General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Thurs., March 15, 2012

Cassandra has already reported the Big News, and it took place at Wilmington’s Latin American Community Center. In fact, the DREAM Act has not been officially introduced, or at least its introduction has not yet made its way to the official General Assembly page, but it will be introduced, and it will serve as a Rorschach Test for members of the General Assembly and the public at large. I strongly support the bill, it is a bill where the benefits to the state far outweigh any costs that might be associated with it. Unless, of course, you are opposed to an educated and upwardly-mobile citizenry. You know, taxpayers, productive citizens. I don’t know whether the cowardly followers in the Delaware General Assembly will dare pass it during an election year, but I believe that the Dream Act’s passage is ultimately inevitable–eventually.  I salute Bob Marshall, Helene Keeley, Joe Miro, and whoever else signs onto the bill as a sponsor; as well as one of my favorite Delawareans, Maria Matos. Maria has served as Executive Director of the LACC since 1994, and her dynamic leadership has made such a difference, and continues to make a difference, in the lives of so many in Delaware’s Hispanic community.

Yesterday was committee day. While most of the bills I discussed in yesterday’s Post-Game/Pre-Game made it out of committee, this notable nominee for Worst Bill of the Year did not. Maybe legislators read the barely-intelligible comments by the bill’s most vociferous supporter in the comments thread, and maybe they did not. But this bill is simply special interest legislation with no public policy justification to it. HB 249 (Brady) waives continuing education requirements for realtors with 40 years of service. Why? The sponsors have made no public policy justification. It’s because someone with 40 years of service didn’t want to have to complete the CE requirements for licensure, and they were powerful enough to convince legislators to introduce the bill. That’s no reason to pass a bill like this. BTW, I don’t think I should have to pass an eye exam to get my driver’s license renewed. Will some legislator sponsor a bill to make me a legalized blind menace on the roads? Didn’t think so.

Only one bill on the Senate agenda today. SB 34(Blevins) ‘provides Delaware public employees with representation on the (State Employee Benefit) Committee’. Man, the Senate is really operating in Slo-Mo since its return.

The House agenda, per usual, is more interesting:

HB 251(Longhurst) gives a $100,000 tax break to the operator of the Delaware City refinery. Doesn’t bother me. Assuming that DNREC does its job, the State will get at least that much back in fines.

Hard to disagree with HB 256(Schwartzkopf), which ‘ensures that when a person fails to report a missing child and that child becomes a neglected child as a result of the failure to report, that person can be charged with the crime of endangering the welfare of a child.’ Looks like practically every member of the General Assembly has signed on as a co-sponsor. Election brochure material, for sure.

Not quite as sure about HB 270(Osienski), which would ‘provide(s) that a person who is convicted of graffiti and was under the age of 21 at the time of the offense shall lose his/her driver’s license for a period of 30 days for the first offense and between 90 and 180 days for a second or subsequent offense’. I don’t (a) see the link between graffiti and driving privileges, can’t they do public service or something?; and (b) why the specific age designation? Why should someone under 21 be treated differently than someone over 21? Shouldn’t the penalty be the same? I’d welcome answers from those ‘in the know’.

That’s all I’ve got today because that’s all they’ve got. Gotta start work on a big deluxe version of Delaware Political Weekly, voraciously inhaled at DL every Friday by political junkies everywhere. If you’re not yet addicted, tomorrow’s a good time to start. C’mon, one little article couldn’t possibly hurt…