Becoming Involved

In 1992, I was only 7 years old and there was a Presidential election. I remember wanting to know who would win and I left a sheet of paper and a marker outside of my bedroom door so that my parents could write the newly elected President's name so I could find out as soon as I woke up the next morning. That's the first time I remember ever being interested in politics. In high school, I got the opportunity to meet (at the time, future) Congressman Robin Hayes. I had no understanding of the significance of meeting a political candidate. I didn't really care about politics until I was 19 and was able to vote in my first Presidential election. Then, I started to realize that the decisions other people were making were going to affect me. And for the first time, what I thought mattered. I couldn't stay awake long enough to see the result that night either... but it sparked something in me.

Now, I can't get enough. I watch the news when I wake up, am immersed in the workings of government while I'm at work, and watch the news before I go to sleep. You don't have to love politics like I do.. you don't even have to like it. But, I will challenge you to care enough to act. Decisions are made every single day and they affect your life, personal freedoms and your ability to make a profit. Those decision makers, whether they're County Commissioners or the President of the United States, must hear from you. How will they make the best decision? How will they see the real-life implications of their decisions? They can't. The people whose opinions matter are in our cities and towns - not only the folks paid to be on television.

Again, I urge you to contact your elected officials or other decision makers when anything that they are involved with concerns you and your family. You might be surprised how one voice can make a profound difference.

Former Congressman Robin Hayes & I (1999)

House Budget - NCDA

On May 22, Commissioner of Agriculture, Steve Troxler, sent a letter to those involved in agriculture and referenced the House Budget being worked out in Subcommittees at the NC legislature. The House Natural and Economic Resources Appropriations Subcommittee released a document [e-mail me at aefowler@ncgrange.com for a copy] which outlines proposed cuts to the Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services' budget for the upcoming biennium.

The document that was presented contains $5.7 million in options for member consideration - of which members will be considering approximately $4 million (6%) for inclusion in their budget. Reductions to the Department and other agencies must total $43.5 million from the Natural and Economic Resources Continuation Budget (spending $34.3 million less than the Senate budget).

WHAT ARE WE CONCERNED ABOUT??
The Subcommittee has proposed eliminating the Agricultural Review which is the Department's newsletter that first began in 1914. The Ag Review has informed the public about North Carolina agriculture and the work of the Department of Agriculture. The paper also provides a forum for commerce through the free classified advertisements for farm-related items (equipment, supplies, farmland, farm animals and other agricultural items). An issue usually contains 1,000-1,200 classified ads which provides farmers a no-cost forum to sell these items. The total value of items, land and animals advertise for sale in the October 2008 issue was more than $17 million. Farms gain extra income through services and products sold through the Ag Review. Cooperative Extension agents and farm organizations use the publication as an outlet for publicizing their events such as field days, seminars, workshops, and horse and livestock events. Many subscribers do not have Internet access and the hard-copy publication serves them well. The cost of publishing the Ag Review (labor, printing, postage) is 32 cents per copy.

"The Ag Review's classifieds have one superb, although quite intangible value, and that is that they make the peanut farmer in Murfeesboro and the apple grower in Brevard feel like next-door neighbors. ... No other publication in the state can achieve that." (J.A.C. Dunn, Winston-Salem Journal, April 15, 1982)

The House Subcommittees are to finish their work by June 4th and the House are to vote on the full budget by June 18th.

Comments to the Subcommittee are encouraged!!!
Chairman: Pricey Harrison - Guilford
Chairman: Garland E. Pierce - Hoke, Robeson, Scotland
Chairman: Edith D. Warren - Martin, Pitt
Vice Chairman: Carolyn H. Justice - New Hanover, Pender
Vice Chairman: W.A. "Winkie" Wilkins - Durham, Person
Vice Chairman: Michael H. Wray - Northampton, Vance, Warren
Member: Angela Bryant - Halifax, Nash
Member: James H. Langdon - Johnston, Sampson
Member: Efton Sager - Wayne
Member: Ruth Samuelson - Mecklenburg
Member: Roger West - Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Macon

Washington, DC

National Grange held their Legislative Fly-In from May 17-19, 2009. As the State Grange Legislative Director, I was excited to join other Legislative Directors from across the nation for my first fly-in! There were folks there from all over - Connecticut to California to Indiana to New Hampshire and more.

When I arrived on Sunday, a student at Georgetown University made a presentation on the Grange. She had learned about the Grange in a class that dealt with political movements in American history and she wanted to learn more so she focused a research paper on our organization. It was interesting to hear analysis on how a social group could be such a political force at its inception. It was also interesting to gain a non-member's perspective on the Grange.

Monday was filled with information, information, information! A number of speakers visited our group at the National Grange building with presentations. The issue focuses and the organization representatives that visited were:
1. Developing a National Broadband Strategy that Includes Rural America, Internet Innovation Alliance
2. Retirement Security Challenges Facing Family Farmers and Rural Americans in an Uncertain Economic Environment, RetireSafe
3. Expanding Options for Wireless "Lifeline" Telephone Service to Low Income Rural Americans, The Hastings Group
4. Digital Television Update: Less Than 30 Days to Go, Are We Ready?, National Association of Broadcasters
5. Health Care Reform: Bridging the Health Care Gap in Farming and Rural Communities, PhRMA
6. Impact of the Financial Crisis on Financing for Family Farmers and Rural Homeowners and the Response by the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation, FarmerMac
7. Renewable Energy and Climate Change Update, Growth Energy

On Tuesday morning, Jimmy flew into DC and we set out on our full day of Congressional visits! We met with Legislative Aids who deal with agriculture in each respective office. We met with LA's from the offices of Heath Shuler (D-11th), Virginia Foxx (R-5th), Howard Coble (R-6th), Larry Kissell (D-8th), Mel Watt (D-12th) and Mike McIntyre (D-7th). The issues that we brought forth were H-2A reform in order to meet our need for affordable, reliable and legal agricultural labor, the Mexican trucking ban and the proposal for a National Animal Identification System. Between the visits, we ate lunch in the Supreme Court cafeteria with the rest of the Fly-In group.

Thanks to Leroy Watson and the rest of the National Grange staff for a great experience!

SB 494 Recap

If you're familiar with legislation or how government works, you'll understand that things can change extremely quickly! True to the NC General Assembly’s form, there have already been changes to how this bill is going to move. Doug Aitken, with Fair Annexation Coalition, sent me an email saying that the discharge petition is not longer going forward because President Pro Tem Marc Basnight has stated that it will be a priority in the Finance Committee. This declaration deserves a big “Thank you” to Senator Basnight, so your action is now needed to be directed toward Senator Basnight (marc.basnight@ncleg.net) for his leadership in the movement of this bill and the urgency he has placed on annexation reform.

The work isn’t over yet – the Senate Finance Committee will be dealing with this bill by forming a subcommittee and the focus must be on these Committee members. If your Senator is on the Finance Committee please make communication with them in support of the reforms made in SB 494.

URGENT ACTION NEEDED!

One of the main issues of concern this year has been involuntary annexation. Years of efforts for reform have been made and there has been constant opposition from cities and some Representatives and Senators who represent large cities. Fortunately, Senator Shaw (Cumberland County) filed a bill (SB 494) and Representatives Dollar (Wake), Steen (Rowan), Goforth (Buncombe) & Brown (Davidson, Forsyth) filed a companion bill (HB 645) which will bring real reform to annexation. Bills that have been essentially written by the League of Municipalities (the lobbying group that represents cities) have also been filed. They do not contain significant reform for property owners and could do more damage than good if they are passed. If passed, many will think that annexation reform has been made and there doesn’t need to be an effort for better protections for North Carolinians.

The Bill

SB 494 provides a vote for those property owners affected by an involuntary annexation. Once and for all, citizens will have a say as to whether they're brought into a city or not! There will be oversight - instead of courts listening to limited issues AFTER an annexation, County Commissioners will provide oversight for the process. This is essential because city officials do not have as much of a vested interest in those living in the city AND the county and County Commissioners do. This bill provides a definition for meaningful services and requires them. The bill also allows for a deannexation procedure if there is a failure to deliver these services. Seems like the involuntary annexation process would already provide for this, right? NO! We must, once and for all, protect the state's citizens.

Background

SB 494 and HB 645 have been held up in Committee and never moved. The crossover deadline was May 14 which means that if a bill that does not involve appropriations has not passed either the Senate or the House, it is no longer eligible to go to the floor for a vote in either chamber. SB 494 and HB 645 were stuck in Committee and never got to the floor of either chamber for a vote and are considered “dead” this session. However, Senator Shaw has chosen to file a discharge petition. A discharge petition, if obtained by 34 Senators, will pull the bill from Committee and send it straight to the floor for a vote.

Significance of a Discharge Petition

A discharge petition is very rare and sometimes used by the minority party. The process in itself goes around the Speaker of the House or President Pro Tem’s leadership. Senator Shaw feels strongly enough about his bill and the significant reforms that it contains and is willing to put the citizens of North Carolina before his party membership.

What’s Needed

The petition was filed today so ALL MEMBERS OF SENATE MUST BE CONTACTED IMMEDIATELY! Every Senate member needs to know the importance of SB 494 and the reforms that will bring more power to the citizens during the involuntary annexation process. Let them know that you live in your Senator’s district and POLITELY REQUEST THEIR SIGNATURE ON SENATOR SHAW’S DISCHARGE PETITION OF SB 494.

This effort could be historic, but without “real people” contacting your representation in Raleigh, the effort may not gain traction.

Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009

Both Senator Burr and Senator Hagan voted YES for legislation entitled Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009. The bill passed the Senate floor 91-5, 3 not voting. Bloomberg offers an article about this legislation and includes all sides of the argument. At one point in the article, it states that the bill was pulled from the floor because of opposition by the American Bankers Association. Upon review of their website, they released a statement which supports the passage of the bill so I assume the "kinks" were worked out.

Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act

The US House voted and passed the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (367-59, 1 Present, 6 Not Voting). The intent of this legislation is to improve enforcement of mortgage fraud, securities fraud, financial institution fraud, and other frauds related to federal assistance and relief programs and for the recovery of funds lost to these frauds.

This legislation was sponsored by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). Senator Leahy's press release concerning the bill can be found here.

The Heritage Foundation's Senior Legal Research Fellow, Brian Walsh made this statement about the legislation:

Congress has many methods of responding to crises, yet some Members of Congress consistently choose a politically popular and expedient route: more and harsher criminal laws, criminal enforcement, and criminal punishment. The knee-jerk congressional response to virtually every crisis is to add to the over 4,400 federal criminal offenses already on the books and increase already harsh federal criminal penalties.

Not surprisingly, some Senators are bent on "solving" the subprime meltdown and the resulting financial crisis by adding more criminal offenses to the currently monstrous compilation of criminal laws. The faulty premise of the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (S. 386) (FERA), co-sponsored by Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Charles Grassley (R-IA), is that criminal activity caused the financial mess America is facing and that criminal prosecution and punishment can fix it. This is precisely the sort of reflexive criminalization that is behind the current over-federalization of crime and that Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have stated they abhor because it has contributed to the record federal prison population.

North Carolina delegation voted:

Butterfield: YES

Etheridge: YES
Jones: YES
Price: YES
Foxx: NO
Coble: YES
McIntyre: YES
Kissell: YES
Myrick: NO
McHenry: NO
Shuler: YES
Watt: YES
Miller: YES

Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Bill

Rep. Brad Miller and Rep. Mel Watt sponsored the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act which passed the House (300-114, 19 not voting) The following press release was released by Rep. Brad Miller:

Miller, Watt and Frank Introduce National Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Bill

Washington, DC - Rep. Brad Miller (NC-13), along with Rep. Mel Watt (NC-12) and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, introduced today The Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2009 aimed at curbing predatory lending, which has been a major factor in the highest home foreclosure rate in the nation in 25 years.

The bill is a tougher version of a measure that Rep. Miller sponsored in the previous Congress that would have overhauled mortgage regulations in an effort to prevent another subprime mortgage meltdown. Rep. Miller’s previous bill passed the House in 2007 with bipartisan support, but was never considered in the Senate.

“The political climate has changed,” said Rep. Miller. “The foreclosure crisis has wreaked havoc on middle-class families and our economy as a whole. The industry’s arguments for watering the bill down are not at all convincing.”

Specifically, the new measure will strengthen restrictions on compensation paid to mortgage loan originators and brokers that is based on a loan’s interest rate and terms, often called yield-spread premiums. Lenders sometimes pay brokers an extra fee for making loans at a higher interest rate than the borrower otherwise could have received. The Congressman says those payment arrangement are an indefensible conflict of interest.

The 2009 measure also includes stronger language on so-called assignee liability. That language would make mortgage investors, who often own home loans that are packaged into securities, more liable for fraudulent loans.

A key element of the legislation prohibits lenders from underwriting loans that consumers do not have a reasonable ability to repay and prohibits practices that increase the risk of foreclosure for consumers. The bill also encourages the market to move toward making 30-year fixed-rate, fully documented loans, the norm again in mortgage lending. The growth of exotic, non-traditional mortgages were a major factor in the current housing and foreclosure crisis.

“This bill represents an important step toward preventing the predatory and questionable practices that took hold in the mortgage lending industry in the past several years and undoubtedly contributed to our current housing crisis,” said Rep. Watt. “Mortgage lending reform is a vital piece of the Congressional effort to prevent a future financial services disaster of this scale.”

The legislation also protects consumers from being steered into loans that aren’t in their best interest, and if they refinance there must be a tangible net benefit to the consumer.

According to the Center for Responsible Lending, 2.4 million Americans risk foreclosure in 2009. That number could rise to 8.1 million over the next 4 years. The foreclosure epidemic is being caused primarily by families borrowing against their homes to pay their bills when something has gone wrong, not because they are buying more house than they can afford. Families are borrowing against their homes because of job loss, serious illness, divorce and major home repairs. Approximately 72 percent of subprime mortgages from 1998 to 2006 are refinances, not loans to purchase homes.

The bill will also create greater transparency by ensuring lenders make full disclosure of the terms of the loan at the time of signing.

“Americans who lose their home to foreclosure fall out of the middle class and into poverty, probably forever,” said Rep. Miller. “And, middle-class homeowners are seeing their life’s savings disappear with the collapse of home values.”

The Miller-Watt-Frank bill is modeled after North Carolina’s predatory lending statute, which is considered the model state statute for preventing abusive lending practices, while preserving consumer access to credit.

###

According to a mortgage blog:

That all sounds well and good but as you might expect the bill does contain a number of flaws as well. Barney Frank, who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, addressed some of critics’ concerns over the language used in the legislation:

“Is it vague? To some extent, but that’s what you do with the law and then they are defined by practice,” he said.

North Carolina delegation voted:

Butterfield: YES

Etheridge: YES
Jones: YES
Price: YES
Foxx: NO
Coble: NO
McIntyre: YES
Kissell: YES
Myrick: NO
McHenry: NO
Shuler: YES
Watt: YES
Miller: YES