Senators voted 32-14 after testy debate on Wednesday, June 27, to pass House Bill 913, which creates a Bipartisan Board of Ethics and Elections Enforcement. The bill also bars lawmakers from sitting on boards and commissions of the executive or judicial branches of government.
The House passed the constitutional amendment 74-44 on Tuesday. It will appear as a referendum question on the Nov. 6 general election ballot.
Sen. Ralph Hise, R-Mitchell, said the constitutional amendment would create an eight-member board. The majority and minority leaders of the House and Senate would send nominees to the Senate leader and House Speaker, each of whom would name four to the board. No party would be allowed to have a majority on the board.
Democrats protested vigorously.
Senate Minority Leader Dan Blue, D-Wake, accused Republicans of an “obsession for power at any cost,” and warned this was creating a path to future tyranny.
Republican leaders “want to set the policies, want to execute those policies, and want to enforce those policies,” rolling all of government into one branch, Blue said. “You see no need for the other two branches of government,” and it’s surprising a bill hasn’t been introduced abolishing them, he said.
Blue said the power grab is not purely partisan, claiming the GOP leadership bullied Pat McCrory, the first Republican governor in the state in 20 years, “and wanted to make him irrelevant.”
When McCrory lost his re-election race to Roy Cooper the intensity only increased, Blue said.
“Unlike McCrory, Gov. Cooper is constantly fighting back, and is willing to stand up to what the legislature does,” exercising his constitutional role in balancing the legislative branch, Blue said. “Legislatures need to be kept in check.”
Hise bristled at that contention.
“For two years, the General Assembly worked to ensure that ethics and elections are administered in a bipartisan fashion that favors no one party, avoiding even the appearance of impropriety. And for two years, Gov. Roy Cooper has attempted to thwart these commonsense efforts with litigation, in an attempt to seize more power for himself,” he said.
Hise said the amendment is preferable to vesting all appointment power in one individual. It divides appointive power among 170 elected representatives of the people in two bodies — House and Senate — and splits recommendations between two parties.
“The real facts here are that the executive branch at the present time thinks that it is appropriate in a situation where there is divided government that the executive branch have full control over the election process,” said Senate leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham.
While Cooper was suing the legislature over creation of the state elections board, his lawyer, William McKinney, in January sent a letter to Josh Lawson, attorney for the current Bipartisan State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement. It stated the board “must halt all activity relating to, or in support of, the merger of the State Board of Elections and the State Ethics Commission.” McKinney’s order also directed the staff to “refrain from taking any substantive action with respect to elections or ethics law policy decisions.”
“Now I don’t think anyone thinks that the governor, whoever he or she might be, should have complete control over the machinery of their election, or re-election,” Berger said. The amendment would remove partisanship from the process.
Sen. Floyd McKissick, D-Durham, said the amendment is “the bold, deliberate transfer of power” from the executive branch to the legislative branch.
Sen. Jerry Tillman, R-Randolph, rebutted McKissick.
“This bill simply puts back in our hands what we already have, and that’s the [constitutional] power to set up these commissions, appoint these commissions, and make the rules for you,” Tillman said. “Then the governor has the responsibility of carrying it out.”
A bit of levity arose when Sen. Paul Lowe, D-Forsyth, submitted an amendment saying the constitutional amendment should openly strip the administration of all power, turning it over to the General Assembly.
“Since that is the goal, why not just make it easy so that everybody can understand it clearly, and no one will be confused, and lawyers won’t have to debate it,” Lowe said.
“I encourage every member of the minority party to vote for this amendment,” Berger said. “I can tell you I’m going to vote no.” Laughter slowly broke out as senators realized Berger called Lowe’s bluff. The amendment received only three favorable votes, with 43 votes against it.
In other action, the Senate voted 34-11 without debate to override Cooper’s veto of House Bill 374, the Regulatory Reform Act of 2018. Four other vetoes remain subject to Senate overrides. Two are on Thursday’s calendar.