Archives

Commentary

Medicaid expansionIn case you missed them while scraping your windshield earlier today, there are two new lead stories  over on the main Policy Watch site today that will be worth a few minutes of your time.

This morning’s Weekly Briefing is an open letter to the one man in North Carolina politics with the clout (and, one hopes, the human decency) to set politics aside and guarantee access to health care for hundreds of thousands of people like Dana Wilson.

Meanwhile, this afternoon’s Fitzsimon File examines what was certainly the strangest claim in GovernorWorkers comp McCrory’s State of the State speech and its apparent origins with a little known administration official who seems to be keeping some odd and perhaps worrisome ties to the private sector.

Commentary
Sen. Phil Berger

Sen. Phil Berger

In case you missed it over the weekend, Charlotte Observer editorial page editor had a scathing and excellent essay taking Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger to task for his downright embarrassing hypocrisy on the issue of redistricting reform.

As Batten points out, Berger was sponsored at least five reform bills over a period of eight years that would have done almost exactly what the proposal he is now standing in the way of in 2015 would do:

“Has there ever been a more glaring example of how where you stand depends on where you sit?

Berger, R-Rockingham, sat toward the back when he was in the minority throughout the last decade. Today he sits up front as the Senate President Pro Tem. Surrounded by fellow Republicans everywhere he looks, he has a grip on power like Vladimir Putin – and a similar fondness for true democracy.

Maybe that’s not fair. Maybe the proposals announced last week to take much of the politics out of drawing congressional and legislative districts differ dramatically from the ones Berger co-sponsored. Let’s check.

Oh, no, actually they are nearly identical. In fact, entire passages from the bill filed last week are taken verbatim from bills Berger co-sponsored.”

As Batten also rightfully notes, Democratic leaders like Marc Basnight and Jim Black were at fault in those days for blocking reform — even though other Democrats were pushing for it. But that doesn’t absolve Berger now. At least Basnight and Black never pretended to be for it or led voters to believe they would implement it once in office as Berger clearly did.

As with so many other conservative switcheroos in recent years — on transparency in government, on a commitment to open debate in the General Assembly, on the need for “revenue neutral” tax reform — Berger’s flip flop smacks of raw opportunism and power hunger at their worst.

About all one can say going forward is that at least North Carolinians will have no illusions about where things really stand.

Commentary

McC709Maybe Gov. Pat McCrory will continue to cruise along as the state’s ribbon-cutter-in-chief in 2015 and leave all the real governing decisions to legislative leaders for yet another year. It’s certainly conceivable that he could eke out reelection next year by pursuing such a strategy so long as urban areas of the state continue to enjoy the moderate growth that’s accompanied the national economic recovery.

However, if the Guv wants to be taken seriously and be seen as anything other than a glorified errand boy for Senators Phil Berger and Tom Apodaca, he must stake out a strong position on a high profile issue and dictate the result. And, no, some relatively minor matter like historic tax credits isn’t enough to get the job done.

No, the only issue that really stands out in this area as the means for McCrory to truly establish himself as Governor is Medicaid expansion. McCrory knows it’s the right thing to do. He knows it will save thousands of lives and pump billions into the state’s economy. He knows that a huge and important segment of the business community is for it. Heck, his DHHS Secretary has already endorsed the idea. And he knows that the Senate leaders stand in the way.

All that remains for a real and definitive battle to ensue is, as we noted as few weeks back, is for McCrory to find his inner Jim Hunt, grab the elephants down the street by the ears and lead. For once, McCrory must find a way to bend the General Assembly to his will, rather than the other way around.

So, which will it be in 2015 — McCrory the would-be general or McCrory the same ol’ doormat?  What the man says or doesn’t say about Medicaid expansion in tonight’s State of the State speech should give us a pretty clear indication.

Commentary

In case you missed it over on the main site, here is John Cole’s excellent cartoon for February 2. It obviously speaks for itself. And if such images exposing the state leadership’s strange obsession with who people love appeal, be sure to check out Dwayne Powell’s cartoon this morning in Raleigh’s News & Observer entitled: “Skip that burger and get your Phil of religion-approved grub.”

 

2-2-15-NCPW-cartoon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commentary

Greensboro News & Record columnist Susan Ladd does a great job of skewering state Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger’s ridiculous “religious freedom” for magistrates legislation today in this essay.

“It’s appalling that the first order of business for our state legislature would be to reinstate Jim Crow. Or should we call it James Crow? Jane Crow? Jim Crow 2.0?

Discrimination by any name smells just as sour.

But discrimination is precisely what the bill introduced Wednesday by state Sen. Phil Berger (R-Rockingham) allows. Currently titled the Magistrates Recusal of Civil Ceremonies, the bill falls under the general heading of “religious freedom” laws sweeping the country after the legalization of same-sex marriage in many states.”

She goes on:

“Though this bill is narrower in scope than ‘religious freedom’ laws that have been attempted in other states, it still legislates discrimination and limits the rights of groups that could be targeted by a religious objection….

Because this bill doesn’t specify, however, magistrates presumably would be free to recuse themselves from performing other marriages that violated their religious beliefs. Religion is a very malleable thing, having been used to object to all kinds of practices. But let’s take an obvious case.

A magistrate opposed to interracial marriage simply could cite the passage used by the Virginia circuit court judge in 1959, when he convicted Richard and Mildred Loving of the crime of interracial marriage.”

Here’s the excellent conclusion:

Read More