The video below was posted at the U.K. Mail:
I have nothing to add.
Tag Archives: North Carolina
Common Sense During An Election Season
Dave Chadwick describes himself as a 59-year-old African American man, born and raised in Jacksonville (North Carolina), and now living with my family in New Bern (North Carolina).
He recently wrote a letter to the New Bern Sun Journal stating his thoughts on the current election cycle. After reading the letter, I am convinced we need this man in public office.
This is the letter:
I am a 59-year-old African American man, born and raised in Jacksonville, and now living with my family in New Bern.
I am insulted by the arrogance of the Democratic candidates during this election because they talk to us through their advertisements as if we are stupid.
My kids attend public schools here in New Bern. Not only are the staff and teachers at the schools outstanding, my kids have plenty of books.
I seriously doubt if money is really being transferred from the schools to yacht owners. But each time someone purchases a yacht, jobs are created and secured at companies like Hatteras Yachts located right here in New Bern.
I was shocked to hear the radio commercial that featured a couple of ladies suggesting the Republicans were trying to take away the rights of African Americans to vote. The voter ID initiative,(if that’s what they’re referring to) is to preserve the integrity of the vote, and a photo ID can be acquired for free through the North Carolina DMV.
And recently, the commitment of the incumbent Democratic Senator Kay Hagan to a strong military and American security was questioned by the Republican candidate. In her rebuttal commercial, the Democratic Senatorial candidate cited her relatives who have served in the military and her support for the administration’s current strategy regarding the terror group ISIS.
Well, almost everyone in Eastern North Carolina has relatives currently serving or who have previously served in the military. Despite all the “support of the administration’s ISIS strategy,” it doesn’t seem like much progress is being made at stopping them. I just finished watching a CBS, 60 minutes story on Benghazi which is completely inconsistent with the administration’s story.
These things do not invoke trust within me or many of my friends for the current Obama administration. The Democrats are spending an awful lot of money on negative ads designed to discredit Republicans.
Why would anyone choose that kind of strategy over one that highlights their own accomplishments?
Thank you for allowing me to voice this opinion.
David Chadwick, New Bern
Thank you, Mr. Chadwick, for introducing some common sense into the race.
Mr. Chadwick was recently interviewed on NewsMax TV. This is the interview:
It’s A Little Late To Discover This
The Sun Journal in New Bern, North Carolina,(no link–current article available only to subscribers) posted an article today about a state audit of voters in North Carolina that indicates that hundreds of people on North Carolina voter rolls aren’t U.S. citizens — and are ineligible to vote.
The article states:
The State Board of Elections said in a news release late Friday that it found 1,425 registered voters who are likely non-citizens in an analysis of data from the state Division of Motor Vehicles and the federal Department of Homeland Security.
The announcement comes less than two weeks before an Election Day that features the close race between Democratic U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan and her Republican challenger Thom Tillis. The contest will help determine which party controls the Senate.
“We are working to ensure that no ballot cast by a noncitizen will count in this or any future election,” Kim Westbrook, the board’s executive director, said in a statement.
The board is preparing instructions for local elections officials to challenge ballots under a process that would give the voters a chance to prove their citizenship. The board says it’s a crime for a noncitizen to register or vote.
The article further reported:
On Friday, a coalition of voting rights groups expressed concern about the audit in a letter to state elections officials. It cited laws regarding maintenance of voting rolls and urged caution when comparing voter rolls to data from the DMV and federal immigration officials.
The letter was signed by Project Vote, Demos, Fair Elections Legal Network, American Civil Liberties Union, NALEO Educational Fund, Southern Coalition for Social Justice, and Action NC.
“Our organizations are deeply concerned about maintaining access to the polls for all of North Carolina’s voters in keeping with the requirements of the NVRA,” the letter said, referring to the National Voter Registration Act.
There are requirements in the NVRA that voter lists be periodically audited and purged of people who have died, moved out of an area, or for some reason are ineligible to vote. Unfortunately, the Department of Justice under Eric Holder chose not to enforce these laws.
Judicial Watch is an organization that has worked tirelessly in recent years to ensure the integrity of the vote in America. Their latest victory has been in Indiana, where 700,000 voters were moved to “inactive status” as a result of a May 2014 statewide mailing to all registered voters. This mailing was the result of efforts by Judicial Watch and True the Vote. They had been advocating in court for two years to get this mailing to take place. Statistically, nearly 1 in 5 Indiana voter registrations are for people who have moved and no longer live at the address associated with that voter’s outdated registration. That is a scary statistic.
An Exercise In Futility
On July 16, 2014, the North Carolina General Assembly ratified SB812 (follow link for full text). The bill charges the State Board of Education with the task of conducting a comprehensive review of all English Language Arts and Mathematics standards adopted under G.S.115C 12(9c) and propose modifications to ensure that those standards will improve the students’ level of academic achievement, meet and reflect North Carolina’s priorities, and other goals. The law sets up the Academic Standards Review Commission composed of eleven people who are charged with reviewing current standards and making recommendations. Unfortunately the way the law is written, the Commission is simply going through the Common Core standards line by line (by hearing a presentation of the Department of Public Instruction [DPI], which supports Common Core). There is no objectivity in the presentation, and there is no factual information at this point that indicates Common Core does anything to raise academic standards.
In May of last year, I wrote an article about the introduction of Common Core in Massachusetts. The article cited a Wall Street Journal article detailing the changes in Massachusetts education during the 1990’s. Education in the state was reformed in 1993, and SAT scores rose for thirteen consecutive years. In 2005 Massachusetts scored best in the nation in all grades and categories on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. They have repeated that performance every time they have taken the test. Massachusetts is doing very well educationally right now.
On October 1 of this year, I wrote another article about Common Core in Massachusetts. The article was about the Lincoln-Sudbury School Board‘s decision to decline a chance to offer the PARCC (Common Core) to students next spring, sharply criticizing the standardized test that could end up replacing the MCAS in the state.
That article quotes a Massachusetts newspaper article that states:
One board member equated the trial run of the exam as making “guinea pigs” out of students, whom he said wouldn’t see any worthwhile benefit from the dozens of hours they would put into practicing for and taking the test.
Lincoln-Sudbury, like all public high schools in Massachusetts, had a choice to administer the PARCC, short for Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, in ninth and 11th grade later this year. The new test, which was introduced in a small pilot roll-out this past spring, was developed by a consortium of states to closely conform to the new Common Core standards adopted by most schools in the nation.
…Several committee members also bemoaned the PARCC’s potential effect of putting increased emphasis on standardized testing, arguing Lincoln-Sudbury on its own is able to come up with much more effective measures of students’ grasp of learning standards.
No matter how hard the Department of Public Instruction tries to sell it, Common Core is untested. If the Commission is truly concerned about the education of North Carolina students, they will look to other states that have successfully improved the academic achievement levels of their students. I am sure there are many communities in Massachusetts who would be willing and able to help with this task.
Meanwhile, today’s meeting was a biased, self-serving presentation by the Department of Public Instruction–a department that was not interested in changing anything (except possibly the name Common Core). That is unfortunate.
If the parents and grandparents of North Carolina students are truly concerned about their students’ education, they need to get involved very quickly. There will be a meeting next month in which the DPI will do a presentation of the mathematics section of Common Core similar to the one they did today on the English Language Arts section. So far there has been no public examination of any set of standards other than the unproven Common Core standards. If that continues, the students of North Carolina will be the victims of an exercise in futility that accomplished nothing.
A Congressman I Respect
If you read this blog regularly, you know that it has been almost a year since I moved from Massachusetts to North Carolina. I am still learning about North Carolina politics and the people involved in them. Today I had the privilege of being part of a small group that met with Congressman Walter Jones. I was thoroughly impressed.
Congressman Jones believes in the United States Constitution. He votes in Congress based on what the Constitution says.
One of Congressman Jones’ concerns is the rapid increase of America’s national debt. He states that he believes we need to stop raising the debt ceiling and begin to bring government spending under control. He pointed out that the last time the debt ceiling was raised, it was done in a way that did not require the House to vote on increasing the debt ceiling until March of 2015, regardless of how much the debt had risen by then. He reminded us that just as you would not run your household budget that recklessly, the United States budget should not be run that way.
Congressman Jones is currently seeking another term in the U. S. House of Representatives. Based on what I saw today, I will happily vote for him. He stated that he sees serving in the House of Representatives as both an honor and a privilege. It is an honor to be represented in Washington by a man who loves his country and respects the United States Constitution.
The Question On The North Carolina Ballot
This was posted on Facebook by the Republican Liberty Caucus of North Carolina. When you vote in North Carolina, please keep in mind that a trial by jury is a right guaranteed by the U. S. Constitution.
Waive Right to Trial by Jury
Amendment
Friends,
As you may or may not have heard by now, on Election Day, November 4th 2014 there will be an amendment on the ballot left for North Carolina Voters to decide on. The Amendment, if passed, would amend the Constitution regarding jury trials in non death penalty cases. Instead of having a jury trial as mandated in the current form of the constitution, this would allow a defendant to waive his right to a jury trial and opt instead for a bench trial (with judicial allowance) and the case would then go before the NC Superior Court.
While the legislatively referred amendment may seem to lack fanfare or immediate consequence, there always remains the lingering possible negative consequences of “tinkering” with defendant rights and the judicial system. I would recommend folks look into this issue by referring to it’s Senate Bill # SB 399; which was sponsored by Peter Brunstetter. (This passed in the house overwhelmingly, with only one hold out vote cast by Michael Speciale.)
Consider the careful and thoughtful intent our Founding Fathers placed into writing the US Constitution, their foresight into matters such as these is absolutely relevant still today. In the Declaration of Independence a major grievance was the deprivation or jury trials in matter dealing with Great Britain, and detainment without trial. (We know the rest of the story so I will spare you the political history soapbox) However, fast forward to our modern system of criminal justice and even our Federal system has now adopted the right to waive a jury (in certain cases) to opt for a bench trial. In fact 49/50 states have this option (though statutes and limitations on this vary by state) so North Carolina is the last hold out; and to be perfectly honest and to inject my personal thoughts here, I truly think it is something to be proud of. We have maintained over the years that the right to jury trial is the best form of justice for defendants.
Some of the issues which have been raised to counter this Amendment include cases such as White Collar crimes and Fraud, bankers, political boosters, lobbyists, Insurance and Securities fraud etc. because of potential close relationships these types of defendants may have with certain judges or prosecutors. One case Nicole Revels brought up was the one in which the heir to the DuPont fortune was accused (and supposedly later admitted) to child molestation of one of his own children (he was accused of molesting two of his own children) he was granted a bench trial and sentenced to serve time, which was quickly after repealed by the judge with the explanation or excuse that he would not “fare well” in prison.
The other side of the rich and wealthy are the indigent, and low IQ defendants who already often admit to crimes they have not committed. If this option (to waive a jury) were to be taken away, perhaps a more sympathetic jury would not get to consider circumstances in which would either influence a lighter sentence (or even give the jury the option to nullify the case) I have been trying to find an old case I studied while in Criminal Law class at Campbell. I recall that there was a case in which an African American man with a fairly low IQ (and possibly some learning disorder) had seen a class where you could order away for information to become a private detective (he also at a certain point obtained a handgun) at some point later he went to the police station (possibly to talk to someone about being a “detective”) and either he disclosed that he had the gun, or it was found. It went to trial and he was facing a lengthy sentence. The case ended up being Nullified as the sympathetic jury decided he was not intending harm, and in fact was not able to even comprehend properly the laws and regulations. (No one was hurt and no violent crime happened here) I fear this man would have had the book thrown at him if he had gone in front of a judge.
Our prisons are already overpopulated with minority youths, many of which are serving very lengthy sentences because of possession charges or other non-violent crimes. Many of these defendants plea out, but for the ones who do not, I believe the Founding Fathers had the vision and capacity to understand that a jury of one’s own peers would be best fit to decide a sentence (if any at all) or find them not guilty. This amendment, in a perfect world, may just give defendants a fair option to make their own decision. However, the possibility to persuade or sway defendant’s in an intended direction remains a great risk to liberty. Most voters will not have even heard about this amendment when they go vote on November 4th, and they may just pick a quick answer, move on and never think twice about it. I think our Voters deserve more information, and more transparency. No matter what stance you take, I believe we need to educate and get the word out about SB 399, before it slips past us.
In Liberty,
Sara Remini
Keeping Election Integrity
In the last state legislative session, North Carolina changed its voting laws to ensure the integrity of its elections. Photo ID will be required in 2016, there will be no more same day registration, and voters will be required to vote in their own precincts.
The reasoning behind these changes was simple. Voter ID prevents a voter from being disenfranchised by someone who casts an illegal vote. Same day registration does not provide a way to check to make sure someone actually lives at the address they state. As I recently reported, a friend of mine who lives in North Carolina checked the voter registration rolls a few weeks ago and found out that there were six people who claimed her house as a residence, but did not live there. That is potentially six illegal votes cancelling out the votes of legal voters. Requiring people to vote in their own precinct ensures that they receive the appropriate ballot. Precinct ballots vary according to local offices being filled, obviously, voters need to vote for their local officials–not someone else’s. The idea behind the new law was to secure the right of voters to an honest election.
Unfortunately, some of that law was recently struck down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. According to the U. S. Supreme Court blog, the Fourth Circuit judges felt that the new laws would limit the black vote. I guess I’m a little dense, but it seems to me that if it actually limited anyone’s ability to vote (which it doesn’t), it would limit everyone’s ability to vote. Registering to vote is easy–it can be done five days a week at the Board of Elections or when you get your license. Advance registration gives the Board of Elections time to confirm your address. Voting in your precinct should not be a problem as your precinct is determined by where you live–therefore the voting place should be relatively close to your home.
Well, now the U. S. Supreme Court is involved.
The article reports:
The Supreme Court, with two Justices noting dissents, on Wednesday afternoon allowed North Carolina to bar voters from registering and casting their ballots on the same day, and to refuse to count votes that were cast in the wrong polling places. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. The majority did not explain its action.
The order gives the state time to file an appeal from lower-court rulings striking down those two provisions, which were part of a larger, sweeping change in voting rights in the state. If the Court grants review of the state’s appeal, the postponement will remain in effect until there is a decision.
Justice Ginsburg, writing for herself and Justice Sotomayor, argued that the two restrictions at issue as well as others in the broader reach of the new law probably would have been found illegal, if the Voting Rights Act of 1965 remained in full effect and North Carolina had had to ask permission from the federal government to make those changes. The Court last year limited the 1965 Act in a way that the dissenters said “effectively nullified” the law’s pre-clearance requirement.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found that the two provisions permitted by Wednesday’s Supreme Court order would risk a significant reduction in voting opportunities for black voters in North Carolina, in violation of a part of the Voting Rights Act still intact.
Ensuring the integrity of the vote does not disenfranchise anyone–in fact, it ensures that legal voters will not be disenfranchised by illegal voters.
The Legislature Got It Right–The Court Got It Wrong
Two of the key provisions in North Carolina’s new voting law have been overturned by a a 2-1 ruling of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Yahoo News posted an article yesterday explaining the details.
The two parts of the law that were overturned were same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting. The court claimed that to end these practices would disenfranchise some voters. I beg to differ. The reason the legislature ended same-day registration was that it did not provide ample time to check the address information given by the voter. A friend of mine, a North Carolina resident, checked the voter registration in her town and found that there were five people registered at her address that did not live there. I don’t know whether those five people had voted in recent elections or not, but if they did, they cancelled the vote of legal voters–disenfranchising legal voters. Stopping out-of-precinct voting is a good idea because ballots are different in different precincts–precinct elections include local candidates that vary by precinct. If a person votes in the wrong precinct, he may not get to vote for the officials in his precinct–thus he is disenfranchising himself!
The article reports:
State House Speaker Thom Tillis, the Republican challenging incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan, said he and state Senate leader Phil Berger, also a Republican, would appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The article at Yahoo attempts to portray the passage of this law as a political issue related to the Republicans wanting to take the Senate. The question we need to ask is, “Why does ensuring the integrity of our elections give a political advantage to Republicans?”
The new North Carolina voting law is a step toward more honest elections. Why are there politicians who are fighting this?
Where Did The Stimulus Money Go?
Paul Mirengoff at Power Line posted an article yesterday about Kay Hagan, who is running for a second term in the United States Senate. Senator Hagan is the junior Senator from North Carolina. At the present time, she leads her opponent, Republican Thom Tillis, by three to five points. However, it appears that Mrs. Hagan’s husband’s company benefited from the stimulus bill she supported.
The article reports:
But Hagan suffered a blow over the weekend when it was revealed that, by virtue of the 2009 Stimulus Bill for which she voted, her husband’s company received nearly $390,000 in federal grants for energy projects and tax credits.
Hagan’s response to this story is that she did not help her husband win the federal funding. She also disputes any suggestion they have profited from the Stimulus.
As to the first claim, it may be true that Hagan did not intervene directly on her husband’s behalf. But soon after voting for the Stimulus, she told a North Carolina newspaper that “there’s a lot of renewable energy-generating capacity in the stimulus package.” Her husband’s company was in the renewable energy business and Hagan knew that it was a potential direct beneficiary of the Stimulus.
As to the second claim, it’s implausible to believe that the husband’s business did not profit from receiving almost $400,000 in federal grants and tax credits. According to Politico, the Hagans’ income from JDC Manufacturing increased from less than $201 in 2008 to nearly $134,000 in 2013.
Crony capitalism anyone?
We need to elect people who will put the welfare of America ahead of their own personal gains. Obviously, Mrs. Hagan had a vested interest in voting for the stimulus.
The Fight To End Common Core In North Carolina Continues
On Monday, some members of the Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association (CCTA) attended the NC Academic Standards Review Commission’s First Meeting.
This is the report from the meeting from one of the attendees:
…the meeting room was very crowded. It was also hot, and uncomfortable. CCTA’s Common Core Committee with Kim Fink, our Chairman, was in attendance.
Unfortunately, it appeared to us that the review committee had been stacked with supporters of Common Core, although it was clear that some of the members definitely want the standards adopted to be North Carolina Standards. Senator Jerry Tillman made an impassioned statement that the US Constitution left eduction to the people and the States by not directly allocating authority for education to the federal government. He also said that the “bar must be raised” because NC’s children need to compete in national and world economies and that our top quarter of school graduates were not fairing well in competition with other states and the rest of the world.
Senator Tillman said the General Assembly would not stand for a re-hash of Common Core, but expected the review committee to do its job and develop North Carolina Education Standards which he said would drive curriculum, something proponents of Common Core deny.
It is up to parents and grandparents to get involved in this battle against Common Core. Common Core is not good for our children and needs to be stopped. The curriculum related to the standards is not the only problem–Common Core involves data mining of personal information on our children and grandchildren with no guarantee of the security of the data. It needs to be stopped.
What Did You Learn In School Today?
In North Carolina, high school students are required to complete two courses entitled American History I: Founding Principles and American History II in order to graduate. Students also have the option of substituting Advanced Placement U. S. History (APUSH) for these two courses. So what does AP U.S. History teach? Let’s looks at some of the mechanics of how this whole process works.
A student who takes AP U.S. History will be given tests by his teacher during the school year. If he receives a satisfactory grade, he passes the course and gets credit for it. However, in order to get college credit for having taking an American History course, he has to pass a national test on the subject. The national test is designed by David Coleman, now president of the College Board, formerly the architect of the Common Core Standards.
According to the Course and Exam Description put out by the College Board about the AP History Course,the goal of the course is to teach the student ‘historical thinking skills.’ How about teaching them history instead?
Here are some of the questions and concepts taking from the booklet put out by the College Board explaining the goals and concepts in the AP History course. The quotes are taken directly from the teacher’s guide:
Describing the historical period of 1607-1754, the teacher’s guide explains:
The British-American system of slavery developed out of the economic, demographic,and geographic characteristics of the British-controlled regions of the New World.
…Reinforced by a strong belief in British racial and cultural superiority, the British system enslaved black people in perpetuity, altered African general and kinship relationships in the colonies, and was one fact that led the British colonists into violent confrontations with native peoples.
Slavery was then, and still is, common in Muslim cultures. It was the Muslim slave traders who were capturing the slaves and selling them to the British and the British colonies. It was, later on, the British who ended the practice of slavery. Many Muslim cultures still practice slavery. It wasn’t and isn’t about the British and their colonies.
The AP History section on World War II is very limited. Among other things, it states:
Wartime experiences, such as the internment of Japanese Americans, challenges to civil liberties, debates over race and segregation, and the decision to drop the atomic bomb raised questions about American values.
No they didn’t. The internment of the Japanese was a violation of their civil liberties. It was wrong. However, it was understandable as a panicked response to the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. Many historians today view that internment as a serious mistake. The debates over race and segregation were needed–we were still a segregated society in many areas of the country as was most of the rest of the world. The military made great strides during this time in its acceptance of black soldiers. Not perfect strides, but definite progress in the right direction. The dropping of the atomic bomb ultimately saved American lives and the Japanese culture. Japan would have been totally destroyed by ground troops with heavy losses to American troops had we not forced their surrender with atomic bombs. The debate on these issues is a credit to American values.
There is no mention in the World War II summary of the German concentration camps and the people killed in them. There is no mention of D-Day and the risks (and reasons to take those risks) taken on that day. There is no recognition of the heroes of World War II.
There is no understanding in the AP History course of the greatness and uniqueness that is America. That greatness and uniqueness comes from the genius of our Founding Fathers and the Constitution they wrote. It seems to me that the students would be better served by spending their time studying the U.S. Constitution and the efforts and principles involved in writing it.
Protecting North Carolina Voters
Tonight the Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association held a public meeting in the Stanly Hall Ballroom in New Bern to discuss the voter law recently passed in North Carolina. The speakers were Susan Myric of Civitas, Meloni Wray, Director of Craven County Elections, and Gary Clemmons, Chairman of the Craven County Board of Elections.
H.B. 589, the Voter Information Verification Act (VIVA), aka the Voter Identification Bill, is the first comprehensive change to North Carolina election law in decades. H.B. 589 passed the North Carolina House of Representatives in April of 2013. In July the North Carolina Senate amended H.B. 589 and passed it. The bill then went back to the House of Representatives. The bill was ratified on July 26, and the Governor signed it on August 12. The ACLU, NAACP, and various other organizations promptly filed lawsuits against the bill, with Eric Holder later filing a suit against the State of North Carolina.
The lawsuits filed are objecting to the change in early voting–from 17 days to 10 days, the end of same day voter registration, and the end of out-of-precinct voting. There will be a hearing on September 25 in Charlotte regarding the change in the voting law.
Under the new law, voters must register to vote by October 10, 2014. This gives the Board of Elections the opportunity to verify the address of the voter. Under the new law, voters will be required to vote at their correct precinct based on their address as of 30 days prior to Election Day. In 2016, voters will be required to show an acceptable photo ID. In 2014 all voters will be asked if he or she has one of the acceptable ID’s for the purpose of voting. A list of acceptable photo ID will be provided for review at the polling location. Instructions will be given to voters without acceptable ID on how to obtain a no-fee photo ID from the NCDMV.
The request for photo ID when voting is not unreasonable. We live in a society where photo ID is required for many activities–purchasing cigarettes or liquor, to board an airplane, to cash a check, to receive government benefits, etc. It also makes sense to have voters register to vote in time for their addresses to be verified.
Hopefully, the Court will uphold this law, as it ensures that every vote counts by attempting to eliminate voter fraud.
Common Core In North Carolina
The Fayetteville Observer posted an article on Wednesday written by North Carolina Lt. Governor Dan Forest about the current status of Common Core in North Carolina. Lt. Governor Forest is an opponent of Common Core and has fought the program for the two years he has been in office. Common Core was brought into North Carolina schools before Lt. Governor Forest was elected.
Lt. Governor Forest explains the current situation:
Recently, a bill passed and was signed into law that removed Common Core from the general statutes. There is no longer a legal requirement for Common Core in our state schools. However, those of us against Common Core cannot yet claim victory. Though Common Core has been repealed, it is still the standard in use in our public schools.
But one thing is absolutely sure: The line of authority and responsibility is now clearly delineated with the State Board of Education.
The same bill repealing Common Core also set up an Academic Standards and Review Commission of 11 members, one appointed by the governor, two appointed by the State Board of Education, four appointed by the House, and four appointed by the Senate.
These individuals are tasked with going through the existing Common Core Standards line by line. They will make recommendations on which standards should be kept, which should be fixed, and which should be thrown out.
Is this a good thing? Yes.
Is it as far as it could have gone in repealing Common Core? No.
The bill that repealed Common Core also set up an Academic Standards and Review Commission of 11 members. The Commission will be going through the Common Core Standards line by line to determine which are worth keeping and which need to be thrown out.
The article outlines what parents and grandparents who are opposed to Common Core can do:
Get involved
It is important to know that every North Carolina resident is represented by six members of the State Board of Education (two elected officials, three at-large members and one district representative).
The members of the state school board are William Cobey, chairman and member at large; A.L. Collins, vice chairman, from the 5th Education District; Dan Forest, lieutenant governor; Janet Cowell, state treasurer; Rebecca Taylor, 1st Education District; Reginald Kenan, 2nd Education District; Kevin Howell, 3rd Education District; Dr. Olivia Holmes Oxendine, 4th Education District; John Tate, 6th Education District; Gregory Alcorn, 7th Education District; Wayne McDevitt, 8th Education District; Marcella Savage, member at large; Patricia Willoughby, member at large; and Dr. June Atkinson, state superintendent of public instruction, chief administrative officer and secretary.
All meetings of the Academic Standards and Review Commission are required by law to be public. Likewise, meetings of the State Board of Education are also open to the public.
I encourage those of you opposed to Common Core to communicate with the members of the review commission and the State Board of Education through email, phone calls or mail, or face-to-face. Express to them your desire that they exercise the authority given to them to repeal Common Core with the best standards in the world, made specifically for the children in North Carolina.
The battle is not over. In many ways, it is just beginning.
We all need to be aware of what our children are learning in school and whether or not the things they are being exposed to are age-appropriate.
The Dangers Of A Law Which Will Alter The Right To A Trial By Jury
The following is taken from Michael Speciale’s website. He is a representative to the North Carolina House of Representatives who opposes a change to the North Carolina legal system that will be on the ballot in November.
On the November ballot you will be asked to vote on a change to the North Carolina Constitution. The change is to allow individuals who appear in Superior Court, in cases where the State is NOT pursuing the death penalty, to waive their right to a trial by jury. With the approval of the Judge, they will go in front of a Judge only. The question on the ballot will be as follows:
[ ] FOR [ ] AGAINST
Constitutional Amendment providing that a person accused of any criminal offense for which the State is not seeking a sentence of death in Superior Court may, in writing or on the record in court and with the consent of the trial Judge, waive the person’s right to a trial by jury.
Constitutional Amendment providing that a person accused of any criminal offense for which the State is not seeking a sentence of death in Superior Court may, in writing or on the record in court and with the consent of the trial Judge, waive the person’s right to a trial by jury.
To some, the proposed amendment seems benign. It seems like no big deal, until you look at the ramifications, the precedence being set, and the liberty safeguards being forfeited.
Next to our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, whose inclusion into the Bill of Rights was intended to ensure that we the people had the ability to fight a tyrannical government, our 6th Amendment right to trial by jury is the next most important right that we have.
This right is another measure to ensure that we can overcome a tyrannical government because juries have the power to judge the law as well as the facts of a case.
What would be the purpose of this amendment? I can only reason that its purpose is intended to clear the backlog of cases. On whose backs will this come? The State would like to cut down on costs for providing legal defense to the indigent. Sadly, they will be the ones targeted because disposing of their cases by a Judge alone is generally quicker and cheaper than dragging out a Jury Trial.
Let’s take a look at a couple scenarios to determine what could happen:
1. Promises and Coercion: The indigent defendant is sitting in their cell awaiting trial because they cannot afford bail. They are approached by an officer of the court and the conversation goes like this: “It will likely be months before we can get you in front of a jury, but if you sign this waiver, we can get you in front of Judge so-and-so in a week or two. He’s usually pretty lenient in cases like yours.” What do you think the defendant is likely to do? He wants out of the cell; he wants his freedom. He is likely to sign the waiver under the belief that he will be out of there quicker, and with a lighter sentence. It is not likely that all will go as promised.
2. Juries have the right to judge the law as well as the facts of the case. That means that, even though you may be guilty of violating a law as written, the jury may choose not to convict you because they believe the law to be a bad one, or they believe that the law simply should not apply in your case due to mitigating, extenuating, or exigent circumstances. This is called Nullification, and a Judge is not likely to consider this.
3. What about Justice? The powerful and the politically connected commit crimes like everyone else. Picture a Senator or other powerful individual manipulating the system by choosing to waive his/her right to a jury trial in order to get in front of a Judge that he/she knows, such as a friend, a supporter, or someone who owes a favor. Justice would not be served in this case.
4. When the government gets their ‘foot in the door’ the next step is to kick it wide open. Think of the seat belt law. In order to calm public opinion when the seat belt law was being considered, we the people were told that this would be a secondary offence. In other words, we would not be pulled over just for a seat belt violation, but we could be ticketed for not wearing a seat belt if we were pulled over for another offence. The reality is that shortly after the law was passed, it was changed to make it a primary offence. Just like that, once this amendment is passed, after a short time I can easily envision a change making it no longer a choice in certain cases, but a mandate. I can envision the law being changed to state that if you are charged with certain crimes, those particular crimes will no longer allow trial by jury, but will be tried in front of a Judge only. Can you see it?
We are losing our rights by the day, and we should not just give them away. I voted NO on the bill to put this on the ballot.
I recommend that you vote NO on the amendment.
It would not be smart to change the law in this way. Under this change, an average citizen could very easily be deprived of his right to a trial by jury. Please vote against this change.
Townhall Meeting In New Bern
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.
How Bureaucracies Begin
On Saturday, The Haymaker posted an article that clearly illustrates how bureaucracies are born. The article was about a recent Farm Bill passed in North Carolina. The agricultural interests in the State of North Carolina supported the bill. The bill itself was going to pass. So what happened? The legislature added the beginning of a bureaucracy to the bill, the bill passed, and a new bureaucracy is born.
The article reports:
“It was a requirement for landscapers to get licensed. Yes, that’s right. A licensing board, regulations, fees, and licenses for people who cut grass for a living. Apparently, someone heard a landscaper expressing frustration about not being able to bid on state work because a license was required. Instead of killing off all licensing requirements for landscaping, the requirements have been expanded to everybody.”
So what difference does it make? The small business that cuts your lawn now has to go through a licensing process. This costs the small business owner time and money. As a result of the extra cost, he has to charge you more to mow your lawn. As a result of that, you may buy a lawn mower and mow your own lawn. If enough people do that, the small landscape business owner will go out of business. Meanwhile, the money paid to get the license will be used to set up a new bureaucracy. There will be more state workers to pay for and fund pensions for. There will be more office space and office equipment needed for the bureaucracy created. And like all bureaucracies in the past, every year the budget for this bureaucracy will increase.
This is how it begins. Even colonies of rabbits don’t grow as fast as bureaucracies.
Status Update On Common Core In North Carolina
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.
Protecting Your State From Federal Government Overreach
This week the Supreme Court ruled on President Obama’s recess appointments. This was the first slap on the wrist the President has received when he has overreached his power. There is also a lawsuit coming from Congress regarding his changes to ObamaCare, which were clearly unconstitutional. However, there has generally not been a lot of pushback to President Obama’s power grabs. States that have refused to blindly follow the President on ObamaCare changes to Medicaid or on Common Core have found themselves treated poorly by the Obama White House. It has become obvious to some citizens that states need to protect themselves from unconstitutional actions by the federal government. Now more than ever, we need to follow the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
One concerned citizen has done something about his concern. The following article is posted at the Craven County North Carolina GOP website:
Craven County GOP Leaders visit with Senator Sanderson and Representative Speciale
By Mark Jones on June 23, 2014 in Events
Today, Carl Mischka and I traveled to Raleigh to visit with Senator Norman Sanderson (District 2) and Representative Michael Speciale (District 3). Joining us on the trip were Hal James, Raynor James, Rick Hopkins, and Randy Siler. The group thanked Norm and Michael for their efforts to further the cause of Conservatism in the North Carolina Legislature. We also asked both gentlemen to work hard to pass an effective bill that will end Common Core as we know it in North Carolina. Senate and House Bills about Common Core are currently expected to be debated and possibly combined this very week. It will take efforts in both Chambers of the Legislature to ensure an effective outcome.
We also talked to Senator Sanderson and Representative Speciale about what the Legislature may be able to do to protect North Carolina citizens from unconstitutional Federal executive orders. State Legislatures are the final line of defense between our out-of-control Federal Government and the people. We received commitments from both gentlemen to work with us on this issue between now and the next Legislative Session which begins in January. Let us hope and pray we have until January to do something before more freedoms are lost. More information will be provided on our website as it becomes available.
If anyone wishes to join us in our efforts to defend the Constitution and save America (one county at a time), please contact us for information about how you can help. One person can make a difference.
About Mark Jones
Mark is the current 1st Vice Chairman of the Craven County Republican Party and former Precinct Chair for Epworth. Mark serves as a GOP leader organizing efforts in rural Precincts in western and northern Craven County. Mark believes in personal liberties, personal responsibility, limited Government, and in the U.S. Constitution as the blueprint for everything Government should do.
I Thought That One Of The Principles Of Our Republic Was The Protection Of Individual Property Rights
As Iraq collapses and President Obama thinks about what to do, his administration has taken action on a truly pressing matter. Today’s Wall Street Journal is reporting that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has canceled the trademark of the Washington Redskins.
At the end of last year I moved from Massachusetts to North Carolina. As a result of that move, I became involved with a group of constitutional conservatives. I look at things now in the framework of the U.S. Constitution. Aside from being unconstitutional, this is just tacky.
The Independent Journal Review also posted an article on the subject.
The article in the Independent Journal Review reported:
This is how the Obama administration rolls. Get in a confrontation with the president, and some IRS branch patent office makes trouble for you. That’s how “community organizers” do business. That’s the Chicago Way.
The latest example? After Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder made it painfully, abundantly clear that he believes their team name is a tribute to their historic legacy and an honorable reflection of the spirit they aim to incorporate, a lowly patent office clerk just went ahead and cancelled their trademarks.
…The timing of this move is pretty convenient for the president and is a classic example of both the distraction politics this administration is good for and the lack of seriousness of his administration.
This is clearly petty revenge served up by a president who has little regard for the law or respect for free speech. Just because you are “offended” by something, doesn’t mean you get to violate other people’s rights. This move is obviously less about the Redskins than it is about the president’s thin skin.
Impeachment will not work because the Senate is controlled by Democrats and there is no political will for it, but I hope enough people realize the damage this administration has done to the rule of law to vote the Democrats out of office and limit the damage that can be done in the next two years.
Do you suppose anyone has the emails to show where this action originated?
Dr. Greg Brannon Spoke In New Bern Tonight
Dr. Greg Brannon spoke to the Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association (CCTA) in New Bern, North Carolina, tonight. Dr. Brannon spoke about the grass roots constitutional conservative movement. He pointed out that both the Republican and the Democrat parties have drifted away from the U.S. Constitution. He reminded us that our Constitution is based on God’s law, Natural Law, and that the Constitution states that our rights are given to us by the Creator–not the government.
Dr. Brannon reminded us that the legitimate role of government is to protect the individual’s inalienable rights. The moment a government oversteps its bounds, it is no longer legitimate. Our Constitution is designed to chain the government–not the individual.
Dr. Brannon stated that the solution to the problem of a government that has overstepped its bounds is the individual. In the last primary election in North Carolina, only 15 percent of eligible voters voted. The role of the grass roots constitutional conservative movement is to reach the 85 percent that did not vote with the message of constitutional conservatism. That is how the country can be brought back to its roots and the boundaries of the Constitution.
There was a spirited question and answer period following Dr. Brannon’s remarks. Those in attendance were challenged to ignore party labels and vote according to Constitutional principles.
The monthly meetings of the CCTA are open to the public. They deal with issues that impact all of us. The next meeting will be held on July 15th. Details of upcoming programs are posted on their website.
Common Core In North Carolina
The article below was written by the Chairman of the Common Core section of the Watchdog Committee of the Coastal Carolina Taxpayers’ Association, Kim Fink:
The NC Legislative Study Committee on Common Core has recommended a repeal and replace piece of draft legislation that will be up for a vote in the short session of the General Assembly.
Obviously, this has the proponents of nationalized education digging in their heels with all sorts of dooms day scenarios that a repeal would cause. The Big Business, Big Government and Chamber of Commerce advocates are spending allot of money on radio and TV advertising, trying to build public support to put pressure on legislators not to repeal Common Core. Since this is an election year, money talks. There are two sides to every issue, and the compliant, and complacent Media has made it difficult to get the opposition opinion out. I pray that our legislators have done their own homework and will support the repeal of Common Core in NC.
Common Core is copyrighted, it cannot be altered by state or local school authorities. The schools can Add 15% content, however, they will not be tested on that content. Cursive writing is an example of what NC has “added” that is being used to demonstrate how “flexible” these standards are. The combination of taxpayer-funded bribes, ( like Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind waivers), outright deception (like globally benchmarked standards that has yet to be seen, or proven) and rampant bullying by the Educrats leaving most teachers fearing retaliation for complaining, is truly alarming.
Dr. Sandra Stotsky (member of the standards committee that wouldn’t “sign off” on them) has stated that the texts and analysis are used to guide students’ thinking toward a pre- determined outcome. The new buzz word will be consensus, and building towards a global community.
This is NOT the America I was educated in.
Citizens Do Have A Voice
The North Carolina state legislature has listened to concerned parents and teachers who opposed Common Core.
Lady Liberty 1885 reported the following today:
At the fourth and final meeting of the NC General Assembly’s Common Core study committee, a bill was unveiled that will remove Common Core from the state’s statutes. The bill also calls for a return to North Carolina Standard Course of Study, which will be developed by an academic review commission.
The draft bill is titled “Replace Common Core To Meet NC’s Needs”. The draft number is TLza-24. Update: Here is the link to the report and draft bill.
Chairman Holloway stated this bill is not intended to just rename Common Core but instead, replace it. The draft bill also leaves the national testing consortiums tied to the Common Core (PARCC, SBAC) in favor of a new assessment instrument to assess student achievement. In addition, the draft bill states, “The State Board shall not acquire or implement such an assessment instrument without the enactment of legislation by the General Assembly authorizing the purchase.”
This is wonderful news. The invasion of privacy included in Common Core, along with the age-inappropriate material and the convoluted approach to mathematics is not a good thing.
Thank you, legislators in North Carolina for listening to the people who elected you.
Waking The Sleeping Giant
Last night the guest speaker at the Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association (CCTA) was Dr. Timothy Daughtry, author of Waking the Sleeping Giant. The CCTA holds a non-partisan monthly public meeting to educate voters about issues facing North Carolina and America.
The mission statement of the CCTA is:
The Coastal Carolina Taxpayers Association, a grassroots, nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, advocates minimum government and maximum freedom. We are dedicated to the preservation of free enterprise and the United States Constitution. Excessive taxation upon citizens is unconstitutional, immoral, and a complete contradiction of success through the free market system. We are dedicated to serve our community, our state, and our country by oversight, research, public education and advocacy in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government.
Dr. Daughtry pointed out that politically America is basically a center-right country, yet most legislation in the past one hundred years has been initiated by the political left. Generally speaking, conservatives are playing defense while liberals are on the offense with a long-range plan.
The mainstream of America can be described as believing in a Judeo-Christian worldview, personal responsibility, and a sense of independence. The political left generally believes in moral relativism, entitlement, and more government power. The book, Waking the Sleeping Giant, explains what the mainstream needs to do to take back America.
I strongly recommend reading Waking the Sleeping Giant, but I also strongly recommend attending the next public meeting of the CCTA on May 20 so that you can become a better-informed voter.
Candidates Forum In New Bern
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.
Sometimes The Solution Is Worse Than The Problem
In November of this year, North Carolina voters will be asked to vote on an amendment to the North Carolina Constitution that would allow a person to forgo their right to a Superior Court trial by jury. At first glace this sounds like a great idea–it would help loosen the log jam that is in our courts and it would keep the flow of cases in our court system moving quickly. But what would it do to the rights of North Carolina residents?
The Sun Journal posted an article about this amendment on March 23. The article pointed out that State Representative Michael Speciale, R-Craven, was the only member of the North Carolina House of Representatives to vote against putting this on the ballot.
The article lists some of Representative Speciale’s reasons for his vote:
The question on the ballot, for which voters will pick “yes” or “no,” will read: “Constitutional amendment providing that a person accused of any criminal offense for which the state is not seeking a sentence of death in Superior Court may, in writing or on the record in court and with the consent of the trial judge, waive the person’s right to a trial by jury.”
He said “The title of the bill SB399 is ‘An act to amend the constitution to provide that a person accused of any criminal offense in Superior Court for which the state is not seeking a sentence of death may waive the right to trial by jury and instead be tried by a judge.’”
…Speciale said, “The government is already taking our rights away; the last thing we need to do is give them up willingly. There is nothing good about it for the American citizen. A person could be coerced into signing by being held in nastier circumstances or being told that ‘if you don’t sign, a jury is going to convict you and send you a way for a long time.’”
He added: “This was one of the last bills passed in a flurry of bills and I’ve talked to people at a couple of organizations — Civitas and John Locke Foundation — who weren’t aware of it. They are looking at it and will get back to me. I just want to get word out that this is coming.”
What are the unintended consequences of passing this bill? Unfortunately this bill will result in a two-tiered justice system. Most of us ordinary citizens do not have an in-depth understanding of how our justice system works (I include myself in that category). Most of us do not have a high-powered lawyer that we can call if we are ever accused of a serious crime–we would have to rely on a public defender. Chances are that the public defender would ask us to waive our right to a jury trial–it would help with the overload of court cases and it would help with his workload. It is also quite possible that we might be under pressure from the court to waive the right to a jury trial. If we were in a high income bracket, we would have a different story–our high-powered lawyer would take us to trial and probably win the case. So what this bill will actually do is create a quickie justice system for the average American that may or may not be fair and a more precise justice system for the wealthier than average American. That is absolutely not what America is about.
Please keep your eyes open for more about SB399. I suspect that as we near the November election more information about this amendment will come out and people will begin to see the problems with it. Meanwhile, Michael Speciale will be making the rounds to do his part in informing the voters of North Carolina what this amendment would mean to all of us.
