Tag Archives: Michael Speciale

The North Carolina Election For The Third District In The U.S. House Of Representatives

Posted on by

There are a lot of candidates running in the primary election for North Carolina’s Third District in the U.S. House of Representatives. There are candidates running in the Republican, Democrat and Libertarian parties. I will be voting in the Republican Primary for Michael Speciale. I have known Michael Speciale almost since I arrived in North Carolina, and I am impressed with his knowledge of the U.S. Constitution, his devotion to the law, his work ethic, his leadership, and his accessibility to the people he represents.

The For Love of God and Country Blog gives a list of Michael’s accomplishments while serving in the North Carolina legislature:

Legislation that NC Rep. Michael Speciale has Sponsored or Co-Sponsored:

2019 SESSION:

HB 22 – Woman’s Right to Know / Ashley’s Law.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) —  This bill requires that women/girls seeking an abortion are informed about the possibility of reversing that abortion when using the high-dose hormone product, RU486. Hence, the bill is referred to as the “RU486 Reversal Bill.” RU486 is an abortion pill regimen that uses a 2-step process: The woman takes 2 pills – Mifepristone and then misopristone. RU486 can effectively terminate a pregnancy that is less than 10 weeks along (70 days) by sloughing off the uterine wall and the fetus with it. RU486 (mifepristone, a progesterone blocker; progresterone being essential for the uterus to sustain a pregnancy) basically causes the lining of your uterus to shed — so your pregnancy can no longer continue because the egg will have nothing to stay attached to. Then, the misoprostol will cause uterine contractions to allow the uterus to be emptied. According to the bill: The following information must be provided to a woman before a medical abortion: (A). Immediately prior to administering the drug mifepristone, the physician or qualified health professional shall inform the woman that: (i) it is still possible to discontinue a medical abortion by not taking the prescribed misoprostol (the second drug in the abortion protocol) and taking progesterone to reverse the effects of the mifepristone and (ii) information on how, where, and from whom women can obtain assistance in discontinuing a medical abortion is available on the Department of Health and Human Services’ Internet Web site. And (B) Immediately prior to administering the drug misoprostol, the physician or qualified professional shall provide medical proof to the woman that fetal death has occurred.”

HB 28 – Prohibit Abortions After 13 Weeks.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) — This bill would prohibit abortions after 13 weeks, unless absolutely necessary to protect the life of the mother or for a verified medical emergency. (The current law prohibits abortion after 20 weeks). After 13 weeks, the physician or qualified health professional who recommends an abortion would have to explain that recommendation, as well as present his medical findings, to the state Department of Health and Human Services.

HB 53 (= SB 52) – A Second Chance for LIFE.  (Speciale as co-sponsor) —  HB 53 is the COMPANION BILL – S 52.   HB 53 (and S 52), would require a physician who prescribes an abortion-inducing drug to a pregnant woman to provide the woman with written information about the possibility of reversing the drug-induced abortion through the administration of progesterone. The bills direct the State Department of Health & Human Services to design the written materials including the phone number for the Abortion Pill Reversal Hotline. (Refer also to HB 22).

HB 54 (= SB 51) – Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment     (Speciale as co-sponsor) —  HB 54 is the COMPANION BILL to S 51.   HB54 would make it illegal for a physician to perform a “dismemberment abortion” in North Carolina. The bills define this gruesome procedure in the following manner: “With the intent to cause the death of an unborn child, to dismember a living unborn child and extract that child in pieces from the uterus through use of clamps, grasping forceps, tongs, scissors, or similar instruments that, through the convergence of two rigid levers, slice, crush, or grasp, or a combination of these, a portion of the unborn child’s body to cut or rip it off.”

The bills (S 51 and HB 54) make it unlawful “for any person to willfully perform a dismemberment abortion and thereby kill an unborn child, or attempt to perform a dismemberment abortion, unless it is necessary to prevent serious health risk to the unborn child’s mother.” The term “health risk” is narrowly defined to include circumstances necessary to avert the death of the mother or “serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function, not including psychological or emotional conditions.” Both bills would allow the mother or father of the unborn child to seek civil penalties, including monetary damages and attorneys fees, against an individual who performs a dismemberment abortion.

HB 61 – Omnibus Gun Changes (aka, Permittless Conceal Carry).  (Speciale as co-sponsor) —  HB 61 is nearly identical to HB746 (“Permittless Conceal Carry”) which the Republican leadership in the NC Senate failed to move forward last year (2017). HB 61 provides: PART I: Section 14-415.35 of HB 61 makes it lawful to carry a concealed handgun in North Carolina without obtaining a conceal handgun permit (ie, “Permitless Conceal Carry”). All citizens are allowed to carry a concealed firearm without obtaining a permit as long as they meet certain common-sense criteria (to ensure the safety of others).

HB 63 – Protect North Carolina Workers Act.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) —  HB 63 would (1) increase the number of employers who are required to participate in the federal E-Verify program; (2) would repeal the E-Verify exemption for temporary employees; and (3) would exclude farm workers from the definition of “employee” under Article 2 of Chapter 64 of the General Statutes. HB63 would increase the number of employers required to comply with E-Verify by changing the definition of “employer” as “any person, business entity, or other organization that transacts business in this State and that employs five or more employees in this State.” (Originally, for an employer to be required to participate in E-Verify he/it was required to employ at least 25 employees). Furthermore, the definition of “employer” includes the following exclusions: “The term does not include a farm worker, an independent contractor, or an individual who provides domestic service in a private home that is sporadic, irregular, or intermittent.”

HB 65 – Marriage Re-Affirmation Act.  (Speciale as co-sponsor) —  The full title: “An Act to Reaffirm the Vote oif the People of North Carolina to Adopt Article XIV, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of North Carolina, Known as the Marriage Amendment, to State Why the Amendment Should be Upheld, to Declare Null and Void for the State of North Carolina the Obergefell v. Hodges Decision of the US Supreme Court, and to Call on the US Supreme Court to Overturn the Obergefell v. Hodges Decision.” The bill would do the following: (1) Reaffirm the Marriage Amendment, which would be added to the state Constitution (Article XIV, Section 6); (2) Nullify the Obergefell decision in North Carolina (unenforceable in NC); (3) Call on the Supreme Court to overturn the opinion; and (4) No same-sex marriage would be recognized in the state.

HB 73 – Civic Responsibility in Education.  (Speciale as co-sponsor) —  HB 73 would require the State Board of Education to include instruction on civic responsibility in the standard course of study (course curriculum) in Elementary, Middle, and High School. In Elementary, civic responsibility would be taught in the course “North Carolina History” and in Middle School, it would be taught in the course “North Carolina Geography.” In High School, civic responsibility would be taught in the course on the Founding Principles of the United States of America and the State of North Carolina.

HB 76 – School Safety Omnibus Bill.  (Speciale as co-sponsor) —  HB 76 would establish school safety requirements for all public schools – to require Threat Assessment Teams be established at each school with duties clearly defined.

HB 110 (= SB 90) – Protect Religious Meeting Places.  (Speciale as co-sponsor) —  HB 110 would allow concealed carry on the premises when religious meetings are being held.

HB 131 (= SB 71) – Repeal Map Act.  (Speciale as co-sponsor) —  This bill would repeal the Transportation Corridor Official Map Act

HB 135 – Government Immigration Compliance.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) —  HB 135 would do several things, including: (1) Repeal Law Enforcement authority to use prohibited forms of identification (ie, illegals can no longer present a matricula consular identification as an acceptable form of ID); (2) Create additional incentives for local governments to comply with state laws related to immigration; (3) Create a private cause of action to remedy local government non-compliance with state immigration laws; (4) Prohibit the institutions of the UNC university system from becoming sanctuary universities; and (5) Direct the Department of Public Safety to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the US Department of Homeland Security.

HB 136 – Concealed Carry Permit Relapse / Revise Law.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) —  HB 136 would revise the Concealed Carry Law, Sect. 1. G.S. 14-415.16(e) to read: “If the permittee does not apply to renew the permit prior to its expiration date, but does apply to renew the permit within 180 days after the permit expires, the sheriff shall waive the requirement of taking another firearms safety and training course. course so long as the permittee (i) completes a refresher course on the laws governing the use or carry of firearms in this State that is certified or sponsored by at least one of the entities listed in G.S. 14-415.12(a and (ii) submits documentation to the sheriff confirming the permittee completed the refresher course.

HB 160 – Rescind Calls for Constitutional Convention.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) — House Joint Resolution 160. This Resolution calls for the rescinding of all applications made by the NC General Assembly made during any session to the US Congress to call a Convention pursuant to Article V of the US Constitution for proposing one or more amendments to that Constitution and urging other states to do the same.

HB 172 – K-12 Academic Freedom Act.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) —  This bill would REQUIRE the State Board of Education to adopt a policy of academic freedom. It would impart a DUTY to the SBOE to adopt a policy that SHALL include, at a minimum, the following elements:

(a) Students and educators are encouraged to respect the ideological, political, religious, or nonreligious viewpoints held by all persons in the classroom.

( b) Students and educators are permitted to engage in open dialogue, critical thinking, and the free exchange of ideas related to the content of the course.

(c) A student shall not be discriminated against or mocked for the student’s ideological, political, religious, or nonreligious viewpoints.

(d) An educator shall not take a student’s ideological, political, religious, or nonreligious viewpoints into account when evaluating the student’s performance.

(e) Educators may answer questions posed by students with openness and honesty.

HB 173 – Exempt Ocular Surgery from Certificate of Need (CON) Laws.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) —  HB 172 would exempt ocular surgery and would provide limited exemption for limited exemption for gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures from the Certificate of Need requirement under NC law. The growing need of the elderly for ocular surgery requires this exemption.

HB 174 – Home School Tax Credit.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) —  This bill would provide an income tax credit for those operating a home school.

HB 196 – Parental Consent for Sex Education.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) —  HB 196 would require a student to have parental consent for any class that educates or attempts to education on reproductive health and safety. Each school year, before students may participate in any portion of (i) a program that pertains to or is intended to impart information or promote discussion or understanding in regard to the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS, or to the avoidance of out-of-wedlock pregnancy or (ii) a reproductive health and safety education program, whether developed by the State or by the local board of education, the parents and legal guardians of those students shall be given an opportunity to review the objectives and materials as provided in G.S. 115C-81.25(d). Local boards of education shall adopt policies to provide opportunities for parents and legal guardians to consent to their students’ participation in any or all of these programs. A student shall not participate in any program described in this subsection unless the student’s parent or legal guardian has consented to the student’s participation.

HB 215 – Justice for Rural Citizens Act.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) —  HB 215 would remove the injustice of extra-extraterritorial planning jurisdiction by declaring that no city in the state may have or exercise planning jurisdiction outside its corporate limits. HB215 lists the reasons for removing such extra-territorial planning jurisdiction: “Whereas, under current State law, any city may exercise planning jurisdiction under Article 19 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes within a defined area extending not more than one mile beyond its corporate limits; and Whereas, with the approval of the board of county commissioners with jurisdiction over the area, a city of 10,000 or more but less than 25,000 may exercise planning jurisdiction over an area extending not more than two miles beyond its corporate limits, and a city of 25,000 or more may exercise these powers over an area extending not more than three miles beyond its limits; and Whereas, the citizens who live in an area over which a city exercises extraterritorial planning jurisdiction are prohibited from voting in municipal elections; and Whereas, without the ability to vote in municipal elections to choose the persons who will make planning decisions about the areas in which they live, rural citizens do not have a say in some of the important matters that affect their lives and livelihoods.”

HB 216 – School Self-Defense Act.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor) — HB 216 would authorize certain members of a school’s faculty or staff to carry a handgun on the school grounds to respond to acts of violence of imminent threat of violence.

HB314 – Constitutional Amendment – Remove Literacy Test.  (Speciale as Primary sponsor – bipartisan bill) —  HB 314 is a bi-partisan bill that would amend the state constitution by repealing (removing) Section 4 of Article VI which requires a person to pass a literacy test in order to register to vote in North Carolina.

HB328 – Same Reqs/Officials/Early Vote & Election Day.  (Speciale as Primary Sponsor)  —  HB 328 would ensure that requirements for precinct officials (poll workers) will be the same for Early One-Stop Voting as they are on Election Day.

 2017 – 2018 SESSION: (Bills Michael Speciale was the primary sponsor or co-sponsor)

HB 3 – Eminent Domain

HB 69 – Constitutional Carry Act   (to amendment the state constitution to prohibit condemnation of private property except for public use)

HB 76 – Increase Fire & Rescue Pension Benefits

HB 145 – Repeal Constitutional Regulation of Concealed Weapons   [this bill would remove the following language from Article I, Section 3 (“Militia & the Right to Bear Arms”): “nothing herein shall justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons, or prevent the General Assembly from enacting penal statutes against that practice”)

HB 146 – Citizens Allegiance to US Constitution     [this bill would amend Article I, Section 5 (“Allegiance to the United States”) to remove the offending language, as underlined: “Every citizen of this State owes paramount allegiance to the Constitution and government of the United States, and no law or ordinance of the State in contravention or subversion thereof can have any binding force”]

HB 147 – Amend the NC State Constitution to Remove Article I, Section 4 (“Secession Prohibited”)

HB 148 – Amend the NC State Constitution to Remove the Literacy Requirement to Vote   [this bill would remove Section 4 of Article VI (“Qualification for Registration”) of the state constitution which requires a person to pass a literacy test in order to register to vote – “Every person presenting himself for registration shall be able to read and write any section of the Constitution in the English language”]

HB 201 – NC Constitutional Carry Act (to protect a person’s right to carry a concealed weapon without a permit and to protect his right to purchase a handgun without a pistol purchase permit)

HB 266 – Terminate Agreement for Tolling of I-77

HB 306 – Require E-Verify for All Government Contracts

HB 417 – Actually Getting Rid of Common Core Act

HB 986 – Various Changes to Education Laws [passed and signed into law – SL 2018-32]

HB 1092 – Constitutional Amendment to Require Photo ID to Vote

If you want to send someone to Washington who will work to represent you, Michaael Speciale is your man.

I Wonder How We Will View This In Ten Years

Posted on by

There is a bit of mob hysteria going on right now about the Confederate battle flag. It is not the Confederate flag–it is not even the ‘stars and bars,’ although it is occasionally called that by people who do not know the history of the flag.

Yesterday I attended a meeting of the House Homeland Security, Miltary, and Veterans Affairs Committee in the North Carolina Legislative Building. The meeting was chaired by Representative Michael Speciale from Craven County. WRAL.com posted an article about this meeting. I have included a link to their article although the article is totally misleading.

First of all, I would like to say that this committee meeting had nothing to do with any of the ruckus that is currently ongoing about Confederate flags and memorabilia. The Bill was originally filed in the North Carolina Senate on February 3rd of this year. The purpose of the Bill is to set up a standard procedure for preserving historic items from North Carolina’s history. There were people in the meeting who tried to make this a discussion of the Confederate battle field and other civil war items, but that is not what the Bill is about.

The article at WRAL did report one important comment made during the meeting:

But Rep. Larry Pittman, R-Cabarrus, compared efforts to remove Confederate monuments to George Orwell’s novel 1984.

“History needs to be retained. You don’t know what you are without your history,” Pittman argued. “We need to face it and, like it or not like it, it is what it is, and we shouldn’t be trying to change it. And I don’t think the government has the right to change what history is.”

The Bill will be voted on by the North Carolina House of Representatives next Tuesday. The Bill easily passed the Senate in April, but that was before the insanity started. It is truly sad that many Americans wants to erase our history rather than learn from it.

As Representative Speciale noted, “This bill has nothing to do with what’s happened over the Confederate flag. But I think that’s a good reason why we need something like this to stave off the flames of passion. Because once an item is destroyed, an item is removed, a historical item, it’s gone.”

We need to preserve our past, learn from it, and move on. Destroying it accomplishes nothing.

 

 

Townhall Meeting In New Bern

Posted on by

Tonight I attended a Townhall style meeting held in Stanly Hall in New Bern. The two main speakers at the event were state Representative Michael Speciale, who represents North Carolina’s third district, and state Senator Norman Sanderson, who represents North Carolina’s second district. These men are dedicated conservatives who represent eastern North Carolina in Raleigh.

Representative Speciale spoke first. He talked about the need for the conservatives in the state legislature to stand for their principles. He reminded us that he was sent to Raleigh to vote for conservative principles and for what was best for the State of North Carolina. Recently H.B. 1224 was defeated by a 54 to 47 vote. The bill included special interest spending that was not necessary, and needed to be voted down, despite the fact that many Republicans supported it.

Senator Sanderson reminded us that the reports in the press of disunity in Raleigh have been exaggerated. He stated that the Senate and the House agreed on about 95 percent of the budget. About 5 percent of the budget required compromise to work out differences, which the legislature did. Senator Sanderson listed the recent accomplishments of the legislature. These accomplishments included expanded restrictions on sex offenders, rules regarding mo-peds on North Carolina highways, allowing prayer in North Carolina schools, election laws designed to protect the integrity of elections in North Carolina, and energy laws to allow North Carolina to develop its energy resources.

There was an extended period of questions from those who attended the meeting. A variety of subjects were addressed that concern those of us who live in eastern North Carolina–education funding, Common Core, the tourism industry, the fishing industry, and other issues.

The evening was very informative. The meeting was sponsored by the Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association (CCTA). The CCTA meets at Stanly Hall on the third Tuesday of every month at 7 pm. Attending a CCTA meeting is a good start in becoming an informed voter.

Status Update On Common Core In North Carolina

Posted on by

Representative Larry Pittman is a member of the North Carolina General Assembly. This is his update on the status of Common Core in North Carolina:

Common Core…what really happened. Okay, most of you probably know that I am the one who started the fight against Common Core in the NC House by running a study bill. I actually wanted to go ahead and run a bill that would just get rid of Common Core, plain and simple; but not enough legislators knew enough about it to get on board with that. So I had to settle for a study bill, instead. Of course, since none of my bills were allowed to be heard in committee, they put forward a larger study bill which included establishing a study committee, instead. Michael Speciale and I were allowed to serve on that committee.
The study committee produced a very weak bill, which appeared to be about getting rid of Common Core, but which I felt actually left open the possibility of simply rebranding it. This bill was authored by Sen. Tillman, who had asked early on in the meetings of the committee whether we couldn’t just take the name Common Core out of our statutes and call it something else. I went ahead and voted to report it out of committee, but knew I would have to work to improve on the bill.
Michael Speciale, Bryan Holloway, and I were doing just fine making the bill stronger, when all of a sudden, Craig Horn, who had expressed support for Common Core early on, showed up at one of our meetings with a different version that removed some of the language I had written into the bill. So I submitted another version that added my language back into the bill. As I recall, this happened twice. In all, I submitted four versions of the bill before Craig agreed to leave my language in it.
Before we were through, Craig wrote something like 23 versions of the bill. The final version still had my language in it that would make sure that going back to Common Core and simply rebranding it was not an option. I never said or intended that if a way of doing something that was in Common Core happened to be a good idea we couldn’t use it; but I was urgent about making sure that if we did, we should reword it to avoid copyright violations. My main concern was that whatever we do would end a lot of the foolishness that is in Common Core. I was insistant upon not using assessment sources that were tied to Common Core. I also wanted to make the commission we were creating permanent, with the idea that it would be a watchdog to make sure DPI and the State Board of Education did not pull another fast one on us like Common Core, and that we never get ourselves entangled with further federal control of our education system.
Well, the result of all this work was HB 1061, which passed the House with a strong majority. When SB 812 came over from the Senate, we also got strong support in the House to remove the weak language of that bill and replace it with what was in HB 1061. This, too, passed the House with a strong majority. If we could have gotten the Senate to go along with us, I could assure you that we would be driving a stake through the heart of Common Core in North Carolina.
When the Senate failed to concur with the House version of SB 812, that caused the issue to be sent to a conference committee. As the one who started all of this, you might expect that I would be on that conference committee. However, I was not allowed to serve on it. Michael Speciale was on the committee, and I’m sure that he did his best to contend for what we had done. I appreciate him so much, and he should be commended for his efforts. However, he was outnumbered and outvoted.
The end result is a bill two pages shorter than HB 1061. The lack of those two pages is the result of the Senate insisting on removing everything I had put into it to make clear that continuing with Common Core is not an option. The bill as we finally passed it does repeal Common Core from our statutes, and has the potential to lead to the end of Common Core in our State. In the end, I had to vote to concur because I felt that if we didn’t pass something this year, it would be next to impossible to come back next year and start from scratch. At least with this bill, we do have a basis for coming back later to push for further reforms, if need be. While it does not call for rebranding Common Core, I fear it leaves that option open. So we must be watchful and ready to resist such an outcome.
Finally, considering what was removed from the bill, and considering the fact that Gov. McCrory, a strong advocate of Common Core, has already essentially said that he can sign it because it doesn’t change anything, I do not have a lot of confidence about what will happen. I got this thing started because I heard the cries of parents and children who have been victimized by Common Core. I heard from some teachers who sounded the alarm, also, and was told about many other teachers who were afraid to speak of their opposition to Common Core for fear of losing their jobs. If that is the case, something is really rotten about the whole affair. I fear that, in the end, the voice of wealthy special interests spoke louder than the voice of the people who suffer under the curse of Common Core. While good could come from what we finally passed, I believe the opponents of Common Core should stay on the alert. We haven’t necessarily won yet. There may be more to do.

Please do your homework on Common Core. If you are not a parent with children in school, talk to a parent who has helped their child with Common Core math homework. Aside from being an unconstitutional federal takeover of education, the Common Core includes data mining of children without proper security protection of the information. It also includes questions asked of the children regarding their parents’ religious beliefs and gun ownership. That information is none of the school or the government’s business.

Candidates Forum In New Bern

Posted on by

Last Night I attended the Candidate Forum at the Stanly Hall Ballroom in New Bern, North Carolina. The forum was sponsored by the Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association. The candidates attending included Republicans and Democrats running for office at various levels of government including the U. S. Senate the U. S. House of Representatives, the North Carolina Senate, the North Carolina House of Representatives, and various other state and county offices. It was a very informative night, and I encourage you if you live in an area that does candidate forums, to attend one–they are worth attending. On May 6th North Carolina voters will go to the polls to vote in a primary election. Many of the candidates for office have primary challenges. Be an informed voter.

It would take forever to detail what each candidate said, so I am going to simply list general impressions of a few candidates who stood out.

Greg Brannon is impressive. His off-the-cuff knowledge of the U.S. Constitution is inspiring. He is definitely ready for prime time. His answers to questions were clear and concise, and there was nothing he had to backtrack on as the questions continued. It was also interesting to see that some of the other candidates deferred to him on Constitutional questions. There were a number of candidates who made statements during the question and answer period that they had to backtrack on. I suspect they will be working on this before the election.

I was also impressed by Norm Sanderson and Michael Speciale. Norm Sanderson is serving is freshman term in the North Carolina Senate, and Michael Speciale is serving his freshman term in the North Carolina House. Both men had clear ideas on what needs to be done in North Carolina and clear plans for instituting those ideas.

I was also impressed by George Liner, running for Craven County Board of Commissioners. When asked a question about the Craven County tall structures laws and how they would protect people and property values from a wind farm, he was already aware of the potential problems that would arise. He seemed well prepared to hold the office if he is elected.

All of the candidates had an opportunity to state their reasons for running and their positions on various subjects. It was a very informative evening. As a new resident of this area, I learned a lot at the forum. It was very helpful to me to see the candidates and hear what they considered the major issues facing the state and local communities.

Enhanced by Zemanta