Civitas Review » Carrie Leggins

Reassessing the Racial Justice Act

Carrie Leggins — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 20:06:11 +0000

Yesterday, SB 416, Amend Racial Justice Act, cleared a House Judiciary subcommittee on an 8-6 party line vote. This action comes off of a failed attempt to repeal the act last year, when legislators were unable to override Perdue’s veto of the repeal. The changes to the bill come relatively soon after a Cumberland county case where, under the Racial Justice Act, the judge converted a convicted murderer’s sentence from death row to life without parole. The defendant, Marcus Reymond Robinson, was able to do so via the use of evidence showing racial bias in the judicial process. In the aftermath of the act, nearly all of the inmates on death row have filed claims under the act. Debate on the amendments to the Act was limited during committee yesterday, but was heated nonetheless. Opponents of the changes argued that they were not included in the interim committee’s extensive study of the bill and that the bill is being rushed through for party line purposes. Legislators also referenced the Cumberland Co. case multiple times, where statistics showed that black jurors were stricken from cases nearly twice as often as white jurors.

So what does all this mean exactly? It means that if passed, the Act will narrow the ways that death row inmates can attempt to show racial bias in their cases: statistics would be restricted to the county or prosecutorial district where the sentence was given, and the evidence used must fit within a two year time frame prior to when the crime was committed. With so many convicted murderers claiming racial injustice in their trials, how can we be ensured that malicious murderers receive the sentence they deserve? The death penalty is their given sentence, but the current Racial Justice Act allows them a potential outlet to avoid it. Let’s just say, life without parole is much less intimidating than being sent to death row, and these convicts will likely use any escape route they can – let’s not continue to outright hand them one.

Reacting to Regulation

Carrie Leggins — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 19:53:16 +0000

The House Agriculture committee discussed HB 1093 yesterday, also known as Agriculture Regulatory Reform. If passed, the bill would establish a number of means towards reducing the red tape discrepancies currently found within the sector. First, the bill would add a legislature-appointed agriculture representative to the Environmental Management commission, meanwhile reducing the total number of appointees from 19 to 13. Second, the bill would require that the state’s Board of Agriculture be notified of any rule changes or additions that would affect the agriculture sector. This is intended to increase the communication between farmers, the Department of Agriculture, and rule-making agencies – the bill’s sponsors say this provision is needed, since most farmers’ infractions are committed because of the complex web of regulations they are continuously perplexed by. Lastly, the bill takes into consideration the penalties these farmers face when committing these infractions. Because most farmers break these rules unintentionally, this House bill proposes that when addressing rule violations, these civil penalties for farmers focus on compliance assistance rather than monetary sanctions.

The bill addresses some prominent issues plaguing North Carolina’s agriculture sector, but there is a larger issue at hand bringing this bill into the limelight. The excessive amount of red tape between rule making bodies and state agencies has created a disparity in communication, and our state’s farmers are suffering because of it. Too much regulation creates these kinds of problems, and North Carolina should consider that agriculture is just one of the numerous fields where this issue needs to be addressed. Suffering from the bane of government bureaucracy is a problem all across the board.

Redundant Words on Education

Carrie Leggins — Thu, 31 May 2012 20:44:24 +0000

We need more money! How often have North Carolinians heard this phrase from our state government? Too many to count in recent times, and Governor Bev Perdue is once again on her education rant. With the new Republican-crafted state budget, the Governor issued a statement today condemning the budget for its lack of education funding. Perdue calls for “more revenue to adequately fund our education system” and says the budget is “barely neutral”. Hasn’t North Carolina heard this repeatedly? How much money is enough? And hasn’t it been even clearer that money pumped into the system can’t touch the severity of our below average national education ranking? As an education governor, Perdue is expected to reiterate this redundant message of hers, and Lt. Governor Walter Dalton has jumped on board as well. Dalton points out that the budget doesn’t repair any of the cuts made last year, and that lawmakers need to support an increase in education funds.

Yes, education is very important, and yes, it is imperative that we do something about our less than competitive K-12 public education in North Carolina. But state entities across the board must face these types of economic challenges for the time being and find innovative ways to improve resource management to cut costs. Pumping more money into to the system doesn’t necessarily prompt innovation; improving how we use the money currently in the system does. Our state government’s chronic disease of overspending continues to catch up with us, and cutbacks must be made at all levels. Bev Perdue is just beating a dead horse with her words. Giving immunity to education will only dig a deeper hole in our state’s financial mess.

Sex-Selective Abortions in America

Carrie Leggins — Wed, 30 May 2012 19:10:24 +0000

Gendercide – Countries such as China and India typically come to mind when we hear this word. But what about the United States, where women have increasingly risen up the social ladder to equal men? Unfortunately, gendercide does affect the U.S. A new undercover video released this week by Live Action, an anti-abortion group, revealed that gendercide does in fact exist right here in our medical clinics. The video exposes a Texas Planned Parenthood employee advocating gendercide, even telling the patient how to fraudulently receive Medicaid benefits during pregnancy.

Congress is taking action on the matter this week, with the U.S. House of Representatives voting today on H.R. 3541, more commonly known as the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA). If the bill passes, it will be illegal to coerce, fund, or transport a pregnant woman to have an abortion in this manner, criminalizing actions like those of the Planned Parenthood employee in the leaked video. A concern surrounding these types of abortions is the length of the pregnancy – gender often cannot be determined until the 4^th or 5^th month, when the child’s vital organs have started to develop.

These types of issues with particular services of Planned Parenthood have extended to North Carolina, where lawmakers have proposed budget cuts to agencies of this type. Planned Parenthood claims that North Carolina is targeting the agency by withholding money - $343,000 to be exact. Last Thursday, a House budget committee approved the plan banning DHHS from providing family planning and pregnancy prevention funds to private organizations; if this provision of the budget remains intact, funds will stay within local health departments to address such issues.