The rising tide of new voters
State director of elections Gary Bartlett has more startling numbers. Since the first of the year, more than 165,000 new voters have registered to take part in elections. That’s an average of 55,000 new voters per month.
It’s an unprecedented outpouring of potential voters in North Carolina – greater even than the bulge of new N.C. registrants before the 2004 fall elections.
Will polling places have enough ballots on hand in the May 6 primary? “We are encouraging all counties to review their order and make adjustments as needed,” Bartlett said.
For the record, the new registrants comprise 74,587 Democrats, 41,301 Republicans and 49,561 unaffiliated voters. About 64 percent of the new voters are white, 27 percent black. Nearly 54 percent are women. Overall, the state has about 5.7 million registered voters.
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
Monday, March 31, 2008
An American success story
Teenagers in the packed-house crowd at Beasley’s Barn on Highway 32 near the Washington-Beaufort county line Saturday night were still children when their parents first heard the news that they might lose their farms.
Their parents were a lot younger then, too – far younger than the six or seven roller-coaster years that have taken a toll on the emotions, finances and resolve of the sturdy folks who farm the rich, flat fields of northeastern North Carolina.
But Saturday night was a party night for about 500 folks jamming Beasley’s Barn. On a concrete floor of a big steel barn that normally houses John Deere tractors and all manner of heavy farm equipment, the folks of Washington and Beaufort counties held a “Blessed Celebration” marking the success of an utterly All-American grass-roots campaign to preserve what they saw as their way of life and persuade the Navy that their homeland was the wrong place to build a practice jet landing field.
The secretary of the Navy withdrew the plan in January after concluding what the local folks have been saying since 2002: putting a jet field so near the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge – with its many tens of thousands of large migratory waterfowl posing a distinct threat to jets and their pilots – was a bad idea.
So Jennifer Alligood and Doris Morris and Jerry and Myra Beasley and a lot of other folks put on the dog Saturday night. They buffed up the barn with enough red, white and blue bunting to decorate a major political convention, arranged for experienced hands to cook chicken and pigs and ribs and got everyone in the community with a recipe for banana pudding or chocolate cake to bring it on over to feed the masses.
And they got the lawyers from the big city: Ray Owens, Kiran Mehta and Chris Lamm from Kennedy Covington in Charlotte, and Derb Carter from the Southern Environmental Law Center. They filed the lawsuit and whipped the Navy in court when they persuaded U.S. District Judge Terrence Boyle the Navy hadn’t met its obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act.
And they let elected officials, volunteers, county managers and advocates for various groups talk about how they had all pitched in to win the fight. It went on a while.
I think Brian Roth, the ex-Navy navigator and mayor of nearby Plymouth, had it exactly right when he faced the crowd to talk about what they had done in putting together a local movement to address what they saw as a threat. “It’s breathtaking from up here.”
I know what he meant. I’ve followed this story since December 2002, and the thought that a coalition of ordinary folks could take on a branch of the Armed Forces and persuade it to change its mind is just extraordinary. These were smart folks, but they don’t usually have to figure out how to run a grass-roots campaign and make the federal government turn the aircraft carrier around. Most of the time they’re working on getting the roots of grains to grow in abundance, which it does up there.
There ought to be a book about the OLF campaign. Some folks think it’d make a good movie. Derb Carter says it already has resulted in the N.C. Symphony developing a new piece: “The Swans of Pungo,” after the tundra swans that fill the skies on winter days. It was those birds, and snow geese, too, that caught the attention of folks across the land so they could finally understood the dangers of an OLF near the refuge.
Ray Owens had a compelling thought about what it meant. “I want to thank the Navy,” he said, “... for bringing us all together.”
Their parents were a lot younger then, too – far younger than the six or seven roller-coaster years that have taken a toll on the emotions, finances and resolve of the sturdy folks who farm the rich, flat fields of northeastern North Carolina.
But Saturday night was a party night for about 500 folks jamming Beasley’s Barn. On a concrete floor of a big steel barn that normally houses John Deere tractors and all manner of heavy farm equipment, the folks of Washington and Beaufort counties held a “Blessed Celebration” marking the success of an utterly All-American grass-roots campaign to preserve what they saw as their way of life and persuade the Navy that their homeland was the wrong place to build a practice jet landing field.
The secretary of the Navy withdrew the plan in January after concluding what the local folks have been saying since 2002: putting a jet field so near the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge – with its many tens of thousands of large migratory waterfowl posing a distinct threat to jets and their pilots – was a bad idea.
So Jennifer Alligood and Doris Morris and Jerry and Myra Beasley and a lot of other folks put on the dog Saturday night. They buffed up the barn with enough red, white and blue bunting to decorate a major political convention, arranged for experienced hands to cook chicken and pigs and ribs and got everyone in the community with a recipe for banana pudding or chocolate cake to bring it on over to feed the masses.
And they got the lawyers from the big city: Ray Owens, Kiran Mehta and Chris Lamm from Kennedy Covington in Charlotte, and Derb Carter from the Southern Environmental Law Center. They filed the lawsuit and whipped the Navy in court when they persuaded U.S. District Judge Terrence Boyle the Navy hadn’t met its obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act.
And they let elected officials, volunteers, county managers and advocates for various groups talk about how they had all pitched in to win the fight. It went on a while.
I think Brian Roth, the ex-Navy navigator and mayor of nearby Plymouth, had it exactly right when he faced the crowd to talk about what they had done in putting together a local movement to address what they saw as a threat. “It’s breathtaking from up here.”
I know what he meant. I’ve followed this story since December 2002, and the thought that a coalition of ordinary folks could take on a branch of the Armed Forces and persuade it to change its mind is just extraordinary. These were smart folks, but they don’t usually have to figure out how to run a grass-roots campaign and make the federal government turn the aircraft carrier around. Most of the time they’re working on getting the roots of grains to grow in abundance, which it does up there.
There ought to be a book about the OLF campaign. Some folks think it’d make a good movie. Derb Carter says it already has resulted in the N.C. Symphony developing a new piece: “The Swans of Pungo,” after the tundra swans that fill the skies on winter days. It was those birds, and snow geese, too, that caught the attention of folks across the land so they could finally understood the dangers of an OLF near the refuge.
Ray Owens had a compelling thought about what it meant. “I want to thank the Navy,” he said, “... for bringing us all together.”
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Time for a real debate, Ms. Perdue
Note: On Monday the Perdue campaign challenged the Moore campaign to a debate. More at the end of this post.
The folks who run Lt. Gov. Bev Perdue’s campaign for the Democratic nomination for governor have carefully kept her away from appearances that might give her primary opponent, State Treasurer Richard Moore, a chance to confront her directly on political issues.
She’s making plenty of appearances, including televised forums and other public sessions where candidates answer questions posed by moderators or the public. She’s campaigning hard.
But unlike the U.S. presidential races that created so much excitement nationally, and even unlike the N.C. Republican gubernatorial primary candidates who’ve taken part in a number of sessions that include some head-to-head questioning of one another, the Perdue campaign has avoided anything like a classical debate.
There is an online one-hour “debate” set for Monday evening at 7:45 p.m. on BlueNC.com, a Web site with a lot of blog postings by those interested in public affairs. Click here for a link.
I asked the Perdue campaign via e-mail if it would consider a head-to-head debate.
Said Perdue spokesman David Kochman, “I don’t recall any of the events we’ve been invited to including a dedicated segment for the candidates to directly challenge each other, but I think both candidates did directly challenge each other in 3 of the 4 previously televised debates.”
But those weren’t debates. They were joint appearances without much opportunity for give-and-take among the candidates.
That’s probably wise politics from the campaign’s viewpoint. Perdue is generally regarded as the front-runner, and a tradition among some North Carolina Democrats – not all – is to keep the front-running candidate away from challengers. In 1992, for instance, two-term Gov. Jim Hunt was making a comeback and running for a third term after being out for eight years. His campaign advisers kept him away from a debate with challengers including then-Attorney General Lacy Thornburg, now a federal judge, until fairly late in the campaign, when Hunt agreed to a debate sponsored by the Charlotte Observer. He dominated that debate, as I recall, and rolled to a primary victory.
But it isn’t good for voters who don’t get to see how the candidates would fare against one another in a setting where the candidates can ask questions of one another and debate issues point-by-point. In a campaign where the two essentially agree on quite a lot of issues, it would be helpful to see how the candidates handle themselves. Unless something changes, that won’t happen.
This is silly. Bev Perdue is an accomplished legislator, a decent public speaker and candidate for leader of a state of 9 million people and growing. There’s no good reason she shouldn’t take part in a debate with other candidates in both the primary and the general elections, and show voters how she performs under fire.
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have sometimes mesmerized and energized voters with their debates and sometimes sharp exchanges. And Republican gubernatorial candidates Bob Orr, Fred Smith, Pat McCrory and Bill Graham have put their views on the line as well.
I’m betting Bev Perdue would do well against any of these candidates in a more formal debate setting.
After all, she’s presided over a Senate that included the likes of Hugh Webster, Tony Rand and Marc Basnight. I expect she can handle whatever Richard Moore has to say, too. But unless something changes we’ll never know.
Postscript: Here's what the Perdue campaign put out Mondayu morning:
Perdue Challenges Moore to 7th Debate to confront sleazy attack ads
Also demands release of public records withheld for eight months
In a letter to the North Carolina Association of Broadcasters, Bev Perdue has challenged Richard Moore to a seventh debate. Perdue has asked the broadcasters’ association to oversee the process to ensure a statewide televised audience.
“After seeing the sleazy personal attacks in Richard Moore’s most recent ad, I want an opportunity to look him in the eye to confront him with the facts,” said Perdue.
“And because the debate is supposed to be about our ideas and our records, I call on Richard to release all of the public documents we have requested – documents that he has failed to provide for more than eight months. If we’re going to have a debate about our records, then it’s time for Richard Moore to come clean regarding the missing public records and the sweetheart deal he gave to State Insurance Services.”
Missing public records:
(* denotes documents first requested July 20, 2007)
Copies of the daily schedules and/or visitor logs for State Treasurer Richard Moore -from January 6, 2001 to the present.*
Travel and expense reimbursements (including copies of receipts) submitted by or paid to Richard Moore from January 6, 2001 to the present. *
Records of any state-owned or state-leased vehicles used by Richard Moore, including but not limited to mileage logs and accident reports from January 6, 2001 to the present*
unclaimed property contracts*
legal services contracts*
pr/lobbying contracts*
Letters declaring support or opposition to legislation*
Records regarding the contract awarded to State Insurance Services and any complaints that have been filed regarding policies sold by SIS
The folks who run Lt. Gov. Bev Perdue’s campaign for the Democratic nomination for governor have carefully kept her away from appearances that might give her primary opponent, State Treasurer Richard Moore, a chance to confront her directly on political issues.
She’s making plenty of appearances, including televised forums and other public sessions where candidates answer questions posed by moderators or the public. She’s campaigning hard.
But unlike the U.S. presidential races that created so much excitement nationally, and even unlike the N.C. Republican gubernatorial primary candidates who’ve taken part in a number of sessions that include some head-to-head questioning of one another, the Perdue campaign has avoided anything like a classical debate.
There is an online one-hour “debate” set for Monday evening at 7:45 p.m. on BlueNC.com, a Web site with a lot of blog postings by those interested in public affairs. Click here for a link.
I asked the Perdue campaign via e-mail if it would consider a head-to-head debate.
Said Perdue spokesman David Kochman, “I don’t recall any of the events we’ve been invited to including a dedicated segment for the candidates to directly challenge each other, but I think both candidates did directly challenge each other in 3 of the 4 previously televised debates.”
But those weren’t debates. They were joint appearances without much opportunity for give-and-take among the candidates.
That’s probably wise politics from the campaign’s viewpoint. Perdue is generally regarded as the front-runner, and a tradition among some North Carolina Democrats – not all – is to keep the front-running candidate away from challengers. In 1992, for instance, two-term Gov. Jim Hunt was making a comeback and running for a third term after being out for eight years. His campaign advisers kept him away from a debate with challengers including then-Attorney General Lacy Thornburg, now a federal judge, until fairly late in the campaign, when Hunt agreed to a debate sponsored by the Charlotte Observer. He dominated that debate, as I recall, and rolled to a primary victory.
But it isn’t good for voters who don’t get to see how the candidates would fare against one another in a setting where the candidates can ask questions of one another and debate issues point-by-point. In a campaign where the two essentially agree on quite a lot of issues, it would be helpful to see how the candidates handle themselves. Unless something changes, that won’t happen.
This is silly. Bev Perdue is an accomplished legislator, a decent public speaker and candidate for leader of a state of 9 million people and growing. There’s no good reason she shouldn’t take part in a debate with other candidates in both the primary and the general elections, and show voters how she performs under fire.
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have sometimes mesmerized and energized voters with their debates and sometimes sharp exchanges. And Republican gubernatorial candidates Bob Orr, Fred Smith, Pat McCrory and Bill Graham have put their views on the line as well.
I’m betting Bev Perdue would do well against any of these candidates in a more formal debate setting.
After all, she’s presided over a Senate that included the likes of Hugh Webster, Tony Rand and Marc Basnight. I expect she can handle whatever Richard Moore has to say, too. But unless something changes we’ll never know.
Postscript: Here's what the Perdue campaign put out Mondayu morning:
Perdue Challenges Moore to 7th Debate to confront sleazy attack ads
Also demands release of public records withheld for eight months
In a letter to the North Carolina Association of Broadcasters, Bev Perdue has challenged Richard Moore to a seventh debate. Perdue has asked the broadcasters’ association to oversee the process to ensure a statewide televised audience.
“After seeing the sleazy personal attacks in Richard Moore’s most recent ad, I want an opportunity to look him in the eye to confront him with the facts,” said Perdue.
“And because the debate is supposed to be about our ideas and our records, I call on Richard to release all of the public documents we have requested – documents that he has failed to provide for more than eight months. If we’re going to have a debate about our records, then it’s time for Richard Moore to come clean regarding the missing public records and the sweetheart deal he gave to State Insurance Services.”
Missing public records:
(* denotes documents first requested July 20, 2007)
Copies of the daily schedules and/or visitor logs for State Treasurer Richard Moore -from January 6, 2001 to the present.*
Travel and expense reimbursements (including copies of receipts) submitted by or paid to Richard Moore from January 6, 2001 to the present. *
Records of any state-owned or state-leased vehicles used by Richard Moore, including but not limited to mileage logs and accident reports from January 6, 2001 to the present*
unclaimed property contracts*
legal services contracts*
pr/lobbying contracts*
Letters declaring support or opposition to legislation*
Records regarding the contract awarded to State Insurance Services and any complaints that have been filed regarding policies sold by SIS
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
How much open government?
How much government should be open?
Last week’s Sunshine Day observance at Elon University examined some provocative issues regarding governmental transparency. The keynote luncheon speaker was former state public information officer Debbie Crane, who was shown the door on Gov. Mike Easley’s orders at the Department of Health and Human Services in what appeared to be a fit of gubernatorial pique.
Her speech appears on the Web site of the John Locke Foundation's Carolina Journal. Click here to read it.
Among other things, she argues, correctly I believe, that all e-mails ought to be retained, not “chunked” when a state employee deems it not necessary for administrative or reference value. She said:
“With few exceptions, most materials are public record. So rather than debating who deletes what and when, public officials should be required to maintain archives of their emails. Rather than cluttering up the state server and taking lots of time, as Freeman suggests, these archives could be maintained on discs or pst [Personal Storage Table] files. Memory is cheap and convenient these days. This wouldn’t require a huge amount of effort in terms of either financial cost or administrative practicality. It is simply a matter of building it into the process of doing daily business.”
Meanwhile, Gov. Mike Easley has appointed the members of a panel that will re-examine the state’s e-mail retention policy. Among them are former Observer Raleigh correspondent Ned Cline of Greensboro.
Here’s the press release from the governor’s office:
GOV. EASLEY ANNOUNCES MEMBERS OF E-MAIL RECORDS REVIEW PANEL
First Meeting Is Set For Thursday, March 27 In Raleigh
RALEIGH - Gov. Mike Easley today announced the membership of a special panel that will conduct a comprehensive review of policies concerning the retention of e-mail messages under the North Carolina’s public records law. The panel’s first meeting will be at 10:30 a.m. Thursday, March 27 in the Council of State meeting room on the 5th floor of the Administration Building, 16 W. Jones St., Raleigh.
"These are distinguished individuals, from inside and outside of state government, who bring both experience and concern for public affairs and public information to this important task," said Easley. "I know their input will provide guidance so that we make sure the public’s records are properly maintained."
Previously, Easley directed Franklin Freeman, his senior assistant for government affairs, to lead the panel and directed him to conduct a comprehensive review of policies concerning the retention of e-mail messages under the state’s public records law and make recommendations for any changes in policy or state law. He also named Ferrel Guillory, the founder the Program on Public Life and member of the faculty of the UNC-Chapel Hill School of Journalism and Mass Communication, to the panel.
Others named to the panel include:
Ned Cline, former managing editor of the Greensboro News & Record: Cline spent more than 30 years as a reporter and editor, covering state government for the Greensboro Daily News and the Charlotte Observer and as an editor and editorial page editor at the News & Record. He has also published biographies of former state Sen. Marshall Rauch of Gastonia and Joseph M. Bryan; "Adding Value: The Joseph M. Bryan Story from Poverty to Philanthropy." In 1974 he was a Nieman Fellow at Harvard University.
DeWitt F. (Mac) McCarley, Charlotte City Attorney: McCarley has been city attorney for Charlotte since 1994 and before that was city attorney in Greenville. He is a past president of the North Carolina Municipal Attorneys Association and is 2nd vice president of the International Municipal Lawyers Association.
Staci Meyer, chief deputy secretary N.C. Department of Cultural Resources: Prior to joining the Department of Cultural Resources, Meyer was a special deputy attorney general in the N.C. Justice Department for litigation, health care and personnel matters. She was clerk to former Chief Court of Appeals Judge Robert Hedrick.
George Bakolia, state chief information officer: Bakolia has more than 27 years of experience in information systems in both the public and private sectors. Prior to his appointment in 2002, he was the chief information officer at the N.C. Department of Justice. He spent more than a decade in the private sector before joining state government, working for Unisys Corporation, supporting United Airlines as well as state of North Carolina clients, from 1985 until 1990. He held various positions at Sperry Corporation from 1979 to 1985. He received his bachelor’s of arts degree in computer science at CUNY Queens College in New York.
Bryan Beatty, secretary of Crime Control and Public Safety: Beatty, a former SBI agent, has served as director of the State Bureau of Investigation and Deputy Attorney General for Policy and Planning for the Department of Justice. He also served as an associate attorney general assigned to represent the UNC Hospital system and as an assistant attorney general in the Motor Vehicles Section. In November 1997 he was named the first Inspector General for the State, where he was responsible for a staff of attorneys and investigators charged with the investigation, prosecution and prevention of fraud in state public assistance programs.
Also serving as adviser to the panel is David Lawrence, William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of Public Law and Government at the UNC School of Government. Lawrence joined the Institute of Government in 1968. He has written on local government revenues, budgeting and fiscal control, and capital finance. As part of his work in local government law, he has also written on public records, open meetings, governing board procedures, economic development and other topics.
Grayson Kelley, Chief Deputy N.C. Attorney General will serve as counsel to the committee and Liz Riley, deputy legal counsel to the governor, will staff the committee.
The committee’s review will encompass the governor’s office and all cabinet and other administrative offices directly under the governor’s control. The review will include use of state-owned e-mail systems as well as electronic text communications on state-owned or leased wireless devices such as BlackBerry handheld units.
The panel will develop proposals that can be implemented by executive directive or changes in current policy and procedure. If changes in current law are necessary, that too will be addressed. The panel will make a preliminary report to the governor by May 20. Meetings of the committee will be open and it will hold public hearings to get input from the various groups with interest in the issue along with the general public.
###
Last week’s Sunshine Day observance at Elon University examined some provocative issues regarding governmental transparency. The keynote luncheon speaker was former state public information officer Debbie Crane, who was shown the door on Gov. Mike Easley’s orders at the Department of Health and Human Services in what appeared to be a fit of gubernatorial pique.
Her speech appears on the Web site of the John Locke Foundation's Carolina Journal. Click here to read it.
Among other things, she argues, correctly I believe, that all e-mails ought to be retained, not “chunked” when a state employee deems it not necessary for administrative or reference value. She said:
“With few exceptions, most materials are public record. So rather than debating who deletes what and when, public officials should be required to maintain archives of their emails. Rather than cluttering up the state server and taking lots of time, as Freeman suggests, these archives could be maintained on discs or pst [Personal Storage Table] files. Memory is cheap and convenient these days. This wouldn’t require a huge amount of effort in terms of either financial cost or administrative practicality. It is simply a matter of building it into the process of doing daily business.”
Meanwhile, Gov. Mike Easley has appointed the members of a panel that will re-examine the state’s e-mail retention policy. Among them are former Observer Raleigh correspondent Ned Cline of Greensboro.
Here’s the press release from the governor’s office:
GOV. EASLEY ANNOUNCES MEMBERS OF E-MAIL RECORDS REVIEW PANEL
First Meeting Is Set For Thursday, March 27 In Raleigh
RALEIGH - Gov. Mike Easley today announced the membership of a special panel that will conduct a comprehensive review of policies concerning the retention of e-mail messages under the North Carolina’s public records law. The panel’s first meeting will be at 10:30 a.m. Thursday, March 27 in the Council of State meeting room on the 5th floor of the Administration Building, 16 W. Jones St., Raleigh.
"These are distinguished individuals, from inside and outside of state government, who bring both experience and concern for public affairs and public information to this important task," said Easley. "I know their input will provide guidance so that we make sure the public’s records are properly maintained."
Previously, Easley directed Franklin Freeman, his senior assistant for government affairs, to lead the panel and directed him to conduct a comprehensive review of policies concerning the retention of e-mail messages under the state’s public records law and make recommendations for any changes in policy or state law. He also named Ferrel Guillory, the founder the Program on Public Life and member of the faculty of the UNC-Chapel Hill School of Journalism and Mass Communication, to the panel.
Others named to the panel include:
Ned Cline, former managing editor of the Greensboro News & Record: Cline spent more than 30 years as a reporter and editor, covering state government for the Greensboro Daily News and the Charlotte Observer and as an editor and editorial page editor at the News & Record. He has also published biographies of former state Sen. Marshall Rauch of Gastonia and Joseph M. Bryan; "Adding Value: The Joseph M. Bryan Story from Poverty to Philanthropy." In 1974 he was a Nieman Fellow at Harvard University.
DeWitt F. (Mac) McCarley, Charlotte City Attorney: McCarley has been city attorney for Charlotte since 1994 and before that was city attorney in Greenville. He is a past president of the North Carolina Municipal Attorneys Association and is 2nd vice president of the International Municipal Lawyers Association.
Staci Meyer, chief deputy secretary N.C. Department of Cultural Resources: Prior to joining the Department of Cultural Resources, Meyer was a special deputy attorney general in the N.C. Justice Department for litigation, health care and personnel matters. She was clerk to former Chief Court of Appeals Judge Robert Hedrick.
George Bakolia, state chief information officer: Bakolia has more than 27 years of experience in information systems in both the public and private sectors. Prior to his appointment in 2002, he was the chief information officer at the N.C. Department of Justice. He spent more than a decade in the private sector before joining state government, working for Unisys Corporation, supporting United Airlines as well as state of North Carolina clients, from 1985 until 1990. He held various positions at Sperry Corporation from 1979 to 1985. He received his bachelor’s of arts degree in computer science at CUNY Queens College in New York.
Bryan Beatty, secretary of Crime Control and Public Safety: Beatty, a former SBI agent, has served as director of the State Bureau of Investigation and Deputy Attorney General for Policy and Planning for the Department of Justice. He also served as an associate attorney general assigned to represent the UNC Hospital system and as an assistant attorney general in the Motor Vehicles Section. In November 1997 he was named the first Inspector General for the State, where he was responsible for a staff of attorneys and investigators charged with the investigation, prosecution and prevention of fraud in state public assistance programs.
Also serving as adviser to the panel is David Lawrence, William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of Public Law and Government at the UNC School of Government. Lawrence joined the Institute of Government in 1968. He has written on local government revenues, budgeting and fiscal control, and capital finance. As part of his work in local government law, he has also written on public records, open meetings, governing board procedures, economic development and other topics.
Grayson Kelley, Chief Deputy N.C. Attorney General will serve as counsel to the committee and Liz Riley, deputy legal counsel to the governor, will staff the committee.
The committee’s review will encompass the governor’s office and all cabinet and other administrative offices directly under the governor’s control. The review will include use of state-owned e-mail systems as well as electronic text communications on state-owned or leased wireless devices such as BlackBerry handheld units.
The panel will develop proposals that can be implemented by executive directive or changes in current policy and procedure. If changes in current law are necessary, that too will be addressed. The panel will make a preliminary report to the governor by May 20. Meetings of the committee will be open and it will hold public hearings to get input from the various groups with interest in the issue along with the general public.
###
Monday, March 24, 2008
Oops: Legislature's Web site: www.ncleg.net
Oops! In Sunday's column I mentioned the legislature's very useful Web site but gave an incorrect address by putting an extra period in the middle. The correct address, as I well knew but failed to provide, is www.ncleg.net. Or you may click here.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Former Sen. Morgan: Who guards guardians?
Former U.S. Sen. Robert Morgan has had an interesting career – trial lawyer, Naval officer in World War II and Korea, Harnet County Clerk of Court, legislator, director of the State Bureau of Investigation, N.C. Attorney General and senator from 1974-1980.
Now 82 and living on the banks of the Cape Fear River in Lillington, he has lamented what he sees as the loss of freedoms in the name of preserving freedom. Our Bill of Rights, he said in the written text of remarks prepared for delivery Friday morning at Charlotte Law School, “is under attack and being torn asunder in the name of ‘national security.’ This is not a new thing. My concern is the pace at which our protections are being dissolved.”
His talk, prefaced on a question posed by a Roman poet named Juvenal, asked, “Who will guard the guardians?” He noted that the oaths of office for the presidency, members of Congress, Cabinet members, judges, state legislatures and even members of the armed forces focus on supporting the Constitution of the United States. They ask the office holder to swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic....”
In his written text, Morgan noted a subtle change in wording lately. A speaker told graduates of West Point last year that their job was “to defend the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Not the Constitution, as the oath requires, and the United States by extension, but skipping mention of the Constitution entirely.
That’s a small but telling change, Morgan wrote – a “seismic” change in words used. Defending the Constitution, he wrote, means “you must be particularly wary of attacks on it from within.”
Freedoms have eroded with passage of the Patriot Act enabling warrantless searches of phone calls, e-mails, bank accounts and other areas of routine life.
“I would say to you that if the powers being exercised by our ‘Guardians’ (Homeland Security, the FBI, the CIA and others exercising police powers) are not enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, if the powers are anathema to the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, then the blood of Americans spilled on every battlefield from Concord to Normandy is now in vain.”
Now 82 and living on the banks of the Cape Fear River in Lillington, he has lamented what he sees as the loss of freedoms in the name of preserving freedom. Our Bill of Rights, he said in the written text of remarks prepared for delivery Friday morning at Charlotte Law School, “is under attack and being torn asunder in the name of ‘national security.’ This is not a new thing. My concern is the pace at which our protections are being dissolved.”
His talk, prefaced on a question posed by a Roman poet named Juvenal, asked, “Who will guard the guardians?” He noted that the oaths of office for the presidency, members of Congress, Cabinet members, judges, state legislatures and even members of the armed forces focus on supporting the Constitution of the United States. They ask the office holder to swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic....”
In his written text, Morgan noted a subtle change in wording lately. A speaker told graduates of West Point last year that their job was “to defend the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Not the Constitution, as the oath requires, and the United States by extension, but skipping mention of the Constitution entirely.
That’s a small but telling change, Morgan wrote – a “seismic” change in words used. Defending the Constitution, he wrote, means “you must be particularly wary of attacks on it from within.”
Freedoms have eroded with passage of the Patriot Act enabling warrantless searches of phone calls, e-mails, bank accounts and other areas of routine life.
“I would say to you that if the powers being exercised by our ‘Guardians’ (Homeland Security, the FBI, the CIA and others exercising police powers) are not enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, if the powers are anathema to the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, then the blood of Americans spilled on every battlefield from Concord to Normandy is now in vain.”
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Easley on e-mail
Gov. Mike Easley Tuesday ordered up a review of state policy on retaining e-mail messages as it relates to compliance with the state’s open records laws. The policy apparently allowed state employees to dispose of e-mail messages they thought had no administrative or reference value. News organizations and First Amendment lawyers have been raising hell with the governor’s policy ever since it came to light last week.
His senior aide Franklin Freeman will lead a review of the policy and make a report by May 20. "Use of e-mail and other electronic forms of communication have expanded in ways that were not contemplated in 1993 during a major update of our state's public records law in which I was involved when I was Attorney General," Easley said in a news release.
The announcement the administration would rethink the e-mail policy comes about 48 hours before a speech by a veteran public information officer the governor ordered fired several weeks ago. Debbie Crane, former chief information officer at the Department of Health and Human Services, was fired because Easley’s office thought she persuaded former Secretary of Health and Human Services Carmen Hooker Odom not to talk to a reporter about the state’s failed mental health reform.
After her firing, Crane told reporters that it was Easley administration press policy to advise information officers to kill e-mail messages after they’d sent them. The Easley administration denies that, but some readers may invest more credibility in her word than Easley’s on mental health reform.
Say, you don’t think the governor’s order to review the e-mail policy had anything to do with the fact that Crane is to address news organizations and other members of the Open Government Coalition Thursday at the annual Sunshine Day observance at Elon University, do you?
Naaaaahhhhhh.
His senior aide Franklin Freeman will lead a review of the policy and make a report by May 20. "Use of e-mail and other electronic forms of communication have expanded in ways that were not contemplated in 1993 during a major update of our state's public records law in which I was involved when I was Attorney General," Easley said in a news release.
The announcement the administration would rethink the e-mail policy comes about 48 hours before a speech by a veteran public information officer the governor ordered fired several weeks ago. Debbie Crane, former chief information officer at the Department of Health and Human Services, was fired because Easley’s office thought she persuaded former Secretary of Health and Human Services Carmen Hooker Odom not to talk to a reporter about the state’s failed mental health reform.
After her firing, Crane told reporters that it was Easley administration press policy to advise information officers to kill e-mail messages after they’d sent them. The Easley administration denies that, but some readers may invest more credibility in her word than Easley’s on mental health reform.
Say, you don’t think the governor’s order to review the e-mail policy had anything to do with the fact that Crane is to address news organizations and other members of the Open Government Coalition Thursday at the annual Sunshine Day observance at Elon University, do you?
Naaaaahhhhhh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
