The House Veto Override

Posted on September 13, 2019 by admin in Budget, Cooper, McGrady, Newsletters

A Perspective on What Happened

Wednesday morning I was up early since a disaster relief bill, SB429 [Disaster Recovery – 2019 Budget Provisions], I was handling on the House floor was on the calendar at 8:30 a.m. Early morning sessions are somewhat unusual in the House. They sometimes occur late in the week in order to allow legislators to get an early start driving home. They sometimes occur when bills needs to be reported in from a committee for re-referral to another committee or for action on the floor. They also may occur when other big things are happening, and leadership wants to free up the day so committee work can continue. It looked like the early morning session was caused by the timeline for the legislature to produce certain legislative maps for a court-ordered redistricting.

The calendar also included one other appropriations bill, SB118 [Prison Safety/Temporary Assistance for Needy Families State Plan/Clarifications], two potential override votes — one on the budget, HB966 [2019 Appropriations Act], and one on a Medicaid bill, HB555 [Medicaid Transformation Implementation] and a bill which is typically referred to as a form of Medicaid expansion, HB655 [NC Health Care for Working Families]. The Speaker promised to allow the latter bill to be heard if and when the budget veto was overridden.

The budget bill had been routinely placed on the calendar for over a month; Speaker Moore said he’d bring it up only when he had the votes to pass it. There weren’t enough votes to override the veto simply from Republicans. To override the veto, seven Democratic votes were needed if all Members opposing the override were present. For the past month and a half, Speaker Moore had been unsuccessful in getting more than four Democrats to commit to supporting the bill, so the bill had languished on the calendar.

Another way of overriding the veto is to take a vote when some number of those supporting the veto are absent. That is what happened yesterday.

When I arrived for the early morning session, there were many of my Republican colleagues on the floor and few of my Democratic colleagues. The Speaker had consistently warned everyone there would be an override vote when he thought he had the votes, and he quickly realized, with about 40 Democrats missing, that he had the votes to override.

Coverage of what happened in the media and social media has not been completely accurate. To my knowledge, Republican Members weren’t told to be there for an override vote. No one checked to see if I was going to attend the session. I just assumed there would be votes because the presiding officer the day before told everyone there would be votes. Moreover, I had a bill on the calendar and no one told me we wouldn’t be voting on it.

It seems there was some sort of miscommunication. The Democratic leader, Rep. Darren Jackson (D-Wake), and the Republican Rules Chairman, Rep. David Lewis (R-Harnett) did talk and Jackson came away with the understanding that there would be no votes. He advised his Democratic Members that they didn’t need to attend.

Having been on the floor as session started, I could see that Speaker Moore was puzzled by the sudden absence of Democratic Members. They’d been very disciplined for six weeks and had thwarted his efforts to override the veto. However, on Wednesday the votes on the floor were sufficient to override the veto by the required three-fifths vote.

What follows is an abridged and edited version of what happened according to Speaker Moore:

The budget veto override was taken during a House floor session with a properly noticed calendar following two public announcements votes would be taken on Wednesday.
There was never any of the customary public communication of a no-vote session by the Speaker’s office, which makes all such announcements to members of the House when a no-vote session is planned.
House Republicans never planned to attempt a veto override on Wednesday, nor were they aware House Democrats were incorrectly told by their own leadership of a no-vote session.
House Republicans had only 55 members in session on Wednesday morning — not even enough to hold a majority on the floor with all members present.
By their numbers alone, it is obvious that House Republicans never planned to override the veto Wednesday.
Contrary to reports that House Democrats in North Carolina were attending 9/11 commemoration ceremonies on Wednesday morning, four extremely credible, separate accounts factually demonstrate this was not true.
First, the editor of the News & Observer’s ‘Insider’ Colin Campbell tweeted the following: “So much misinformation going around the #ncga today: -Only one Democratic House member has been confirmed as attending a 9/11 event during the veto override vote.”
Second, Governor Roy Cooper said in a noon press conference (4:45 mark) Wednesday that he did not see and was not aware of any House Democrats at a ceremony he attended, directly contradicting a false narrative spun by national media outlets like the Washington Post.
Third, as widely reported, House Rep. Deb. Butler (D-New Hanover) said on the floor (5:20 mark) that Democrats were downstairs drawing maps during the veto override.
Fourth, House Minority Leader Darren Jackson confirmed in his press conference that in-fact Democrats had a redistricting committee meeting planned that morning.
The North Carolina House held its commemoration session for 9/11 first responders and victims in its afternoon session on Wednesday.
The narrative that the budget veto override vote on Wednesday had anything to do with 9/11 ceremonies is a provably false fabrication debunked by credible sources — the House Democrats themselves.
This was a mistake by the House Democratic leadership that they took responsibility for it in their press conference Wednesday morning.
The Speaker frequently announces no-vote legislative sessions for members’ planning purposes, often at least once or twice a week.
The announcement is made by the Speaker from the floor of the House, by email from the Speaker’s office to all members, or both.
The announcement is often shared on social media to make the broader General Assembly community aware of a no-vote legislative session.
None of the customary public announcements were ever made of a no-vote session Wednesday by the Speaker’s office.
The Speaker’s office relies on public announcements of no-vote sessions from the floor of the House and by direct communication to all members to avoid confusion.
In three terms as the presiding officer, Speaker Moore has never announced a no-vote session then held votes that session.
At the end of Tuesday afternoon’s session, Chairman Lewis announced publicly the intention to take recorded votes the following day on two appropriations bills that were directed to Wednesday’s calendar “without objection.”
When adding both bills to the calendar on Tuesday, Chairman Lewis explicitly announced that there would be recorded votes on Wednesday (5:20 mark of the session’s House audio archive.)
Shortly after Chairman Lewis announced intention to take recorded votes on the two budget bills the following day, he announced a start time of 8:30 a.m. for Wednesday.
The Speaker of the House, present members of the House, and staff, were all planning to hold recorded votes on bills on the published calendar for Wednesday’s morning session.
Speaker Moore and other House leaders were completely unaware that House Democrats were told by their leadership of a no-vote session.
The House Republican caucus was genuinely confused and surprised when the Democrats did not arrive for the 8:30 am voting session.
The Speaker confirmed with the clerks and his staff that no announcement had been made of a no-vote session following the prayer and Pledge of Allegiance.
Members and staff briefly discussed whether to hold the veto override with the votes appearing secured on the floor during a voting session.
The veto override was never planned, discussed, or considered, by House leaders or staff until Wednesday morning’s session when Democrats did not arrive.
The Speaker said repeatedly he would hold the veto override when the votes were secured on the floor of the House in a voting session.

The question most asked by constituents about the override vote is what happened to make Democrats think there would be a no-vote session. Both Rep. David Lewis (R-Harnett), the Rules Chair and the presiding officer for the Tuesday session, and Rep. Darren Jackson (D-Wake) spoke on the floor after the vote about a private conversation they had the day before, that apparently lead to Jackson’s communication to his Democratic colleagues.

The discussion was around the two bills that had been added to the calendar–the two appropriations bills, one of which was my bill–would be voted on at 8:30 a.m. Apparently, the Democrats wanted to meet privately as a caucus to discuss those bills. Lewis agreed that there’d be no votes on those bills at 8:30 a.m., but Jackson apparently understood him to be saying there’d be no votes on any bills at 8:30 a.m.

Neither Rep. Lewis nor Rep. Jackson accused anyone of lying, but it is certainly understandable how things got miscommunicated to Democratic Members since Lewis, when asked by a reporter later in the day whether there would be votes at 8:30 a.m., communicated there would be “No votes at 8:30”.

There are numerous accounts of what happened. The one that seems to set forth facts and provide a balance report is one by WRAL reporter, Travis Fain:

What is still hard to understand is why, when 15 Democrats on the floor realized that they were badly outnumbered, they didn’t just leave the chamber. If all but one of the Democrats had left, the remaining one could have asked for a quorum call. Clearly, there wouldn’t have been a quorum, and no vote could have been taken. Meanwhile, Democratic Members who were apparently in the building could have come back and potentially defeated the veto override.

How I Voted and Why. I voted to override the veto, and that shouldn’t be a surprise. I was a primary cosponsor of the budget bill and am a budget chair. The vetoed budget funds lots of projects important to Henderson County and western North Carolina.

I would have not voted to override if Speaker Moore had said there would be no votes and then orchestrated a vote when Democrats weren’t present. Moreover, I never saw any orchestration of the override vote. My Republican colleagues seemed genuinely surprised, as I was, when the vote occurred.

My View. I’m very conflicted on what has happened. While happy to have overidden the Governor’s veto of the budget, I’m unhappy with the way it happened.

No House Rule was apparently violated, and Speaker Moore did what he said he would do if he ever had the opportunity to call a vote when sufficient number of Democratic Members were missing.

While the vote apparently conformed with House Rules and custom, it has left the House deeply divided. The atmosphere has been described as toxic, and I fear it will be difficult to rebuild the relationships and trust that are critical to resolving sometimes difficult issues. For example, when we finish work on the map-drawing required by a court order, can one reasonably expect that we can work together to cobble together a compromise on nonpartisan redistricting? At this point, I don’t see how that is possible.

While the House Rules provide the formal structure for how the chamber works, what gets done actually depends on the relationships one has with one’s peers. Often one has to trust what one is told about what a complicated bill will do, but without that trust will we be able to efficiently do our work? I’m not sure.

What Happens Next. With the House’s override of the veto of the budget, the bill is now with the Senate. As with the House, if all Republicans support the budget and all Democrats oppose it, there are insufficient votes to override. Senate leadership needs only one Democratic vote to override if all Republican senators are present.. Originally, when the budget passed in the Senate it had bipartisan support. However, now that the Governor has vetoed the budget and the House overrode the veto in a party-line vote, it is unclear what will happen.

Speaker Moore has said he intends to take up a form of Medicaid expansion. The House cannot assume that the Senate will override the veto, so it will likely continue to put forth stand-alone appropriations bills like the ones passed this week.

For the next few days, the legislature’s focus will be on complying with a court order to redistrict some number of state house and state senate districts. Neither of the districts that encompass Henderson County are included in the redistricting process. When new maps are submitted to the court, my hope is that we’ll take some time off to provide a cooling off period for everyone.

Budget Impasse Continues

Posted on August 28, 2019 by admin in Agriculture, Appropriations, Budget, Cooper, Education Reform, Election Reform, McGrady, Medicaid, Newsletters

The Background. The legislature passed its budget in late June, and Governor Cooper vetoed it shortly thereafter. Each biennium the House and Senate alternate which chamber begins the budget bill process. This year, the budget bill started in the House. Therefore, the vetoed bill was returned to the House. Since that time, House leadership has worked to get the votes to override the veto.

While four or five House Democrats support the budget along with all Republican Members, that does not produce enough votes to override the veto. The override of the veto is on the House calendar every day, but Speaker Tim Moore will not call for a veto override vote until he believes he has the votes to override. He can get those votes by persuading a few more Democrats to support an override or he can get the votes when some number of Democrats do not show up to vote when all Republican Members are present and voting.

Since the vetoed bill first appeared on the calendar, Democratic Members have had excellent attendance—on occasion better than Republicans. With September only a few days away, Speaker Moore continues to work to muster votes for an override, but the legislature is pivoting to another strategy.

The Pivot. Over the past few days, the legislature has begun to move legislation intended to break the impasse. Five spending bills are moving and are expected to pass. Each of the bills provides pay raises for some group of state employees. For example, House Bill 126 [Pay Increases/State Highway Patrol] is a bill which only addresses State Highway Patrol salaries. Its pay plan is the same as what was in the budget passed by the legislature and vetoed by Governor Cooper, HB966 [2019 Appropriations Act]. The other appropriations bills are HB609 [Salary Increases/Adult Correctional Employees], HB226 [Pay Increases/State Employees], HB777 [Pay Increases SBI & ALE], and HB426 [Educators’ Pay Increases/Retiree Supplement]. The latter bill involves salary increases for UNC system and community college teachers and includes a cost-of-living increase for state retirees.

All of the bills, except H 426, are moving forward using a process that does not allow amendments. Essentially, legislative leaders are using conference reports on bills that have already passed both chambers to avoid a messy amendment process. By rules of both chambers, a conference report comes to the floor for an up or down vote. So legislative leaders stripped out whatever bill was the subject of the conference and replaced it with duplicate provisions from the vetoed budget. Presumably, when these bills reach the Governor’s desk, he’ll have to decide whether he is willing to delay pay raises for whole groups of employees because of differences of opinion between the Governor and the legislature over Medicaid expansion, public school teacher raises or other issues.

With respect to H 426, the bill was amended in committee to change its title so that amendments that are outside the narrow scope of the bill will be ruled out of order when it comes to the House floor. This procedure was used when Democrats were in charge and wanted to keep Republicans from putting forward amendments, but it is a procedure that hasn’t been used over the past 8 years. For example, Democrats could try to amend the bill to add pay raises for public school teachers that are higher than what is in the budget bill. Wanting to avoid addressing an issue in dispute with the Governor, legislative leaders will keep the scope of H 426 narrowly focused on pay raises for college and community college teachers and cost-of-living raises for state retirees.

One reason for running these bills is to show the Governor and Democratic legislators that Republican legislators will move forward those portions of the budget that are not really part of the controversies thwarting its adoption. [Update: The House unanimously passed all the pay packages except H 426, the bill raising salaries of university and community college teachers and the cost-of-living increase for retirees. H 426 was removed from the calendar.]

Aside from the spending bills, there are two other bills related to the budget battle. The Senate has passed and the House is expected to take up HB74 [Taxpayer Refund Act]. It is a bill to provide every taxpayer a $125 refund (married couples would receive $250). Since the state has exceeded its revenue forecast, the argument is that excess monies should be returned to taxpayers. The conventional wisdom is that this bill is simply being put forward for Governor Cooper to veto —putting him on record as refusing to refund monies in excess of the projected revenues. In that regard, it is like HB370 [Require Cooperation with ICE Detainers], a bill to force sheriffs to comply with detainee and administrative warrants issued by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Governor Cooper announced he would veto HB370, which he did, and there appears to be no effort to override the veto since there are not enough votes to override it.

The other bill is HB555 [Medicaid Transformation Implementation]. While the bill does provide funding for the operation of the Medicaid program, it does more than that. It is a bill that funds the transition to managed care and makes other changes necessary for the transition to managed care scheduled for November 1, 2019. The provisions are substantially the same as the language in H 966, the budget bill vetoed by Governor Cooper. [Update: The bill passed the House by a very narrow margin on Second Reading, with all Democrats voting against it. The final vote will take place tomorrow. Democratic Members have generally been supportive of Medicaid Transformation as reflected in their earlier votes on HB656 [Medicaid Changes for Transformation]. I’m told the Governor informed Democratic Members that he would veto the bill, and my guess would be this is just part of the back-and-forth on expanding Medicaid.]

I expect to vote for the bills that simply pull out provisions included in the vetoed budget. I supported the pay raises and monies for Medicaid transformation as part of the budget and hope that a series of targeted appropriations bills will narrow the scope of the budget battle. I am skeptical of the tax refund bill, H 74. Rather than giving small tax refunds, I think the budget surplus could better be used to replenish the so-called “rainy day fund” that was used to pay for disaster relief. The shortfall related to providing retiree medical benefit is estimated at $28 billion, and beginning to address that issue would also be a better use of the budget surplus.

The House will be holding skeletonal sessions next week, so the Governor will have to take action on any bills by the time we return on September 9.

Other Developments. During the extended session caused by the impasse over the budget, the legislature has continued to work on legislation that ordinarily might have waited until next year’s Short Session. Senate Bill 683 [Combat Absentee Ballot Fraud] is the legislature’s response to absentee ballot irregularities in the Ninth Congressional District. The House made changes in the Senate bill, but passed it nearly unanimously. The bill is now back with the Senate.

SB621 [Testing Reduction Act] passed both chambers with broad bipartisan support. Its purpose is to reduce testing in public schools. It eliminates the North Carolina Final Exams, and replaces end-of-grade assessments and end-of-course assessments with other nationally recognized assessments, such as the ACT or SAT. The bill is now with Governor Cooper.

SB315 [North Carolina Farm Act of 2019] had a tortured path towards adoption by the House making stops in several committees. The most discussed part of the bill was a provision dealing with smokeable hemp. Initially, the agricultural community, including hemp growers, battled with the law enforcement community, including sheriffs and district attorneys, over whether North Carolina should make it a crime to sell smokeable hemp. Ultimately, a compromise was struck allowing the sale of smokeable hemp until May 1, 2020. After that date, it will be a crime to sell smokeable hemp.

From the Times-News

Posted on July 23, 2019 by admin in Inside Baseball, McGrady

The following editorial appeared in the July 21, 2019 edition of the Hendersonville Times-News.

How sausage gets made

There’s an old saying: “Laws are like sausages. It’s better not to see them being made.” But there’s a lot to be learned about the sometimes messy goings-on in Raleigh from N.C. Rep. Chuck McGrady’s newsletters to constituents.

How does a bill become law? What’s the status of disaster relief for farmers in Henderson County and elsewhere affected by last year’s historic flooding? And what happens to legislation when the governor vetoes the state budget in an impasse with lawmakers over expanding Medicaid?

McGrady answers these questions and many others in painstakingly detailed insider accounts he emails to anyone who requests them.

Many legislators use their newsletters, websites and social media to update constituents, spell out positions and tout accomplishments. McGrady, a former summer camp owner, attorney and environmental and civic leader, goes a step further to educate his readers on the legislative process.

In his July 15 newsletter, “More Than One Way to Pass A Law,” he explains how bills become laws “in less straightforward and transparent ways” than the “textbook process” of being introduced, heard in committee and then modified between House and Senate.

“As we approach the end of the legislature’s Long Session, veteran legislators employ different methods of moving their bills to the governor’s desk,” he writes. “While one feels good about passing a free-standing bill that carries one’s name and the bill number as introduced, if a legislator is focused on having something becoming law, one should forget about public credit for passage of a numbered bill, and just move the bill or provision in whatever way is most likely to achieve success.”

He explains several of these alternative methods, including attaching provisions to another lawmaker’s legislation.

For instance, McGrady introduced a bill, passed by both chambers and expected to be signed by the governor, to allow Henderson County to join the Metropolitan Sewerage District of Buncombe County and lower sewer rates. Sen. Bill Rabon, R-Brunswick, attached a provision to study wildlife enhancement, invasive species control and natural habitat restoration on state property. Rabon is the chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, “the gatekeeper for all legislation in the Senate.”

“I was certainly willing to provide a vehicle for Sen. Rabon to move a provision that I supported in the budget and was important to him,” McGrady writes.

McGrady also updates the status of other bills important to Henderson County and the state. For instance, a bill to provide disaster relief to Henderson and adjoining counties affected by last year’s flooding was in the budget the governor vetoed. However, it was included in a supplemental appropriations bill intended to provide funding for “critical or time-sensitive items.” This is one way legislators keep money and laws flowing despite a budget impasse with the governor.

In providing constituents with detail, context and education on the process, McGrady sets a high bar for keeping the public informed — for other legislators, and for whoever succeeds him representing District 117 when he steps down later this year.

Budget Prospects After the Veto

Posted on July 17, 2019 by admin in Appropriations, Budget, Cooper, McGrady, Newsletters

On June 28, Governor Cooper vetoed House Bill 966 [2019 Appropriations Act], the budget bill. The most-asked question of legislators now is “What happens next?” In theory, the answer is simple: The legislature can override the veto. But that isn’t easy. With all legislators present, it takes 72 votes in the House and 30 votes in the Senate to override a veto. Since only 65 House members and 29 senators are Republicans, it will take a bipartisan vote to override the veto.

In the Senate, a total of 33 senators voted for the conference report on the budget — more than enough votes to override the Governor’s veto. However, in the House, only 68 House members voted for the conference report on the budget or announced their support — less than the required number of votes to override the veto. Prior to adoption of the conference report on the budget, House leaders worked to gain bipartisan support for the budget and three Democratic Members, Reps. Cecil Brockman (D-Guilford), Elmer Floyd (D-Cumberland) and Howard Hunter (D-Hertford) voted for the budget conference report. As noted in the media, monies to fund projects and programs in the districts of Democratic members were included in the conferenced budget. Even with money flowing to projects and programs generally supported by the Democratic members, the bill failed to garner sufficient support to override the veto.

Subsequently, House leadership — primarily Speaker Tim Moore (R-Cleveland) — has worked to garner additional support — showing a willingness to seek additional funding for projects and programs. While the Governor explained his veto by citing the need to invest in public schools, teacher pay and health care, most of the focus has been on his demand for Medicaid expansion. In an effort to respond to this demand, Speaker Moore allowed a type of Medicaid expansion to be heard in committee and placed on the House calendar for consideration, HB655 [NC Health Care for Working Families]. Presumably, that bill will not be heard by the full House until he has commitments from Democrats to support the budget. HB655 received a strong vote in the committee that heard the bill, and the conventional wisdom is the bill would pass with a large majority of Democrats and one or two dozen Republicans supporting the bill.

More than two weeks have passed since the Governor vetoed the bill and no one seems to know what will happen next. No significant negotiations between the Governor and House and Senate leaders have occurred. House leaders continue to seek votes to override the veto, but how long will this effort continue? Both the Governor and legislative leaders have communicated through the media, but no one expects negotiations via the media to result in any compromise or breakthrough.

So what could happen?

First, the House and Senate could just give up and go home. If this happens, the recurring funding in last session’s budget would remain in place. Teachers would still get paid. Many programs would still be funded. The State Highway Patrol would continue to function, and NCDOT would continue to build roads. However, the pay raises for state employees and teachers would not happen. New capital projects would not be started, and some number of programs would be without funding, as they were funded with nonrecurring funds.

Second, the budget could be cut into its component parts and sent back to the Governor. If that were to happen, the Governor would have to decide if he wanted to veto a public safety bill, one involving funding for law enforcement, prisons and programs like Raise-the-Age, that has nothing to do with his chief complaints about the budget involving increased funding of public education and health care. Will the public support the Governor not approving funding new school construction or school safety programs because he prefers teachers to get larger pay increases?

Third, the Governor and legislative leaders could agree to compromise in some fashion. While this might be seen as the most sensible alternative to outside observers, the differences between the two sides are significant. The House may be willing to pass a Medicaid expansion-type bill, for example, but no one sees any likelihood of the Senate passing such a bill. If that is true, what is the point of holding up the funding of many projects and programs that have broad support? Legislative leaders have included inducements for Democrats (including the Governor) to support the budget bill. They are not likely to simply allow the Governor to cherry-pick those portions of the budget he supports for inclusion in some compromise budget.

If the problem was not having the money to spend on projects and programs, the public might understand the budget impasse, but the legislature’s budget is hundreds of millions of dollars less than the money available to spend. The budget impasse reflects serious philosophical differences, and it also reflects very different perspectives on how this might play out in the elections in 2020.

The only obvious movement to resolve some set of budget differences came with the House’s unanimous vote for HB111 [Supplemental Appropriations Act]. Unlike HB966, a 400-page bill, HB111 is only a six page bill. HB111 only addresses a handful of funding issues, like funding increases in Average Daily Membership (ADM) for public schools — essentially increases in public school enrollment The bill also allows the UNC’s Board of Governors to carry forward unexpended UNC enrollment funds to continue the financial obligations of the NC Promise program — the program that keeps tuition fixed for students at the rate charged when they enter Elizabeth City State University, UNC-Pembroke, and Western Carolina University.

HB111 also implements some disaster relief provisions in the vetoed budget, and provides the minimum funding necessary to implement Raise-the-Age. There was only one capital project only partially funded in the FY 2018-19 budget: the Western Carolina University steam plant project. HB111 adds the money to complete that project.

The presumption is everything in this bill is totally noncontroversial, and that presumption was likely confirmed by the unanimous House vote. No doubt, some legislators would have liked to see more included in the supplemental appropriations bill. However, the idea was to pass what was necessary but not to pass anything that would relieve the pressure to pass a complete budget.

The Senate’s version of a bare-bones appropriations bill was approved in a Senate committee yesterday. HB961 [Ensuring Authorization of Federal Funds] appears to only appropriate some federal funding coming to North Carolina. These funds are primarily used to pay for various human services, like health care. It will be interesting to see if this approach garners the same bipartisan support that the House bill did.

As an Appropriations Chair, I assumed House and Senate leaders were in agreement on what was going to be in a supplemental appropriations bill. Obviously, the House appropriations chairs made a bad assumption, and I doubt we’d have pieced together HB111 if we’d known that the House and Senate would take such different approaches to the adoption of these stripped down appropriation bills. If House and Senate leaders cannot agree on a small step forward towards addressing the budget impasse, one has to wonder how we can address the more complicated budget issues dividing the House, Senate, and Governor Cooper.

In the coming weeks, my expectation is the House and Senate will not have as many voting sessions as usual. The Senate went home on Tuesday this week and is already shutting down its committees.

Both senators and House members reasonably expected to be home by this time of year and increasingly legislators will need to consider returning to their regular jobs and honoring family obligations. My hope is that, with a slower legislative pace, the Governor and legislative leaders will stop negotiating through the media and in social media, and instead will focus on resolving the budget impasse. If that isn’t possible, then we should head home and let the voters decide who is at fault for the failure to adopt a budget.

More Than One Way to Pass a Law

Posted on July 15, 2019 by admin in Agriculture, Appropriations, Beer, Budget, Children, Civil Service, Crime, Disabilities, Economic Development, Economy, Elections, Environment, Farming, Food, Government Reform, Hard Cider, Health, Inside Baseball, Jobs, Justice, Law, Local Government, McGrady, Newsletters, Nonprofits, Private Property Rights, Public Safety, Recreation, Redistricting, Regulatory Reform, Spirituous Liquor, Utilities, Water

The textbook way of passing a law is to introduce a bill in one legislative chamber, have that bill heard in one or more committees, and then passed by that legislative chamber and sent to the other one. The same process then occurs in the second legislative chamber, resulting in passage of the bill. Any discrepancies may be addressed in a conference committee, but ultimately both legislative chambers pass the same bill and it goes to the governor for his approval. Many bills take this textbook path, but other bills become law in less straightforward and transparent ways.

As we approach the end of the legislature’s Long Session, veteran legislators employ different methods of moving their bills to the governor’s desk. While one feels good about passing a free-standing bill that carries one’s name and the bill number as introduced, if a legislator is focused on having something becoming law, one should forget about public credit for passage of a numbered bill, and just move the bill or provision in whatever way is most likely to achieve success.

One of the easiest ways to move a bill is to have a colleague in the other chamber move a companion bill—an identical bill in the other chamber. So for example, I am a primary cosponsor on HB532 [DNCR Add New Trails & Various Changes] but the same bill was filed in the Senate as SB380. Rather than moving SB380 in the Senate, by agreement with its Senate sponsors, the House bill was moved and passed both chambers and was signed by the Governor into law.

Another way to move a bill is to incorporate a bill into the budget. Typically, the House objects to policy in the budget (unless it is policy put in to conform with a money appropriation or the House’s position on some issue), but sometimes both chambers want to avoid an extended debate or want to expedite consideration of a bill. The budget bill is a must pass bill, so including another bill in the budget is usually a sure-fire way of getting a bill passed. Of course, that assumes the budget is not vetoed.

HB570 [Water/Wastewater Public Enterprise Reform] and its companion bill, SB536, were incorporated in the budget bill, HB966 [2019 Appropriations Act]. Usually, the budget bill passes and becomes law, but this year the budget bill was vetoed by Governor Cooper making the effort to include the bill to fund the fixing failing water and wastewater systems in the budget not successful.

That has now led to another way of passing a bill. Senator Newton, my colleague, in an effort to address the issue of failing water and wastewater systems, attached the language from our bills to HB777 [Various Retirement Chngs/Wastewater Reform]. That bill is pretty different than HB570/ SB536 since it passed the House as HB777 [Purchase Opt/Credit for Prior Year FT Service], a bill to allow certain employees to purchase into certain retirement systems under certain circumstances. Of course, if the legislature overrides the governor’s veto, then HB570/SB536 will become law as part of the budget and there will be no need for the new HB777 to address water and sewer infrastructure.

So as we move towards the end of the legislative session, here is the status of the bills I have introduced:

HB3 [Eminent Domain]. The bill passed the House and is currently awaiting action in the Senate.
HB14 [Reconstitute Various Boards & Commissions]. HB14 was attached to SB381 [Reconstitute/Clarify Boards and Commissions] which passed both chambers and is now law.
HB69 [Nonpartisan Redistricting Commission] & HB140 [The FAIR Act]. These are both bills to require nonpartisan redistricting. HB69 is technically dead since it didn’t meet the crossover deadline, but HB140 is not subject to the crossover deadline. If the issue of nonpartisan redistricting is taken up, it is likely to move only after the completion of the constitutional challenge to legislative redistricting currently being tried.
HB91 [ABC Laws Modernization/PED Study] & HB536 [ABC Omnibus Regulatory Reform]. These bills got combined when they were heard in the House Finance Committee. After passing the House, the combined bill was then added to SB290 Distiller Regulatory Reform Bill] and passed by the House. The bill is awaiting action in the Senate. SB290 was a companion bill to HB378, a bill I introduced in the House.
HB245 [DEQ/Policy Changes.-AB]. This agency bill did not receive a hearing and is now dead since it didn’t meet the crossover deadline.
HB246 [DEQ/Fund and Fee Changes.-AB]. This agency bill was largely incorporated in the budget, HB966, but since the budget has been vetoed, the bill hasn’t become law. If the governor’s veto is overridden, then it will become law.
HB326 [Hendersonville Local Option Sales Tax]. Technically, the bill is still alive, but it really isn’t. It will not receive a hearing before the House Finance Committee prior to the end of session.
HB334 [NCSU Honey Bee Laboratory/Funds]. The bill would fund a complete renovation of the honey bee lab at NC State. Sen. Brent Jackson (R-Sampson) put this bill in the Senate version of the budget, and it was included in the conference report of the budget. With the Governor’s veto, funding of the bee lab has been blocked.
HB347 [Study No Delinquent/Undisciplined Under 10]. The bill passed the House as a study bill and is now awaiting action in the Senate.
HB373 [Ag Disaster Fund/Excessive Rain and Flooding]. The bill is a companion bill to SB268 which passed the Senate. If it becomes law, it would provide disaster relief to Henderson County and adjoining counties related to Tropical Storm Alberto. The bill was incorporated into the budget, HB966, but when the budget was vetoed, it was included in HB111 [Supplemental Appropriations Act]. HB111 is intended to provide funding for certain critical or time-sensitive items that were vetoed in the budget. HB111 passed the House last week and is expected to be considered by the Senate shortly.
HB374 [Sex Offender/Expand Residential Restriction]. The bill passed the House and is awaiting action in the Senate.
HB395 [Regulate Challenge Courses]. The bill was never heard in the House. A bill on the same subject, HB380 [Aerial Adventure Courses/Sander’s Law] did pass the House. HB380 is now awaiting action in the Senate. Having opposed HB380, my hope is the Senate will not take action on that bill.
HB536 [ABC Omnibus Regulatory Reform]. The bill passed the House, but has now been combined with SB290 and is awaiting action in the Senate.
HB559 [The Pollinator Protection Act]. While this bill is now dead having not made crossover, funding for the bee lab at NC State University is still possible if the legislature overrides the Governor’s veto or some other budget bill is put together later in the session.
HB560 [Ban PFASBin Fire Retardant Foam]. This bill is technically dead having not made crossover, although another primary cosponsor, Rep. Pricey Harrison (D-Guilford) was working to revive the bill by adding an appropriations provision to it to keep it alive.
HB570 [Water/Wastewater Public Enterprise Reform]. The Senate companion to this bill passed the Senate, and it is now included in the budget and in HB777. With broad support, the bill is likely to pass in some form.
HB592 [Check-Off Clean Water Mgmnt Tr. Fund]. The bill passed the House and is now awaiting action in the Senate.
HB610 [Civil Procedure/Deponent Declaration]. The Senate companion bill, SB508, has cleared both chambers and is awaiting action by the Governor.
HB649 [Grand Jury if LEO Charged Performing Duties]. The bill is dead since it didn’t make crossover.
HB671 [Behavior Analyst Licensure]. The bill would provide licensure for behavior analysts, the primary providers of services for autistic children. The bill passed the House and is awaiting action in the Senate. [Note: This bill is one of my primary priorities in the coming weeks.]
HB682 [Capital Procedure/Severe Disability]. Having not made crossover, the bill is dead.
HB732 [Nonprofit Mergers/Incr Charit. Solic. Exempts]. The bill passed the House and is awaiting action in the Senate.
HB741 [Study Flood Mitigation]. Having not made crossover, the bill is dead.
HB758 [MSD Expansion and Governance/DACSBStudy]. The bill has cleared both chambers and is awaiting action by the governor. It will allow Henderson County to join the Metropolitan Sewerage District of Buncombe County and will lower sewer rates in Henderson County. The bill is expected to be signed. Interestingly, the bill includes a provision, that was in the budget, put forth by Sen. Bill Rabon (R-Brunswick) to study wildlife enhancement, invasive species control, and natural habitat restoration on state properties. In other words, my bill was used as a vehicle for another legislator to pass a provision important to that legislator. Rabon is the chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, the gatekeeper for all legislation in the Senate. I was certainly willing to provide a vehicle for Sen. Rabon to move a provision that I supported in the budget and was important to him. Having the Senate Rules Chairman move your bill is certainly a good way to get a House bill passed.
HB759 [Electronic Recycling Amendments]. The bill is dead, having not made crossover. However, the subject of electronic recycling is the subject of a study in the budget bill. With the budget having been vetoed, it is unclear if the State’s electronic recycling program will be studied by a legislative committee between legislative sessions.
HB812 [Nutrient Offset Amendments]. The bill has become law.
HB823 [NC Managing Environmental Waste Act of 2019]. The bill seeks to address the problem of single-use plastic. The bill passed the House and is awaiting action in the Senate.
HB828 [Energy Savings Incentives/State Agencies]. The bill is dead since no action was taken prior to the crossover deadline.
HB879 [End of Life Option Act]. The bill is also dead, since no action was taken prior to the crossover deadline.
HB885 [Study Criminal Justice Data Collection]. The bill passed the House and is awaiting action in the Senate.
HB966 [2019 Appropriations Act]. This is the budget bill that was vetoed by the Governor. It will take a three-fifths vote to override the Governor’s veto; 72 House Members and 30 Senators would have to vote to override the veto if all House Members and Senators are voting. A veto override would have to start in the House since it is a House bill. As of today, no attempt to override the veto has been taken.
HB971 [Modern Licensure Model for Alcohol Control]. This is a bill to adopt a licensure model for the sale of alcoholic beverages. The bill is sometimes called the “privatization bill” since it would get the state and local governments out of the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages. The bill is likely to be heard in the House ABC Committee before the end of the Long Session.
HB995 [Hard Cider/Revise Excise Tax Rate]. The bill got a favorable recommendation from the House ABC Committee, but is being held in House Finance. The bill is not likely to be heard this year.

In the not-so-distant-past, by mid-July the legislature would have passed a budget and would be getting ready to adjourn. With the budget hung-up and no near-term solution evident, the session continues with no clear end in sight.

If the budget becomes law in some form, several bills that I’ve put forward are likely to become law, e.g. HB334 [NCSU Honey Bee Laboratory/Funds], HB570 [Water/Wastewater Public Enterprise Reform], among others]. Within days, it is possible that several of the alcoholic beverage laws will clear the Senate in SB290. Two bills, HB758 [MSD Expansion and Governance/DACSBStudy] and HB610 [Civil Procedure/Deponent Declaration] will likely become law when the Governor signs them.

The session is expected to continue for several more weeks while everyone awaits some resolution of the budget stalemate. Until the budget is complete, legislators, including this one, will continue to use the time to complete work on pending legislation.

1 2 3 ›»

Going to a Benziger party tomorrow but will try to check out Gunclach Bundschu. Thanks for the recommendations. https://t.co/WCuoilbwsH
September 20, 2019
While as frustrated as you with the GOP under Trump and his pals, I’m done with public office. https://t.co/D6E5IXrSTo
September 19, 2019
@ShookMadison Now at Martinelli—three wineries today!
September 18, 2019
Greetings from Sonoma, California. A few more wineries to go... https://t.co/S9EruDlnpQ
September 18, 2019
#SB559 = more utility control & higher power bills. Rep. Strickland said it best: “We need rate structures that wil… https://t.co/H5HWRBNm09
September 17, 2019
@TerenceEveritt @ChristyClarkNC I misjudged you when we first met. You seemed like a smart & not overly partisan co… https://t.co/BHasLig4nR
September 16, 2019
The House Veto Override: A Perspective on What Happened — https://t.co/Kj4LdeGnfU #ncga #ncpol
September 13, 2019
@timothypeck I disagree with you. If they’d walked out as soon as they saw the situation, there would have been no… https://t.co/1Tgz9LyPL3
September 12, 2019
@ksurles13 @NCGOP I voted yes to override the veto because I support the budget. The override was calendared & the… https://t.co/bs5uleGePQ
September 12, 2019
@chimpsea @dcraighorn I voted yes because I support overriding the veto. I’m a budget chair. I helped put together… https://t.co/n6hemPxWpQ
September 12, 2019