Tag: Debate

The Debate Begins for Presidential, Gubernatorial Candidates

Monday night marked the first presidential debate of the 2016 election cycle. Democrat Hillary Clinton joined Republican Donald Trump on the same stage for the first time, and the same is about to happen in a West Virginia.

Tuesday, Republican Bill Cole and Democrat Jim Justice will meet in Charleston for their first of two televised debates focused on the top issues facing West Virginia- a struggling economy, a high unemployment rate, and a less than effective education system, just to name a few.

Bill Cole sat down to discuss his debate preparations and his focus this election cycle- jobs.

Jim Justice has been invited to sit down with us for an interview on this podcast, but has not yet responded to those requests. 

Dr. Robert Rupp is a former member of the State Election Commission and a professor of political science at West Virginia Wesleyan College. This week, he discusses the first presidential debate and what West Virginia’s candidates for governor can take away from it. 

Donald Trump told an oil and gas industry conference in Pittsburgh last week that if elected, he’ll “unleash” America’s fossil fuel sector– more fracking, more drilling, and fewer regulations. But the oil and gas industry has shown less commitment to Trump than previous Republican candidates. The Allegheny Front’s Reid Frazier reports that’s because Trump is a Republican of a different stripe. 

Editor’s Note: The original version of this post said the Dr. Rupp is a member of the State Election Commission. It has since been updated to show that he is a former member.

Candidates for Governor Take on Marijuana at Charleston Debate

At their second televised forum in three days, two of the three Democratic candidates for Governor continued their push to convince the voters of West Virginia to cast ballots in their favor during the upcoming primary election. 

The WCHS-TV gubernatorial debate featured only two of the three Democrats running for Governor, Senate Minority Leader Jeff Kessler and former U.S. Attorney Booth Goodwin.

Front runner Jim Justice was in Beckley Monday evening discussing education reform with members of the public at a campaign roundtable.

The hour-long debate focused heavily on budgetary issues, the state’s substance abuse epidemic and the need to improve infrastructure, including both West Virginia’s roadways and broadband access.

The two candidates showed similar resolve to finding solutions to those problems.

It was a question about legalizing marijuana that had the two on opposite sides of the fence.

Kessler said he believes legalizing medical marijuana to aid in the treatment of serious diseases like cancer should be considered in West Virginia, but he referred to a bill that would have allowed the sale of alcohol at 10 a.m. on Sunday mornings as a sign that the Legislature would not move on such an issue.

The brunch bill, as it was commonly referred to, was approved by lawmakers, but now includes a county referendum to allow for such sales.

“I think we need to decriminalize some of the particularly marijuana offenses,” Kessler said. “There are way too many people that have got a criminal record that can no longer work.”

“These folks are now permanently under or unemployable because they have some, because they smoked pot or got caught with an ounce of pot when they were 21-years-old.”

As U.S. Attorney, Goodwin spent a good deal of his time prosecuting drug-related crimes and was less sure about legalizing the drug.

“People don’t understand that the marijuana of today has 10 times the THC content of the marijuana of the late ’60s, early ’70s,” Goodwin said, “but here is the problem I have ultimately is, every time we have arrested a druggy, they have said they went through marijuana.

“Is that because it is crossing that bright line of illegality, or is it because that it is a true gateway, that’s the difficulty I have.”

All three candidates — Goodwin, Kessler and Justice — will face off in the May 10 primary. The last day to register to vote is Tuesday, April 19.

In a statement to WCHS-TV, Jim Justice’s campaign said it would be impossible for him to participate in every debate held by every media outlet in the state. 

You're Invited to our PBS NewsHour #DemDebate Watch Party

PBS NewsHour will produce the first Democratic presidential candidates debate (following the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary) on Thursday, February 11. Watch it along with West Virginia Public Broadcasting at our #DemDebate Watch Party!

Join the West Virginia Public Broadcasting news team on Thursday, February 11 at the Red Carpet Lounge (308 Elizabeth Street in Charleston) as we watch PBS NewsHour co-anchors and managing editors Gwen Ifill and Judy Woodruff moderate the PBS NewsHour Democratic Primary Debate.

Although the #DemDebate begins at 9:00pm, drop by the Red Carpet Lounge at 8:30pm for a pre-debate conversation hosted by The Legislature Today‘s Ashton Marra that includes State Democrat Belinda Biafore, State Republican Conrad Lucas, Senator Chris Walters and Delegate Sean Hornbuckle.

Snacks, #DemDebate bingo cards and PBS swag will be provided throughout the debate.

The event is free and open to the public. More information at Facebook.com/wvpublic.

Can’t make it to the Watch Party? Watch the debate starting at 9:00 p.m. on WVPB television or online and tweet along with our Watch Party by tagging @wvpublic and @NewsHour.

Forced Pooling Resurfaces in W.Va. Legislature

Two bills that both died on the final night of the 2015 legislative session, resurfaced Monday during interim meetings – forced pooling and public charter schools. Both ideas erupted in debate in 2015, but Monday’s discussions were calm and reflective – but not without some concerns.

The separate discussions Monday on forced pooling and charter schools were mostly on how to make these controversial pieces of legislation work for lawmakers and interested parties on both sides of the issues.

First, forced pooling –

Delegate Woody Ireland chairs the House Energy Committee and sponsored the forced pooling legislation during the 2015 session. He told his fellow lawmakers Monday they must do something about pooling, even if they don’t all agree.

Forced pooling works like this – When companies prepare to drill a well, they create a giant rectangle of land parcels and then negotiate with the mineral owners within that rectangle for their gas rights.

The 2015 bill would have allowed companies to force owners to sell their minerals if they could get 80 percent of the owners in their parcel to agree to the drilling. However, the 20 percent forced to sell would still get paid for their proportion of gas drilled.

Democrats and some tea party Republicans were strongly against the bill, even showing their discontent through demonstrations on the floor. On the final night, the bill died on a tie vote in the House.

Now, Delegate Ireland has proposed a new pooling bill.

“With the passage of this bill, it would create a lot of land owner protections that currently aren’t available,” explained Seth Gaskins, counsel to the committees on Energy, “and the new title for the bill is the Horizontal Well Unitization of Landowner Protection Act. We wanted to make sure that this bill is known as a protection bill as well as a pooling bill.”

One aspect of this new bill would clarify the royalty rights of mineral owners. It would protect owners from deductions if they are included in a pool without their consent.

But there’s more – Ireland is also proposing what he calls a companion bill to compliment the Horizontal Well Unitization of Landowner Protection Act.

“This bill attempts to create some transparency,” Gaskins said, “in the royalty payment process as well as institute or establish rather, reporting more frequent report of production…reporting of production data to the office of oil and gas.”

While there was little debate during the meeting, a couple lawmakers did express some concern over the two new draft bills, but Ireland says the legislature has to make pooling a priority.

“I think what we have currently is an opportunity to really improve on personal property rights,” Ireland said, “If you look at the statutes that includes forced pooling from the deep strata, and you look at what’s going on in the industry with a movement towards the Utica shale, which is a deep strata, so if we don’t do something, we basically have forced pooling already.”

The second controversial piece of legislation taken up during November interims Monday – public charter schools.

The 2015 bill on charter schools also died on the final night but not quite as loudly as forced pooling.

Public Charter Schools receive state and county funds just like regular public schools, but charter schools are not held to the same regulations as regular public schools. This in turn would give teachers at charter schools more flexibility in the way they deliver their curriculum, but they would still be subject to state education standards.

Lawmakers in the Joint Standing Committee on Education revisited the idea Monday and were presented statistics that showed increased test scores and creativity. Other studies, however, show charter schools do not increase student achievement and actually hurt low income and minority students. But Monday, lawmakers were presented with a new concern; lower rates of pay for educators.

“I’d say our teacher with twenty-eight years experience all-together is probably gonna make $38,000 and the teacher at the traditional public school is probably gonna make $58,000,” Susie Pierce said, the principal of the Rural Community Academy; a charter school in Graysville, Indiana.

Some lawmakers expressed concerns over how to attract and keep teachers in charter schools if they’re going to be paid less than traditional public school teachers.

Delegate Amanda Pasdon, a Co-Chair on the Joint Education Committee, says she’s looking forward to continuing the discussion in 2016.

“I’m glad that they were honest about their challenges,” Pasdon noted, “because what we’d like to do in West Virginia is take note of the challenges that other states have faced. We’re not reinventing the wheel, so we can learn from their successes and then also be aware of their challenges, so we know how to navigate them a little better.”

Coal Jobs & Safety Act of 2015 Passes in the House

The House passed Senate Bill 357 Friday, the Coal Jobs and Safety Act of 2015. This bill has caused a lot of controversy, so it was no surprise when the House debated the bill for two hours. Republicans feel like the bill is an update to previous safety laws, while some Democrats feel like it’s a scale back.

“This act strengthens the state’s enforcement of the coal industry’s drug testing program to treat all miners the same and promote drug free coal mines,” Delegate John Shott, the Judiciary Chair, explained, “It updates West Virginia mine laws on equipment movement and operation to match federal regulations and well-established safety standards; in one instance exceeding the federal regulations requiring the movement of workers out by when in the case of the movement of equipment where electrified trolley wires are present. It also places oversight of underground diesel equipment in the hands of experienced state mine safety regulation, regulators. It syncs state reclamation rules with federal laws to bring consistency to regulatory oversight. It adjusts the aluminum water quality standard to reflect the latest science and better protect the environment, and it conforms, permit enforcement processes to federal laws.”

After the bill was explained to members, a flood of debate ensued on the floor. Republicans expressed belief the bill was steering the coal industry in the right direction, because it was updating technology and saving money, while Democrats felt the bill would roll back the safety laws currently in place.

The bill had full support from Republicans but Democrats were divided.

Delegate Rupert Phillips of Logan County was one of those Democrats who supported the bill.

“If we’re going to move our state forward and be competitive on what’s built this state, the backbone of the state; the coal, the coal miner, we’ve got to move forward,” Phillips noted, “We cannot continue to let DC, EPA, and other groups overregulate our industry.”

Delegate Gary Howell, the Government Organization Chair, also supported the bill.

“It is time we updated these laws for safety,” Howell said, “Time changes, technology changes, we must make sure our coal miners are safe. I support this bill, and I hope you will to for the safety of our miners.”

Delegate Barbara Fleischauer of Monongalia County was strongly against the bill.

“There’s not anything in this bill that improves safety, nothing,” Fleischauer said, “And I can’t believe, after all the fires and explosions we’ve had in this state, recently, we would, and you know what they are; Upper Big Branch, Aracoma, Sego, that we would ever consider rolling back safety protections.”

Minority Leader, Tim Miley, also expressed rejection of the bill.

“We haven’t even heard the cost savings per ton, as to what this bill will accomplish,” Miley noted, “Wouldn’t you think, you can measure man hours saved by activities in the mine that you do or don’t have to do as a result of this bill, you can measure that. How many man hours, combined man hours does it take to stop the mining operations, move heavy equipment, and then bring the miners back, you can measure all of that, this is the 21st Century. You can measure all of that. We can measure what effects and cost savings, the environmental aspects of this bill will have. We can measure how much it costs to lay track, we can measure all of that, that’s how you come up with a cost per ton as far as how much it costs to mine a ton of coal. If it really were to gonna save that kind of money to reinvest back into creating jobs, I think we would know that.”

After the two hour debate, House Bill 357 passed, 73 to 25, with only Democrats voting against.

Abortion Bill Debated Nearly Two Hours in the House

Delegates approved six pieces of legislation Wednesday including a Senate bill that allows emergency responders, doctors, and family members to administer a drug to reverse the effects of an overdose. But it was House Bill 2568, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act that got the most discussion on the floor before it was ultimately approved.

Members of the House debated the 22-week abortion ban for nearly two hours on the House floor. Republican and Democratic members alike stood to back the bill including Delegate Lynne Arvon from Raleigh County.

“This is about protecting a five month old or above unborn baby from pain. Period. That’s what we’re discussing today,” Arvon said, “We’re not discussing whether we should have abortion or not. If this bill passes, abortions will be allowed up to five months for any reason. I don’t agree with that, but we have to start somewhere. And there is a debate about whether the baby experiences pain or not, but there’s not debate in my mind. I carried three children, I said that yesterday, I know they experience pain.”

Delegate Tom Fast of Fayette County said the government has a right to protect lives.

“The reason we have these laws is because government has a civil duty to protect human life,” Fast said, “I hear over and over and over again about a woman’s right to choose. We had a debate yesterday about rape and incest. I can be sympathetic with those situations, truly, they are bad situations, but you have to understand, we need to understand that Government has a duty to protect human life. The Scripture was quoted a minute ago. Where does that duty come from? That duty comes from Almighty God that gives individual rights, that gives family rights, that gives church rights, and it also gives rights and duties to civil government.”

Delegate Saira Blair of Berkeley County expressed concern for the fathers of unborn children.

“She has every right to visit her doctor and consult her doctor about what to do, she has every right to visit her minister and make decisions, but one thing that I’m really interested in today is that not once has she had the right to visit the father of the child either,” expressed Blair, “and I will never understand that, and I know that there are a lot of men in here right now who would like to stand up and say, well you know where’s my decision? But they can’t, and so I would like to stand up for them, because they would come off as selfish, but it’s not selfish, it’s just as much your decision. And I think this is the first step we can take to representing, not just the child, but the father of the child as well.”

Only Democratic Delegates stood to oppose the abortion ban, including Delegate Nancy Guthrie of Kanawha County. Guthrie said she supports funding for family planning and birth control to prevent future abortions.

“And finally, what I’m really for, and I pray that all of you gentlemen in this room, I’ve said it before and I will say it again, would start to campaign for mass production and use of male birth control,” Guthrie said, “because to be honest with you, I’m tired. Every single year, we have a bill like this that comes before us, and it’s never about you, it’s never about you, it’s always about us. Why don’t you be in charge of reproductive health for the next couple of decades?”

Delegate Dave Pethtel of Wetzel County said he stood with women and is against the bill.

“Ladies, I’m proud to stand with you today, in speaking and voting against this bill, because I believe that when a woman has to make one of the most difficult decisions in her life on whether or not to have an abortion,” noted Pethtel, “especially in high risk, complicated pregnancies, that decision should between her, her doctor, her family, and her God, not the Government. Never the Government. Because the law is that a woman does have the right to choose, and it’s really no one’s business.”

Delegate Linda Longstreth is a Democrat who stood to back the bill, but says she’s still concerned with some of its provisions.

“I asked yesterday and argued the point about rape and incest that seemed to be overlooked today for the fact that yes, there are young children who are raped, nine, ten years old with no support. Do you ask them to carry that child to complete term? And what do they do with that child? Will she make it that long without committing suicide?  We don’t know, that is not our choice to make, and that’s a very personal, very personal thing,” Longstreth said, “I’m going back to what I said yesterday about the United States, the House of Representatives. They will not pass this bill themselves until these exceptions are put in, because they found it too restrictive. I’m saying today, this is restrictive, vote your conscience.”

The bill was ultimately approved by lawmakers on a vote of 87 to 12. It now goes to the Senate for consideration.

Exit mobile version