Readers appalled at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's failure to closely monitor a peanut plant operations in Blakely, Georgia and a syringe packager in Raleigh http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/02/more-regulatory-failure-fda-didnt-inspect-syringe-plant-despite-complaints.html may be longing for the leadership of the late U.S. Rep. L.H. Fountain, D-N.C.
Fountain, who died in Raleigh in 2002, was a courtly Southern gentleman, a conservative Democrat from Tarboro who was hardly regarded as a radical in any fashion. He was the senior member of the N.C. delegation in his later years, and affectionately referred to as "Dean."
But early in his career in Washington as the congressman from North Carolina's 2nd Congressional District, Fountain realized how critical the FDA was to safe foods and drugs in America. Over the years he became a watchdog of the FDA, frequently writing pointed letters to the agency over reported problems and holding congressional hearings before his governmental operations oversight subcommittee. He steered the work of hundreds of investigations into the FDA's operations.
The Peanut Corporation of America has been linked to 666 illnesses and possibly linked to nine deaths. The AM2PAT plant in Raleigh has been linked to 300 cases of sickness and perhaps five deaths. In both cases, inadequate inspections and failures to follow through on reports of problems exposed the FDA's ineptitude. Had Fountain still been in Congress, he may have been involved in inquiries, issued subpoenas and held hearings into the FDA's oversight of these problem companies long ago. Fountain served 15 terms in Congress -- 1953-83 -- and was responsible in the 1960s for exposing the shenanigans of Billy Sol Estes, a former ally of Lyndon Johnson.
We could benefit from another L.H. Fountain right about now.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Bev and I-485: How will she do it?
So, how is it that under the Easley administration the completion of the last remaining unbuilt segment of Interstate 485 around Charlotte could not begin until 2015, but under Gov. Bev Perdue it will start later this year?
A couple things. Mike Easley isn't governor anymore. Bev Perdue is governor, and she gets to shift the state's agenda, pursue different policies than her predecessor and adopt different priorities. The changes at the state Department of Transportation, where she has moved to make its powerful Board of Transportation more a planning agency and less a decision-maker on roads projects, are prime examaples.
Second, Perdue has something that Easley did not have: an opportunity to take advantage of federal stimulus funds. While the amount that might become available for I-485 may not be nearly enough to pay for the remainder of the project, it may be enough to launch the process by the end of this year if the project can be pulled together in time to qualify for the 12-month "shovel-ready" projects window, says Perdue aide Dave Kochman. "We may have an announcement on that within 45 days," he says.
Other projects in the Charlotte area were determined to be shovel-ready within 120 days and thus qualified for the first round of construction. As the Observer's Steve Harrison and Lisa Zagaroli pointed out the other day, initial stimulus funding will pay for $17 million in improvements to N.C. 218, from I-485 to U.S. 74, $4.7 million for a new bridge on N.C. 73 over Long Creek in Stanly County, $3 million for resurfacing I-85 in Cabarrus County, $8.3 million for widening N.C. 51 south of Pineville and $5.6 million for S.R. 1542 in Stanly County.
It's not clear yet how much stimulus money will be available for the I-485 project, which could require about $120 million for construction of five miles of the highway, plus $100 million for an interchange with I-85. One analysis estimates that Charlotte would get about $35 million in stimulus money for the I-485 project, but the Perdue administration will probably be pressing for more for that project as well as for replacing the Yadkin River bridge on I-85, a top priority for Perdue. One potential source of I-485 funding may be a $180 million pot of money set aside for the Monroe Connector/Bypass, Harrison and Zagaroli reported.
Whether the I-485 project can be completed within three years is a question that will be answered by the availability of state and federal funds, of course. But Perdue's willingness to move the project's schedule up and go to bat for more funding is a dramatic turnaround for a project that many thousands of area drivers have lost a lot of teeth enamel fretting about. And Perdue may have an incentive. Near the end of that three-year window, she'll be running for re-election. Completion of I-485 -- or even significant progress that tells motorists the project will be done within the forseeable future -- would be a big bragging point in that campaign.
A couple things. Mike Easley isn't governor anymore. Bev Perdue is governor, and she gets to shift the state's agenda, pursue different policies than her predecessor and adopt different priorities. The changes at the state Department of Transportation, where she has moved to make its powerful Board of Transportation more a planning agency and less a decision-maker on roads projects, are prime examaples.
Second, Perdue has something that Easley did not have: an opportunity to take advantage of federal stimulus funds. While the amount that might become available for I-485 may not be nearly enough to pay for the remainder of the project, it may be enough to launch the process by the end of this year if the project can be pulled together in time to qualify for the 12-month "shovel-ready" projects window, says Perdue aide Dave Kochman. "We may have an announcement on that within 45 days," he says.
Other projects in the Charlotte area were determined to be shovel-ready within 120 days and thus qualified for the first round of construction. As the Observer's Steve Harrison and Lisa Zagaroli pointed out the other day, initial stimulus funding will pay for $17 million in improvements to N.C. 218, from I-485 to U.S. 74, $4.7 million for a new bridge on N.C. 73 over Long Creek in Stanly County, $3 million for resurfacing I-85 in Cabarrus County, $8.3 million for widening N.C. 51 south of Pineville and $5.6 million for S.R. 1542 in Stanly County.
It's not clear yet how much stimulus money will be available for the I-485 project, which could require about $120 million for construction of five miles of the highway, plus $100 million for an interchange with I-85. One analysis estimates that Charlotte would get about $35 million in stimulus money for the I-485 project, but the Perdue administration will probably be pressing for more for that project as well as for replacing the Yadkin River bridge on I-85, a top priority for Perdue. One potential source of I-485 funding may be a $180 million pot of money set aside for the Monroe Connector/Bypass, Harrison and Zagaroli reported.
Whether the I-485 project can be completed within three years is a question that will be answered by the availability of state and federal funds, of course. But Perdue's willingness to move the project's schedule up and go to bat for more funding is a dramatic turnaround for a project that many thousands of area drivers have lost a lot of teeth enamel fretting about. And Perdue may have an incentive. Near the end of that three-year window, she'll be running for re-election. Completion of I-485 -- or even significant progress that tells motorists the project will be done within the forseeable future -- would be a big bragging point in that campaign.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Of smokes, votes and folks
Tobacco's hold on the N.C. General Assembly has long been a tight one, and efforts to adopt a bill prohibiting smoking in restaurants and workplaces has come fairly close a time or two in the past, but never has had enough votes. On the other hand, the legislature has slowly whittled away at the list of public places where you can smoke -- and the Legislative Building itself is now off-limits, as are other state government buildings.
In 2007, the bill came tantalizingly close for a time in the House, where Majority Leader Hugh Holliman, D-Davidson, a lung cancer survivor, has sponsored the anti-smoking bill. In the spring of 2007, the bill failed on a 61-55 vote with about 10 Democrats opposed to Holliman's bill. A switch of four votes would have made the difference, and Holliman probably had at least two of those ready to go if he had had another couple for a majority. He didn't.
This year may be different. The smoking ban bill -- H 2 -- got its first airing in the House Health Committee Thursday afternoon and a key vote against the bill last time -- Pitt County Democratic Rep. Marian McLawhorn of Grifton, in the heart of tobacco country -- publicly announced her support during discussion. She said she still had a few problems with the bill but planned to vote for it this time.
That's the sort of turnaround that Holliman believes is taking place this time around. He cites several other Eastern N.C. legislators who he believes will vote his way -- and whose vote to ban smoking would be a symbol of how dramatically attitudes have changed. More legislators now see this bill as a public health matter and less as a property-issue matter, and he believes more Democrats and more Republicans will support the ban this year.
If he's right, it will continue a slow but steady progression in the legislature to limit the effects of second-hand smoke on those who do not want to inhale it. As outgoing State Health Director Leah Devlin reminded the House committee, there is no safe level of second-hand smoke -- and, she said, studies show that 1,600 non-smokers die each year from the effects of second-hand smoke in North Carolina. You could almost see legislators digest that somber information. That's a lot of folks.
In 2007, the bill came tantalizingly close for a time in the House, where Majority Leader Hugh Holliman, D-Davidson, a lung cancer survivor, has sponsored the anti-smoking bill. In the spring of 2007, the bill failed on a 61-55 vote with about 10 Democrats opposed to Holliman's bill. A switch of four votes would have made the difference, and Holliman probably had at least two of those ready to go if he had had another couple for a majority. He didn't.
This year may be different. The smoking ban bill -- H 2 -- got its first airing in the House Health Committee Thursday afternoon and a key vote against the bill last time -- Pitt County Democratic Rep. Marian McLawhorn of Grifton, in the heart of tobacco country -- publicly announced her support during discussion. She said she still had a few problems with the bill but planned to vote for it this time.
That's the sort of turnaround that Holliman believes is taking place this time around. He cites several other Eastern N.C. legislators who he believes will vote his way -- and whose vote to ban smoking would be a symbol of how dramatically attitudes have changed. More legislators now see this bill as a public health matter and less as a property-issue matter, and he believes more Democrats and more Republicans will support the ban this year.
If he's right, it will continue a slow but steady progression in the legislature to limit the effects of second-hand smoke on those who do not want to inhale it. As outgoing State Health Director Leah Devlin reminded the House committee, there is no safe level of second-hand smoke -- and, she said, studies show that 1,600 non-smokers die each year from the effects of second-hand smoke in North Carolina. You could almost see legislators digest that somber information. That's a lot of folks.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
'Liberty and Freedom' in North Carolina
Serious students of North Carolina history will want to take a look at "Liberty and Freedom: North Carolina's Tour of the Bill of Rights,"
just published by the N.C. Office of Archives and History. It's a paperbound book of essays on the meaning of the Bill of Rights and particularly the First Amendment freedoms of religion, speech, assembly and the press. It's of special interest because North Carolina refused to ratify the Constitution the first time around because it did not include a Bill of Rights. George Washington sent each state a copy of the Bill of Rights, and state researchers proved that the recovered copy was indeed the one the first president had sent the state in 1789.
It's a timely book summarizing the talks that folks heard in 2007 when North Carolina's original copy of the Bill of Rights -- recently recovered in a fascinating mystery story -- went on tour in seven cities around the state. The speakers included former NAACP Legal Defense Fund head and N.C. Central Chancellor Julius Chambers, former N.C. Supreme Court Justice and Campbell Law School Dean Willis Whichard, and noted historians Alan Watson and William Price, among others.
For my money, the account by state lawyers Dale Talbert and Karen Blum, in a chapter about "The Odyssey of North Carolina's Original Copy of the Bill of Rights and the State's Case for its Ownership," is a fascinating detective story of how the document came to disappear from the state Capitol at the close of the Civil War and how it came back to Raleigh. That happened following a sting operation launched when those who possessed the document attempted to cash in on it in Pennsylvania.
The book, which goes for $24, can be ordered from the N.C. Office of Archives and History's Historical Publications Section. Call (919) 733-7442 for more information or go online at www.ncpublications.com.
just published by the N.C. Office of Archives and History. It's a paperbound book of essays on the meaning of the Bill of Rights and particularly the First Amendment freedoms of religion, speech, assembly and the press. It's of special interest because North Carolina refused to ratify the Constitution the first time around because it did not include a Bill of Rights. George Washington sent each state a copy of the Bill of Rights, and state researchers proved that the recovered copy was indeed the one the first president had sent the state in 1789.
It's a timely book summarizing the talks that folks heard in 2007 when North Carolina's original copy of the Bill of Rights -- recently recovered in a fascinating mystery story -- went on tour in seven cities around the state. The speakers included former NAACP Legal Defense Fund head and N.C. Central Chancellor Julius Chambers, former N.C. Supreme Court Justice and Campbell Law School Dean Willis Whichard, and noted historians Alan Watson and William Price, among others.
For my money, the account by state lawyers Dale Talbert and Karen Blum, in a chapter about "The Odyssey of North Carolina's Original Copy of the Bill of Rights and the State's Case for its Ownership," is a fascinating detective story of how the document came to disappear from the state Capitol at the close of the Civil War and how it came back to Raleigh. That happened following a sting operation launched when those who possessed the document attempted to cash in on it in Pennsylvania.
The book, which goes for $24, can be ordered from the N.C. Office of Archives and History's Historical Publications Section. Call (919) 733-7442 for more information or go online at www.ncpublications.com.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
The endless debate: Jim and Jesse
Public Policy Polling's findings about how Jim Hunt and Jesse Helms are viewed these days (Hunt with an edge, but not a huge one) was a reminder of the epic 1984 battle between the two symbols of North Carolina's competing schools of political thought.
Going into that race, Hunt, the two-term governor who was seen as a rising star of the Democratic Party, held an early and seemingly commanding lead over the two-term Republican senator. But Helms -- who never lost a statewide race in his five terms in the Senate (1973-2003) -- made up ground fast and defeated Hunt in the 1984 general election, the only defeat Hunt suffered in six statewide races beginning with his successful campaign for lieutenant governor the same year Helms first won the Senate race and his four successful runs for governor. Helms, of course, died last summer; Hunt remains quite active in setting and shaping the public policy agenda in this state.
No way to prove this, but I always thought that North Carolina voters liked Hunt's optimism, energy and can-do approach to education, while they also liked Helms' penny-pinching ways when it came to the federal budget and his distrust of a powerful central government. My working theory was that in any Hunt-Helms matchup beyond 1984, voters would stand by Jesse in a Senate contest but stick with Jim in any race for governor.
Here's Tom Jensen's analysis:
Jesse Helms may have beat out Jim Hunt at the polls when they faced off for the Senate in 1984, but when it comes to who North Carolinians say they have a higher opinion of now, the former Governor is winning out 43-37.
That fact has a lot to do with the changing demography of the state. Among natives of North Carolina Helms has the better legacy, 42-41. But with folks who have moved into the state Hunt has a substantial 45-31 lead.
The numbers break down pretty much as you would expect. Liberals, moderates, women, urban and suburban voters, and African Americans all have a more favorable view of Hunt. Conservatives, whites, men, and rural voters all prefer Helms.
The results are not quite as polarized along party lines as one might expect. 16% of Democrats say they have a better opinion of Helms, an indication that even though the influence of the Jessecrats has clearly been diluted, as evidence by Barack Obama's victory in the state last fall, they're not completely gone. At the same time, 16% of Republicans say they have a more favorable view of Hunt. That is particularly true among non-native Republicans, 25% of whom say they like Hunt more.
I think this poll actually says a fair amount about where North Carolina is today politically. When we decided to ask this question I expected Hunt to win by a much larger margin, and I think the further into history we go the more favorably Hunt will be viewed in these types of comparisons. But the reality is that even though the state is turning in a more progressive direction, shifting the pendulum to Hunt after he lost to Helms at the polls, there is still a very strong conservative base of voters in the state whose influence will remain strong if not necessarily dominant moving forward.
Going into that race, Hunt, the two-term governor who was seen as a rising star of the Democratic Party, held an early and seemingly commanding lead over the two-term Republican senator. But Helms -- who never lost a statewide race in his five terms in the Senate (1973-2003) -- made up ground fast and defeated Hunt in the 1984 general election, the only defeat Hunt suffered in six statewide races beginning with his successful campaign for lieutenant governor the same year Helms first won the Senate race and his four successful runs for governor. Helms, of course, died last summer; Hunt remains quite active in setting and shaping the public policy agenda in this state.
No way to prove this, but I always thought that North Carolina voters liked Hunt's optimism, energy and can-do approach to education, while they also liked Helms' penny-pinching ways when it came to the federal budget and his distrust of a powerful central government. My working theory was that in any Hunt-Helms matchup beyond 1984, voters would stand by Jesse in a Senate contest but stick with Jim in any race for governor.
Here's Tom Jensen's analysis:
Jesse Helms may have beat out Jim Hunt at the polls when they faced off for the Senate in 1984, but when it comes to who North Carolinians say they have a higher opinion of now, the former Governor is winning out 43-37.
That fact has a lot to do with the changing demography of the state. Among natives of North Carolina Helms has the better legacy, 42-41. But with folks who have moved into the state Hunt has a substantial 45-31 lead.
The numbers break down pretty much as you would expect. Liberals, moderates, women, urban and suburban voters, and African Americans all have a more favorable view of Hunt. Conservatives, whites, men, and rural voters all prefer Helms.
The results are not quite as polarized along party lines as one might expect. 16% of Democrats say they have a better opinion of Helms, an indication that even though the influence of the Jessecrats has clearly been diluted, as evidence by Barack Obama's victory in the state last fall, they're not completely gone. At the same time, 16% of Republicans say they have a more favorable view of Hunt. That is particularly true among non-native Republicans, 25% of whom say they like Hunt more.
I think this poll actually says a fair amount about where North Carolina is today politically. When we decided to ask this question I expected Hunt to win by a much larger margin, and I think the further into history we go the more favorably Hunt will be viewed in these types of comparisons. But the reality is that even though the state is turning in a more progressive direction, shifting the pendulum to Hunt after he lost to Helms at the polls, there is still a very strong conservative base of voters in the state whose influence will remain strong if not necessarily dominant moving forward.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Judge's poker ruling mirrors Black's view
Wake County Superior Court Judge Howard Manning has in effect sided with former House Speaker Jim Black, the disgraced Mecklenburg Democrat who now resides in federal prison, on the topic of video poker. Here's a link to Mark Johnson's story.
Manning -- who incidently is a Republican, though judges don't run on a partisan ballot anymore -- ruled Thursday that a 2006 law banning video poker machines in North Carolina was unconstitutional because federal law and a state agreement allow the machines on the Cherokee Indian reservation in Western North Carolina. Manning stayed his order until the state Court of Appeals rules on a lawsuit on this issue, but Manning found it was unlawful to ban video poker in one part of the state if they're legal in another part -- pretty much what Black thought.
The irony is that a federal investigation of video poker operations, and campaign contributions from the industry, led to an investigation of Black and ultimately his sentencing to federal prison for taking illegal contributions from optometrists. Black was long the video poker industry's strongest defender in the legislature, resisting Senate bills that would have banned video poker years earlier. His political committees got a lot of video poker contributions, and a lot of folks thought that arrangement was a simple retail purchase.
One reason Black said he opposed the ban was that if it was legal on the Indian reservation, it ought to be legal elsewhere. "Why are you going to discriminate against any legal business in the state?" he asked at a 2006 press conference while he was still speaker. But Black later supported the bill phasing out video poker after the legislature approved a state lottery and Gov. Mike Easley signed it into law.
Manning -- who incidently is a Republican, though judges don't run on a partisan ballot anymore -- ruled Thursday that a 2006 law banning video poker machines in North Carolina was unconstitutional because federal law and a state agreement allow the machines on the Cherokee Indian reservation in Western North Carolina. Manning stayed his order until the state Court of Appeals rules on a lawsuit on this issue, but Manning found it was unlawful to ban video poker in one part of the state if they're legal in another part -- pretty much what Black thought.
The irony is that a federal investigation of video poker operations, and campaign contributions from the industry, led to an investigation of Black and ultimately his sentencing to federal prison for taking illegal contributions from optometrists. Black was long the video poker industry's strongest defender in the legislature, resisting Senate bills that would have banned video poker years earlier. His political committees got a lot of video poker contributions, and a lot of folks thought that arrangement was a simple retail purchase.
One reason Black said he opposed the ban was that if it was legal on the Indian reservation, it ought to be legal elsewhere. "Why are you going to discriminate against any legal business in the state?" he asked at a 2006 press conference while he was still speaker. But Black later supported the bill phasing out video poker after the legislature approved a state lottery and Gov. Mike Easley signed it into law.
Burr understands value of siding with local folks
U.S. Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., has made it clear where he stands on the Navy's continuing quest for an Outlying Landing Field in either Virginia or North Carolina. If the Navy wants to put it in an area of this state where residents oppose it, Burr will do everything he can to pull the plug on Navy funding for the project. The Daily Advance in Elizabeth City reports that Burr, a member of the Senate Armed Service Committee (as is recently-installed Sen. Kay Hagan, a Democrat who also opposes the field where residents are against it), told the Advance he would play "a number of cards" including denying funding if the Navy pressed to put the OLF in an unwanted area. The Navy is looking at three sites in Virginia and two in North Carolina -- in Camden and Gates counties. The counties are formally on record against the OLF, and so are citizens.
What a turnaround this represents. Eight years ago, residents of Washington and Beaufort Counties were desperately combing the ranks of elected officials trying to find allies in their fight to keep the OLF from being built next to the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge. For years they had a hard time finding anyone in high office to help them fight Washington, but the tide turned after they won a key victory in federal court when Judge Terrence Boyle ruled the Navy had not taken the required "hard look" at the environmental impact of the OLF in an area that harbors large migratory waterfowl that pose a threat to the Navy's aircraft and crews.
Later, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole and Gov. Mike Easley, as well as Burr, took strong stances against the OLF. Had Dole taken a leadership position against the OLF earlier in the fight, she would have gotten a lot of credit from the environmental community -- and that would have made it a lot harder for Kay Hagan to unseat her in last fall's election. It would not have been the only issue, of course, but it would have helped Dole. Burr, whose seat is up in 2010, is a savvy politician who understands the value of being on the same side as the people.
What a turnaround this represents. Eight years ago, residents of Washington and Beaufort Counties were desperately combing the ranks of elected officials trying to find allies in their fight to keep the OLF from being built next to the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge. For years they had a hard time finding anyone in high office to help them fight Washington, but the tide turned after they won a key victory in federal court when Judge Terrence Boyle ruled the Navy had not taken the required "hard look" at the environmental impact of the OLF in an area that harbors large migratory waterfowl that pose a threat to the Navy's aircraft and crews.
Later, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole and Gov. Mike Easley, as well as Burr, took strong stances against the OLF. Had Dole taken a leadership position against the OLF earlier in the fight, she would have gotten a lot of credit from the environmental community -- and that would have made it a lot harder for Kay Hagan to unseat her in last fall's election. It would not have been the only issue, of course, but it would have helped Dole. Burr, whose seat is up in 2010, is a savvy politician who understands the value of being on the same side as the people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
