Civitas Review Online

Depositions taken last month show that former Democratic Governor Mike Easley was hiding a lot from the people of North Carolina.  Testimony from his former communications directors for a public records lawsuit brought by the John Locke Foundation and several news outlets show that Governor Easley had a private email address that he used to conduct state business.  Because email messages are considered public information, Locke and the news outlets sued the Easley administration when they found that messages were being deleted, or in the case of Easley’s secret account, not revealed at all, even when requests for information were made.

Easley’s private email address, a Road Runner account, was “Nick Danger” spelled backwards, presumably a reference to the fictional private eye.

In an April 2008 interview, Easley made it clear that he thought private email addresses should be public record if they contained messages pertaining to state business.  North Carolina Public Records Law applies to every message “in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government.”  Although Easley said on the record that he understood the law, he continued to keep his email account and the state business he conducted using it a secret.

According to the communications staff in the deposition made public yesterday, Easley’s communications director, Sherri Johnson, instructed public information officers in several Cabinet agencies to delete emails to and from his office, and not to mention his office in emails.  Officers were instead instructed to use the telephone for most communication, and not to mention the order in emails.  This policy likely came about from feelings arising after an email from the Department of Cultural Resources painting Easley in a negative light.

DATELINE NC – NOVEMBER 3, 2010: The GOP now holds 34 of the 50 seats in the NC Senate and 82 of the 120 seats in the NC House. Not a likely headline but read below how it could happen.

Does last nights win by Scott Brown in the Massachusetts US Senate race mean that the GOP will have a good year in 2010? Since the election is 9 months away a lot can happen. A human can be conceived and born in that time-frame – and the political landscape can change drastically.

If this was an isolated incident I would likely say that it might not be a good predictor, but it is not isolated coming after the elections in Virginia and New Jersey. What these show us is the GOP candidate performing over 10 points better (conservative estimate) than previous GOP performance. If we assume that this shows a trend in the electorate what does it mean in NC. At the national level it would probably mean Richard Burr is in a much better position than Elizabeth Dole. On the congressional level this probably means that Freshmen Larry Kissell – D ( 8th District) will have a tough reelection campaign and the three other Democrats representing conservative districts, Bob Ethridge (2) Mike McIntyre (7) and Heath Shuler (11) could have competitive races.

But what does this mean for the NC House & Senate. It could be a game changer. Civitas publishes a North Carolina Partisan Index (NCPI) which shows how districts vote compared to the state as a whole.

Using the State Senate NCPI numbers, without considering the recent elections, you would say there were 7 seats held by Democrats in which Republicans should be very competitive. If we assume that this minimum 10 point swing in the GOP favor continues, it expands competitive senate seats up to 14 with seats rated up to a D+7 having to be considered competitive.

Looking at the State House NCPI without considering the recent elections you would say there were at least 8 seats held by Democrats that should be considered competitive. Using a 10 point swing as we have seen in the past 3 elections that number increases to up to a possible 30 seats using the D+7 threshold as the cutoff.

It was always going to be an interesting year for General Assembly elections - I think it will be even much more interesting than I or anyone else thought.

For those not following the recent election for Wake County Commission chairman, you can read one media account here and watch another one here. Once you get the media’s take on what is going on read the below email from the new Chairman, Tony Gurley (R). It should be noted that the other main actor in this drama, Betty Lou Ward (D), has been a county commissioner for over 20 years.  

His email does a good job in explaining how everything is not as it seems when it comes to politics and governing.

The facts are very simple, after one hour of voting, and 14 deadlocked votes, Ms. Ward motioned for a break.   The County Clerk presiding at the beginning of meeting (until a Chair is selected) asked for a vote and the break was denied with a 3-3 vote.  We have never taken a break after just one hour of meeting.   

Ms. Ward then left the room unexcused.  Lindy Brown (Dem.) asked the attorney about the consequences of Ms. Ward’s absence.  The attorney basically said the voting should continue.  The only item on our agenda at that time was selection of the Chair and the Clerk presiding had no power to do anything but continue the voting.  I was elected with a 3-2 actual vote and Ms. Ward’s vote was technically assigned to me since an unexcused absence results in a vote in the affirmative for any motion made.

The gamesmanship is not so simple……  Ms. Ward came to the meeting with only 2 or 3 votes.  For whatever reason, Mr. Webb did not participate by phone and he has not requested a temporary replacement (both viable options on our Board).  When Ms. Ward saw the 3-3 deadlock, she left the room and had her vote recorded for me.  Then, the Dems spent the next 11 1/2 hours deadlocking the vice-chair selection portion of the meeting to assure that the meeting would be recessed.  Mr. Coble took pity on Mr. Norwalk’s claim that he needed to go home for an insulin shot at 2:30am and motioned for the meeting to recess until 10:00am on Wednesday. 

The political ploy was revealed when our meeting reconvened at 10:00am on Wednesday.  Ms. Ward’s first statement was a “Motion to reconsider the vote for Chairman”  since she now had Mr. Webb on the phone and now had her 4 votes for Chairman.  Her reasoning was that since her vote was recorded for me, she had the right to ask for reconsideration.  And since the Monday meeting was recessed, the Wednesday meeting was a continuation of the first meeting in December.  We are required by Statute to elect a Chairman during the first meeting in December.

Their plan would have worked, except that I ruled her motion as “out of order” for various reasons.  The major reason being that we had completed the business items on Monday’s agenda and many third parties had received vested interests in those agenda items.  To allow reconsideration would render the previous vote “null” and therefore the motion was “out of order”.

The County Attorney supported my decision with 4 or 5 additional reasons for ruling the motion “out of order”.

We then went to the selection of Vice-Chair and Ms. Ward took that position with a 4-3 vote in about 5 minutes.  She would have won the vote for Chairman in the same time if Mr. Webb had been on the phone Monday.

This was a planned event.  During the meeting, Mr. Norwalk was constantly communicating with Mr. Jack Nichols, Chairman of the Wake County Democrat Party.  Along with Ms. Ward, they planned this to try to embarrass the Republican commissioners since all 3 GOP commissioners are up for reelection in 2010.

They are not alone in this effort.  The News & Observer ran very misleading stories and Ruth Sheehan of the N&O will not return my phone call.  The TV reports also do not represent the story properly and they are not interested in reporting something that takes more than 10 seconds to explain.

The other Democrat on our Board (Ms. Brown) stated publicly in our Wednesday meeting that she was aware of the political posturing by Mr. Norwalk and Ms. Ward. 

NOW MY OPINION —  For whatever reason, Mr. Webb refused to participate in the Monday meeting resulting in a 3-3 deadlock.  Only Ms. Ward, Mr. Norwalk, and Ms. Brown would have known that he wasn’t going to participate.  Ms. Ward concocted her plan to have the meeting recessed and was able to convince Mr. Webb to come to her rescue.  Unfortunately for her, her plan was flawed and she was not able to undo the previous election of Chair although she was able to muster a great deal of political advantage through newspaper and television coverage 

Tony Gurley

Chairman, Wake County Board of Commissioners

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ)  reports that only several months after blasting CEOs from bailout banks for using corporate jets, House lawmakers approved $500 million for eight new government V.I.P. jets.  The article continues:  

“Ellis Bachman, a spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee, said the changes were part of “Congress’ normal oversight responsibility” to make sure “the troops have everything they need.”

Ellis, please remove your tongue from your cheek. Out-of-touch lawmakers and congress’ unlimited travel fund are the REAL reasons for the spending   spree. Congressional travel costs have increased ten-fold since 1995.

By the way, the Congressional Budget Office reported earlier today that the U.S. budget deficit climbed to $1.3 trillion. Let’s thank Congress for their normal oversight responsibility.   

P.S. If you think NC is immune from “plane issues”  read Francis De Luca’s post on NC state government planes.

Blame the law when you break the law; that is what Scott Mooneyham does on behalf of Mike Easley and Jim Black in his article “A Root of Corruption” in the Capitol View, INSIDER AFTERNOON UPDATE, July 20, 2009.  It is Mooneyham’s contention that there is a loophole in a campaign finance law and he thinks it should be closed. He joins Democracy North Carolina in their call for the Board of Elections to hold hearings due to “troubling patterns” of party contributions to Easley’s Campaign Committee.

In his article Mooneyham makes it clear that he does not want to blame the transgressor.  He rests the blame squarely on the law.  He writes “It's the law that spawns much of the political corruption in North Carolina. It's a campaign finance law that, weak as it is, foments abuse of power.  The law in question allows the state's political parties to make unlimited contributions to candidates. ”   He even goes on to say “Human nature is human nature, and politicians have always been and will always be susceptible to temptation.”

Wow – let’s all take a minute to “soak” up this point of view.  I guess Mooneyham thinks we are wrong to expect anything resembling honesty and integrity from our elected leaders.  I can’t help it, I expect so much more from someone who makes me promises and begs me for my support.

Mike Easley didn’t come straight from the backwoods to the big city to lead our State.  He was a District Attorney for ten years (according to his biography, “a top drug buster”), North Carolina’s Attorney General for eight years and elected Governor twice.  He knows North Carolina’s laws, he knows right from wrong; I will hold him entirely accountable, if he is found guilty.

For some reason Jim Black gets slipped into this argument for changing the state's political party’s ability to make unlimited contributions to candidates.  We would have to throw away all of North Carolina's laws to cover all of Black’s transgressions; public corruption, bribery, obstructing justice, accepting kickbacks in public restrooms…

Before we ask our elected representatives to rewrite campaign finance laws, we should remember John McCain blamed the law after he was investigated in a political influence scandal in the 1980’s – does anyone remember the Keating 5?  McCain then made campaign finance reform a priority and we got McCain-Feingold.  Remember – the cure can kill you.

Here is the first glimpse of something I think you will be hearing a lot more about in the near future:

Jeff Taylor over at MeckDeck has details of what seems to be a bailout for Jim Black by the Wake County Public Schools.

If you recall, as part of former Speaker Jim Black's (D-Mecklenburg) sentence, he had to pay a $1 million fine in addition to his prison sentence.  Having already paid back $500,000 of the fine, Black needed to come up with another $500,000 to satisfy the plea arrangement.

Taylor has uncovered a property transfer report in the Charlotte Business Journal that list two properties totaling just over 7 acres transferred from Jim Black to the Wake County School System.

The tax value of these properties is assessed at just over $140,000.

Since all fines go to the schools, is Black being able to transfer just $140,000 worth of property to fulfill a $500,000 fine?

And just what in the world is the Wake County Public Schools going to do with 7 acres in Mecklenburg County?

Many, many questions need to be answered on this.

With the reporting on the Easley corruption scandal and the attention on Mary Easley and her "job" at NCSU, it would seem like legislative action to save the taxpayers some money and put an end to a part of the drama would be as simple as a line in the budget. Of course nothing is easy when you start navigating laws and rules as the below email exchanges should show.

Having laws and rules usually only keep the honest, honest. All of the laws and "ethics" rules did not stop Mike Easley, Thomas Wright, Jim Black or any of the other corrupt politicians. Remember the below exchange when you here calls for more rules or regulations to "remedy" some problem.

Even with all of the so-called ethics legislation and rules, North Carolinians, by over 2-1, think that our state government and political leaders are corrupt.

                            ***************Original Request***************
Is it ethical to introduce or sponsor legislation to eliminate a specific contract position at a specific university?

From: Name Redacted (Research)
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 10:37 AM
To:Keith Weatherly (House Minority Leader's Office)
Cc:Rep. Paul Stam; Name Redacted (Research); Name Redacted (Research); Name Redacted (Research); Name Redacted  (Research); Name Redacted (Research)
Subject:[RTS-2009-00965] Ethical considerations of eliminating positions (Rep. Paul Stam)

Representative Stam and Keith,

Attached please a copy of G.S. 120-86.1, which states is it unethical a legislator to take, promise, or threaten any legislative action for the purpose of influencing or in retaliation for any action regarding State employee hirings, promotions, grievances, or disciplinary actions subject to the State Personnel Act (SPA).

If the contract position is subject to the SPA, then it is unethical to use legislative action, whether actual or threatened, to influence a hiring, promotion, grievance or disciplinary action.  If the contract position is not subject to the SPA, then it is not as clear cut.  However, I think one could argue that it would unethical to use legislative action to accomplish the same thing with a position exempt from the SPA. 

I hope this helps, even though it may not be a clear answer.  Please let me know if you like for me to determine if the position in question is subject to the SPA.

Name Redacted

Before the left uses the Easley scandal of the day to rev up the call for "Welfare for Politicians", also laughingly called voter-owned elections, they should take a deep breath. The Easley story is not about using existing campaign laws to an advantage, if proven to be true, it is about violating EXISTING campaign law and about personal enrichment. As many politicians before him, it appears that Easley aspired to a lifestyle that his income as an elected official would not support. Enter "friends" all to happy to help him live that lifestyle and throw in taxpayer financed aircraft and security to make life that much easier.

Planes, trips, land, home renovations are not the stuff of campaigns, they are the ingredients in an all too typical story of greed and corruption.

Back to the voter-owned elections – I called that laughable because whoever controls the money controls the politicians. In the method the left is proposing the government will control that money which means that government will control the elections. That does not sound like voter-owned to me. It sounds like politician-owned. Before my words are misused remember that "legally" (Easley excluded) any one individual can only donate a maximum of $8,000 over one election cycle (primary and general). If an election raises and spends $8,000,000 do the math. The influence any one individual or PAC can have on an election is very limited, but when government is the source of almost all of your money – BIG IMPACT. Besides, voter-owned elections don't work.

Something that NC Lottery Director Tom Shaheen apparently thinks is "not a big problem" gets a full expose on Dateline NBC.

Chris Hansen, best known for his work at exposing pedophiles, dedicated tonight's episode to exposing lottery fraud and how some lottery retailers are taking advantage of players and the system to make big bucks.

The full article with video is here.

But with the appearance of lottery fraud documented in this much detail in California, why does North Carolina's lottery director seem like it's not a big deal?  Given the NC Lottery's controversial beginnings, is the lottery director just trying to put on a good face for public relations sake?