Fitzsimon File

Troubling budget targets

Major votes on the death penalty and the statewide smoking ban marked the flurry of activity Wednesday at the General Assembly as the deadline for legislation to pass one chamber draws near.  

But the most jarring news came behind the scenes, as House leaders gave budget writers spending targets that will mean far deeper cuts than the Senate made in the plan it passed a few weeks ago.

The House budget will spend $10.58 billion on education next year. That's $1.1 billion less than the Senate education budget which made devastating reductions in the Department of Public Instruction, eliminating 300 jobs and cutting $60 million from school construction funding.

The story was much he same in other subject areas and comes after last week's news that next year's shortfall will be $1.5 billion more than the Senate budget addressed. The House budget targets mean that House leaders are not including $500 million in new tax revenue called for in the Sensate plan.

The spending targets are vitally important because of the rules that govern the process lawmakers use to put the budget together.  Proposals to add new spending or reduce cuts can only use money in the same subject area.

Lawmakers are not allowed to offer an amendment to cut funding for beach renourishment on Bald Head Island and use the money to reduce cuts in services to people with disabilities.

The only way to protect those services would be to make deeper cuts in programs that help poor children or people with HIV/AIDS.

If there is no new revenue in the House plan, then budget writers need to cut a total of $2 billion more than the Senate.

More than half of it will come from education, leaving health and human services to absorb the bulk of the rest. That's ominous news for schools, child care, mental health, early childhood programs, virtually every part of the state safety net, unless House leaders are convinced to support a revenue package to protect the state's vital institutions and the families who rely on them.

Voting for resuming executions and racial justice?

The Senate voted Wednesday afternoon to go around the state courts and restart executions in the state. The vote came on an amendment to the Racial Justice Act, legislation that would set up a procedure to allow defendants in death penalty cases to present evidence that racial bias played a role in their sentence or the decision to seek the death penalty.

Executions have been on hold for more than two years while the courts considered the medical board's decision that a doctor who monitors an inmate's vital signs during the execution is violating medical ethics and can be disciplined. The State Supreme Court rejected the medical board's position last week.

The courts are also considering a challenge of a decision by the Council of State that approved the lethal injection protocol used to put inmates to death. That case is now before Superior Court Judge Donald Stephens.

Senate Minority Leader Phil Berger's amendment would make it clear that health care providers cannot be sanctioned for their role in an execution and would remove the requirement that the Council of State approve the execution protocol, an attempt to end the court case. The amendment would also direct state officials not to schedule more than one execution within 30 days.

Senate Majority Leader Tony Rand asked for a recess after Berger explained his amendment and when the Senate reconvened, the amendment passed 38-11. Berger says that means executions will resume if the bill passes.

The Senate's final vote on the bill will come Thursday. The House is also considering the Racial Justice Act and it is likely that a conference committee will ultimately come up with a final version, but that doesn't inspire much confidence, judging by how many Senate Democrats seemed willing to restart executions, or at least were afraid to vote against an amendment that did.

It is a far cry from the 2003 Senate passage of a moratorium on executions because of the flaws in the capital punishment system, flaws that remain.

A slimmed down smoking ban

Governor Beverly Perdue will have the chance to sign a bill banning smoking in bars and restaurants across the state. The House voted to agree with changes to the smoking ban made in the Senate, including the removal of a provision that would allow smoking in bars that don't serve or employ minors.

The final version doesn't ban smoking at all worksites, which was part of the original proposal by House Majority Leader Holliman, but it's a vast improvement over current law and will protect thousands of waitresses, bartenders, and cooks from the deadly effects of secondhand smoke.

 Email This Post  Print This Post

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 13th, 2009 at 7:16 pm and is filed under Fitzsimon File. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.