DAG McCrory and the Bergermeister at odds over Veto overrides

Serious conflict or Kabuki theater?

"All governors, without regard to party, swear an oath to uphold the Constitution," Berger said. "We expect Gov. McCrory to perform his constitutional duty to enforce the law."

McCrory said he would not enforce the new law requiring drug testing of some welfare recipients until the legislature finds the money to pay for it. And he said there would be additional legal scrutiny of the new law making it easier to hire immigrant employees.

At first glance this might appear to be nothing more than a minor tiff between power-hungry Republicans. But there could be some deeper roots, related to some previous power struggles in the NC GOP.


Tell you what I'd like to know

Why nearly half of House Democrats voted "Aye" on drug-testing Welfare applicants?

Is this one of those cases where they knew it was going to pass anyway, and they wanted support from Tillis (or whoever) for something else, or are they starting to sympathize and agree with the GOP's draconian handling of public assistance programs?

I don't give a rat's ass that they switched back for the Veto override vote. The fact they supported this in the first place gave Berger the ability to rightly claim this was a bi-partisan bill, and that makes me sick to my stomach.

That bill had a long, winding road

The original bill that came out of the House passed with the likes of Deborah Ross and Rick Glazier voting for it.

Then it went to the Senate and got completely screwed up.

So the House didn't agree with the Senate's version, and sent it to a conference committee.

This is where is gets interesting.

Listen to Rep. Glazier's comments on the House floor for the veto override about why the deal struck in conference committee was a betrayal.



But I think that vote I linked

took place after the conference committee screwed it up. Is that right? If so, those Dem votes are still questionable.


... but there was considerable negotiation within the House about various parts of the bill.

Glazier's floor comments explain the disconnect very well.

Then again, what doesn't Glazier do very well?


Unfunded mandates are a problem now?

McCrory cited the lack of funds in his refusal to implement this law. This is not the first law passed by this GA that requires funds it neglected to budget, but Gov. Pat chose this one to stand on his hind legs and object to.

The other laws have received objections from the County Commissions and Municipal governments, who will have to pay for them, all year. Suddenly, McCrory is going to be fiscally responsible. It bears watching.

Thanks for the link

I have to say, I'm pretty impressed by Dr. Fulghum's testimony. Whatever other views he holds, he was spot-on about the punitive nature of some of the provisions in this bill (excuse me, law).

Too bad it's not catching