Check out this link to Riley's Office.
http://governorpress.alabama.gov/pr/pr-2008-02-28-01-pac.asp
Thursday, February 28, 2008
No Dice on PAC to PAC Bill
The House voted to non-concur with the Senate version of a bill that would stop the practice of transfering money between political action committees (PAC) to hide campaign contributions.
The bill will now go to a conference committee of members of the House and Senate where they will either negotiate a bill they can live with it or kill the bill again.
The Senate passed a much revised version of Rep. Jeff McLaughlin's bill that removed legislative caucuses from being defined as a PAC.
McLaughlin said he's happy that the Senate finally passed a bill, he's just frustrated it wasn't the bill that unanimously passed the House.
"The senate disregarded the work of the House, and substituted our bill and been changed significantly," he said. "We have unanimously voted a very clean PAC-to-PAC prohibition bill in this chamber, and we want a clean bill."
Represenatives McLaughlin (D-Guntersville), Mac McCutcheon, R-Capshaw, and Rod Scott, D-Fairfield, will be a part of the conference committee.
The bill will now go to a conference committee of members of the House and Senate where they will either negotiate a bill they can live with it or kill the bill again.
The Senate passed a much revised version of Rep. Jeff McLaughlin's bill that removed legislative caucuses from being defined as a PAC.
McLaughlin said he's happy that the Senate finally passed a bill, he's just frustrated it wasn't the bill that unanimously passed the House.
"The senate disregarded the work of the House, and substituted our bill and been changed significantly," he said. "We have unanimously voted a very clean PAC-to-PAC prohibition bill in this chamber, and we want a clean bill."
Represenatives McLaughlin (D-Guntersville), Mac McCutcheon, R-Capshaw, and Rod Scott, D-Fairfield, will be a part of the conference committee.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
The Count Continues
The Governor's Office has taken to counting the number of days its been since the Democratic Party promised to pass legislation to end annual property appraisals.
Apparently, the Dems made the promise in their 2006 campaign platform "Covenant for the Future."
Now if you've been reading this blog at all, you know the Dems have vowed to make Riley undo the annual property appraisals by executive order.
They allege that he is the one who used his executive order to institute annual appraisals in the first place.
Senate Republicans say no such executive order exists.
There is legislation afoot that would change the law, but if you've been reading this blog you know how far its gotten (nowhere).
So if you feel like it, count with the governor. He says its now up to 548 days.
Apparently, the Dems made the promise in their 2006 campaign platform "Covenant for the Future."
Now if you've been reading this blog at all, you know the Dems have vowed to make Riley undo the annual property appraisals by executive order.
They allege that he is the one who used his executive order to institute annual appraisals in the first place.
Senate Republicans say no such executive order exists.
There is legislation afoot that would change the law, but if you've been reading this blog you know how far its gotten (nowhere).
So if you feel like it, count with the governor. He says its now up to 548 days.
On This We Can Agree
There is one thing this legislative session that Gov. Bob Riley and the Senate Democratic Caucus can agree on: the stimulus rebate tax cut.
Both the governor and the caucus support passing legislation that ensures that the federal tax rebates that turn up in peoples' mailboxes don't get hit with state taxes.
But who gets to take credit for it is a whole different matter.
The Senate Democratic Caucus jumped out first by acknowledging the need to pass legislation to eliminate state taxes on the rebates.
The only problem with that is any bill that deals with money--the expenditure or approrpriation of state funds--has to originate in the House.
While the Dems were working up a bill, Gov. Riley began publicly prevailing on the State Legislature to take action urging them to pass a bill this week.
The problem with that is it takes roughly five legislative days to pass a bill, and that's only if things run smoothly.
As you know, the State Legislature has a problem with smooth.
The Dems finally got their bill together and it is being sponsered by Rep. Terry Spicer, D-Elba.
And just so Riley knows who the Dems think should get the credit for passing the legislation, they wrote himea little letter thanking him in advance for supporting their stimulus plan and urging him to call his fellow Republicans to ask them to support it.
It reads: "Members of the Senate Democratic Caucus look forward to attending our bill signing ceremony with you."
I don't know about you , but if I were a betting woman I would say that Alabamians aren't giving anybody any credit until a bill is signed and their untaxed checks are in the mail.
Both the governor and the caucus support passing legislation that ensures that the federal tax rebates that turn up in peoples' mailboxes don't get hit with state taxes.
But who gets to take credit for it is a whole different matter.
The Senate Democratic Caucus jumped out first by acknowledging the need to pass legislation to eliminate state taxes on the rebates.
The only problem with that is any bill that deals with money--the expenditure or approrpriation of state funds--has to originate in the House.
While the Dems were working up a bill, Gov. Riley began publicly prevailing on the State Legislature to take action urging them to pass a bill this week.
The problem with that is it takes roughly five legislative days to pass a bill, and that's only if things run smoothly.
As you know, the State Legislature has a problem with smooth.
The Dems finally got their bill together and it is being sponsered by Rep. Terry Spicer, D-Elba.
And just so Riley knows who the Dems think should get the credit for passing the legislation, they wrote himea little letter thanking him in advance for supporting their stimulus plan and urging him to call his fellow Republicans to ask them to support it.
It reads: "Members of the Senate Democratic Caucus look forward to attending our bill signing ceremony with you."
I don't know about you , but if I were a betting woman I would say that Alabamians aren't giving anybody any credit until a bill is signed and their untaxed checks are in the mail.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Line in The Sand
The Senate Democratic Caucus and Gov. Bob Riley have each drawn a line in the sand over the issue of reversing annual property tax appraisals, and they are each daring the other to cross it.
Last week the Dems vowed that until Riley uses his executive order to reverse the annual property appraisals that he signed into law, they will pass a resolution every day the State Legislature meets calling on him to make the change.
Senate Majority Leader Zeb Little, D-Cullman, said Riley signed annual property appraisals into law with the stroke of a pen and he can undo them the same way.
"Gov. Riley instituted the largest tax increase in the history of the state without a vote of the people, and without the vote of the Legislature," Little said.
But Little and the members of the caucus aren't the only ones with a good memory.
According to a press release from Riley's office, 547 days ago the Dems promised to pass a bill and change the law on annual appraisals.
"They didn’t promise to pass resolutions urging others to take action," Riley said in the release. "Resolutions cannot change the law. Only legislation can change the law, and they promised specifically to 'introduce legislation' and 'vote to enact' a bill changing property reappraisals."
With each side continuing to stand its ground, Alabamians might need to get their checkbooks ready so they can continue to pay their annual property tax bills--at least until it's politically expedient to change the law.
Does it matter to you who changes the law? Let me know what you think with a post.
Last week the Dems vowed that until Riley uses his executive order to reverse the annual property appraisals that he signed into law, they will pass a resolution every day the State Legislature meets calling on him to make the change.
Senate Majority Leader Zeb Little, D-Cullman, said Riley signed annual property appraisals into law with the stroke of a pen and he can undo them the same way.
"Gov. Riley instituted the largest tax increase in the history of the state without a vote of the people, and without the vote of the Legislature," Little said.
But Little and the members of the caucus aren't the only ones with a good memory.
According to a press release from Riley's office, 547 days ago the Dems promised to pass a bill and change the law on annual appraisals.
"They didn’t promise to pass resolutions urging others to take action," Riley said in the release. "Resolutions cannot change the law. Only legislation can change the law, and they promised specifically to 'introduce legislation' and 'vote to enact' a bill changing property reappraisals."
With each side continuing to stand its ground, Alabamians might need to get their checkbooks ready so they can continue to pay their annual property tax bills--at least until it's politically expedient to change the law.
Does it matter to you who changes the law? Let me know what you think with a post.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Change in the State of State Address Line Up
House Majority Leader Rep. Ken Guin, D-Carbon Hill, will deliver the Democratic response following Gov. Bob Riley's State of the State address.
Lt. Gov. Jim Folsom Jr. was originally scheduled to do the job.
Remember, Riley's speech will be broadcast on Alabama Public Television at 6:30 p.m.
Lt. Gov. Jim Folsom Jr. was originally scheduled to do the job.
Remember, Riley's speech will be broadcast on Alabama Public Television at 6:30 p.m.
Hot in Here
The flames have been officially fanned in the Alabama Senate.
Members of the Democratic majority passed a resolution Tuesday to discourage senators from punching each other out on the Senate floor.
While it might seem like senators would be on their Ps and Qs after the embarassing dust up between Sen. Charles Bishop, R-Jasper, and Sen. Lowell Barron, D-Fyffe, Sen. Hank Sanders, D-Selma, wanted a little more security--from himself.
As he said after the resolution was passed, "I'm not sure I could have refrained from hitting back if he had hit me."
Mind you this resolution is not about punishing Bishop. It's about clamping down the potential Bishops that apparently lurks inside every State Senator.
Now, brawling senators will have a security escort whenever they're in the Senate chamber, and the Senate can vote to apply the resolution retroactively to Bishop.
The security detail could be lifted if a senator successfully completes anger management classes.
Bishop, of course, is taking it personal.
In an Oscar-worthy perfomance he declared on the Senate floor that Sanders drew up the resolution in retaliation against him for not supporting Sanders' slavery bill last session.
Then he stalked out of the room, saying he wouldn't return until he'd sought the advice of his lawyer. So he'll be back next Tuesday.
Republicans say the Dems are once again changing the rules.
If you will recall squabbling over the rules is what caused the shutdown in the Senate last year.
Senate rules allow for the Ethics and Conduct Committee to deal with senators behaving badly, Republicans say.
That committee was responsible for handling the complaint against Bishop, but only its members know whether Bishop was punished or not.
Will the drama ever end? Probably not. Stay tuned friends.
Members of the Democratic majority passed a resolution Tuesday to discourage senators from punching each other out on the Senate floor.
While it might seem like senators would be on their Ps and Qs after the embarassing dust up between Sen. Charles Bishop, R-Jasper, and Sen. Lowell Barron, D-Fyffe, Sen. Hank Sanders, D-Selma, wanted a little more security--from himself.
As he said after the resolution was passed, "I'm not sure I could have refrained from hitting back if he had hit me."
Mind you this resolution is not about punishing Bishop. It's about clamping down the potential Bishops that apparently lurks inside every State Senator.
Now, brawling senators will have a security escort whenever they're in the Senate chamber, and the Senate can vote to apply the resolution retroactively to Bishop.
The security detail could be lifted if a senator successfully completes anger management classes.
Bishop, of course, is taking it personal.
In an Oscar-worthy perfomance he declared on the Senate floor that Sanders drew up the resolution in retaliation against him for not supporting Sanders' slavery bill last session.
Then he stalked out of the room, saying he wouldn't return until he'd sought the advice of his lawyer. So he'll be back next Tuesday.
Republicans say the Dems are once again changing the rules.
If you will recall squabbling over the rules is what caused the shutdown in the Senate last year.
Senate rules allow for the Ethics and Conduct Committee to deal with senators behaving badly, Republicans say.
That committee was responsible for handling the complaint against Bishop, but only its members know whether Bishop was punished or not.
Will the drama ever end? Probably not. Stay tuned friends.
Riley's State of the State Address
Don't forget to watch Gov. Bob Riley deliver his State of the State tonight.
Riley is expected to stress the need for perserving and expanding education programs such as the Alabama Reading Initiative, the Alabama Math, Science and Technology Initiative and the ACCESS Distance Learning program.
He will also speak about his desire to expand the state's voluntary pre-K program to 21,000 4-year-olds by 2011.
Coverage of the address starts on Alabama Public Television at 6 p.m.
Riley's speech begins at 6:30 p.m., with a Democratic response coming from Lt. Gov. Jim Folsom Jr. immediately after.
Keep an eye on the Capitol Letters blog for interesting tidbits and observations. We'll also try to get you a copy of Riley's complete text.
I want to know what you think, so don't forget to post your comments.
Riley is expected to stress the need for perserving and expanding education programs such as the Alabama Reading Initiative, the Alabama Math, Science and Technology Initiative and the ACCESS Distance Learning program.
He will also speak about his desire to expand the state's voluntary pre-K program to 21,000 4-year-olds by 2011.
Coverage of the address starts on Alabama Public Television at 6 p.m.
Riley's speech begins at 6:30 p.m., with a Democratic response coming from Lt. Gov. Jim Folsom Jr. immediately after.
Keep an eye on the Capitol Letters blog for interesting tidbits and observations. We'll also try to get you a copy of Riley's complete text.
I want to know what you think, so don't forget to post your comments.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Alabama Wins Critical Water War Victory
MONTGOMERY—Gov. Bob Riley hailed a major victory today for Alabama in its long-running water war with Georgia.
The United States Court of Appeals in Washington ruled today that a secret settlement agreement between Georgia, the Corps of Engineers, and Atlanta-area water users is illegal under federal law.
The agreement, which was signed in 2003, would have allocated nearly 25% of Lake Lanier, a federal reservoir on the Chattahoochee River, for Atlanta’s water supply. This would have resulted in major reductions in water reaching Alabama downstream.
“This is the most consequential legal ruling in the 18-year history of the water war, and one of the most important in the history of the State of Alabama,” Riley said. “The ruling invalidates the massive water grab that Georgia tried to pull off. The ruling will have far reaching consequences.
"It establishes that the decades-old practice of Atlanta taking more and more water from the federal reservoirs in the Coosa and Chattahoochee rivers without any legal authority to do so will not stand,” Riley said.
In 1990, Alabama challenged the practices of the Corps of Engineers to elevate Atlanta’s water supply needs over downstream interests in Alabama.
Alabama is currently engaged in discussions with Georgia and Florida to reach a solution to the interstate water dispute.
“I hope this ruling will enhance the prospects for a fair and equitable deal among the three states,” said Riley. “The secret agreement that the appellate court threw out today had been a major stumbling block for the last five years in our efforts to work out a reasonable sharing deal for this precious resource.”
The United States Court of Appeals in Washington ruled today that a secret settlement agreement between Georgia, the Corps of Engineers, and Atlanta-area water users is illegal under federal law.
The agreement, which was signed in 2003, would have allocated nearly 25% of Lake Lanier, a federal reservoir on the Chattahoochee River, for Atlanta’s water supply. This would have resulted in major reductions in water reaching Alabama downstream.
“This is the most consequential legal ruling in the 18-year history of the water war, and one of the most important in the history of the State of Alabama,” Riley said. “The ruling invalidates the massive water grab that Georgia tried to pull off. The ruling will have far reaching consequences.
"It establishes that the decades-old practice of Atlanta taking more and more water from the federal reservoirs in the Coosa and Chattahoochee rivers without any legal authority to do so will not stand,” Riley said.
In 1990, Alabama challenged the practices of the Corps of Engineers to elevate Atlanta’s water supply needs over downstream interests in Alabama.
Alabama is currently engaged in discussions with Georgia and Florida to reach a solution to the interstate water dispute.
“I hope this ruling will enhance the prospects for a fair and equitable deal among the three states,” said Riley. “The secret agreement that the appellate court threw out today had been a major stumbling block for the last five years in our efforts to work out a reasonable sharing deal for this precious resource.”
Embers still Warm
A dispute that ended in fisticuffs between two senators on the last day of the 2007 session doesn't appear to be over just yet.
Senators are floating a resolution about the matter, and it could come up during today's session.
For those who might not remember, Sen. Charles Bishop punched Sen. Lowell Barron after Barron allegedly insulted his mother.
The Senate Ethics Committee decided Bishop's punishment in executive session Jan. 31, but Bishop is upset that the matter isn't officially history.
The committee refused to share what punishment Bishop will receive citing that under its rules such a complaint and its resolution are to be dealt with privately.
Bishop said while he's not mad at anyone on the committee of four Democrats and one Repbulican he believes that the matter has been mishandled.
Bishop said Barron should receive punishment because of his role in the dispute.
"We can't allow verbal abuse on the Senate floor," he said. "We certainly can't have physical abuse either."
The sponsor and the content of the resolution remain a mystery at this time.
Senators are floating a resolution about the matter, and it could come up during today's session.
For those who might not remember, Sen. Charles Bishop punched Sen. Lowell Barron after Barron allegedly insulted his mother.
The Senate Ethics Committee decided Bishop's punishment in executive session Jan. 31, but Bishop is upset that the matter isn't officially history.
The committee refused to share what punishment Bishop will receive citing that under its rules such a complaint and its resolution are to be dealt with privately.
Bishop said while he's not mad at anyone on the committee of four Democrats and one Repbulican he believes that the matter has been mishandled.
Bishop said Barron should receive punishment because of his role in the dispute.
"We can't allow verbal abuse on the Senate floor," he said. "We certainly can't have physical abuse either."
The sponsor and the content of the resolution remain a mystery at this time.
Senate Remembers Ben Preuitt Stanford
The Senate opened the 2008 session by passing a resolution recognizing the death of Sen. Jim Preuitt's grandson, Benjamin Preuitt Stanford.
The resolution was introduced by Speaker Pro-Tem Sen. Hinton Mitchem, and co-signed by all of the members of the Senate.
In a choked voice Preuit spoke of his gratitude to his fellow senate members for their outpouring of support.
"Ben was a grandson that his grandmother and I loved dearly," he said. "I thank this every member of this body and if there is anything I can ever do call on me anytime."
After mysteriously going missing, Standford was found dead near Villa Rica, Ga. in November 2007.
The resolution was introduced by Speaker Pro-Tem Sen. Hinton Mitchem, and co-signed by all of the members of the Senate.
In a choked voice Preuit spoke of his gratitude to his fellow senate members for their outpouring of support.
"Ben was a grandson that his grandmother and I loved dearly," he said. "I thank this every member of this body and if there is anything I can ever do call on me anytime."
After mysteriously going missing, Standford was found dead near Villa Rica, Ga. in November 2007.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)