Viewing Category

North Carolina - Republicans

09
She plighted her troth not in church and not as a bride or in marriage but in town hall meetings and political forums and rallies, saying she was a fire-breathing Tea Party conservative in a Congressional District filled with small towns and flannel-shirted farmers and churches full of hymn-singing Baptists.
 
After consummating her victory (with an oath of office) Renee Ellmers settled into Congress – then the wind veered and when she veered with it she left the Tea Partiers back home with raised eyebrows. But there was no tempest. She was reelected and reelected again.
 
Then she surprised not just the Tea Partiers but just about every other Republican in her district by single-handedly stopping a bill that would have prohibited a woman having an abortion after 20 weeks.
 
This time there was a tempest. Harmony vanished. And cries rose of betrayal and infidelity and her first response made the storm worse: She said she’d opposed the bill because it was unpopular with younger voters.
 
When political expediency didn’t sit well she changed directions – in a heartbeat – and gave a different reason: She said she was standing up for rape victims – that the rape exception in the bill was too weak. (The bill said a rape victim had to report the rape to the police in order to have an abortion after twenty weeks.)
 
Her second explanation collapsed like a house of cards when  Linda Devore, the Republican Chairman in one of the biggest counties in her district, asked bluntly,How many rape victims wait until they’re five months pregnant to decide whether to have an abortion or not? It doesn’t compute with people.
 
The third time she not only shifted directions she did a complete about face – and announced she was going to vote for the bill.
 
But she miscalculated again. Fickleness only dug the hole deeper. Her final position made the only voters who still agreed with her – the Pro-Choice voters – mad too.

 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

09
Uncovering hypocrisy by politicians is as easy as finding sand at the beach. But the turnabout by Republicans on redistricting reform is noteworthy for its cynicism. Here’s what four key GOP Senators say now and did then.
 
“God bless ’em, I can’t wait to get it over here. It’s dead. It’s not going anywhere.” - Senator Tom Apadaca, who sponsored redistricting reform three times (2007-08 S1122, S1093) (2009-10 S25).
 
“It doesn’t need a new commission, it’s unnecessary….The Supreme Court made it clear how to draw these maps, it eliminates the gerrymandering that they’re talking about.” - Senator Robert Rucho, sponsor of Senate bill 283, Independent Redistricting Commission, 2001.
 
"Some feel like it should, some feel like it shouldn’t. You know, the other side had a chance to do that for what, a hundred and some years, never did and there’s some pressure to do it. Again, I’m not sure where our caucus will be on it, but we’ll have that conversation." - Majority Leader Sen. Harry Brown, who sponsored redistricting reform legislation three times.
 
“I have yet to see a so-called independent redistricting commission that is truly independent. ... I'm still out there looking for that nonpartisan soul that really has no opinion about politics one way or the other that has an informational background in politics. So I believe that (state Supreme Court) decisions provide North Carolina with a set of criteria that removes many of the problems that folks have complained about with reference to redistricting. I don't see an independent redistricting commission or any of the proposals that have been floated as improving on the system that we have now.” - Senate President Pro-Tem Phil Berger, who five times sponsored redistricting reform legislation (2001-02 S283) (2005-06 S430) (2007-08 S1122, S1093) (2009-10 S25).
 
Then there is Governor McCrory, who said last November: "I think the gerrymandered districts where we have no competition in the general elections make all of our jobs difficult." Unless I dozed off during his State of the State speech, he did not mention it Wednesday night.
 
In fairness, some Republicans have not let where they sit change where they stand on reform, like Rep. Skip Stam of Wake County. He still supports it.
 
Also in fairness, Democrats could have passed redistricting reform long before now. They didn’t see the light until they lost the power.
 
There is one difference: Democrats didn’t promise to end gerrymandering. Republicans did. Will they break their promise?
 
If they do, Democrats should make them pay. They should make Republicans the poster boys for corrupt machine politics. Then, when they get back in power (the wheel always turns), Democrats better keep their promise.
 
 
 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

06
Senator Tillis, we’d like to discuss your intriguing idea about not requiring restaurant employees to wash their hands before serving our food, but we’re due back on Planet Earth.
 
Besides, who could top Barry Saunders’ skewering in the N&O? Especially this: “Repeated efforts to get a comment from the senator’s office or from Starbucks’ headquarters were unsuccessful: Both apparently wish to – forgive me for this – wash their hands of the whole thing.”
 
But give Tillis credit. He did – forgive me for this – put his finger on the crux of the issue: “That's the sort of mentality we need to have to reduce the regulatory burden on this country.”
 
He’s right. That’s exactly the sort of mentality we would need to have.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

05
A TAPster offers this view of the State of the State – and the GOP’s mindset:
 
Governor McCrory’s weepy, exhausting speech for the ages (it sure seemed like it lasted that long) Wednesday night highlights again the philosophical mess entangling today’s modern Republicans.
 
McCrory proposes to address some of the state’s challenges with new cabinet-level departments filled with bureaucrats who spend money, create rules and get in each other’s way.
 
Contrast that approach, meanwhile, to that of our esteemed junior senator who believes government should keep its soiled hands off the soiled hands of restaurant workers, arguing (to well-deserved ridicule) that the marketplace – instead of government – will save us from dysentery.
 
And further contrast that to the thought process of newbie save-the-world legislators. Rather than think through what’s best for North Carolina, they quote the philosophies of free-market apostle Milton Freidman when opposing new regulations designed to protect health and safety.
 
You can’t have it both ways.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

05
When your speech goes on for an hour and 20 minutes, you need either a clearer vision or a new speechwriter. Viewers desperately needed some diversion.
 
Twitter to the rescue! Featuring a special guest appearance by Tony Tata, the DOT Secretary who apparently is our answer to Tom Clancy and a monster on Twitter!
 
The only way to watch a political speech, debate or any event today is with Twitter close at hand. You get exaggerated praise from the rah-rah supporters, forced flattery from the brown-noses and a healthy helping of snark from the carping critics.
 
When Governor McCrory said he wanted to make North Carolina a teaching destination, the critics pointed out how many North Carolina teachers are leaving for new destinations, or new lines of work.
 
When he waxed indignant over the condition of fountains in the state government complex, the critics wished he was that upset about the condition of public schools. (One wonders what Tiny Untidy Thom Tillis would say about big government interfering in the free market of dirty water fountains.)
 
My highlight of the night was seeing tweets from Tony Tata being posted during and after the speech. Gadzooks! Was a member of McCrory’s Cabinet actually tweeting during the speech? And not even about the speech, but about the novels Tata has written? This is a big story!
 
I had to go on Twitter myself to spread the news. Within minutes, Tata himself tweeted back at me: “@jgaryp didn't touch my phone during state of state. Publicist runs personal Twitter and schedules tweets. Thx for asking.”
 
He added, “Great speech!” Which just proves he wasn’t listening.
 
Now I need to check out Tata’s books. Is there any hot sex in them?
               
(NOTE: A tip of the TAP cap to the TAPster couple who suggested today’s headline. Their prize is my company over fine food and fine wine for a great cause.)

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (1) RSS comment feed |

03
One number jumps out of Public Policy Polling’s latest survey of the 2016 Governor’s race: 48. That’s the percentage of Independents who disapprove of Governor McCrory’s job performance. Only 32 percent approve.
 
McCrory leads Roy Cooper among all voters by 44-39. But that includes a 43-28 McCrory lead among Independents. That’s not going to hold in the face of 48 percent disapproval. Those Independents are ready for a reason to vote against McCrory.
 
Assume that Cooper makes it an even race among Independents, instead of a 15-point gap. If Independents are a quarter of the voters, Cooper picks up four points overall. The race is a tie.
 
Then, say Cooper drives up McCrory’s negatives among Independents to 54 percent, which is where former Senator Hagan’s negatives are today. That’s potentially another three points overall.
 
If this were the Super Bowl, you’d say McCrory has big holes in his defensive line, Cooper has a lot of running room and the game will come down to a few yards and the final seconds.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

30
Not long ago, I blogged that Democrats in the legislature should help Governor McCrory expand Medicaid (“Pass McCroryCare”). With Democratic votes and some Republicans, McCrory could overcome opposition from the legislative leadership.
 
But a Raleigh group called the Carolina Partnership for Reform, which says it “was formed to advocate for a freedom-based agenda in North Carolina,” sees a nefarious plot afoot.
 
Nobody’s name is listed on the group’s website, so we can’t credit any individual for unmasking my hidden agenda. Here follows, in full, their post, “Pearce’s Democrat Revival Plan”:
 
 
We recently pointed readers to Democrat strategist Gary Pearce’s Pass McCroryCare column urging Democrats to lobby the Obama Administration to grant the waivers Governor McCrory might ask for in order to expand Medicaid under ObamaCare.
 
Pearce said McCrory could help himself in 2016 by splitting with the conservative majority in the Legislature and working with Democrats to give free health insurance to able bodied people. Right now, Medicaid primarily covers poor children, their moms, the elderly and the disabled, not working age adults who don’t work.
 
But now we can see the ulterior motive behind Gary Pearce’s suggestion. And the upshot is Medicaid expansion will be a loser for Governor McCrory according to a new survey of people who voted in November.
 
The Foundation for Government Accountability surveyed 500 people who voted last year. Here is the question.
 
North Carolina’s legislature and governor are deciding whether or not to expand North Carolina’s Medicaid health insurance program to give taxpayer-funded Medicaid benefits to 500,000 mostly working-age adults who have no kids and no disability. Do you support or oppose expanding Medicaid in North Carolina to these adults?
 
Support – 47.13%
 
Oppose – 36.63%
 
Undecided – 16.24%
 
At first blush, Medicaid expansion is a winning issue. But among voters who approve of the Governor, it’s a big drag. Among strongly approving McCrory people, 59% oppose Medicaid expansion and 40% are against Medicaid expansion among somewhat approving McCrory voters.
 
In short, expanding Medicaid splits McCrory’s own voters. And that gives clever Democrats like Pearce a chance to funnel cash to the Libertarian candidate and siphon fiscal conservatives away from McCrory. Perhaps enough of them to throw the election to Democrats
 
In fact, 54% of all voters are less likely to support McCrory if he backs ” ObamaCare Medicaid expansion ” and 82% of Republican voters are less likely to vote for a legislator supporting it and 67% oppose it if it could result in education cuts.
 
Remembering the Greeks at the gates of Troy, beware Gary Pearce bringing advice.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

29
A TAPster with long experience in the General Assembly offers this:
 
In reaction to Gary’s blog about “Big Government” and Speaker Moore’s laughably large staff, here are the three popular theories in Raleigh today about why Republican leaders like the Speaker and Lt. Governor think they can singlehandedly solve the state’s unemployment problem by hiring everyone in sight:
 
1.       Operating the government and understanding the complex issues in a modern North Carolina are simply beyond their intellectual ability to manage or understand. They can count votes and bully their colleagues, but they need all the help they can get to really do the work.
 
2.       They are small-town folks who’ve never bossed around anybody but a law clerk and a secretary. It’s fun to have minions!
 
3.       They don’t care what anybody thinks. They operate with impunity, without budgets and with no concern that their choices are in conflict with their principles.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

26
The government is too big, Republicans say. Too much bureaucracy, too much waste, too many overpaid, do-nothing chair-sitters mooching off hard-working taxpayers.
 
Presumably, House Speaker Tim Moore agrees. He’s as eager as any other hard-nosed Republican to cut out the deadwood.
 
But first he has to hire a staff. Here, thanks to Under the Dome, are some of the positions on the Speaker’s staff:
 
-          A Chief of Staff
-          A Deputy Chief of Staff
-          A Communications Director
-          A senior policy adviser
-          A policy advisor on agriculture and education
-          The director of House caucuses/policy analyst
-          A senior policy advisor for health issues
-          A director of boards, commissions and constituent services
-          A policy advisor on transportation and public safety
-          An executive assistant/director of administration
-          Another policy analyst
-          An administrative assistant
 
Once upon a time, House Speakers in North Carolina got by with a couple of administrative assistants and a legislative counsel or two, some of them part-time.
 
Now, apparently, it takes a lot of staff to cut down the size of government.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

26
She said Yes. Then No. Then Yes, again.
 
Four years ago, running for Congress, Renee Ellmers told voters she was a nurse who had “held the hands of new born infants.” Yes, she said, she was Pro-Life.
 
Then, last week, she said No to banning abortions after twenty weeks of pregnancy. The idea, she said, was unpopular with younger voters.
 
She won (scuttling the bill) but was pounded by Pro-Life groups: One called her “traitorous.” Another wrote, “She is worse than a Democrat.”
 
Ellmers then did another about-face, announcing she was all for the abortion ban.
 
Yes. No. Then Yes, again. All in one week.


 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

Page 2 of 130First   Previous   1  [2]  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next   Last   
Copyright (c) Talking About Politics   :  DNN Hosting  :  Terms Of Use  :  Privacy Statement