Thursday Legislative Notebook
- Negotiations are expected to begin soon between the House and Senate on how to handle a bill meant to restore some of the cuts to the budget the governor had to make as revenues continued to fall off. Senate Democrats hoped to send the House bill to the governor, but two Democrats joined all Republicans in inviting conference with the House. Both sides, however, seem to be in agreement that they need something done quickly.
- House Appropriations Chairman Johnny Stringer (D-Montrose) said it makes sense to send the House bill to the governor which uses $100 million from one-time funds to restore cuts. His reasoning? “The vote in the Senate was so close and we got a strong vote in the House for spending the $100 million. The Senate is divided. I think we ought to use the $100 million.”
- Speaking of budget cuts, the Supreme Court threw a wrench in the governor’s cuts to the judicial system saying that he does not have the authority to make such cuts. Their appears to be some confusion on what- if anything- the governor’s office can do to appeal, but right now the cuts are on hold. Kevin Upchurch, executive director of the Department of Finance and Administration, said he is worried he could be arrested if he follows through with the cuts until he gets further clarification.
- Clarion-Ledger columnist Sid Salter shot back at that House Democrats proposal to sell the governor’s plane. He said, “In terms of public policy, it’s more of the same- spending non-recurring funds (net proceeds of the plane’s sale) for recurring expenses (the state car-tag fund). So what do we sell or hock next year? The Woolfolk State Office Building? The state’s Welcome Centers? Maybe the Bilbo statue. Bottom line? This is a political stunt, not sound public policy.”
- While one-time money may not be the solution, Jim Hood has announced a news conference where he is expected to announce a settlement that will “put millions into the state coffers.” I am sure the legislature will not mind.
- Look for Haley Barbour to sign HB 512, otherwise known as the Meth Bill. Once law, it would require a prescription to get any medicine containing Pseudoephedrine, one of the key ingredients in meth-making.
I understand meth is a horrible drug, but seriously requiring every person who has a cold or allegies to get a doctor’s prescription to get Sudafed/Claratin etc. is not the solution. While there are other cold/allegry medication which do not contain Pseudoephedrine they are not nearly as effective as the ones which had Pseudoephedrine.
So because of a handful of drug dealers and addicts we all have to pay more for medication when we get sick. Not to mention the inconvenience of having to wait in a doctor’s office while your sick. All that is going to do is pack doctor’s offices and drive up costs.
That’s just ridiculous. A perfect example of the house, senate, and Gov’s office using a sledgehammer to swat a fly.
Can’t argue with that and I think most people agree with you. I don’t think I’ve read one positive comment on the bill when reading about this at the CL/ DJ, etc. Seems to be a big disconnect. The media and state legislature likes it, the voters (at least the ones who voice their opinions) don’t.
RandomThoughts I could not agree more. I am so tired of my law abiding life being affected by law breakers. I work in the paint industry and if I try to purchase more than two cans of Acetone I am treated like a common criminal. Whats next not being allowed to buy break fliud or a car battery without two forms of I.D.. This sets a bad precendent that we have to give up our liberties in order to stop crimnials.
The number of Crystal Meth labs is increasing and causing terrible problems in our communities. What is the the solution?
Currently I must show my I.D. to purchase any of the cold remedies in question. So that means there should be a databank somewhere listing who is buying the product. Right? If my name appears in said databank too much, then that is just cause to come and pay me a visit. Furtheremore I do not know about your community envolvment but I am involved in mine enough that I know where the meth labs are. I have called the police more than once about activity at said homes. I am fortunate to live in an area where the city police dept. and county sheriff work hard to oust these people. I feel sure that if communities and local law enforcement get together other remedies can be discovered and implimented. Just throwing legislation at a problem will never solve the problem. That is part of what my irritation with the current admin. in Washington is all about. I for one do not want to set back and let the government solve all of my problems. Together we as Americans can work together to solve most any problem. By reading what you wrote I have to assume you do not agree.