY.
-          Youngest pitcher in Giants franchise history to win a post season game
-          Named Starting Pitcher on the 2010 Baseball America All- Rookie team
-          Had 1.13 ERA in 5 games in September as Giants overtook the Padres to win the NL West.
-          He’s from Hudson, NC (near Lenoir) and led South Caldwell HS to the state championship his sr. season.
-          Committed to play at UNC but chose to sign with the Giants after they made him the 10th overall pick in the 2007 MLB draft.

A better Senate debate last night

2010-10-14T08:27:00.000-04:00

Last night's debate in the U.S. Senate race, the second of three planned for this campaign, was likely much more helpful to voters than the first. Sponsored by NBC-17 and the League of Women Voters of North Carolina, it included Libertarian Party candidate Michael Beitler, a business professor at UNC-G whose views provided voters a third choice in addition to Republican incumbent Richard Burr and Democratic challenger Elaine Marshall. As Rob Christensen points out in his front-page coverage of the debate, exchanges between the two major candidates were more pointed -- especially the debating points made by Marshall, the N.C. Secretary of State. She was more intently focused on making points that Burr has been a captive of special interests in Washington and that she is more of an outsider, pointedly noting this time that she was not the hand-picked darling of the Senate leadership.

I thought Burr did a better job this time, too, not just responding more aggressively but more effectively carrying his message against Marshall -- and at one point accusing her of supporting a single-payer health care system. Marshall retorted she had never supported that system and branded Burr as wrong. He surprised me at one point, though, giving a less than ringing endorsement of the public's right to know who's giving money in politics in the wake of the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision. Marshall has been critical of that decision and Congress's failure to insist on disclosure of who's contributing money to independent campaign committees.

Beitler chipped away at the image of both, but most pointedly accusing Burr of cronyism in accepting large contributions from Wall Street and supporting the big bank bailout, calling it a "perfect example of big business and big government." He accused Burr of voting with "fiscal liberals" and declared himself the only fiscal conservative in the race, a point that the record certainly seemed to bear out.

I liked the debate format and setting a lot better Wednesday night, too. On my TV screen the lighting was much better, and the format allowed each candidate a number of rebuttals to each other. This forum may not have been a classic debate in the sense of candidates asking questions of one another, but the ability to respond to one another's remarks if the candidates chose to use their opportunities was helpful to watchers looking not only for information on issues but also how the candidates stood up to one another and for nuances in their positions.

Burr-Marshall debate would have been livelier with Beitler

2010-10-12T09:15:00.002-04:00

Last night's Senate debate between incumbent Republican Sen.. Richard Burr and Democratic challenger Elaine Marshall explored some key differences between the two veteran politicians. Rob Christensen's story from UNC-TV studios where it was broadcast has a good rundown on those differences. http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/10/12/735558/they-dont-see-eye-to-eye.html

But I was struck more by appearances, and what might have been. Burr, the former Fifth District Congressman from Winston-Salem, seemed to be in the position of sitting back and letting the debate come to him. He landed fewer jabs at Marshall than she swung at him, and Burr's trademark smile -- detractors call it a smirk, admirers think of it as a boyish beam -- shone throughout the one-hour debate. I learned six years ago when he first won the Senate seat that Burr has an appeal to voters that may be hard for observers to immediately grasp. He campaigns his own way and makes a connection with individuals with the same kind of personal appeal that made him an outstanding microwave oven salesman before he went full-time into politics. It's easy to underestimate Burr, as many political opponents have discovered on election day.

Marshall, a veteran state legislator who became the first woman to win a statewide executive branch office when she became Secretary of State, wore a bright red suit that on my TV screen (cable, not high def) seemed to bloom, almost overpowering her presence. I checked three channels and the results were similar, and I wondered if that sharp contrast was off-putting to other viewers.

Marshall held her ground pretty well, but for someone who the polls show to be facing a significant gap, I thought she missed a chance to swing hard and swing aggressively at Burr. She did land some body blows, but I also thought, again, that she was missing an opportunity to remind viewers in a more direct way that she was not the hand-picked candidate of the Washington insiders with whom so many voters nationally are reported to be thoroughly disenchanted. She did observe in an understated way that she was not the anointed candidate of the Senate leadership, but I thought her advisers should have pushed her to make the point in a more forceful and emphatic way. Perhaps they did. I take it that she does not see any point in antagonizing Senate leaders if she does win, but I believe she has to find a way to strike a chord with voters who aren't enthusiastic about Burr. His numbers haven't been great all year, and while he has a big lead in the horserace, Marshall ought to pursue a way to focus on that.

The debate was moderated by Carl Kasell, a Goldsboro native, UNC Chapel Hill graduate and star of National Public Radio. But I thought the debate would have been livelier had it included Michael Beitler, the Libertarian Party candidate and one-time bodybuilder who is a professor of business at UNC-Greensboro. Beitler has a sharper sense of humor than either Burr or Marshall and would have lightened up the debate with his pithy comments. As the Observer's Jim Morrill noted the other day, Beitler says Burr panders to the "Glennbeckistani crowd" and accuses Marshall of sometimes "talking but saying nothing." But Beitler is way down in the polls, and the sponsors set a minimum of 10 percent standing in the polls. The N.C. Broadcasters Association Foundation sponsored the debate; there will be two more.

Update: Beitler will appear on Wednesday night's 8 p.m. debate sponsored by WNCN-TV and the League of Women Voters of North Carolina.

Solomon Burke's Charlotte connection

2010-10-11T09:45:00.000-04:00

Solomon Burke, to his fans the King of Rock and Soul, and to others little more than a distant foonote in the development of rhythm and blues, died Sunday on a flight from Amsterdam to Los Angeles, the wire services report. It was a sad thing to hear, because Burke was a wonderful singer who bridged many gaps from gospel, country, rhythm and blues, blues and rock and roll. I plumb wore out two casette tapes of his Best of Solomon Burke before CDs were invented. He just never got the same attention that other famous entertainers have enjoyed, but he made solid contributions that helped a lot of rich superstars get where they are. He wrote for the big boys, too.

If you're a fan of Burke, I don't have to tell you how important he was. If not, it may help to point to his work that was featured, among many other places, in the 1987 movie Dirty Dancing with the song "Cry to Me" and in the 1980 movie The Blues Brothers with his song "Everybody Needs Somebody to Love." The Blues Brothers had one of the worst movie plots in memory but the entertainment was just terrific, including pieces from Ray Charles, John Lee Hooker and a host of the best session players in the world. We watched it so many times my children memorized the dialogue -- and as adults still quote it at the appropriate times.

There's a Charlotte connection with Burke's "Everybody Needs Somebody to Love." According to this website http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=8708 , Burke hired some unnamed musicians from Charlotte to play a Long Island gig with him and them help him cut the song he wrote with Jerry Wexler and Bert Russell in the 1960s. The website doesn't say who those Charlotte players were, but they were there at the beginning. Here's a snippet from the songfacts.com article:

Solomon Burke recalled to Mojo magazine August 2008 that he'd hired musicians from Charlotte, North Carolina, to play at a gig in Long Island and he drafted them in to play the instrumental riff on this. The riff was the money march he did at church where the congregation marches down the aisle to the front to make offerings. Burke continued: "Got the band cooking, get a bit of echo, we went through it, came back out, said to (record executive/producer) Jerry (Wexler), 'Whaddya think?' He said, 'Too fast. Doesn't have any meaning.' (Engineer) Tommy (Dowd) says, 'What can we lose? His band's here, let's just cut it.'"

The Blues Brothers covered this. Their version featured in the 1980 The Blues Brothers film. Nine years later, it was released as a single in the UK, backed by "Think" and it peaked at #12.

Anyone have any idea who those Charlotte musicians were?

Supreme Court: Easley transfer unconstitutional

2010-10-08T13:39:00.004-04:00

The N.C. Supreme Court made some law Friday by deciding not to decide. Or maybe that's by not deciding to decide, letting stand a lower court ruling that says Gov. Mike Easley should not have shifted money from the Highway Trust Fund in 2002, even to help balance the state budget.

The court split 3-3 on the issue after Judge Patricia Timmons-Goodson properly recused herself from the case. She had been on a Court of Appeals panel when it considered a procedural issue affecting the case. Later the Court of Appeals dealt with the substantive issue whether governors can alter legislative decisions to put money in a specific trust fund -- in this case, the Highway Trust Fund. The Court of Appeals panel ruled 2-1 against it, and the Supreme Court's 3-3 tie leaves the lower court's ruling intact. Thus a two-judge majority on the Court of Appeals decided an important question -- at least for the time being. The ruling does not have precedential value, as an earlier version of this post stated. But lawyers and politicians will argue about the impact regardless of that.

The lawsuit was filed in response to Gov. Mike Easley's using $80 million in Highway Trust Fund money to balance the state budget in 2002. He argued that the constitutional provision directing the governor to manage the state's money gave him the authority to transfer money as needed.

What's interesting is that this does not exactly reflect a political split. After all, many Republicans as well as Democrats in the General Assembly supported the lawsuit and supported the Court of Appeals decision. If there was any split at all, it was between a legislature that argues its decisions on designated money cannot be overruled by a governor, even when there's a financial emergency, and the executive branch.

Update: There was bipartisan support on both sides. Former Govs. Jim Hunt, a Democrat, and Jim Martin and Jim Holshouser, both Republicans, supported the theory that the Constitution gives governors the authority to tap special funds in order the balance the budget.

And it's a big win for the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law, which represented former state Sen. Bill Goldston and former Secretary of Transportation Jim Harrington in challenging the transfer.

"The Constitution and the People have prevailed. The Court of Appeals decision will stand and government accountability will stand with it,” says the institute's senior staff lawyer, Jeanette Doran. “The People can count on the constitutional mandate that the General Assembly set the budget and the governor administer it as enacted. Voters can count on future governors not raiding special trust funds.”

Here's the court's decision today:

Justice TIMMONS-GOODSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. The remaining members of the Court are equally divided, with three members voting to affirm and three members voting to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals. Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed and stands without precedential value.

Perdue planning government reorganization

2010-10-06T09:23:00.000-04:00

Gov. Bev Perdue will announce next month what could be the most important initiative of her governorship: a merger, consolidation and maybe elimination of state programs and possibly agencies, too. Dome reports she made remarks about the coming reorganization at the end of Tuesday's Council of State meeting, though it was not exactly a stunner. She has previously talked about the need for such a reorganization to deal with a projected budget deficit of as much as $4 billion next year, when federal stimulus funds are no longer available to help tide the state over.

Perdue is absolutely right about the need to reorganize state government. In a period of growing demands for basic services such as education, health care and public safety, and a weak recovery from the recent recession, ends no longer meet. Perdue is promising "a big announcement" and her spokesperson, Chrissy pearson, notes that this is an opportunity to "transform state government."

Both political parties and the broad-based middle ought to embrace such a transformation -- but also concentrate on avoiding hurting those who need help the most while making hard decisions that would cut programs or agencies that have served a public purpose in the past but no longer can be regarded as critical to our future. While everyone has their least favorite agencies or programs that they'd get rid of in a minute if they had the opportunity, the fact is that they exist because either legislators or other elected or appointed officials saw a need and got enough of a consensus to create them.

Perdue should think boldly about what state government should look like and offer a comprehensive vision for how agencies might work together. It may be far too much to hope for, given the public's opposition to losing what they perceive as an opportunity to vote even for judgeships whose occupants many do not know the names of, but a wholesale revision of the Council of State itself also ought to be under a spotlight. Do we really need separate elected constitutional offices to supervise and regulate insurance, agriculture and labor? Should there be a separate superintendent of public instruction or an elected secretary of state, for example? There are arguments for and against all these offices, but getting a constitutional revision on the ballot next year may be beyond reach.

It's also worth nothing that it's possible to reorganize widely without saving a lot of money, if programs and agencies are merely reshuffled. To save money, Perdue is going to have to recommend ending or sharply cutting spending in a lot of places. She'll find, as have other governors who have pushed for reorganization -- including Gov. Bob Scott in his landmark reorganization four decades ago -- that a lot of folks will come out of the woodwork to argue for keeping a program that doesn't seem to be all that essential. That's all the more reason for Perdue to work hard on this, take the broadest view of what we need to end up with and seek allies across the board. This is important work, and she needs all the help she can find.

Gov's office takes exception to Democratic poll

2010-10-05T16:50:00.013-04:00

I meant to take a blogpost note of an unusual e-mail yesterday from Pearse Edwards, senior advisor to Gov. Bev Perdue, taking issue with a recent polling firm finding that blames Perdue in part for the troubles Democrats are having in this year's election. Edwards objected to Public Policy Polling's conclusions about a relationship between Perdue's job performance and the possibility of Republican gains this fall.

PPP is a Democratic polling firm, which is what makes the response especially interesting. So is the fact that the response to PPP came from the governor's office and not her political committe. First, here's what Tom Jensen of PPP sent out:

A majority of North Carolinians continue to be unhappy with Bev Perdue's job performance and the relationship between that and likely Republican legislative gains this fall shouldn't be underestimated.

Perdue's the face of Democrats in state government and her approval rating continues to languish at 35% with 51% of voters disapproving of her. She's starting to see some improvement in her numbers with her own party's voters, pushing her favor with Democrats to 57%. But she continues to be toxic with independents at a 25/64 approval spread and whatever limited appeal she may have ever had to Republicans is gone. Only 8% of them like the job she's doing.

When you have a highly unpopular Governor that's going to take a toll on your party's legislative candidates and Republicans continue to hold a 50-42 lead on the generic legislative ballot. That's fueled mainly by a 50-27 advantage with independents and an incredible degree of GOP unity. While 17% of Democrats say they're planning to support Republican candidates this fall, only 2% of Republicans say they'll go back in the other direction and vote Democratic.

If Republicans really do end up having an 8% advantage on the legislative vote in November they will almost definitely gain control of both the House and the Senate. But many legislative Democrats have a long history of outperforming the general leanings of their districts and if that remains the case again this year the party could narrowly retain control.

Back to Perdue's numbers- while her approval rating is better than it has been some months over the last year and a half what might be most distressing for her is that just 18% of voters in the state think she's improved on her first year performance during her second year in the Governor's mansion. 27% they think she's gotten worse and 55% feel she's doing about the same, which is not a good sign given how dimly voters viewed her after year one. Part of her problem may be a failure to communicate with average voters. 48% think her communications efforts have been ineffective while only 36% think she's doing a good job on that front.

Perdue still has time to rehabilitate her image for her own reelection campaign but it looks like it's too late for her to be anything but a liability for Democratic candidates across the state this fall.

See the rest of the poll and the analysis at http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/10/perdue-drag-on-nc-democrats.html

That led to Edwards' response to Jensen and Dean Debnam, CEO of the firm. Edwards, a savvy political communications and policy advisor whose family has strong ties to N.C. politics and business, was hired earlier this year to help Perdue get her message and her proposals across to policymakers as well as to constituents. Here's Edwards' response :

We believe your analysis of these numbers is not only unfair but wrong.

Gov. Perdue’s net job approval has improved by five percentage points since May, according to PPP’s own surveys. Her support among Democrats has increased by 18 points.

Those same polls show that the support for Democrats in legislative races has remained the same.

Voters are not angry with Democrats. They are not angry with any one party. They are angry with incumbents, period, and that anger shows in polls nationwide. It’s easy to draw a bull’s eye on the one person in power who is seen all the time. Why do they see Bev Perdue? Because she gets out of Raleigh – out of the capital – in the streets talking to real people and working to create jobs and make North Carolina’s economy better for the people.

Here are the numbers that matter:

* North Carolina ranked fourth in the nation for job creation.

*30,000 jobs created and $5.2 Billion in investment.

*As USA Today recently reported, North Carolina is one of a handful of states leading the nation out of the recession, ranking No. 4 for income gains.

*North Carolina has been recognized for the best business climate in the nation.

*CNBC declared North Carolina No. 4 among the Top States for Business this year.

*North Carolina was awarded $400 million in the federal “Race to the Top” grant for Gov. Perdue’s innovative “Career and College – Ready, Set, Go!” education initiative.

Nineteen months into the Perdue administration, people are angry because we’re in hard times. But times would be harder without Gov. Perdue’s unflinching commitment to growing jobs and making North Carolina better place to live and work.

GOP opposition to judges 'inexcusable, irresponsible"

2010-10-04T13:34:00.000-04:00

A spokesman for U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says there's more to Republican opposition to Democrats' nominees for federal judgeships than I wrote about in Sunday's column about the failure to even vote on President Barack Obama's nominees. The column failed to take note of a key procedural roadblock, writes Regan Lachapelle, deputy communications director for Reid:

Hi Jack,

Just saw your article on judicial nominations. I think it is good, but there was just one thing (procedurally) I want to clarify.

Everything that we do here in the Senate has to be done by unanimous consent- that includes setting up debate time and scheduling votes.

It only takes one Senator to object to anything. So, that means that Republicans are objecting to us even scheduling a vote. The only way to schedule a vote over these objections is to file cloture.

With Republican cooperation we could confirm every single judge on the calendar today and put them to work ensuring that justice for Americans seeking redress in our overwhelmed court system is no longer denied or delayed. Republicans have used their ability to draw out and delay confirmation as their primary leverage for obstructing the Senate from holding votes on these well-qualified judicial nominees who have volunteered to serve their country. Democrats have asked consent for votes on virtually all of these nominees and Republicans have objected, filibustering these nominations and requiring a cloture petition to be filed in order to secure a vote. Republicans are well aware that it requires approximately three days of Senate floor time to break a filibuster on each these nominees, and that it would therefore take approximately 69 days of Senate floor time, well more than is left in the current Congress, to confirm all of the judicial nominees currently pending on the executive calendar. Their stance is inexcusable and irresponsible.

Hope this helps and please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Regan

Regan Lachapelle

Deputy Communications Director

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

Burr builds significant lead in two Senate race polls

2010-09-30T10:20:00.001-04:00

Two recent polls on N.C.'s U.S. Senate race illustrate the steepness of the climb that N.C. Secretary of State Elaine Marshall faces in her bid to unseat incumbent Republican Richard Burr.

Public Policy Polling's latest survey has Burr with a lead of 13 points in a snapshot that shows Burr with 49 percent of the vote and Marshall at 36, while the Civitas Institute's latest shows Burr with a 20 point lead, with Burr holding 49 percent of the vote and Marshall 29 percent. (An earlier version of this post had incorrect numbers.)
PPP's Tom Jensen said in a news release that Burr has consolidated the Republican base. "He now has an 88-1 lead with voters in his own party compared to just 75-9 in late August. He's also increased his lead with independents from 20 points to 25 points and pushed his Democratic support from 16 percent to 20 percent.

"Burr had posted net negative approval numbers in every PPP poll from February through August but in the wake of this recent blitz he's now pushed them into positive territory at 47 percent approving and 38 percent disapproving. Burr has broken the previous record for his highest approval number in PPP's polling by a wide margin- the previous best was 42 percent in December of 2009.

"Marshall continues to be plagued by comparatively low name recognition. It's worth noting that among respondents who have an opinion of Marshall, whether it's positive or negative, she actually leads Burr 47-45. Those numbers suggest that if she was competitive with Burr resources wise this would be a toss up race," he said.

Burr has a lot more money than Marshall, which PPP says has let Burr have "almost complete control of the information flow to voters" despite the fact that Marshall "is one of the more well liked Senate candidates Democrats have across the country."

Meanwhile, Civitas Institute analyst Chris Hayes said his organization's latest poll showed Burr with a "commanding" lead particularly among unaffiliated voters, who support Burr by a 48 percent-21 percent margin.

“Marshall has been virtually non-existent in the media throughout the course of this election cycle,” said Hayes. “Burr’s dominance of the television airwaves has allowed him to expand his lead.”

“Marshall remains relatively unknown to the voters, even voters of her own party. This spells deep trouble for her,” added Hayes. “If she does not answer Burr on television soon, this race will quickly be over.”

To read more about the two polls, go to:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/09/burr-expands-lead.html

http://www.nccivitas.org/media/poll-results/

Reader: 'Fox News like newspaper' on its way

2010-09-28T11:40:00.000-04:00

Jack: Was just reading the comments you got on the Mosque, etc. Could not agree more with the letter writers.

Take a very critical look around your newspaper. How many true conservatives work on the editorial staff, the paper in general?

Probably zero. How would you feel if the tables were reversed and the editorial staff were made up of Cal Thomas, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Peggy Noonan?

I honestly believe, if we could put together a Fox News like newspaper, the Observer would die in 6 months. How do I know this? Look at Air America against conservative radio shows. Complete bomb. CNN, MSNBC, etc against Fox News. Not even close. Why? Because we are a center/right country and we yearn for the truth and an unbiased news reporting apparatus.

I wrote to Taylor Batten a few months ago. His explanation was, these are the opinion pages. True enough, but you barely print the Consrvative views. Krugman shows up weekly, maybe more often. Walter Williams shows up semi-annually. Don't believe it. Go check.

I know I'm wasting my time because your motto is "All the left wing views we can find to print".

I'm working on getting that unbiased newspaper going and that is not a threat, it's a prmoise, and we'll save you a job, because we'll give all views, yours included.

Readers fire back on column about prejudice

2010-09-27T10:00:00.000-04:00

Sunday's column on the proposed community center two blocks from the World Trade Center aroused the ire of several readers, who sent along criticisms and questions:

All I can say after reading your column today in the Observer is thank God there are other outlets that I can get opinions from. I challenge you to give the democratic ads the same scrutiny.

By the way, I am a lifelong Democrat, but no longer can find a single issue that aligns with my values.

Reply: Check out Saturday's blogpost on Democrats who won't admit error or apologize for running misleading ads at http://jackbetts.blogspot.com/2010/09/why-is-it-so-hard-for-politicians-to.html

One reader who did not include his address wrote:

Interesting OpEd. Fact question: Didn't the Imam plan to call the new center "Cordoba House"? If so, why? If he did and has since dropped the name, why?

I'm asking because I think I read about the name and it is the name of a significant Moslem conquest you referenced. If he had planned the name and dropped it you should have included that. If not, no problem. Thanks for listening.

Reply: The original name of the community center project was indeed Cordoba House. It was later changed to Park51.

Another reader, no address included, wrote:

Mr Betts, once again your article on the "Mosque" points out the current liberal view whereby facts are ignored in the debate. When you state the "Mosque" is not BY ground zero you ignore the fact that this proposed building site was damaged in the Muslim terrorist plane crashes on 9-11. You just brush aside that fact that landing gear from the crashing planes passed thru the roof of the Burlington Coat Building the same as if it had been a fired missile. And despite your argument to the contrary, the Cordoba mosque was called the "Grand Mosque" because of its significant Muslim location in Spain and the NY mosque started off with the name Cordoba Project.
And as a suggestion to the Muslims in the US seeking better relations in this country you could have added a comment for those announcing their program for improved relations to add at least one item to their list publicly and forcibly denouncing specific Muslim terrorist bombing around the world. No mention condemning these acts is listed.
As for Feisal Abdul Rauf, would it not be honest journalism to at least mention with his background info that he refused to stand for the National Anthem when playing basketball in the NBA and that he implies that the US carried some of the blame for the 9-11 Muslim terrorist attack.
No sir, most Americans do not agree with you and Renee Elmers is just reminding folks of the arrogance being displayed by local Muslims to force a confrontation when no confrontation would happen if the site was elsewhere.

A Charlotte reader wrote:

Jack, how is the NC race a plus for terrorists? What Western Civilization prejudice and intolerance caused the terrorists to bomb the NY World Trade Center then fly planes into the buildings and the Pentagon and into the Pennsylvania earth, bomb the USS Cole, embassies, the barracks in Saudi Arabia, night clubs, etc? What prejudice and intolerance causes "good" Muslims not to assimilate in European societies? What prejudice and intolerance bans the Bible and the Torah from certain countries? What happens to Muslim tolerance in countries where Muslims achieve the majority? What intolerance and prejudice burns within Muslim terrorists, supported by apathy of many of the "good" Muslims throughout the world, to destroy Western Civilization and replace it with Sharia Law? After WWII should the U.S. have allowed the Japanese to build a Shinto Shrine outside the gates of Pearl Harbor or should countries have allowed German peace memorials to be built outside the gates of Auschwitz, Sobibor, and Treblinka? Yes, "The toll of 9-11 continues to rise." But not as you write. It is the Muslim prejudice and intolerance that is revealing itself throughout the world that we have to fear.

Another Charlotte reader e-mailed:

My very left wing, Obama supporting, brother-in-law is a retired college professor. Prior to his retirement, he taught European History at a midsized university - for his entire working life! He knows his subject and he also knows Islam. He tells me, and anyone else that will listen, that it is, indeed, a muslim tradition to build a "celebratory mosque" at the site of great victories. Anyone who has actually read both the Koran and the Hadith knows that followers are commanded to conduct their business in a prescribed manner - and lying to promote Islam is part of their doctrine.
For reasons you might know but your readers don't, too many in "journalism" give Islam a pass. You and the rest ignore the oppression of Christians in countries where muslims have power; you ignore the complete failure of Rauf to condemn terrorism, he even refuses to acknowledge that Hamas is a terrorist organization when their own charter tells us that it is.
Instead of promoting discussion on the subject, you and many of your fellows resort to name calling and attacks on those who have studied the subject and speak out against it - including some truly moderate muslims.
You got one thing right. Someone is lying but it is not Renee Ellmers or her campaign; nor is it Robert Spencer or Steve Emerson or any of the others who correctly call this proposed building a victory mosque.

Another said:

I think you've leaned too far in the opposite direction over Ms. Ellmer's opposition to building an Islam anything too close to the 9-11 site.
Most Americans are aware that the mosques cited were not built immediately (less than 50 years) after Muslims took control of those cities, and, indeed, New York wasn't overtaken by Muslims - no, rather it's like a cat marking its territory by peeing on a wall.
Despite the 'paternal kindness' of the broadcast media in trying to keep the Muslim world's reaction to 9-11 as it happened (victorious celebrations of people flooding the streets burning American flags and cheering at big screens showing the destruction of the twin towers), most of us had access online to all this at the time or soon after, and it is that reaction that Feisal Abdul Rauf did not address - at the time or shortly thereafter. Not the terrorist act itself, but the fellow Muslims' reactions. Those are two extremely different things, and that difference is what most of us who don't want this mosque are reacting to, and what most of the bleeding-heart, can't-we-all-be-friends supporters just can't seem to get.
And, unfortunately, neither do you.

Why is it so hard for politicians to apologize?

2010-09-25T10:03:00.004-04:00

Why is it so hard for politicians to admit they're wrong? And even harder for them to apologize?

I suspect they feel it might show weakness to voters if they apologize for doing something wrong. Maybe they think their opponents will capitalize on any apology and make a campaign issue out of it. Or maybe they're just so hardheaded, so full of the belief they can get away with anything, that they just refuse to say "I made a mistake" or "I apologize."

In North Carolina politics, it seemed to me the best way for Democratic Attorney General Roy Cooper to end a dispute with a previous opponent was to admit his campaign ad was wrong or at least misleading and apologize to Republican Dan Boyce for the ad's assertion that Boyce's law firm was making an outrageous sum from a lawsuit it brought over the state's method of taxation. At one point Boyce would have settled the whole matter for a simple apology that it seemed to me he deserved. It would have been simple, cheap and quickly ended a lawsuit that ground on for eight years and for all I know still is tied up in court somewhere.

Now state Sen. A.B. Swindell, a Democrat, is refusing to retract, apologize for or admit any wrongdoing in his implication that his opponent this fall in a race in Wilson and Nash counties, Republican Buck Newton, is or was a druggie. In 1990, Newton was evidently mistakenly identified in a drug investigation in Watauga County and was to be charged on eight counts. News reports show that the charges were dismissed by a prosecutor after he learned of the mistake. The officer responsible for the mistake was later fired. But Newton's name remains on the public record as having been charged, and Swindell's campaign is spreading the word that he was once cited in the drug case. Swindell's justification for using that against Newton is that it's a matter of public record and he's telling only the truth as the record shows. But he does not include the complete public record information about an affidavit filed in court that there never was any evidence of Newston's wrongdoing. None.

This is wrong. And it invites a continued low-level of political discourse in this state.

That's a pretty sleazy way to campaign against someone, because the implication is that, even if a mistake was made, Newton must have done something wrong to have even been charged. And Newton is justifiably hot about this -- angry enough to file a libel lawsuit against Swindell.

If Swindell has evidence that Newton sold or bought drugs, that's one thing. But to use a public record based on a mistake to defame a political opponent is pretty low. Swindell owes Newton and voters in his district an apology and a retraction. Given the usual practice of politics, I don't suppose an apology is forthcoming, but one certainly seems in order.

Woods' first U.S. course can't bury half-mile of N.C. trout stream

2010-09-23T10:55:00.000-04:00

The Cliffs at High Carolina golf course project near Asheville has attracted a lot of attention, party because of its claim to be the first American golf course designed by Tiger Woods. Another is that it's a gorgeous site with stunning views and beautiful mountains.

But the Western North Carolina Alliance and Trout Unlimited were disturbed by one part of the Tiger Woods plan: burying more than a half-mile of headwater trout streams in one of the prettiest locations on Earth. The two groups engaged the Southern Environmental Law Center to challenge the plan to use extensive underground piping to cover up 3,132 linear feet of trout streams. The law center argued that burying that much free-flowing trout stream, when other alternatives are available, violated North Carolina law. The center's aim was not to stop the project, but to preserve as much of the open streams as possible.

Now Kathleen Sullivan of the SELC reports that an agreement signed today nearly halves the amount of trout stream footage to be buried in pipes or other structures, to 1,655 linear feet -- to less than a third of a mile. The agreement also means that the project developers will mitigate twice that amount of footage -- or the equivalent of 3,310 feet of stream footage. The SELC praised the developers of The Cliffs for their willingness to reconsider the loss of the open stream footage. For more on The Cliffs, see http://www.discoverhighcarolina.com

The agreement reinforces state protections for streams, the SELC said, including these factors:

--Streams cannot be buried for a project if those impacts can be avoided through a better design.

-- Unavoidable impacts to quality mountain streams must be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio so that, for every area impacted, twice that area must be rehabilitated or restored elsewhere.

-- Developers must mitigate their impacts to streams by restoring streams. They cannot offset their mitigation burden by seeking credit for streams on their property that were not impacted by their development and are not otherwise at risk of being degraded.

In a news release, SELC senior attorney DJ Gerken said, “North Carolina’s mountain headwaters are so vital to aquatic life and downstream communities that they deserve the full protection of our laws. The redesign of the private golf course under this agreement significantly reduces the impact on our stream headwaters and ensures compensatory restoration to North Carolina for any unavoidable impacts to vital mountain streams.”

Nine tough challenges facing nonprofits

2010-09-21T13:47:00.001-04:00

Tthe N.C. Center for Nonprofits in Raleigh has done some important work over the years helping the state's nonprofit community deal with a host of issues -- everything from fundraising to staff development to strategic planning. Now it has some suggestions for nonprofit leaders, board members, staffers and supporters to chew over in this era of diminishing resources.

I've worked for a nonprofit and been a board member of a number of nonprofit organizations, and the center's advice is good -- though it will be tough to take for some entrenched nonprofits to implement. It recommends dealing with the fact that this is a new economy, it's here to stay whether you like it or not, you'd better get rid of the deadwood on your board, you're going to have to innovate, and you must find ways to show the public and your donors that you're operating in a transparent and above-board way.

Trisha Lester, vice president of the center, passes them along in a release Tuesday:

1. Accept and welcome the change. Things are not returning to the way they used to be. The faster organizations embrace this, the better off they will be.

2. Reassess board leadership. Resilient nonprofits are using this time to re-tool and build a board of directors that aligns with the organization’s future, not its past. Board members that are not actively engaged in the organization can be thanked for their service and rotated off the board.

3. Enhance collaboration. Nonprofits must revisit their current and prospective partnerships, choosing partners carefully to be sure they enhance their organizations’ impact and efficiency.

4. Plan for short-term strategies and potential scenarios. Remaining nimble and fluid is essential. The strongest nonprofits adapt by experimenting and revising as necessary – and by not holding anything sacred.

5. Seek continued innovation. For more than a century, nonprofits have been our society’s innovators in addressing needs in the community. Continued innovation is vital. Organizations that also apply innovative approaches to their own governance, management, and operations will likely be able to have more impact.

6. Connect and learn. It’s crucial in this environment to avoid working in a silo. Organizations are achieving this through professional networks and resources available to nonprofits.

7. Demonstrate results. Nonprofits must be able to show their communities what is different because of their work. This includes keeping donors informed of the impact of their support.

8. Speak up. Nonprofits have a responsibility to share what they know from their firsthand experience about what works – and does not work – in local communities. They can help policymakers address the root causes of problems. Policymakers cannot ignore a nonprofit sector that provides more than 400,000 jobs in North Carolina and puts $31 billion back into its economy each year.

9. Be accountable. Just following the law can be difficult with constant changes in the federal and state laws that govern nonprofits. As with all sectors of society, a handful of nonprofits doing the wrong things can damage the public’s view of all nonprofits

Perdue elevates Harrison, again

2010-09-15T11:45:00.000-04:00

Gov.Bev Perdue, rebuffed by the state's courts last year in her attempt to make former Cumberland County schools superintendent Bill Harrison the CEO of North Carolina's schools, has again elevated Harrison to a job that makes him one of the governor's most influential advisors and one of the state's most important policymakers on education.

Perdue said Wednesday that Harrison would not only oversee the state's handling of up to $400 million in federal "Race to the Top" funds to improves schools, but that he would also be chairman of a new Governor's Education Transformation Commission and that he will have a $90,000 salary paid for with the federal funds. The commission he chairs will provide guidance to the state's Career and College - Ready, Set, Go! program, her office said in a news release.

“Both Dr. Harrison and the commission will play an integral role in achieving the goal I have set for all schools in NC: That every child must graduate high school with what it really takes to succeed in a career, in college or in technical training,” said Perdue. “That’s the mission of the Ready, Set, Go! program.”

Last year Perdue hired Harrison with some fanfare to be head of the state's public schools, recommending him as chairman of the State Board of Education and giving him a handsome salary. But Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson -- who had appeared on the podium with Perdue and Harrison when his elevation was first announced -- sued on constitutional grounds, arguing that Perdue did not have the authority to put Harrison in charge of schools. Atkinson's office is one of 10 N.C. Council of State offices whose occupants are elected statewide. Perdue has sought to put Harrison in charge despite, renewing an old debate in this state about who's in charge of schools. She won that case, but Harrison remained as chairman of the State Board of Education.

But the case really didn't answer a long-lingering question of who ought to be in charge of public schools -- and thus who ought to be accountable to the public. Atkinson as Superintendent of Public Instruction at least nominally has that authority, but the legislature also regularly makes education policy by what it chooses to emphasize. And as Perdue proved in her appointment of Harrison to handle the "Race to the Top" money, it's the governor who commands public attention on education.

Bev, Marc and Joe to Ray: No OLF, thanks

2010-09-13T14:40:00.000-04:00

Just in case you thought the fight over the Navy's proposal to put an outlying landing field in northeastern North Carolina was over a long time ago, the governor and the legislative leadership are still fighting. Gov. Bev Perdue, Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight and House Speaker Joe Hackney have written Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus saying it shouldn't go anywhere in the state that doesn't want it.

The trio wrote they'd welcome an OLF in a community that wants it, but it would be hard to find one in Camden, Currituck or Gates counties, all of which have "clearly expressed" opposition to the landing field. So has the General Assembly.

"The procurement of an OLF in North Carolina must not be forced upon any community that has voiced its opposition to it, both as a matter of good public policy and applicable state law," they wrote.

One reason for that opposition is that the proposed landing field would bring a lot of noisy flights to the area with a lot of jobs that often come with a military installation. The outlying landing field would train jet pilots for aircraft carrier landings, and the Navy wants a relatively sparsely populated area that isn't too well lit at night to train those pilots. I've long thought that if the Navy really wants it in this state, it will have to create a large number of jobs or somehow bring significant economic benefits to the local community.

The Navy first wanted to place its OLF in Washington and Beaufort counties near the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge, but withdrew that plan after a heated fight with local farmers over the loss of productive farmland and with conservationists and environmentalists over the likelihood of bird-aircraft collisions with large migratory waterfowl in the neighboring Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge.

6 of 10 N.C. congressional candidates flunk 'courage test'

2010-09-09T10:53:00.002-04:00

Should you hire someone who won't answer questions? If you're hiring, you probably wouldn't give a job to someone who refused to tell you how he or she would do the job. But how about politics? There are a lot of candidates -- challengers and incumbents alike from both major parties -- who won't answer questions.

So says Project Vote Smart, a non-partisan organization whose founders include Republican Newt Gingrich and Democrat Michael Dukakis. It said nearly six out of 10 N.C. candidates won't answer a survey on where they stand -- but the organization has looked up the candidates' records and come up with the answers anyway.

Those who have agreed to provide answers include Repbulican Sen. Richard Burr, Rep. Sue Myrick of the 9th District and Democratic Rep. Mel Watt of the 12th, the group said.

Among those who declined are Democratic Senate candidate Elaine Marshall, Republican Rep. Virginia Foxx of the 5th District and Republican Howard Coble of the 6th.

Here's part of a news release from the group:

North Carolina’s 2010 Political Courage Test results show fifty-eight percent (58%) of the congressional candidates refused to answer questions on the key issues facing the nation. So this year, using a surprise approach, Project Vote Smart has answered twelve major issue questions for them!

Now, regardless of a candidate’s willingness to respond to the Political Courage Test, voters can find out where all congressional candidates stand using the powerful, interactive tool VoteEasy (www.voteeasy.org). VoteEasy is a brand new, cutting-edge tool that helps voters instantly identify the congressional candidates most like them on the issues the voters care about most.

For a look at the N.C. delegation, here's a link: http://votesmart.org/pdf/2010/pct/NC_cong_press_report.pdf

The SBI's Harnett County connection

2010-09-08T16:01:00.003-04:00

In tapping former N.C. Court of Appeals Chief Judge Gerald Arnold to be interim director of the state SBI's troubled crime lab, Attorney General Roy Cooper is following a familiar path. When the SBI needs new leadership, get a Harnett County lawyer and former legislator from Lillington who graduated from East Carolina University. Well, sort of.

Arnold, a well-regarded lawyer, judge and administrator who retired a year ago from Lawyer's Mutual Insurance Company, will be running the forensic lab as well as making a legal review of the lab's divisions while an eight-member panel named by new SBI Director Greg McLeod makes a national search for a new crime lab director. Arnold likely won't be there long.

Arnold's selection was a good one for an agency with a badly tattered reputation, but he has his work cut out for him as defense lawyers and their clients challenge courtroom convictions that may have been reached in part because of with tainted evidence, tests or testimony.

Arnold has had an interesting career that includes a couple of terms in the N.C. House of Representatives. He practiced law in Lillington early in his career with Robert B. Morgan, also an East Carolina grad. Morgan would later serve in the legislature, become attorney general (overseeing, among other things, the SBI) and then was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1974. Defeated for reelection in 1980, Morgan returned to North Carolina and in 1985 became director of the SBI under Attorney General Lacy Thornburg, now a federal judge. Morgan was SBI director for seven years before returning to private practice.

Supremes: Improvidently or not, inmates will remain locked up

2010-08-27T16:29:00.000-04:00

The N.C. Supreme Court has ruled it does not have the authority to tell the NC Department of Correction that it has to apply controversial time off to the sentences of inmates sentenced to live in the 1970s -- and thus the state does not have to release them. It's a big victory for Gov. Bev Perdue, who made an issue of it last fall and forced the Supreme Court to reconsider the issue after it first decided a discretionary review it had agreed to had been "improvidently allowed."

The court ruled 5-2 today against releasing the inmates. Perdue's office released the following:

“We can all sleep a little sounder tonight knowing that violent prisoners will not be released into our communities without review or supervision.
"One hundred and thirty three violent criminals will remain behind bars because of today’s decision.
“I stood up for what I believed was right for North Carolina, and I thank the victims, their families, and law enforcement who stood up with me.”

Perdue's opposition to releasing the inmates came after three conservative judges of the NC Court of Appeals ruled that the time-off policies did apply to a number of inmates, and ordered their sentences recalculated by the courts.

The state appealed; the Supreme Court first agreed to hear the case, then issued a one-page statement saying it had improvidently allowed that appeal.

Judge Ripley Rand followed the dictates of the Court of Appeals and ordered two inmates released in December.

So Perdue's administration appealed again to the Supreme Court, and this time got a hearing on the issue in February. Today's decision came out of that hearing. Justice Robert Edmunds wrote the decision for the majority. Justices Patricia Timmons-Goodson and Robin Hudson dissented.

Providence this time, I guess.

Ross at UNC -- but if baseball comes calling...

2010-08-25T13:53:00.004-04:00

Tom Ross, the former judge, courts administrator and foundation president who has been president of Davidson College for the past three years, is said to be the choice of the search committee of the UNC Board of Governors to succeed Erskine Bowles as head of the UNC system. If that's the case, he'll be the second Greensboro boy in a row to head the 17-campus UNC system. Like Bowles, Ross grew up in Greensboro, where his father was with Burlington Industries.

Ross is also politically savvy, having been a Democratic Party official in his home county and served as chief of staff for former U.S. Rep. Robin Britt, D-N.C. If I remember correctly, Ross is a distant cousin of former Gov. Jim Hunt, who himself was born in Guilford County though he has lived most of his life in Wilson County.

THURSDAY UPDATE: Susan Donaldson Ross, Tom Ross's spouse, says that story about the Hunt connection is not correct. Jim Hunt is related to the Ross family of Pleasant Garden in Guilford County, she says. Tom Ross is related to the Ross family from Charlotte.

Hunt, in fact, appointed Ross to be judge of the N.C.Superior Court judge iin 1984-- the youngest such judge at the time. I ran into Hunt at lunchtime today and told him I heard we were about to have a new UNC president. He winked and said, "We've got a great future." D.G. Martin, by the way, also a Davidson grad, had mentioned Tom Ross as a candidate for the UNC job way back in February.

Ross's elevation puts him in a better spot to watch one of his favorite things: UNC basketball. Ross went to Davidson and is an avid Wildcats fan, of course, but he also loves Tar Heel basketball, and he and his wife Susan kept a condo in Chapel Hill during his foundation days so he could watch the Heels.

Funny thing, though. He once quipped that the only other job in life he really wanted , beyond president of Davidson College, might be Commissioner of Baseball. Well, me too. Baseball could sure use his talent and judgment.

Wanted: SBI agents. Call Roy

2010-08-24T12:55:00.000-04:00

If you've kept up with the newspaper series "Agents' Secrets: Junk Science, Tainted Testimony at the SBI," you already know that there's deep trouble at the State Bureau of Investigation and particularly with the shoddy work performed by blood and bullet analysts in the SBI crime lab and misleading or distorted courtroom testimony by agents. The previous crime lab director is being reassigned, the former SBI director has been given another job, an analyst has been suspended and a new SBI director has been brought in.

Turns out the SBI is looking for a few good people to work there, too. This ad has appeared in the Raleigh classifieds:

NC Department of Justice is currently recruiting SBI Agents. Applications will be accepted from August 12 thorugh September 22. Refer to website: www.ncdoj.gov for complete information.

(You'll have to hunt a little to find the SBI connection about the jobs).

Doesn't say, but I'm guessing honesty, integrity, science background, competence and high ethical standards would be a big help for a candidate.

UNC-TV director: Where are the news media?

2010-08-23T14:47:00.002-04:00

At the height of the tensions in the General Assembly over its demand for copies of videos and research from UNC-TV on Alcoa Power Generating Inc.'s proposed renewal of its license to operate the Yadkin River hydroelectric plants, UNC-TV's Director and General Manager Tom Howe was wondering where other news media were on this story. In an email released after Alcoa asked for copies of the station's e-mails dealing with the Alcoa story, Howe on July 6 wrote several staff members:

"Right -- why hasn't public radio in the state done anything on the story -- why hasn't any of the major newspaper in the state done anything major on the story -- why hasn't any of the major television stations in the state done anything on the story -- why haven't any of the major television news networks done anything on the story -- why hasn't any of the major news magazines done anything on the story -- why hasn't any of the states magazines done anything on the story -- why haven't any of the general assembly reserach staff done anyhing on the story....

"Our NORTH CAROLINA NOW segments will be the most compreenensive coverage of this done by anyone -- seems to me we can stand on that with pride."

Howe raises a good question. Although UNC-TV later took three video segments off its website after concluding that they didn't reflect the station's usual standards, his question is a good one. The Charlotte Observer has opined on this topic in editorials and columns, and reporters from the Observer and The News & Observer have published a number of stories as well. Yet there's still a lot of reporting to be done on the environmental impacts and health consequences in this story, and Howe's frustration over being criticized by others in the press is understandable. UNC-TV worked on the story for a long time and wound up getting burned in various quarters for succumbing to the legislature's demands and for waiving its usual editorial control.

For more on this, see my Sunday column here.