The budget document that the General Assembly approves is not terribly exciting. It’s 300-plus pages of legal language and dollar signs. Lots of those.
Sandwiched or hidden—depending on your point of view—in the budget was a provision requiring kids to get eye exams before starting school. That’s now the subject of litigation from a variety of groups that claim it’s expensive and unconstitutional. They cite Section 2 of Article IX.
The provision came courtesy of Rep. Jim Black, the house speaker and a politician with his share of troubles these days. Because of those troubles, it’s easy to pile on and blame Black for eyegate.
But there’s more to it than that. Unsavory special provisions get passed for one of two reasons: either legislators bow to power or they don’t read the bills they vote on. It goes back to the old argument: is it better to be a fool or a crook?
Your host is Ken Otterbourg, the managing editor at the Winston-Salem Journal. It's a forum to discuss the media, from
Ken,
I’m playing devil’s advocate here. Couldn’t it be argued that the press also shares (a smaller) portion of the blame by missing this provision before the budget got approved?
______________________
Joe Murphy
Senior Online Content Producer
JournalNow.com
That’s a valid critique. The media missed this story or didn’t realize the story’s news value. It’s also possible that Black’s troubles made this a story that it might not have been before the problems began.
Isn’t Black an optometrist? I heard that on a tv newscast recently. If so, that seals the deal in my view.
Post a comment
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.