North Carolina GOP moves to change all the rules to stay in power

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
9,942
Reaction score
1,019
Points
113
Apparently North Carolina Republicans have been studying up on the power moves that dictators in small 3rd world countries make and are looking to implement some themselves:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...th-carolina-right-now/?utm_term=.0493aa2a12a7

In the waning hours of Republicans' hold on government in North Carolina, they are proposing bills aimed at significantly curbing Gov.-elect Roy Cooper's (D) power. In a last-last-minute special session, Republicans introduced a series of bills late Wednesday that would:

—Require the governor's Cabinet appointments to be approved by the state Senate
— Limit the number of members the governor can appoint to powerful board of trustees at the University of North Carolina school system and the state Board of Education.
— Significantly cut the number of positions who work directly for the governor, from 1,500 (a number Republicans approved when they had a Republican governor) to 300.
— Divide members of the Board of Elections, typically appointed by the governor, between parties in a way that gives Republicans control during election years.
It's worth noting that Republicans had held a majority on the Board of Elections and used that power to reduce the availability of polling sites in more strongly Democratic (read: minority) areas. Essentially they looked in the mirror and got an idea of what abuse of power could look like:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...bb8a6fc65bc_story.html?utm_term=.c78b7b3f50c3

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ranchise-black-voters/?utm_term=.60c6765ed1ac

The only good news is that the last time they tried this type of thing, it probably led to Democrats winning the Governorship in the first place. From the first article:

Democrats are having some déjà vu: The last time GOP lawmakers called a high-profile special session, they ended up ramming through one of the state's most controversial laws in recent memory, a bill limiting what public bathrooms transgender people can use and municipalities' ability to pass anti-LGBT-discrimination laws.

The national backlash to that bill helped contribute to McCrory's upset. (He conceded earlier this month, but not before calling the election into question via unproven widespread voter fraud.)
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,658
Reaction score
1,765
Points
113
The fear had been that they would block Cooper from taking over and reinstall McCrory as governor. There's language in statute that they could use to do so if they chose. When McCrory conceded last week, that pretty much ended that concern. As the article notes, the other fear had been that they'd stack the state supreme court by increasing the number of justices, also within their power. Compared to those things, these abuses are a level or two less terrible.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,319
Reaction score
1,502
Points
113
Don't live in NC, don't care.
 

diehard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
31,878
Reaction score
107
Points
63
Bad has it wrong. The Washington Post is the worst and incredibly dishonest, but then that is all you got. gotnofacts at it again.
 

diehard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
31,878
Reaction score
107
Points
63
Thanks for all the liberal media links. That would include the Raleigh and Charlotte papers. You have a great misrepresentation here and is the view supplied by the democrats (very liberal in NC, why the Rs hold a supermajority in both chambers). Without and honest understanding of the Charlotte ordinance and Cooper's first appointees, you can not understand what is going on with partial information. I know many of the house members and a few of the senate. I'm not concerned that this is a problem for anyone other than the hysterical left (that would include you, oneoffewfacts).
 

mplarson7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2011
Messages
2,672
Reaction score
155
Points
63
Curious. That is the first time I've seen someone brand anything related to Fox as liberal.
 

TruthSeeker

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
3,842
Reaction score
424
Points
83
Curious. That is the first time I've seen someone brand anything related to Fox as liberal.
Local Fox affiliates are not tied into the politics of FNC, therefore, the affiliates aren't necessarily right leaning.
 

diehard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
31,878
Reaction score
107
Points
63
Curious. That is the first time I've seen someone brand anything related to Fox as liberal.
Local TV, not national which has progressive tendencies at times itself. As far as NC links I noted the Raleigh and Charlotte papers. Channel 8 isn't so bad. Neither is their link. Still it was based on Democrat talking points. It admits it if you open it. I have a close friend who is near the center of this. I'll give him a call later today. We talk at least weekly, usually see him that often. He is also a RNC member. My only criticisms of him is he is originally from Wisconsin and a Navy veteran. At least he is a veteran. i was unsure of what they would do beyond authorizing $200M for Hurricane Mathew relief and the Mountain's wild fires. I saw the need for expanding the Supreme Court, but did not like the process. Our state party is responsible for the state election loses. Working on electing new people to prevent further electoral calamity.
 

mplarson7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2011
Messages
2,672
Reaction score
155
Points
63
Local TV, not national which has progressive tendencies at times itself. As far as NC links I noted the Raleigh and Charlotte papers. Channel 8 isn't so bad. Neither is their link. Still it was based on Democrat talking points. It admits it if you open it. I have a close friend who is near the center of this. I'll give him a call later today. We talk at least weekly, usually see him that often. He is also a RNC member. My only criticisms of him is he is originally from Wisconsin and a Navy veteran. At least he is a veteran. i was unsure of what they would do beyond authorizing $200M for Hurricane Mathew relief and the Mountain's wild fires. I saw the need for expanding the Supreme Court, but did not like the process. Our state party is responsible for the state election loses. Working on electing new people to prevent further electoral calamity.
K
 

GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
9,413
Reaction score
491
Points
83
Local TV, not national which has progressive tendencies at times itself. As far as NC links I noted the Raleigh and Charlotte papers. Channel 8 isn't so bad. Neither is their link. Still it was based on Democrat talking points. It admits it if you open it. I have a close friend who is near the center of this. I'll give him a call later today. We talk at least weekly, usually see him that often. He is also a RNC member. My only criticisms of him is he is originally from Wisconsin and a Navy veteran. At least he is a veteran. i was unsure of what they would do beyond authorizing $200M for Hurricane Mathew relief and the Mountain's wild fires. I saw the need for expanding the Supreme Court, but did not like the process. Our state party is responsible for the state election loses. Working on electing new people to prevent further electoral calamity.
Thanks for sharing!
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
9,942
Reaction score
1,019
Points
113
Thanks for all the liberal media links.

Why not explain what's going on? Why pretend it's not happening and then pretend that it's only the liberal media that's reporting on it?

I have to tell you that I'm totally shocked that the Republican lawmakers who are doing this don't think it's a problem. Next you're going to tell me the fox thinks leaving the henhouse door wide open is great.

BTW, I can't even imagining living in a world in which you believed that every single major news outlet was out to get you. That has to be terrifying and exhausting.

Just for future reference, is Reuters liberal? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-north-carolina-politics-idUSKBN1442BA
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
43,267
Reaction score
2,382
Points
113
Don't live in NC, don't care.
Right, because the state GOPs never coordinate anything. They all decided to ban gay marriage and close all abortion clinics, etc. at the exact same time by coincidence. The Minnesota GOP would never try anything like this. :rolleyes:
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
43,267
Reaction score
2,382
Points
113
Why did McCrory concede? I thought there was proof of massive voter fraud in Anson county and dozens more and he really won easily? Was that all a load of BS?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,319
Reaction score
1,502
Points
113
Right, because the state GOPs never coordinate anything. They all decided to ban gay marriage and close all abortion clinics, etc. at the exact same time by coincidence. The Minnesota GOP would never try anything like this. :rolleyes:
Did the MN GOP try to pass a bathroom law yet?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,319
Reaction score
1,502
Points
113
Not yet. They just took over both chambers. Would you be shocked if they did?
Yes. I'm sure the MN GOP spends time coordinating with other states all the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

diehard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
31,878
Reaction score
107
Points
63
Here is a reasonably accurate take on what is going on even though it comes from a liberal source.


Republicans point to previous proposals in defending special session bills
Thursday, December 15th, 2016
By Nick Ochsner, Reporter

http://www.wbtv.com/story/34057125/...ding-special-session-bills?clienttype=generic

o RALEIGH, NC (WBTV) - Republican leadership in the North Carolina General Assembly unveiled a raft of new proposals Wednesday night that would alter the way state government is currently administered.
o
The new proposals come amidst a fourth special session of the North Carolina General Assembly, which was unexpectedly announced early Wednesday afternoon. The fourth special session comes immediately on the heels of the legislature’s third special session that was called by Gov. Pat McCrory to allocate funding to assist those impacted by the flood from Hurricane Matthew and the wildfires in the western part of the state.

Many people—including staffers, lobbyists and some lawmakers themselves—spent most of Wednesday waiting to find out what, exactly, Republicans planned to accomplish in the unexpected special session.

The answer came through a series of bills filed in the House and Senate Wednesday evening.

Most of the proposals originating in the Senate are included in one bill that makes changes to elections and the state’s appellate courts.

Proposals from Republican leadership in the House were spread across a number of different bills and include major changes to the way the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction is administered, the way governors appoint cabinet officials and the number of political employees that can be hired by the governor, among other things.

Prior to the legislation being unveiled Wednesday night, Republican lawmakers and staffers had said they were reviewing legislation previously promulgated under Roy Cooper during his time as a lawmaker. A review of some legislation passed in the mid- to late-1990s found that claim to hold up with regard to some of the new proposals.

Change to appellate court procedures
One provision of the legislation introduced in the Senate would allow the North Carolina Court of Appeals to hear cases as a full court; a procedure known as sitting en banc.

Currently, the Court of Appeals only hears cases in three judge panels. A case can be appealed from the Court of Appeals to the North Carolina Supreme Court, which hears and decides cases as a panel of seven.

That panel of seven, though, can sometimes be reduced to six if a justice has a conflict of interest that requires recusal. Such was the case this year when the Supreme Court heard a case over whether it was permissible to hold a retention election for Supreme Court justices.

Justice Edmonds, who was up for re-election that same year and would presumably benefit from a retention election, recused himself.

As a result, the court split 3-3 and the opinion of the three-judge panel at the Court of Appeals stood.

Chief Justice Mark Martin recently attempted to implement a new rule to avoid such situations by allowing a temporary judge to be appointed in place of the justice who had to recuse themselves.

That rule was rescinded weeks later amid questions and controversy.

The new legislative proposal would allow the Court of Appeals to consider a case as an entire panel of 15 in cases where there was not an odd number of justices available to hear a case at the Supreme Court.

Such a proposal more closely aligns with how federal appellate courts operate, which allow for the Court of Appeals to hear cases en banc after a decision from a three-judge panel.

A similar proposal was originally introduced in 1999, legislative records show. Cooper is listed as a sponsor of the bill.

Records show the proposal was approved by the Senate but never got a vote in the House.

Superintendent of Public Instruction to get more powers
Legislation introduced Wednesday night also aims to expand the powers of the North Carolina Superintendent of Public Instruction.

The superintendent is an elected position and serves as a member of the Council of State but has very little day-to-day authority in running the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction.

Republican Mark Johnson beat incumbent Democrat June Atkinson in November to become the next Superintendent of Public Instruction.

Under the new legislation, Johnson will gain additional oversight powers in his chamber that currently reside with the State Board of Education.

Legislative records show the General Assembly approved a similar bill in 1995 when Democrats controlled the Senate.

Control of NCDPI was later moved largely from the Superintendent of Public Instruction to the State School Board in different legislation.

Governors’ appointments, political hiring curtailed
Another proposal in House Bill 17, which also contains the provisions expanding power of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, limits the number of political employees that the governor can hire.

When Pat McCrory took office, the general assembly changed the law and allowed him to hire up to 1,500 political employees—or those subject to being hired and fired at the will of whoever is in office—across executive branch agencies overseen by the governor.

Under the new proposal in HB17, that number would shrink to 300.

If HB17 is to become law as currently written, it will not be the first time the legislature has legislated cuts to political hiring.

A law passed in 1997, when Roy Cooper was the Senate Majority Leader, capped the number of political employees at just 100.

“The legislature is trying to violate the will of the people, by declaring that Governor-Elect Cooper will only be able to declare 300 state employees exempt, 1,200 employees fewer than Governor McCrory was afforded in 2013, and 100 fewer than under Gov. Perdue,” Jamal Cooper, a spokesman for the North Carolina Democratic Party, said in a statement reacting to the proposals unveiled Wednesday night.

Another provision of HB17 would require the Senate to confirm agency heads appointed by the governor.

Currently, the governor appoints secretaries to run executive branch agencies without any oversight. Under the new proposal, cabinet secretaries will require approval by the senate.

A review of bills voted on during Cooper’s tenure as Senate Majority Leader did not find a basis for such a move in previous legislation.

The proposal has already been criticized by Democrats in their list of “top 6 NCGOP power grabs” emailed Wednesday night.

Little, the NCDP spokesman, referred to Senate confirmation as “an unprecedented infringement on the discretion given to North Carolina's governors to pick their own cabinets.”

Republicans’ proposed bills include other changes
Other proposals included in the bills introduced by Republican leadership Wednesday night include efforts to re-organize the North Carolina State Board of Elections, implement a series of regulatory reforms and return state judicial races to having a party affiliation.

A majority of the bill introduced in the Senate focuses on the re-organization of the elections board.

Currently, the board is made up of five members. Three of the members belong to the party of the sitting governor. County elections boards are made up of three members, two of which belong to the same party as the governor.

Under the new proposal, the board would be expanded to eight members—four members from each of the two major parties—and would have oversight of ethics and lobbying compliance in addition to administering elections and enforcing compliance with the state’s elections laws.

The majority vote on the new board would require six of the eight members.

The Senate bill would also return statewide judicial races to partisan contests, where candidates are identified by party affiliation.

Statewide judicial candidates used to be elected by party affiliation until Democrats changed the system after a series of wins by Republicans.

I-77 legislation introduced
Members of the General Assembly proposed other bills not in coordination with Republican leadership.

A trio of Mecklenburg County lawmakers—Representatives Tricia Cotham, John Bradford and Justin Moore—filed two bills aimed at stopping the I-77 toll project.

It remains unclear whether either of the bills will receive a hearing in committee or reach the House floor for a vote.

Copyright 2016 WBTV. All rights reserved.


There is much more to this, but it is an ongoing process. It helps to understand the legislative process which apparently few of you do.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,319
Reaction score
1,502
Points
113
...because you have no morals or ethics.
Your ideology is based in immoral and unethical actions by the state. Forgive me if I don't find your objection to the "other team" doing the same as a principled one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
9,942
Reaction score
1,019
Points
113
Here is a reasonably accurate take on what is going on even though it comes from a liberal source.

.
.
.

There is much more to this, but it is an ongoing process. It helps to understand the legislative process which apparently few of you do.
So to recap, there's no legislative precedent for the reorganization of the elections board. The elections board is the big one because while Republicans controlled it they used to to severely reduce the polling places in Democratic areas. Now that they will not control it they want it to be bi-partisan.

There is also no precedent for a change to the way University trustees are appointed or requiring the Senate to confirm agency heads appointed by the governor.

Also, while there is a precedent for limiting hiring, that limit was raised substantially by a Republican congress and a Republican governor, but now that a Democratic governor is coming in, they want to drop it back down.
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,658
Reaction score
1,765
Points
113
So to recap, there's no legislative precedent for the reorganization of the elections board. The elections board is the big one because while Republicans controlled it they used to to severely reduce the polling places in Democratic areas. Now that they will not control it they want it to be bi-partisan.

There is also no precedent for a change to the way University trustees are appointed or requiring the Senate to confirm agency heads appointed by the governor.

Also, while there is a precedent for limiting hiring, that limit was raised substantially by a Republican congress and a Republican governor, but now that a Democratic governor is coming in, they want to drop it back down.
It's worth noting that the reason the Republicans have a supermajority in both houses is racial gerrymandering that was recently ruled unconstitutional.
 

diehard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
31,878
Reaction score
107
Points
63
It's worth noting that the reason the Republicans have a supermajority in both houses is racial gerrymandering that was recently ruled unconstitutional.
Those districts were established when the Ds controlled the house, the senate, and the Governor's mansion. But nice try anyhow!
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
9,942
Reaction score
1,019
Points
113
Those districts were established when the Ds controlled the house, the senate, and the Governor's mansion. But nice try anyhow!
That is a straight up lie.

Here's the court ruling, including a reference to districts drawn in 2011:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3010776-Redistricting-Ruling.html

In 2011 both the NC Senate and House had Republican majorities:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina_General_Assembly_of_2011–12

Although there was a Democratic governor in 2011, the Governor cannot veto redistricting:

https://ballotpedia.org/Redistricting_in_North_Carolina

You'll also see here that the people disappointed with the ruling are Republicans:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article95080647.html

Redistricting leaders in the House and Senate, Rep. David Lewis of Harnett County and Sen. Bob Rucho of Mecklenburg County, said in a statement that their attorneys are reviewing the ruling. After the legislature approved the districts, the U.S. Department of Justice signed off on them in a process called “preclearance.”

“We are disappointed in the district court’s opinion, which contradicts the Obama Justice Department’s preclearance of these maps and rulings from the N.C. Supreme Court upholding them as constitutional,” Lewis and Rucho wrote. “However, we are relieved for voters that the district court did not disrupt the current election that is already underway. Our attorneys are currently reviewing today’s ruling and evaluating next steps.”
 

diehard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
31,878
Reaction score
107
Points
63
So to recap, there's no legislative precedent for the reorganization of the elections board. The elections board is the big one because while Republicans controlled it they used to to severely reduce the polling places in Democratic areas. Now that they will not control it they want it to be bi-partisan.

The state BOE does not set the polling places. They do approve/disapprove the ones that are requested by the county BOEs. The county commissioners control the budget for the local BOEs which plays an important role in determining polling places. You really have no clue how things work. You just mindlessly repeat false talking points. Students really should vote by absentee ballot in their home precinct. I have explained this more times than I care to say. Blindly stupid posts here by progressives. Uniformed and belligerent. An ugly combination.

There is also no precedent for a change to the way University trustees are appointed or requiring the Senate to confirm agency heads appointed by the governor.

The Governor-elect immediately established the need for oversight of these appointments. By immediately naming Ken Eudy as his senior advisor it left no choice but to require oversight of his appointees. He also moved up his swearing in to January1st while still having his inauguration later in the month. That created the urgency to move now to limit his damage to this state that has had a miraculous recovery in the last 4 years. Ken Eudy can NOT be allowed to hold a position of importance in NC.

Also, while there is a precedent for limiting hiring, that limit was raised substantially by a Republican congress and a Republican governor, but now that a Democratic governor is coming in, they want to drop it back down.
Drop it back down. Yes, the Ds have a horrid history. Governor Easley was conflict on a campaign finance felony charge after he left office.
https://www.carolinajournal.com/news-article/easley-cops-a-plea-in-campaign-finance-probe/
It is not a shock to have Democrat lawmakers convicted of crimes in NC. They are very progressive and more progressive you are the more criminal you are. Think 3 million illegal voters for Hillary on a national basis. It is what progressives are. Crooks.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
9,942
Reaction score
1,019
Points
113
A) Nice deflection on the Governor Easley stuff. Not at all relevant to the current discussion, but it's a good attempt to confuse the issue.

B) THE COUNTY BOARDS ARE CHOSEN BY THE STATE BOARD! I suspect you know this, but are hoping that no one else will find it out.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article121112373.html

Three-member county boards are chosen by the state board with no more than two from the same party



C) The legislation being proposed also attempts to guarantee the BOE is chaired by a Republican during Presidential election years.

http://wfae.org/post/heres-why-board-elections-bill-gives-advantage-republicans
 
Top Bottom