by Sam Hieb
For starters, let me say that in my opinion the Winston-Salem Journal’s Richard Craver is an excellent reporter. However, I have to question the “analysts” he uses as sources to question House Speaker Tim Moore’s ethics when calling last week’s vote to override Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto of the state budget.
The analysts include two Winston-Salem State University professors–one an economist and the other the dean of the university’s College of Arts, Sciences, Business and Education:
“I do not see how trust will be regained any time soon,” said Zagros Madjd-Sadjadi, an economics professor at Winston-Salem State University.
“All bets are off now, and the problem is that bipartisanship will not likely be able to return, which means we could be faced with a completely dysfunctional government in our state for some time to come.”
…“If their legislators are not in the room, especially on something as important as the state budget, it means (their constituents) were not represented in the veto vote regardless of how House leadership portrayed the circumstances around the vote,” Scriven said.
“It says something is clearly broken in the legislature for that kind of vote to occur.”
Scriven said the House GOP leadership’s veto override tactics strikes of subterfuge even if there was an honest miscommunication by Lewis to Jackson about whether votes would be taken during the Wednesday morning session.
“I believe it is important for these veto votes to be interrogated for what was understood and not understood to be on the agenda that day,” Scriven said.
We’re all entitled to our opinion. Speaking for myself, I’m just glad the article didn’t perpetuate the myth that Moore took advantage of Democrats taking part in 9/11 ceremonies to hold the vote— a myth that lingered way too long in both the mainstream media and (needless to say) social media.