Document Actions
Thurs: Not in so many words...
posted at 2008-07-11 01:37 | Last modified 2008-07-11 09:03
Governor Easley’s senior advisor Franklin Freeman delivered what may be the most polite veto threat ever to two legislative committees today.
The controversial measures (there are two versions) would let people tow 10-ft-wide mega-boats on the roads in the dark. Standard lane width is 8½ to 9 feet. You do the math.
Supporters of the change say it’ll keep NC competitive in the market for sport fishing tournaments and other luxury boat tourism. But critics say the boats, which aren’t lit, are dangerous on darkened two-lane roads, where they could sideswipe drivers in the oncoming lane.
Count the Governor among the critics. Freeman told House Finance today Easley “believes wide boats at night are a safety hazard.” He wants to limit towing hours for the big boats to daylight, with an added zero-blood-alcohol requirement for anyone towing them. Otherwise, Freeman said, “the likelihood of his signing it is not good.”
Rather than amend it, House Finance opted to remove the boat language from the big-truck bill entirely, advising Freeman he could take up the Governor’s concerns via a specific boat-towing bill in Senate Finance this afternoon.
The reception there wasn’t much better. Freeman delivered the same message, but it wasn’t enough for Durham Dem Floyd McKissick, who tried to get Freeman to say the Governor would veto the measure.
Freeman: “You know, I don’t like to be heavy-handed. I’m just trying the best I can to rattle before we strike.”
McKissick: “I think I heard the rattle loud and clear.”
Hear it here:
Listen Now!
Sen. Finance passed the measure anyway, prompting Chair David Hoyle to advise Franklin, “Tell the governor to get the ink pen ready.” The bill’s headed for the Senate floor Monday night.
It’s hard to believe that given all the big issues - gangs, ethics, racial justice - waiting in the wings, lawmakers and the Governor have decided to go head to head over the right to tow super-wide boats at night. Honestly, how many NC taxpayers would benefit from the change? Probably not as many as it would put at risk.
Seems to me that if you can afford a 10-foot-wide boat and trailer, you can probably afford a dock slip or hotel room where you can wait till daylight to tow it home, giving the rest of us a fighting chance to see you coming and get out of your way. But hey, I don’t own one, so that’s just my opinion.
Say what?
Franklin Dem Doug Berger pulled a victory out of a logical trainwreck on the Senate floor today. They were debating S2081, a bill that would ban mentally ill people from buying guns if they had been involuntarily committed to inpatent or outpatient treatment.
Senate minority leader Phil Berger sent up an amendment to limit the restriction to those who’d been judged by a court to be a danger to themselves or other. Tony Rand and Martin Nesbitt argued against it, saying a finding of danger is already prerequisite to the involuntary commitment process. But Doug Berger came down on the side of his GOP namesake.
"You could have a circumstance where an elderly person has lost their life partner. They’re living alone, they’re extremely depressed, they won’t eat. And a family member tries to get them to eat, and they won’t eat, and they go through a process of having them involuntarily committed so someone will make sure that they eat…"
Does this sound like someone you’d want buying a gun? Berger says yes.
"That person …late at night may have somebody try to break into their house. And it comes back to the core issue that we’re talking about of constitutional rights – the constitutional right to protect yourself."
Put that way, the Senate wasn’t about to take away Grandma’s right to buy a gun. The double-Berger amendment sailed through over Rand’s objections.
The amended bill passed 49-0. It moves on to the House for concurrence. (Correction: it's a straight bill, not a gut-and-amend. Sorry about that!)
Comment? Drop me a line.
