VoterRadio.com carried debate on Redistricting on the House floor; House now in recess

Darren Jackson, (D-Wake), rebutted statements from GOP leaders on the "curative" bills. Deborah Ross, (D-Wake)asked if Sen. Dan Blue's requested changes would be considered. (No answer.)

Apparently Blue's objections will not be considered. The chair limited debate on the bill. Rep. Paul Stam (R-Wake) spoke and defended the bills as presented by the leaders.

House Committee substitute HB 679. Electronic Vote recorded:
64 ayes
47 nays

Bill sent to the Senate Chamber by special messenger.

According to House Calendar, other bills for committee will be considered:
Session Law 2011-203, Wake
Session Law 2011-404, House

HB 777 "Redistricting Curative Bill" on all areas relating to maps with voting precincts left out because of a "computer programming error that failed to properly record the desires of the Redistricting Committee". In this bill the census tracts were inadvertently not transferred to the maps.

This bill was discussed already in Committee debate todaay. "This issue was discovered by State Board of Election during use for Wake County School Board races."

Legislative staff, including Bill Drafter, Gerry Cohen, have presented in Committee on this bill.

This session law was reviewed by the US Dept. of Justice. They reviewed the "stats from each district to determine the maps were not retrogressive."

The staff used a program called "Maptitude" and the error occurred in generating the maps according to Committee Chair, David Lewis, of Harnett County.

This bill here does not solve the underlying problem with this bill. The DOJ did clear this bill on narrow issues, but they did not look at the entire bill.

"In the end i don't think i would be allowed to vote for this bill, as it violates the State Constitution."--Rep. Grier Martin. His comments were ruled out of order.

The Speaker ruled against Rep. Martin and Rep. Joe Hackney, They say HB 777 is unconstitutional, but were ruled out of order.

Now Speaker Tillis has allowed Rep. Grier Martin (D-Wake) to address the constitutionality of the bill. Martin asked the House to set aside the bill and not to pass it.

480,000 people have been inadvertently put in the wrong place or not counted at all in the language of the bill. The title of the bill is a "curative action" which hides hundreds of thousands of changes made to the maps.

"It was the intent of the legislature to pass a bill, but the maps, the statistics, other documents, not the best intentions of the legislature--in the end the plans that were omitted. The maps is established. We only had one shot at that, and the chance is over."

The member saying this is from Rep. Rick Glazier,(D-Cumberland County). He is being questioned by Rep. Lewis. Lewis asks, "Is it not our perogative to correct it."

"Good intentions are not enough. You can fix it, but you have to first declare the first bill unconstitutional, and then fix it. That has not been done."

If you want to be precise there are 267,000 voters disenfranchised by the bill, according to House member Rick Glazier.

Former Speaker Joe Hackney(D-Orange)addressed the House membership on the requirements of the Voting Rights Act.

He said the bill being debate cannot be "fixed until the Court declares it unconstitutional, or 10 years have passed." "Statistics are not laws, the words of the bill are laws, so the DOJ has not actually reviewed the proposed bill."

Hackney added "It would seem Rep. Lewis should accept some responsibility for the 'computer glitches' in the defective bill that was passed.:

The GOP leaders say the problems are simply a software error that has nothing to do with legislative intent. In the minority's reps' proposed maps, census blocks were missed, too.

Rep. Paul Stam is now debating the bill and addressing Rep. Grier Martin's arguments.

Rep. Mickey Michaux (D-Durham) in rebutting Rep. Stam:
"What was passed was a bill that set out the districts, but some of those things were left out of the bill that became law."

Rep. Lewis. the House GOP Committee Chair, responded to Michaux's comments about the "un-constitutionality" of the bill. "it seems that what you and your colleagues are suggesting is a circular argument."

He asked the rep. from Durham how his suggestions serve the "people of the state." Michaux says look at what the printed word says and the state Constitution. You could have proposed a bill to override what you did before."