Thursday, October 30, 2008

CONA Debate Forum: Part II

Well, it took me long enough. I will start this by saying that many of the questions in the debate have been asked of the candidates before and are answered below. So with this particular blog I'm going to go over my impression of the candidates and a few questions that may not have been covered before.

Board of Education

In the first debate were the candidates for the Board of Education, as a reminder the candidates are Brewington, Chappell, De Shields (Incumbent), Nichols (Incumbent) and Redenbaugh. It seems that the introduction of two new magnet schools is a source of some controversy. Redenbaugh and De Shields both talked about this topic and they both seemed to feel that this wasn't done properly, and that not enough research was done. De Shields added that when the parents and teachers don't buy in then magnet schools don't do well and the speed at which this decision was made did not allow time for this process. All of the candidates agree that Creationism is best left out of our Science programs. One surprise was when Nichols abstained from answering whether neighborhood schools lack racial diversity. Redenbaugh also abstained from answering whether she felt that vouchers would be a good option for our area.

Overall the candidates that I felt made the best impression were Brewington, De Shields, and Redenbaugh. Chappell was not asked many questions during the audience Q&A period, but some of her answers to the panel questions left me a little hesitant. Nichols seems to be of the "old guard" and her abstaining from answer the previously mentioned question left the audience and other candidates to believe that she felt that racial diversity in neighborhood schools is not much of an issue or that she believes that racial diversity is not important. Since we aren't in her mind we can't be sure but it certainly got a few groans all over the auditorium.

District 18 NC House of Representatives

The next debate was between Hughes (Incumbent) and Swart for the NC House of Representatives. Hughes came to the debate prepared to discuss her acomplishments in the short year that she has been a Representative, unfortunately she was not prepared for the attacks that Swart brought with him and this showed in some of her answers and responses to Swarts answers.

When asked about the Districting lines of Pender, Hughes stated that this was a matter for the US Supreme Court to hash out at this point and trusted a fair answer and Swart felt that the lines were unconstitutional and that Pender should be one district with NH being split into two districts.

On the subject of Forced Annexation Swart felt that annexation was being used to bring more tax dollars in rather than to provide services, he also stated rather than cutting programs we should look into getting rid of things like the controversial convention center. Hughes felt that without Annexation that city residents pay more for services that everyone uses and that this should be made more fair.

On the subject of Titan moving to our area, Hughes was against Titan all together and did not feel (after having spoke with the Corp of Engineers) that Titan would be able to obtain the necessary certifications. Swart felt that rather than giving tax incentives to one corporation to come into our area that the Corporate tax rate should be lowered altogether allowing any Corporation that wanted to move in to do so.

Hughes also answered that she felt that corruption of the General Assembly has been taken care of, citing that the House moved to thank the Speaker for his hard work in keeping things together so well, she also supports televising the General Assembly meetings.

Things got a little heated when Hughes asked Swart what kind of experience did he have and he said "Nearly as much as you". Hughes was on City Council before being put into her new position. I can't find where Swart has ever served a political office before.

I generally support Hughes and the vitriole with which Swart attacked and the fact that he has been on TV discussing how county Demecrats vote based on skin color I have to say that my impression of him at this point is quite low. Not to mention that my personal stances are very different than his.

New Hanover County Commissioners

This debate was between candidates Barfield, Berger, Davis (Incumbent), Kopp (Incumbent), and Thompson (City Council member). Obviously this debate centered a lot on Titan and the incentives that were promised by County Commissioner. Berger and Barfield came out as completely against Titan, with Berger even stating that a new Count Commissioner Board needed to pull out of this promise even if it would be problematic stating that it is a moral imperative. Kopp defended the incentive stating that we must offer incentives to get Corporations to move to the area with Davis saying that he would not take back his votefor the incentive if given another chance. Thompson is against incentives as a general rule and feels that this was a bad deal and that the public should have had a chance to give input before the decision was made.

Titan was not the only subject, though. When discussing the consolidation of services, Thompson stated that the concept was good but that it was being poorly managed giving a "C" grade to the process, he was the only candidate that did not feel that the consolidation was poorly planned. Berger was against consolidation of services.

On the subject of the privatization of Wave Transit, Davis was the only candidate that did not feel it was ill-conceived.

A county re-evaluation of Property taxes was also part of the lightening round with Davis and Kopp against the idea and Barfield, Berger, and Thompson for the re-evaluation.

The ABC Board Expansion also came up with Barfield, Berger, and Thompson against this, Davis for it and Kopp abstaining.

The CFCC Bond was generally supported by everyone except Berger.

Overall, I believe the three candidates that were not already on the board are the best candidates (Barfield, Berger, and Thompson). Davis and Kopp made this decision for me quite easy with many of their answers even before the debate, but even more obvious during this debate.

NC Senate

This debate was quite lively between Boseman and Lee. There were a lot of supporters from both sides and many questions from the audience were obviously skewed in favor of or opposition to one candidate or the other.

Titan came up with Boseman supporting incentives as a general rule, but opposed to Titan. She propsed that legislation should be put in to restrict polluting companies from moving into areas that would be that close to schools and wet lands. Lee sees that incentives are necessary but that there needs to be objective criteria used, he also favors lowering Corporate Taxes. Which leads to the subject of taxes, Boseman pointed out that she has already voted (and it was passed) to lower corporate taxes and that our base in NC has increased overall and that is how we get more tax dollars and keep a balanced budget.

When discussing how to keep spending down, Boseman says that a freeze on hiring, freeze on government travel, and eliminating jobs that have gone more than 6 months without being filled. Lee says that he will "stand up and say stop" when projects are being put in the budget that he doesn't support (this seems naive to me since politics is a system of give and take, and may lead to him being ineffective for our area).

When discussing UNCW and State Universities, Boseman states that our schools are a top value and has increased funding, including a new nursing school at UNCW. Lee says that Financial Aid will remain Federally backed and that college should be made more affordable for NC families. Boseman also answered that in our public education system that standardized testing is necessary but needs to shift and we need to be more creative in how this is done.

Boseman is generally regarded as an advocate in the Senate for Domestic Violence legislation. When Lee was questioned he stated that a better system of enforcement of restraining orders was needed statewide.

I hope that this information was helpful. I believe I've handled all of the elected positions in New Hanover county other than the Register of Deeds. Unfortunately, I'm having some problem determining much of a difference between the two candidates and will need to work a little harder. I may be left at just presenting their history and hope that is of some help.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Judicial Races

I received an email from an acquaintance explaining their inside view of the judicial races that will appear on our ballots. This will be an anonymous post, but I would like the readers here to know that this person has been a lawyer in our community for over 20 years in the state and federal trials & appellate courts, this includes work in the US Supreme Court.

The following is an excerpt from the email explaining some opinion on the races.

I'm going to comment only on those candidates that I know professionally and/or who I've appeared before. Party affiliation is irrelevant to me, as it is supposed to be for everyone; judges in NC run as non-partisan. Regretfully, each major party runs its own campaign to promote their candidates solely on party lines. That is too bad, because whether a person is a Republican or a Democrat does not ensure that person is qualified. Hopefully, the day will soon come when we use some other means of choosing our judges other than by election.

My recommendations:

Bob Edmunds, Candidate for re-election to the NC Supreme Court. I've known Bob for years and his credentials are stellar. I've lost count of the number of times I've appeared in front of Justice Edmunds (and the other justices) at the NC Supreme Court. He is professional and always courteous to the attorneys appearing before the Court. He is, by far, one of the most intelligent, knowledgeable, and fair justices I've encountered. I strongly endorse him for re-election to the NC Supreme Court.

James Wynn, Candidate for re-election to the NC Court of Appeals. In my opinion, but for his race, James Wynn would be sitting on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals or would have remained Chief Justice of the NC Supreme Court. Nonetheless, we are very fortunate to have him on our Court of Appeals. He is incredibly intelligent and knowledgeable, and one of the best jurists ever to sit on any of our courts. He has a brilliant analytical brain and even when he rules against someone, the logic is so clear, one almost agrees with him! I've appeared before him at both the NC Supreme Court, where he sat for a short time, and at the NC Court of Appeals. He is one of the best and I highly endorse him for the NC Court of Appeals.

Linda Stephens, candidate for re-election to the NC Court of Appeals. Judge Stephens served many years as a District Court Judge in Raleigh. Her performance on the Court of Appeals has been absolutely stellar. She is brilliant, hard-working, and treats all that come before her quite professionally. (I assure you this has not always been the case with all the judges, whether at the trial court level, the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court.) I highly endorse her for re-election to the Court of Appeals.

Sam Ervin, IV, candidate for the NC Court of Appeals. I've known 'Jimmy' for years and years when he used to do death penalty work. He is from Morganton, NC and has an impeccable reputation for working hard and for his brilliant mind. When he was still in private practice, Jimmy would always be willing to help analyze the law or the facts in any death penalty case that any attorney needed help with. He is very intelligent and I have no doubt will do an excellent job on the Court of Appeals. I highly recommend him.

District Court Judge, New Hanover County.

Sandra Ray Criner, candidate for re-election to District Court Judge. I've known Sandra Criner since she graduated law school and started working in the District Attorney's office here in Wilmington. We were on opposite sides in many cases and she was always prepared and always treated defense counsel with the utmost courtesy. She is one of the most hard working and one of the smartest judges we have. As she did when she was an assistant District Attorney, she continues to treat all who her enter her courtroom---attorneys, defendants, and witnesses--with courtesy and respect. Her rulings are grounded in law and she is a fair jurist. She is by far the most qualified candidate for this seat.
This is probably the best information that I have received on these particular races wince it is succinct and comes from a source that I trust.

I would however like to add some information that I have found on Sandra Criner's opponent at this time. He opponent is Joy Alford-Brand who is a Democrat and has been a practicing attorney for 9 years, 3 years as an ADA and currently the Felony Domestic Violence Prosecutor. According to her web-site:

I stand for:

· Safe families and neighborhoods

When the law is applied accurately and efficiently, criminals have fewer opportunities to commit more crimes. That means the streets we drive on are safer for our children, friends, families and loved ones. When we address crimes of domestic violence in our neighborhoods that means the cycle will be broken and our children will be protected. Safer families equal safer neighborhoods.

· Fair and prompt Justice for all

The role of a District Court Judge is to seek justice. They must hear each case that comes before them and decide whether or not the Defendant is guilty or innocent. They must be fair and just when deciding whether a Defendant is guilty or innocent. If the Defendant is found guilty or pleads guilty, the Judge must sentence that Defendant fairly and accurately. The sentence must match the crime and everyone must be treated equally.

· Better use of resources and tax dollars

Justice delayed is justice denied. We have a limited amount of resources in our court system to handle 70,000 cases that are charged each year. We need to make the best use of those resources which means hearing cases when they are scheduled to be heard. It also means making sure that Defendants are held accountable for not coming to court. Finally, it means working a full day for a full day’s pay. When the system is functioning correctly and efficiently, victims have a better chance to be heard and given justice.

· Respect.

Our District Courtrooms are courts of law that should be respected. Those of us who are elected should have respect for our legal system, the law, and all individuals who appear before us whether they be defendant, victim, defense attorney or prosecutor. I will treat everyone who appears before me with respect.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

CONA Debate Forum

I went to the 3 hour debate for our local candidates last night. I took lots of notes and will get back about those at a later time. I would like to, however, point out that this is the second debate that has taken place during a presidential debate. This seems odd at best, and could be difficult for people to motivate themselves to go. We have DVR and recorded the presidential debate (which we stayed up until midnight watching). Apparently the Young Republicans Club showed up for the debate to support Michael Lee for State Senate (wearing shirts and stickers), so visually it looked as though there were more Lee supporters than anything else, but the round of applause that Julia Boseman elicited showed that she had many supporters of her own in the room. This final of the four debates proved to be the most lively. Many of the questions covered last night have already been covered on my blog so I will post another entry later giving updates as well as my general feeling.

This is just an explanation and summary of the night's events. The debates were televised and will be rebroadcast repeatedly on our government channel. For the Board of Education and the County Commissioner debates a panel started by asking each candidate a question for two rounds, there were then questions from the floor, and then a lightening round in which the candidates were supposed to answer with one word (yes, no, undecided or abstain). This was actually adhered to fairly well. For the State Senate and State House candidates the first two rounds were the same with the third round being that the two candidates asked each other questions. The debate rules were adhered to very well and overall the tenor was very fair. I hope that everyone looks for the rebroadcast on television and watches, especially the State Senate and County Commissioner debates.

I will be back....

CONA Debate Forum

I went to the 3 hour debate for our local candidates last night. I took lots of notes and will get back about those at a later time. I would like to, however, point out that this is the second debate that has taken place during a presidential debate. This seems odd at best, and could be difficult for people to motivate themselves to go. We have DVR and recorded the presidential debate (which we stayed up until midnight watching). Apparently the Young Republicans Club showed up for the debate to support Michael Lee for State Senate (wearing shirts and stickers), so visually it looked as though there were more Lee supporters than anything else, but the round of applause that Julia Boseman elicited showed that she had many supporters of her own in the room. This final of the four debates proved to be the most lively. Many of the questions covered last night have already been covered on my blog so I will post another entry later giving updates as well as my general feeling.

This is just an explanation and summary of the night's events. The debates were televised and will be rebroadcast repeatedly on our government channel. For the Board of Education and the County Commissioner debates a panel started by asking each candidate a question for two rounds, there were then questions from the floor, and then a lightening round in which the candidates were supposed to answer with one word (yes, no, undecided or abstain). This was actually adhered to fairly well. For the State Senate and State House candidates the first two rounds were the same with the third round being that the two candidates asked each other questions. The debate rules were adhered to very well and overall the tenor was very fair. I hope that everyone looks for the rebroadcast on television and watches, especially the State Senate and County Commissioner debates.

I will be back....

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Ballot

This year's ballot is going to be long and so here I am posting what our options are going to be to give a heads up. Since early voting starts this Friday I want to have this out there as soon as possible, since I won't be able to get a blog out on all the races by Friday. I am going to continue to blog on each race within the state until either the general elections occurs, or I somehow make it through them all. I'm starting with the lesser known local races for now and move out to the broader state elections. Here is what the actual ballot will look like.

2008 General Election Candidates

US PRESIDENT
Barack Obama DEM

John McCain REP

Bob Barr LIB


US SENATE
Kay Hagan DEM

Elizabeth Dole REP

Christopher Cole LIB

US CONGRESS DISTRICT 07
Mike McIntyre DEM

Will Breazeale REP

GOVERNOR
Bev Perdue DEM

Pat McCrory REP

Michael C. Munger LIB

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
Walter H. Dalton DEM

Robert Pittenger REP

Phillip Rhodes LIB

ATTORNEY GENERAL
Roy Cooper DEM

Bob Crumley REP

AUDITOR
Beth A. Wood DEM

Leslie Merritt REP

COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE
Ronnie Ansley DEM

Steve Troxler REP

COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE
Wayne Goodwin DEM

John Odom REP

Mark McMains LIB

COMMISSIONER OF LABOR
Cherie Berry REP

Mary Fant Donnan DEM

SECRETARY OF STATE
Elaine F. Marshall DEM

Jack Sawyer REP

SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
June St. Clair Atkinson DEM

Richard Morgan REP

TREASURER
Janet Cowell DEM

Bill Daughtridge REP

SUPREME COURT ASSOCIATE JUSTICE (EDMUNDS)
Robert H. (Bob) Edmunds, Jr. REP

Suzanne Reynolds DEM

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (ARROWOOD)
John S. Arrowood DEM

Robert N. (Bob) Hunter, Jr. REP

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (MARTIN)
John C. Martin DEM

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (MCCULLOUGH)
Cheri Beasley DEM

Doug McCullough REP

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (STEPHENS)
Dan Barrett REP

Linda Stephens DEM

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (TYSON)
Sam J. Ervin, IV DEM

Kristin Ruth DEM

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE (WYNN)
Jewel Ann Farlow REP

James A. (Jim) Wynn DEM

SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05A
Phyllis Gorham DEM

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (CARROLL)
John J. Carroll, III REP

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (CORPENING)
J. H. Corpening, II DEM

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (CRINER)
Joy K. Alford-Brand DEM

Sandra Ray Criner REP

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (DAVIS)
Richard Russell Davis

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE DISTRICT 05 (NOECKER)
Jeffrey E. Noecker

NC Senate- District 9
Julia Boseman DEM - Incumbent

Micheal Lee REP

NC House - District 19
Danny McComas REP - Incumbent

NC House - District 18
Sandra Spaulding Hughes DEM - Incumbent (appointed)

George J. Swart REP

NC House -District 16
Carolyn Justice REP

Register Of Deeds
Jennifer S. Hardison DEM

Tammy T. Beasley REP

County Commissioner (Choose up to three)
Jonathan Barfield, Jr. DEM

Ted Davis, Jr. REP - Incumbent

Bill Kopp REP - Incumbent

Jason R. Thompson REP

Brian Matthew Berger LIB

Board of Education (Choose three)
Jan Brewington DEM

Pat Chappell DEM

Dorothy DeShields DEM - Incumbent

David G. Martin REP

Jeannette S. Nichols REP - Incumbent

Elizabeth Redenbaugh REP

Soil-Water Conservation District Supervisor; Non-Partisan
David Dowdy

David Thomas Incumbent

Friday, October 3, 2008

NC Senate Debate

Last night NC Senator Julia Boseman and challenger Michael Lee had a debate held at the WHQR office. Yes, I'm sure most of us were glued to the VP debate between Palin and Biden last night, as was I, but there were other political goings on last night as well. Most of the information is stuff we've gone over before. But I'll go over it quickly again.

Titan:

Boseman came out unequivocally against Titan saying, “I am absolutely opposed to the incentives to Titan. …I think Titan is wrong for New Hanover County, for Castle Hayne.”

Lee on the other hand "said he is generally against incentives but that the state has laws and regulations to protect the public from harmful environmental impacts. He didn’t say whether he supports the incentives."

The thing is that while our state and federal government have laws to protect it's citizens, these laws have been stripped down over the past 7 years and they aren't as strang as they were a decade ago. Also, how can we say "well, we still have a little pollution we're allowed to dump so let's go ahead and let another corporation do that to us"? We already have a fragile ecosystem in the Cape Fear region, and we aren't helping ourselves with all the sewer spills over the past couple of years. We do NOT need to add more pollution to the area and that's the bottom line. There is a school that is currently being built a couple of miles from the proposed site. Are we going to close the school down if parents refuse to send their kids there? How are we going to protect those kids with coal burning stacks just down the road from them, by disallowing recess and PE?

OK, onward to off-shore drilling:

Senator Boseman is completely against off shore drilling. The Star News reports:
Boseman said the nation should consider drilling where an abundance of oil exists, but not off the coast of North Carolina.

“All of the research I’ve seen is there is very little oil out there,” she said.

The fact is that she's right. This is a graph by the US Energy Information Administration.



This is a projection of where our oil supply will come from over the next 20 years if we drill off-shore. As you can see we will actually continue to INCREASE our foreign oil consumption. While we are adding 200,000 barrels of oil a day we USE over 15 MILLION barrels of oil a day.

Lee, however, fully supports off shore oil drilling.

While the technology is better than in previous years, oil spills DO continue to happen and in an hurricane plagued area like ares, the likelihood of a spill increases. We are a resort community and we just can't afford the cost of a potentially oil filled shore line for so little gain. Also, if an oil spill WERE to occur we couldn't even count on being able to sue the offender and getting them to clean up their own mess, as the recent Supreme Court case Exxon vs Baker shows.

How about other energy problems in the state:

Lee stated that the gas tax in NC needs to be lowered. While I tend to agree that we have a high gas tax, lowering it will only cut out a couple of pennies a gallon which would be unnoticeable. Senator Boseman replied "that if the state lowered the gas tax, it would have to look to local governments to pay for roads, and that could lead to property tax hikes." And let's face it, we would certainly notice a property tax hike. Anyways, Republican should like the gas tax, it keeps our property tax low and while only people who own their property pay the property tax, EVERYONE pays the gas tax.

On to taxes and spending:

Asked for three things they would do to lower taxes, Lee said he would look at lowering corporate and individual tax rates and examine state spending.

Boseman suggested a hiring freeze, except for essential positions, including teachers, and cutting out state travel.

25% of corporations in the US pay no taxes at all and Lee wants to add more to that category. Corporations could have a 10% tax increase and still pay less than they did under Reagan. In a time when state and federal incomes are low and expenditures are rising, we need to make sure that everyone pays their fair share, and that includes corporations.

Lee also attacked several expenditures of late. One thing he keeps picking on is money spent at the NC Zoo for a polar bear exhibition. As someone with a Zoology degree who at one time did behavioral research as well as worked with animal preservation organizations, I find it appalling that we would looking to cut funding for our local zoo. Zoos educate the public as well as provide much needed research on a variety of things such as ecology, animal husbandry, and global climate change. We need to keep our animals in humane conditions as well as highlight certain animals over time, therefore changing the focus and drawing in more public viewing and raising more money. Our zoo is a state owned zoo and to cut funding to it is a reprehensible view, in my opinion. He also brought up other museum expenditures, that in light of the total budget are just a tiny expenditure. Somehow, it looks as if Mr. Lee dislikes education outlets for the public.

Over the past few months Boseman has been attacked for many private problems. She smoked pot (so what), she had a foreclosure which many people are getting pinched with at this time, and she had an ugly seperation with her partner. However, she has been a great Senator, helping to protect our children and our families by introducing and passing bills that made it more difficult for predators to get back on the streets, she has helped women that are victims of domestic violence, she has increased our school funding, and she has helped to bring more HIGH-TECH jobs here to the Cape Fear area. She has been effective and fair and having tried to discuss a personal issue and bill that I want passed I can tell you that she listens without judgement and explores the issue to it's fullest.