Crowley: Tim Crowley
Vajda: Eszter Vajda
Henry:  Johanna Henry
Bush: George W. Bush, [R] President of the United States
Clinton: Bill Clinton, [D] Former President of the United States
Clodfelter: Sen. Dan Clodfelter, [D] Mecklenburg County
Rand: Sen. Tony Rand, [D] Majority Leader
Ross:  Rep. Deborah Ross, [D] Wake County
Ashe: Mike Ashe, Election Director, Durham County
Bartlett: Gary Bartlett, Director, State Board of Elections
Murphy: Warren Murphy, Co-Chair, Common Cause
Allen:David Allen, Plan 9 Publishing
Troxler:Steve Troxler, NC Agriculture Commissioner
Haire:Rep. Phillip Haire, [D] Jackson County
Garrou:Sen. Linda Garrou, [D] Forsyth County
Sherrill: Rep. Wilma Sherrill, [R] Buncombe County
Dalton: Sen. Walter Dalton, [D] Co-Chair, Appropriations Committee
Miller:Cong. Brad Miller, [D] 13 th District
Budzynski:Mike Budzynski, Forensic Biology Section Supervisor, SBI
Parker:Chris Parker, DNA Database Manager
Cooper: Roy Cooper, NC Attorney General
Rudinger:Jennifer Rudinger, Executive Director, ACLU of NC
Hackney: Rep. Joe Hackney, [D] Majority Leader
Gillespie: Rep. Mitch Gillespie, [R] Minority Whip
Leslie:Laura Leslie, WUNC-FM
Smith:Barry Smith, Freedom Newspapers
Robertson:  Gary Robertson, Associated Press

Narrator:   

[BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS]

Coming up:    Lawmakers start to weigh in on election reforms.   There is still one statewide race undecided three months after the election and some lawmakers disagree with some of the court decisions handed down.   One statewide race was decided last week and the first Republican agricultural commissioner was sworn in this week.   Plus, two presidents visit North Carolina in the same week.   That and more coming up.  

[THEME MUSIC]

Voiceover:    This program was made possible by contributions to UNC-TV from viewers like you.   Thank you.

[THEME MUSIC]

[ROLL PROGRAM TITLES]

Crowley:    Good evening everyone.   I’m Tim Crowley.   Thanks for joining us.

Vajda:   And I’m Eszter Vajda.   Tonight we take an in-depth look at election system changes some lawmakers are pushing, from settling contested elections in the general assembly to provisional ballot voting to voting equipment. We will have the latest details of the legislative fallout from November’s election.

Crowley:    Also tonight we hear from Steve Troxler, the newly sworn in commissioner of agriculture.   President Bush visited North Carolina touting Social Security reform and former President Bill Clinton was also in North Carolina talking about health care.  

Vajda:   But first we begin tonight with election reforms.

[BEGIN TOP STORY SEGMENT – ELECTION REFORMS]

Vajda:   A recent ruling by the North Carolina Supreme Court concerning provisional ballots in November’s election is causing some lawmakers to take action.   The ruling last week through out at least 11,000 ballots cast by voters outside their home precinct.   Senators Dan Clodfelter and Tony Rand plan to introduce a bill that would reinforce an existing statute they say makes out-of-precinct voting legitimate.   Clodfelter says the constitution is clear; votes cast in a person’s county but outside of their precinct should be counted.

Clodfelter:    They were eligible to vote.   They were not disqualified for any reason.   They did exactly what the election officials told them they should do in order to cast a ballot.   And it has long been the law in North Carolina that a voter who is innocent in those circumstances, that vote counts.   The error of the election official is not attributed to the voter, but that is what the supreme court has done.

Rand:   For a group of people who are residents of their precinct, do what they are told to do by their election judges and by people running the election, to have their votes disqualified appears to me to be really a travesty of democracy.

Vajda:   The bill heads to the Senate Judiciary Committee once it is introduced.   Tim?

Crowley:    Another bill spawned from the court challenges as part of November’s election involves the commissioner of agriculture and state superintendent races.   It would make clear that contested elections for legislative and state offices would go to the general assembly rather than the courts.   The state constitution gives the authority to resolve a contested race to the general assembly but legal procedures to evaluate and vote on these matters was repealed 35 years ago.

Ross:   This really is about the separation of powers.   If the constitution says that the general assembly is responsible for a particular task, then the general assembly needs to take that obligation seriously and set up a way of doing it.

Crowley:    The bill ultimately could affect the outcome of the race for superintendent of public instruction, which hasn’t been decided more than three months after the November election.

Vajda:   A committee looking into ways to reform North Carolina’s voting system wrapped up its meeting this week and sent a draft of suggestions to the general assembly.

Crowley:    Johanna Henry has been following the story.   Johanna, what is the latest on the legislation?

Henry:   Tim and Eszter, even before the join select committee adjourned its final meeting, bills were filed based on its findings.   It is part of an effort to increase voter confidence in the system after thousands of votes were lost in Carteret County.  

Durham County Board of Elections Director Mike Ashe loves his optic scan voting machines.  He says they help give him the ability to look each voter in the eye and say:

Ashe:   Secret ballot will be honestly counted and honestly recorded.   It is an awesome system.

Henry:   But just because Ashe says optic scan machines work great in his county doesn’t mean he thinks all counties should use the same system.  

Ashe:   I think sometimes they say this is the only way; I don’t necessarily agree with that.   I think there are a lot of ways.  What is right for Durham County may be absolutely incorrect for some others.

Henry:   In an optic scan machine like this one, the ballot becomes the paper trail.   According to state law, they are kept for 22 months for federal elections and 4 months for local elections.   Now according to a legislative study commission, all voting systems in North Carolina should be required to have some kind of paper trail.   Even the DRE, or Digital Record Electronic machines.  The directive is part of a bill designed to improve public confidence in elections.   In the first proposal, the committee directs that by next year every voting system generate a paper ballot.   Each voting system vendor must provide the code or program that counts each vote to the state so technicians can look for discrepancies.   It directs the state board of elections to negotiate a set price for voting systems that would apply to every state.   It also sets up a hand count in a sampling of precincts and a sample hand recount for any candidate entitled to a recount.   The measure calls on the state to reimburse counties for any upgrades they might need to bring its voting system into compliance with any new laws.   The second proposal allows state employees to serve as poll workers without using vacation time.   The third proposal allows county boards to begin the process of counting absentee votes before election day. Proposal four requires a pilot program that would set up one stop early voting sites through election day instead of precinct by precinct sites.   And finally Proposal 5 addresses the issue of lost votes in Carteret County.  A county board would allow citizens whose votes were lost to recast their votes.

Bartlett:   I think that the voters need to know that yes, this is a step in the right direction.   There are a lot of good things in this bill that are addressed to make things more comfortable for the voter in the elections process.

Henry:   Gary Bartlett is the executive director of the state board of elections.   He voted for the proposals but is concerned that each county have enough money to purchase upgraded equipment and that the bill not exclude other means of vote verification besides a paper trail.

Bartlett:   Do not limit the technology.   Yes, today paper is a viable option and should be used for those jurisdictions who want it, but as technology gets better, other things should be available to and we should not be limited to just one technology.

Henry:   The committee voted down six to five an amendment that would have allowed audio, photographic, or other electronic voter verification.  

Murphy:   When you as a voter use a pencil and paper and you fill out your ballot, you know at that point that you have recorded what you intended to record.   However, once you put it into a scanner or use a touch screen without a paper ballot, you lose transparency. The voter cannot understand exactly where that vote is going and how it is being counted.

a llen:    Do you have a ballot which is a tangible object?   Once you convert it into something that is completely intangible, you have lost the record, you have lost the ability to know whether or not what you have done is what has been recorded.

Henry:   David Allen is one of several computer experts on the committee who doesn’t want a computer counting his vote.   He says the committee’s action is the bare minimum that voters should accept to safeguard their vote.

Allen:    Paper in general has been getting a bad rap from the people who support these machines because they keep saying, “Oh, well you can commit fraud.”   We know that people steal ballots, destroy ballots, everything of this nature.   This is true, but the fact that fraud can be perpetuated with a paper ballot does not invalidate the paper ballot as a medium any more than the fact that people counterfeit money, invalidate paper money, as a currency medium.

Henry:   But Mike Ashe says he trusts his machines more than a hand count.

Ashe:   I also have my own personal experience, the times that we have counted ballots by hand.   It is expensive, it is slow, and it is not as accurate as by mechanical counts.

Henry:   But whether the count is by hand, machine, or computer, Ashe says citizens need to appreciate the democracy we have and exercise their right to vote.

Ashe:   I get aggravated when I get a phone call.   People call me and say, “I had to wait in line 30 minutes to vote today.”   Well, too bad.   You know, I think democracy is worth 30 minutes.   I really think it would be worth three hours.

Henry:   The proposals still have a long way to go before they become law.   They will be introduced as bills, sent to standing committees where they will be gone over with a fine tooth comb, before being debated by the House and Senate.   Back to you.

[END TOP STORY SEGMENT]

Crowley:    Thanks, Johanna.   In other political news, Agriculture Commissioner Steve Troxler was sworn in to office this week following a concession from Democrat candidate Britt Cobb three months after the election.   Troxler was sworn in at the state fairgrounds and drove a tractor to his new office in downtown Raleigh.   Troxler says he is ready to get down to work.

Troxler:   New transition.   I am going to get the keys today and, but we will move forward.   It will be, we will make sure that we make the right decisions.

Crowley:    The swearing in ended months of legal battles over 4,400 votes that disappeared in Carteret County.   Troxler, a tobacco and wheat farmer from Guilford County, is North Carolina’s first Republican agricultural commissioner elected by popular vote.

[BEGIN SEGMENT – BILLS]

Vajda:   A case that puts Governor Easley at odds with Senate Leader Marc Basnight over a key piece of Currituck County land, reached a Wake County courtroom this week.   The state budget bill approved by the general assembly last year and signed by the governor directed that the land on which the Currituck County airport is situated be sold to the county for $1.   The county intended to use some of the land for economic development.  The dispute over how many acres the county will receive for a dollar.   The county wants the entire 500 plus acres, but the governor signed over only about 200 acres.

Crowley:    Governor Easley has been invited to the general assembly to give his third State of the State Address.   It will be Easley’s his first major speech since his inaugural last month.   Two years ago, Easley called for expansion of his two cornerstone programs, “More at Four,” a pre-kindergarten program for at-risk four-year-olds, and reducing class sizes in early elementary grades.   In his two prior speeches, he has called on lawmakers to pass a lottery.   Political watchers believe he will do that again.   You can watch the governor’s state of the state address to the general assembly live on UNC-TV February 21 st beginning at 7:00 p.m.

Another bill to help western North Carolina communities impacted by last fall’s hurricanes has been introduced in the house of representatives.   That makes it a total of three from both sides of the chamber.   Representative Phil Harris proposed that $225 million be taken out of the rainy day fund for relief efforts [H108].   Last week residents and officials from mountain communities went to Raleigh to ask legislators for help.   They say the federal government has not come through on promised funds and that the state is their only hope.

Haire:    It has been over five months since we got hit in western North Carolina and we do feel like that we now have enough claims, the necessary forms have been filed, to where we can go ahead and start paying some of them and helping these folks move on with their lives.

Crowley:    A similar bill has been introduced by Representative Mitch Gillespie in the house and another by Senator Mark Nesbitt in the Senate.   Meanwhile Governor Easley has proposed an additional $61 million on top of the 90 he has already secured.

Vajda:   The state is facing an estimated $1.2 billion budget gap in the next fiscal year.   But as of now experts say the state has a surplus of about $116 million.   Economic analysts crunched through the numbers at a budget committee meeting this week.   Experts say part of the reason this fiscal cycle is unique is because of a sub-par economic recovery which includes fewer jobs.   Lawmakers have several options on how to fill that budget gap, including continuing two temporary tax increases which expired this summer or enacting a lottery.   Some Republican leaders, however, don’t like the tax increases and say more prudent spending by government is the best answer.   Regardless, many believe it is crucial to reach across party lines and work together on this issue.  

Garrou:    Neither party is the keeper of good ideas.   We both have good ideas.   We have an ultimate goal of serving the people of North Carolina and sometimes we differ on how we get to that goal.  

Vajda:   Experts say another reason the budget may face a shortfall is because of health care costs and that less money is coming in from the federal government.   And that is why President Bush’s proposed budget has some North Carolina legislators from both sides of the aisle concerned.   President Bush hopes to slice the nation’s deficit in half by the end of his term.   He plans to do so with a two and a half trillion dollar budget.   His 2006 budget unveiled on Monday includes increased funding for defense and Homeland Security.   The president also called for cuts in several areas, such as transportation, agriculture, health care, and education.   Legislators say those losses will squeeze the state’s budget.

Sherrill:   And naturally I am concerned about some of the cuts that will affect North Carolina, most especially in the areas of Medicaid and of course I want to pay close attention to what it will do to our education system because I think those are two things that are very, very critical to North Carolina, most especially with our growth.

Dalton:    Historically, we have been adversely impacted by the federal budget.   They have cut disaster relief in half in some instances.   The No Child Left Behind has not been funded.   The refunds on Medicare that they are requiring of the state has been cut back and cost the state money, some of the compliance issues.   It is estimated that over the last three years it has cost us $3 billion.

Vajda:   Both Sherrill and Dalton agree the budget will not pass without some major revisions from congress.

[END SEGMENT – BILLS]

[BEGIN SEGMENT – PRESIDENTIAL VISITS]

Crowley:    President Bush stopped in North Carolina this week to push his plan to revamp Social Security.   About a thousand people attended a town hall-like meeting at the BTI Center in Raleigh on Thursday morning to hear the president speak.   He says if the Social Security system stays on its current path, by the year 2042 funds will be exhausted and the program will be bankrupt.   Mr. Bush says one solution is privatizing Social Security by creating a personal retirement account.

Bush:   I like the idea of having an account where people say, “I own this,” and they are able to look at a quarterly statement to watch their own asset base grow.

Crowley:    Outside the BTI Center protestors lined the streets.   Meanwhile on Capitol Hill the president’s critics weighed in on Mr. Bush’s plan.   Congressman Brad Miller says workers may end up with less money with the president’s plan.

Miller:   Everything would really have to go just right.   You would have to buy low, sell high.   The guy managing your money would have to make all the right decisions and then you would just about break even.   You would just about stay even with someone who had not invested in one of these plans.

Crowley:    The president was joined on stage by some North Carolina residents concerned by the future of Social Security.

It is a rare occurrence, but former President Bill Clinton also visited Raleigh this week to talk about health care.   President Clinton was one of the keynote speakers at the annual emerging issues forum.   This year the topic was health care.   President Clinton says the U.S. health care system will continue to falter if the poverty rate in America does not improve.

Clinton:   Poverty has increased 14% since 2001.   The more poor people there are, the more uninsured people there are, the more burden it is on the government, the bigger the deficit is.   You cannot have a healthy population with poverty going up.   Poverty has got to be going down.   I don’t care how rich America is, I don’t care how much our GDP is, I don’t care if the stock market goes to 15,000, if we keep getting those of us who are wealthy get wealthier but people who are poor get poorer, it is going to wreak havoc with the health care system.

Crowley:    Protestors outside the forum expressed their displeasure that Universal Health Care was not one of the topics at the session.

[END SEGMENT – PRESIDENTIAL VISITS]

Vajda:   The University of North Carolina Board of Governors has turned down appeals from 14 UNC schools that want to increase instate tuition.   The board voted to freeze tuition for instate undergraduates but deferred action on out of state tuition, graduate tuition, and fees until next month.   Some members say they would rather see the general assembly increase funding for state universities.  Lawmakers could still increase tuition, even though the board of governors will not.

Environmental groups are telling a federal judge that the military should perform a complete environmental study on the plan to expand restricted air space in eastern North Carolina.   But the Navy says the plan to add 900 square miles of air space does not have an environmental impact because the jets will be high above ground.   A lawyer for the National Audubon Society told the judge that jets would disturb wildlife in the region.

Crowley:    State senate leaders want their colleagues to trim the number of introduced bills only with the title but not substantive legislation attached.   The so-called blank bills are designed to be place holders for legislation to be filed later in the session.   According to the general assembly bill drafting office, more than 130 blank bills were filed by mid-week, compared to 22 requests at this point in the session two years ago.   Critics of the blank bill say they’d give the public little time to respond to them.

Vajda:   One North Carolina lawmaker wants to double the fine for motorists who fail to shift lanes when approaching a parked police car, ambulance, or fire truck with emergency lights on.   The proposed fine for the violation is $250.   The measure would toughen a 2002 law that requires a traveling car to move away from emergency vehicles.   Some judges though have been throwing out these kinds of cases because some defendants claim they didn’t know about the law.   Motorists may start seeing signs on highways reminding them of the law.

Crowley:    In 2003 the state’s general assembly passed a law requiring all convicted felons to submit DNA samples.   Since then the State Bureau of Investigation lab in Raleigh has more than doubled its database and expects to triple it by the end of this year.   Some claim the database is a useful tool to solving crimes, others criticize the state and worry personal information will be made public.   Eszter takes a look at how the DNA database works.

[BEGIN SEGMENT – DNA DATABASE]

Budzynski:    We are establishing information for a convicted offender database.

Vajda:   This is the forensic biology section at the SBI lab in Raleigh.   It is where blood samples taken from convicted criminals are processed.   Mike Budzynski supervises the lab.

Budzynski:    There is a tremendous amount of convicted offender samples coming into the laboratory.  As a result of the new law that came in December 1 st, we have been averaging about a thousand blood samples a week.

Vajda:   That is because before December 1 st of last year, only convicted felons committing certain violent crimes, such as murder or rape, were required to submit DNA samples.   So since the law passed, Budzynski says the lab has been playing catch-up, testing those who have already been in prison as well as the newly incarcerated.

Budzynski:    There are currently over 40,000 convicted offender samples in our database.  And we are currently updating those routinely.

Vajda:   So how does the DNA database work?   The sample’s journey starts when blood is drawn at either prisons or sheriff’s departments, then mailed to the SBI lab.

Budzynski:    Inside of these kits contain the liquid blood sample and the card which contains the convicted offender’s name, may contain their Social Security number, their fingerprints, their offense that they were charged with.

Vajda:   A lab technician then stains the sample by pasting it onto a filter paper.   Once it dries it is placed in a stable environment where the DNA will not degrade.   From here the sample is shipped to Bodie Labs in Virginia for analysis.   Budzynski says the state has the technology but can’t handle the volume to separate the DNA into strands, the double helix-like figures that contain genetic information.   So the work is outsourced at $50 a pop.   The bill is partly covered by a federal grant from the U.S. Department of Justice.

Budzynski:    Periodically the federal government will call us and say, “How many samples do you have effective this date?”   We give them the number and then when we get the word from the federal government, then we ship those off as well, so it is a wait and see type of thing.

Vajda:   Once the DNA is analyzed, the information is sent back to the SBI on a CD, then uploaded into the database.

Parker:    They are basically what we call in layman’s terms and for lack of a better word “junk DNA,” they don’t serve a specific function.   But what makes them interesting to us is that they are areas that are very different among individuals.

Vajda:   Fourteen areas of a person’s DNA, or fourteen loci as they are called, are analyzed.   These bands are then translated into a numerical profile.

Parker:    It is the combination of those 13 total that is unique among individuals.   No two individuals are going to have the same exact 13 loci combination, unless you are an identical twin.

Vajda:   This is a DNA sample taken from a crime scene.   It could have been extracted from blood, semen, saliva, or a skin cell.   Now this information is not part of the DNA database but rather it is used to compare to samples taken from convicted felons.

Parker:    When you click on search it is going to search all the profiles in our database.   And it will do it very quickly.   And as you can see right here, it has already searched our entire database.

Vajda:   In less than a second a hit is made.

Parker:    If you compare the sample that you searched, which is the target sample, to the candidate sample, you can see that at every one of those areas they contain the same numbers, CSF 8, 10; 8, 10; 8, 12; 8, 12; 6, 7; 6, 7.

Cooper:   We are making significant strides in North Carolina.

Vajda:   Attorney General Roy Cooper has been on the forefront of an effort to expand the DNA database.   Cooper praises the legislature for including all convicted felons into the system and adding staff to the lab but says more needs to be done.

Cooper:   Clearly the legislature and members of congress need to step up and do what is right to make sure we fully fund DNA technology.

Vajda:   Earlier this year the general assembly approved a $4.5 million expansion of the SBI crime lab but rejected requests for more expert staff.   Cooper has also asked legislators to tack on a $300 fine to a felon who is convicted because of DNA analysis.

Cooper:   Yes, it is fair.   More than fair.   And they ought to pay.  We ask the taxpayers to pay for SBI crime lab to keep us safe.

Vajda:   But Jennifer Rudinger of the ACLU of North Carolina says the entire process is unfair and unconstitutional.   She fears the information collected will be used for alternative purposes.

Rudinger:   The drop of blood which the government does keep contains information of a very private, sensitive nature, not only about the person from whom they got the blood, but everyone related to that individual by blood.

Vajda:   Rudinger is worried the state will follow Virginia and others that are taking DNA samples from anyone who is arrested for a violent crime, even if they are not convicted.   Currently North Carolina does not have such a law.

Rudinger:   The slippery slope is not going to stop at misdemeanors, it is not going to stop where it is now with felonies, it is not going to stop with arrestees.   There really is a desire by the FBI to get as many samples into the database as they can and they are not interested in the privacy rights.

Cooper:   If that person is found not guilty or is exonerated, then they are required to remove that sample from the database.   Yes, I think that is something that North Carolina could look at.

Vajda:   Cooper says as technology advances so does the expectation from lawyers and judges that DNA information is available.   And he plans to fight and secure the resources needed to protect North Carolinians.

Cooper:   It is exciting because DNA, not only can we use it to convict the guilty, but we can use it to exonerate the innocent.   It makes us more effective.   It makes us more accurate.

Crowley:    North Carolina is among 29 states to include all felons in its convicted offender DNA database.

[END SEGMENT – DNA DATABASE]

Vajda:   Now for more on some of the issues house lawmakers will face this session, Tim talks to two of the leaders for the Democrats and Republicans.

[BEGIN NEWSMAKERS SEGMENT]

Crowley:    Representative Joe Hackney, Majority Leader in the House and Representative Mitch Gillespie, the Minority Whip in the House, thanks for joining us today.

Hackney:    Glad to be here.

Crowley:    First of all, Representative Hackney, tell me a little bit from the democratic perspective coming into this session what the top priorities will be for you.

Hackney:    Education, health care, and jobs.   Education, health care, and jobs.   We as Democrats, and I think the Republicans will join us in this, we really want to protect education at all levels in North Carolina.   We want to protect the K-12 system, we want to do something about the Leandro litigation to try to perfect a remedy there, we want to keep our community colleges strong because that is where jobs, that is our best hope of attracting industry and training people and retraining people for jobs.  Health care is a tremendously important concern for our people, and while any comprehensive solution will have to be a national one, there are some things that we can do, we hope, to get more people insured, get more children covered, and so forth.

Crowley:    Representative Gillespie, from the Republican side, what are the top priorities for the GOP coming into this session?

Gillespie:   Tim, I think you will see that we have the same priorities as the Democrats do in the House.   I might would expand on that a little bit and say that we would like to see fiscal responsibility also come to the state and we are going to work with Speaker Black, Speaker Morgan.   Speaker Black had a good session last two years and we are going to work together, continue to work together here in the House to get the state back on good fiscal footing and also to address the needs that the state has.  Just like Representative Hackney said, education; I am a community college graduate so I am a, I like to consider myself a big advocate for the community college system.   So, we need to make sure that we fully fund them so that we can retrain our workers who are losing jobs from manufacturing.   As you know, our state is I think the fourth highest in the nation as far as manufacturing jobs, so all of the trade agreements in the past have really affected North Carolina dramatically and we have to step up to the plate and make sure that we are getting our citizens back to work and trained so that they can do that.   And like Representative Hackney said, health care is a major issue.  We would like to see medical malpractice reform, something done on that, something that was meaningful to try to lower those costs and other things.   But you will see us working together this next two years to try to come to some good solutions for North Carolina so that we can move forward.

Crowley:    You mentioned fiscal responsibility.   One of the phrases we have heard for the last four years coming into this session is “Over a billion dollar budget gap.”   Representative Gillespie, from the Republican side, how would you propose trying to fix that type of a problem?

Gillespie:   Well, the first thing is Republicans that, you know, when you look at a deficit like that, the first thing we don’t want to do is talk about tax increases, raising taxes.   I still think that we can look at some additional cuts that can be made that will not hurt health and human services, that will not affect education.   Speaker Black, I have noticed that we don’t have our committees appointed yet, but Speaker Black has appointed a committee to look at zero, I believe Representative Hackney you can help me on that, a committee to look at zero based budgeting.   So I think we are going to be making an attempt to look at finding all of the efficiencies that we can in state government and I think we are going to be doing that.   Like I said, our committees are not formed yet; we will, that will be our first step and first process is trying to look and see how we can save money that way.

Crowley:    Representative Hackney, is there a structural fix that has to be made to the way the budget is done?

Hackney:    Well, if we were able to do a structural fix it would be wonderful.   But the first priority is to get this year’s budget in good shape.   And I think we will, we always pass a balanced budget, we always balance the budget in North Carolina, and we will do that this year.   As Representative Gillespie said, one of the first things we always do is we look for efficiencies in state government.   We go through the budget with a fine-tooth comb every year, by subject matter.   In effect, do zero based budgeting.   Do we really need this program?   Do we really need the increases in the program and are there staff cuts that can be made with good efficiencies?   One of the efficiencies we did last time was with respect to control of computers in state government.   I think that is going to save a tremendous amount of money.   But having said that, we have to meet the needs of this state.   After you do all that, and after you find all the efficiencies you can, we have to meet the needs of the people of this state.   We have a disaster out west; we need to meet those needs.   And if we need revenues to do that or we need to extend existing tax scheme to do that, then I think you will see some of us advocating that we do that because we have to keep our education system strong.

Crowley:    Let me ask you about that because the governor this week, earlier he had said he would like those two temporary taxes, the half-cent on the sales tax and the half-cent income tax on high income earners to expire at the end of June.   But this week he has said he is not sure that can happen not after he got an updated revenue picture.   What are your thoughts about that?   Do you think those two will end up being extended?

Hackney:    Well, my thought is it is much too early to make any decisions like that.   We have to go through and find all of the efficiencies that we can.   We have to evaluate what we have to do with respect to the Leandro situation.   We have to, and we are working on this right now, Representative Gillespie and all the members from the west are working on this very hard right now, the western disaster package.   We want to do what is right by the people out west and I think we will.   That takes a bit of revenue and so I don’t think we can put our head in the sand about that.   If it takes revenue to help our people out west, then we need to be ready to do it.

Crowley:    From your perspective, what do you want to happen to those temporary taxes?

Gillespie:   Well, personally I think the majority of the Republicans would like to see them expired.   Representative Hackney is correct in that we must first look at everything.   We might have to make some hard choices but, you know when you make promises to people that they are going to expire, I think the citizens expect us to do things and I would like to see us do things that we have promised to citizens. But we do have a lot of needs in this state and that is why we need to look at every way in the world that we can to make sure these needs are funded.   You know, the Republicans don’t want to do any harm to health and human services, we don’t want to hurt education, you know we are very much pro-education.   Like I said, I am a graduate of the community college system and this past session we had I supported the higher universities fully and, you know, we’ve got a lot of needs there and that is our future for North Carolina is education.   It is the future for our citizens, it is to be more educated.   So, we are going to have some hard choices to make and you know we are ready to, and we are gong to work together and make that happen and hopefully it will move itself forward.   Representative Hackney was talking about the hurricanes in western North Carolina. That is a big issue.   We got off to sort of a rocky start down here in Raleigh on that issue, but I think now things, the members are learning more about our actual unmet needs and you know we are going to move forward on that in a very fast manner and we are going to address the needs for western North Carolina.   I don’t think we will have to have a tax increase to do it and I think everybody is looking at that and pretty, coming to that conclusion, so we are going to move forward on that.   The people of western North Carolina are going to get help and we are going to act, but things do take time.   We had to basically get back in session to bring that issue up and start the debate on it, start moving it forward and that is what we are doing and, like I said, we had a rough two weeks but that is over with now and we are moving forward and things are moving along well on that and I would expect something to happen in the very near future as far as getting the unmet needs package out to western North Carolina.  

Crowley:    Most of the bills are centered around taking money from the rainy day fund.   Would Republicans support any type of replenishment of that rainy day fund if it required raising additional revenue?

Gillespie:   I don’t think we will and I think at the end of the day when we get through, you know, the governor has weighed in now on the issue and he says that there is an additional $61 million in unmet needs out there in western North Carolina.   He has already used $91 million and ¾ of a percent of reversion, which he used that to leverage an additional $170 million.   He has also moved $35 million from DOT funds to go to west to fix our roads out there, and he moved an additional $20 million to fix private roads and bridges like that, so all together we already have a package that has been put together in all that is not in effect and working yet, but we have got a package of about $287 million and then with him calling for an additional $61 million, you know, that should meet most of our needs.   Now, Representative Bruce Goforth who is in Buncombe County, he is working closely and I met with him yesterday, were looking over the governor’s figures to make sure that we feel comfortable, that all of our unmet needs are going to be met with this $61 million, so we are not really sure yet that we are in agreement on the $61 million.   We think that it probably, we feel personally just feel like it needs to be more than that but we are working on those figures and we are going to come up with something, get something passed here real soon.

Crowley:    Do you think there might be any additional revenue needed to replenish that rainy day fund?

Hackney:    Well, we ought not to kid ourselves.   We really shouldn’t kid ourselves.   If you take money for western North Carolina, and I’m for that and Democrats are for that, and I think you will see us move very quickly and very soon on that package.   It comes right out of the general fund.   And it comes away from other priorities in education and human services and so forth.   And so I would hope that the people who want to spend the money are willing to raise it as well.   And so we will, I think the decision has been made to defer any assessment of revenue needs to the end of the session and I think that is Okay and that is appropriate.   But we want to help western North Carolina.   We hope they will help, and we know they will, help education and human services and keep our state strong at the end when it comes budget time and that money is gone.

Crowley:    There has already been one bill filed this year for a cigarette tax increase.   Do you think we are going to see more of a debate come up this year on the floor than maybe we have seen in the past regarding this issue and where do Democrats stand on that, do you think?

Hackney:    Well, most of the Democrats I think, we are not unanimous but, most Democrats I think favor some level of cigarette tax increase this time.   I think the speaker does and so I think you will see that being seriously debated and I hope, I personally favor a substantial increase.   I don’t think we should be at lower levels than our surrounding states on that.   We need the revenue.   It is a health issue.   So there are all kinds of good reasons to move ahead on that.  

Crowley:    Republicans thoughts on the cigarette tax?

Gillespie:   Well, we are also split on the issue.  We have several members that support it and several members that don’t.   It is an issue that comes up every year, recently every year.   So we will just have to look at it and see where we go with that.   Personally I am opposed to it.   You know the argument is, is that tobacco in North Carolina is no longer the king in North Carolina but when you look at the jobs that it creates here in North Carolina, and I understand the health benefits to reducing smoking and everything, so it is a real fine line that you have there.   But, you know, we just look at it but we are divided on it, all of   the members are not for a tax and all of the members are not against a tax.   So, it is an issue that comes up just about every session and of course it is up again.   First thing Representative Hackney has said, “We are going to look at our needs and look at the end of the budget time and see where the money is and how much we have left and hopefully when we get to that point there won’t be a need to raise any additional taxes on North Carolina.”

Crowley:    Another revenue option.   Least the governor wants is a statewide lottery.   A lot of political watchers say, and this may be the best year he has a shot at getting that through.   What are the thoughts of Democrats on a lottery issue?  Again, most of it is probably kind of a split just like the cigarette tax?

Hackney:    Well, I think so.   The majority of the Democratic caucus is in favor of a lottery legislation of some kind.   The difficulty comes in which kind and what it goes for and how it is done and whether it is a referendum or not and for the proponents of the lottery, including the governor, putting that all together is a difficult task.   I think you will see a serious effort to do that this time.   I couldn’t tell you whether it is going to pass or not right now.   I don’t know how many votes there are on the other side; I understand there are some.   And so that process, the process of evaluating that situation is ongoing right now.

Crowley:    How about for Republicans on that issue?

Gillespie:   Well, the majority of the Republicans are opposed to it.   We do have some that support it and I understand that and respect their views.   I think the main thing is that the reason Republicans oppose it is because we don’t want to see the state get into that kind of a business.   We just don’t look at it as just—we think North Carolina is a better state than to have to resort to gambling and trying to advertise to promote our people to go out here and play a game even though it is volunteer league.   So, but, you know, it is an issue that we will be looking at this year.   I am sure we will have a vote on it.   Right now I think that it would be defeated again if it was brought up for a vote today.   There is a different bill that was introduced about giving local county options and I think 25 counties, once it was, you know, then it would be a, the lottery would be instituted.   I think that they had the lottery proponents thought that that would really help pass that bill but I think since the members have now looked at that studied it some, I think that idea was pretty well thrown out.   Both sides, Republicans, Democrats, you know, we look at these issues and we are actually down here trying to make the best decisions which you have to remember all come from 120 different districts in North Carolina and all of us are different.   You have a vast difference of people down here and it is hard to get everybody together and agree on things, but you know, we do try and look at the issues and the lottery is one of them that we will continue to debate.   It has been the most debated issue since I’ve been here; I’m in my seventh year, and when I came here they were debating it.   And I have studied it as much as, I can argue either side on the issue, too, so it is a tough issue.

Crowley:    One other controversial issue—and we will end with this—that may come up this year—the senate has already passed it a couple of years ago, the house did not pick it up—but the moratorium on the death penalty.  Do you think that legislation may see the light of day on the house floor this year, Representative Hackney?

Hackney:    I think it will.   I think for many North Carolinians their faith in the criminal justice system, as far as the death penalty, has been shaken by the revelations of the last couple of years.   We have two people who were on death row, convicted, in danger of being executed, who not only didn’t deserve the death penalty, but didn’t commit the crime.   And so they were wrongfully convicted.   And we have all sorts of new tools at our disposal.   Science has given us DNA and law enforcement has a lot of additional tools.   People want to know that when it is the death penalty that you get it right.   And so I think the death penalty moratorium will get a vote this time; I can’t tell you again whether it is going to pass.   It is probably going to be pretty close.

Crowley:    Republicans’ viewpoint on that issue?

Gillespie:   Well, of course we have some that support the moratorium and others that don’t.   When I first, or, when we first started talking about this four years ago, talking about doing a moratorium in order to study it, a lot of Republicans look at is as a way of ending the death penalty in North Carolina.   And a lot of our arguments have been if we are going to study it, go ahead and start studying it now.   And we should have done that four years ago and then we would have the data that they are looking for but we don’t think that is the purpose.   We think the purpose of it is to end the death penalty in North Carolina.   I know a couple of years ago there were about 202 people on death row and their average time on death row is 14 years.   Most of them have as many as 49 attorneys during those times to review cases.   And I know there are some instances here in the past that have come up recently that have found some flaws in it, but we need to, we don’t need to end the death penalty in North Carolina and we look at it, is that happening?

Crowley:    Did you have a rebuttal to that?

Hackney:    Well, if Mitch thinks that each one of them has 49 attorneys, then he hasn’t done enough studying on the issue.  

Crowley:    There are going to be a whole lot of other issues that surface coming up this year but we need to leave it there, Representative Hackney and Representative Gillespie.   Thanks for joining us today.

Hackney:    Thanks, Tim.

Crowley:    Thanks.   Good job.

[END NEWSMAKERS SEGMENT]

Vajda:   House leaders say other issues that may surface this year include medical malpractice reform and a host of election reform bills.

Crowley:    Now for more on the events in state politics and at the general assembly this week, Eszter is joined by three members of the Capitol Press Corps.

[BEGIN ANALYSIS SEGMENT]

Vajda:   We are joined by Laura Leslie, with WUNC, Barry Smith, Freedom Newspapers, and Gary Robertson with the Associated Press.   Welcome everyone.   Well, let’s talk about elections.   We are three months after November’s elections, one race was decided last week, and that is the agriculture commissioner, and now we still have one uncontested race.   The legislators are scurrying to try to make definitions.   You have been here the longest, Barry.   Have you ever seen anything like this?

Smith:    Never seen anything like that.   It is to the point of being absurd.   Or, as some people would say, it is past being absurd.   November 2 nd we thought we elected a superintendent of public instruction.   What is really interesting about this is that, of all the council state races, this may be the one that has the least authority.   The superintendent of public instruction basically has to do what the state board of education says that he or she has to do, so it is time for this to end.

Vajda:   Leslie, is this just a battle between Republicans and Democrats?

Leslie:   Some people might say that it is, it depends on how you look at it.   But there certainly is a lot of partisan bickering and a lot of power play going on right now in the senate.   The senate Democrats have introduced a bill to basically overrule a ruling by the supreme court throwing out some provisional ballots, and that is a Democratic and Republican moment right there.   But I think it goes deeper than party politics, or it ought to anyway.   Because what it is really about is how we vote in the state, what is a legal vote, and how the state has a right to make the laws about elections.   You know, should you be able to vote out of your precinct or not?   Does the state get the right to decide that or does the court get the right to decide that?   So, that is really I think what it should come down to.

Vajda:   And Senator Clodfelter and Senator Rand, of course, say that the constitution is clear and it defines how out of precinct votes should be counted.

Robertson:    I am not sure that some people would agree that it is as crystal clear as they would say, but they feel like that at least the intent of the law, I believe from 2002, that created these more precise rules on out of provisional ballots, they say, “Well, our intent was so that these people could vote and their votes would count.”   And the supreme court, which all five who ruled in this case were either elected Republicans or were endorsed by the Republican party say, “Well, that’s not the case, we don’t see any intent there and the plain language of the law seems to state otherwise.”   So it is de facto, it has become a partisan issue, obviously.

Smith:    I think the supreme court says, the law is very clear here, the Democrats in the general assembly say, “No, the law is very clear here.”   Obviously I am not a lawyer but when I look at the law, it is not as clear as either one of them say in my opinion.   And I do think, I think there are a couple of things that can be done to clear this up.   One is, I mean, statistically the probabilities are that June Atkinson is going to be the superintendent of public instruction.   She has an 8,000 vote lead.   Statistically it is very improbable that all of this stuff will in any way, shape, or form end up giving Mr. Fletcher the win.   So, Mr. Fletcher, a lot of people have called on Mr. Fletcher to go ahead and concede, you’ve made your point.   Second thing that needs to happen is the general assembly does need to clarify the election laws.   Make it crystal clear so that there cannot be any interpretation by the supreme court if they did that, and all of the candidates know what to expect and most importantly, the voters know what to expect.

Robertson:    Regardless of what the Democrats have said, I think Fletcher has been generally consistent in his public comments saying he wants a fair and accurate count.   Now, whether he should have brought up the provisional ballot question before the election or months before is another matter.   But it seems to me that while Barry said that it is statistically probable June Atkinson will win, there is a scenario or two where the number of the margin between June Atkinson and Bill Fletcher is narrowed to below 4,438 votes.   Most people know that vote number really well, that is the number of votes that were lost in Carteret County.   So the Carteret County matter, which we thought may have been resolved when Britt Cobb conceded, it could still come back and be a major part of this race.

Vajda:   And Laura, do you think the courts are going to be involved in these decisions?   And should they be?

Leslie:   Well, as I said last week, the supreme court decided that those provisional ballots should be thrown out and the legislature is guarding its own turf.   It is talking about separation of powers and saying, “We are the ones who should be in charge of deciding A) the contested election and the council of state race, which is in the constitution, but B) we should be in charge of deciding whether or not we are counting provisional ballots or not, and they have also introduced some legislation as Barry said to clarify that.   The courts are involved in it regardless.   I mean, obviously this is going back to Wake County Superior Court probably soon.   But the question is who wins?   The legislature or the courts?

Vajda:   What was Senator Clodfelter’s comment about the judge making a decision, “Well, let him enforce it.”   So, we will see.   But, Barry, what do you make of the fact that so soon during this session there are so many legislations to reform election laws?  

Smith:    Well, a lot of times election law legislation is reactionary.  A lot of the bills that cause this whole provisional ballot question that we have now were because of reforms that came out of the problems with the 2000 election in Florida.   The federal government started talking about provisional ballots and how you need to allow provisional ballots to count in federal elections.   They don’t control state elections, but you need to allow them to count out of precinct ballots like that to count in federal elections.   So, do we want to be consistent in our state laws and state elections?   That is the reason we have this problem now with provisional ballots.   It is kind of reactionary.   And that really does not surprise me.

Vajda:   Gary, do you think the fact that the first Republican agriculture commissioner was elected is going to make a difference in that post?

Robertson:    I will just step back and say it is too early to say, but the very fact that there is a Republican in there, obviously there are going to be some changes in perhaps, obviously at the top; he is going to, Troxler is going to bring in his own Republican allies to take over some of the top posts.   There are only about 20 positions within a department of about 1,300 workers that are not under the State Personnel Act, meaning they can be fired essentially at will.   So you will see some changes up there.   Now in terms of policy, I mean, I don’t anybody thinks that Britt Cobb has been anti-agriculture or anything like that.   He is there to promote North Carolina agriculture, which is our number one industry in this state.   So I think you will see more of that.   The fact that Steve, Mr. Troxler, is a tobacco and wheat farmer as well, I know that Britt owns a farm, a family farm, he has been more of a career employee.   I think you are going to see somebody who has been outside of the department and bringing in more of a farmer’s look, possibly, at how the agriculture department should serve them.

Vajda:   Another fun thing that has been going on this week is the senate committee on appropriations is starting to look at the budget.   I am sure everyone is very excited about that.   A projected $1.3 billion deficit and we heard some numbers, lots of numbers, revenues, economic outlook.   Laura, what do you make of all of those numbers?

Leslie:   They are all projected and they are all completely subject to change.   I mean, right now we are looking at $116 million surplus for this budget year that is going to end at the end of June.   But that is projected on tax receipts that haven’t even come in yet.   And a lot of that is projected according to estimated taxes, and we all know estimated taxes, you don’t know what you are going to end up with at the end of the day.   So, that $116 million may or may not show up, you know, on the black side of the column in June.   But as you said, we are still facing $1.2 to $1.5 billion dollar shortfall, depending on who you ask, so it is a drop in the bucket when you look at next fiscal year.

Vajda:   Barry, are we going to see some decisions made solely on party lines in terms of raising taxes or not raising taxes or what types of actions will be taken by legislators?

Smith:    There will probably be a compromise that will draw Republicans and Democrats in.   You almost have to get that in the house, not exactly, you know, you could have a party line vote and the Democrats could vote one way and the Republicans another.   Democrats don’t really like to see that happen.   If something is going to change, they don’t want to go out in the elections next year being the party of tax hikes.   If they want to be able to pull some Republicans in with them, if there are any tax changes - one of the things that people have talked about this week is there is less optimism that the temporary, and I use that word loosely, the temporary taxes that were enacted in 2001 will come off this year.   That is the sales tax increase and the surcharge on the upper income tax bracket in North Carolina.   There is less optimism that that is going to come off.

Vajda:   But plenty of other taxes have been, bills have been introduced that could reintroduce those taxes.

Smith:    That is true, and, you know, we hear about those taxes and we also hear about the tobacco tax a lot.   Seems like there is more momentum for that this year than there has been.

Leslie:   You know, when you look at the numbers, those two taxes that you spoke of, the upper income tax bracket and the half-cent sales tax hike, that is $450 million to $500 million dollars.   I mean, that is, what, 40% of the projected shortfall right there.   And so I think legislative leaders and the governor have all said sure, we would love to take that tax hike off if we can.   But, I mean, if you can, I mean, this is obviously a year in which we can’t really afford to throw away a half million dollars.

Robertson:    The governor said, or at least his advisor has said that he would prefer, if he has to choose between one or the other, he would choose the higher income tax bracket, removing that.   Probably because it is only about a tenth of the cost of removing the sales tax.   But I think it would set, I think doing that would be very politically positive, a political statement for him to say at least we are trying and you are going to pay less taxes on April 15 th.

Vajda:   Quick question for all of you.   Do you think it is already where, in week two or three of session, and they said the flood aid package will be primary?   Gary, you first.   Is it going to go?   Is it going to …?

Robertson:    Well, I talked to Senator Mark Nesbitt.   He said hopefully we will get it to the senate floor next week.   I think it is going to take, to get it all done and to the governor’s desk, you may be looking, I mean at least two to three weeks.   If longer.   It is a hard job.

Leslie:   There is a significant difference between what the governor thinks we should be paying for hurricane relief and what legislators from the western part of the state think, and I think that is the real issue.   They have got to get it together because they’ve got to pass it and the governor has got to sign it, pretty much.   And so they have got to sit down and figure out how much money they really can come up with.

Vajda:   Okay.   Barry, we will get to you next time.   Thank you so much for joining us.

[END ANALYSIS SEGMENT]

Crowley:    If you want to add your voice to the debate on any of the issues we have talked about this week, call our comment line.   The number is 919-549-7830 or you can send us an email to  legweek@unctv.org.   That is our show for tonight.   Thanks for joining us.

Vajda:   Take care everyone.

[ROLL CREDITS]

Voiceover:    Funding for this program is made possible by UNC-TV members.

[END PROGRAM]