Archive for: May 6, 2008

I’m feeling revitalized. I’ve got some ideas for new content. The blog will stay the same, but I’m thinking about some static content. Maybe a thorough directory of candidates for upcoming elections, for example. Complete with contact info, issue positions, bio, etc.

I have other ideas, and I’m open to suggestion if you have something. I wonder if I could do something for beer…

If an entire city council abstains from voting on a proposal, what happens? This just happened in Birmingham regarding Langford’s free bus ride idea. The council had originally approved the plan, but then recalled the action (as they are allowed to do) to vote on it again. When they voted on it the second time, they all abstained.
Does it become law? Probably not:

Five (5) members of the council shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of any and every power conferred upon said council, and the affirmative vote of at least four (4) members of the council provided such four (4) constitute a majority of those voting shall be sufficient for the passage of any resolution, bylaw or ordinance, or the transaction of any business of any sort by the said council or the exercise of any of the powers conferred upon it by the terms of this act or by law, or which may hereafter be conferred upon it. (Mayor Council Act 3.15(a)).

AL.com had an article that said Langford said the action meant the proposal passed. It has since been recalled, but here’s the relevant section from my RSS reader:

However there is confusion about what the council votes mean. Langford said the unanimous abstentions means free rides will go on as planned.

“As far as I’m concerned, bus rides start May 10,” he said after the meeting. “I don’t know what they think. I don’t think they know what they think.”

Langford then instructed his chief of operations to work toward transferring the money to the BJCTA, but Julie Elmer, special counsel to the mayor, then cautioned that he could not do so without a resolution from the council.

“We can’t appropriate the money unless they say yes,” she said.

Langford said he would research his options.

“We’ll check it all out and see what the heck it means,” he said.

Not sure what he thinks he can do.

I was listening to the live audio feed of the Senate waiting for the special order calendar to be introduced (hoping The Gourmet Beer Bill was on it). The Senate passed the General Fund Budget. It already passed the House, so it’s on the way to the Governor.

It was the nicest I’ve heard the Senate in a long time. So they go to war over a local gambling bill but get along for the budget debate. A little odd.

Well, there was one heated discussion over an amendment. Someone introduced an amendment to reduce the Senate Pro Tem’s budget by $500,000 and give it to the National Guard. There was a story about how guardsmen have been going to drill without heat. They tabled it on a voice vote and I thought they were about to go in deadlock mode again. Fortunately, the presiding officer at the time went back and got a roll call vote.

It was just a good example of how heated things are in the Senate. One misstep…

The Alabama House of Representatives today exempted the federal tax rebate checks from state taxes. The bill was HB455. I looked, and it only applies to the recent tax rebate check. The one I guess I’ll get Thursday.

A similar bill, SB362, has already passed the Senate, but there’s concern over whether or not it meets the restrictions of Section 70 of the Alabama Constitution which says that revenue bills have to originate in the House.

The Gourmet Beer Bill didn’t make it to the Senate special order calendar today, so no vote. We’re expecting to make it on Thursday. On the bright side, you now have more time to call and email your senator.

I think I’m going to start hitting the ad thing harder. In the past, I’ve just waited for advertisers to come to me. That actually worked — a couple Republican lawmakers and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee have actually thrown me some money.

I don’t expect many takers until later. It’ll take me a couple months to build the traffic back up. I actually haven’t lost traffic, but I usually almost double my number of readers during the legislative session.

I don’t intend to make this website a collage of flashing billboards. Right now I’m offering a couple banners on the sidebar where Cam Ward’s ad now sits. Maybe I’ll throw a leader board on top of my header eventually. I also have the advantage of editorial control, so no “Make a million dollars a day” scams. I also have no intention of doing the pay-per-post thing. It’s an easy way to make money, but I don’t like it.

I’m also keeping the Google text ads for now. Feel free to check something out if you want to pay me.

Governor Riley is expected to veto the “double-dipping protection” bill, HB787 by Representative Marcel Black, which passed the House Thursday.

There’s a couple funny things about the Alabama lawmaking process that comes in to play here. First of all, while this bill might have the votes to pass the Senate and did obviously have the votes to pass the House, it doesn’t have a super majority. In Alabama, though, that doesn’t matter. In Alabama, that doesn’t matter much. A governor’s veto can be overridden by a simple majority — it’s pretty useless.

So the Governor doesn’t have much veto power in that case. In another way, however, he has great power. Bills that reach the Governor within the final 5 days of the legislative session fall into a special category. For these bills, the Governor has absolute veto power. Thanks to an apparent mix-up, Governor Riley should be able to veto this bill with an absolute authority, and there’s nothing they can do about it until next year.