It will happen again.

Alternative Title: You are what you vote for.

Before we move on and cover the hundreds of bills that got advanced or passed on the final day of the session last week (a feat that will take some time), I wanted to address what happened with House Bill 121S, also known as the Seaford Bill or the bill that will let corporations vote in Seaford’s muncipal elections.

Former Speaker Pete Schwartzkopf promised his Republican friends downstate that he would get that bill passed. (Repubican Minority Leader Mike Ramone said that a promise was made, and the only person who could have made that promise was the former Speaker). And indeed, on Thursday, when the House voted down the bill by a vote of 22-18-1 (the bill, since it was a charter amendment, needed 27 yes votes), Schwartzkopf and seven other Democrats voted yes. Specifically, Stephanie Bolden, Bill Carson, Franklin Cooke, Sean Lynn, Sean Matthews, Ed Osienski, and Stell Parker Selby.

So Republicans reacted to the defeat like any mob boss or child having a tantrum would. They took their ball and left the House Chamber, preventing passage of any other bill Thursday night that needed more than a simple majority to pass, including other charter amendment bills and the important Bond bill that provides funding for capital improvements.

So that set up the stakes for the final day of the session: either the Democrats allow passage of the Seaford bill, or the bond bill wouldn’t pass. And Mike Ramone, who really enjoyed playing the mob boss role, upped his ransom demand to include House passage of House Bill 123, a Republican fever dream bill that would require the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) to obtain the consent of the General Assembly before it issued any regulations restricting the sale of gas powered vehicles.

I and others implored the Democrats to stand their ground and not pass either bill. Because I don’t like bullies. I don’t like hostage taking. The Republicans can’t accept that they are a minority in this state and country, so they resort to criminal activity to get their way, since they can’t get it any other way, like through moderating their positions so that they can win elections or voting in the General Assembly. They don’t care about the constitution, the country, the state, the democratic process or consequences. Conversely, Democrats, as the governing party, full of people in office who do care about such things, tend to look at a balance sheet of pros and cons and act for the greater good in such situations.

The cons of this situation, the Republican hostage taking of any bill needing more than a simple majority to pass, means that some of those bills wouldn’t pass for a while. There would be a standoff. The government wouldn’t shut down, since the budget bills already passed, but some construction projects paid for by the Bond bill would be delayed until the situation resolved.

The pros of the situation is that the Republican ask was outrageous and easy to understand, and Democratic opposition to it would also be easy to understand and support. Republicans want corporations and other business entitites to vote in elections. To outvote actual living humans who actually reside in a jurisdiction. Democrats don’t. The public would easily understand that, and likely take the Democrats side. And standing up to bullies, or criminals (which is what we typically call hostage takers) is easily defensible and guess what, popular. So it was a easy principle to stand your ground on.

Only six Democrats stood their ground. The next day, the House passed House Bill 121S, the Seaford Bill, by a vote of 35-6, and they passed House Bill 123, the DNREC bill, by a much closer vote of 21-20, where five Democats (Schwartzkopf, Bolden, Carson, Matthews, and Parker Selby) joined with 16 Republicans.

Newly elected Speaker Valerie Longhurst issued a rather indignant statement, reacting to the criticism that she and the members of the Democratic caucus who voted to pass the Seaford bill to end the hostage taking received:

“A lot has been said and written about Delaware’s capital budget in recent days. Let’s be clear about just how vital the Bond Bill is to our state. The Bond Bill is a $1.4 billion budget that funds construction, building repair and road paving projects in all three counties. Without this bill, road repairs stall, school improvements fall behind, and environmental protection initiatives remain in limbo.

“Unfortunately, House Republicans held up this critical funding bill, jeopardizing thousands of projects across the state. We as the majority party don’t feel it’s appropriate making statements in the press about not caring about preventing Delaware’s infrastructure from crumbling. We don’t get to take the capital budget hostage over a controversial bill rather than listening to the opposition. We have the responsibility and burden of governing. We have the responsibility of ensuring that we pass a Bond Bill and Grant-in-Aid bill so our state continues to function well.” (Emphasis added).

The new Speaker is gaslighting us here, and that does not bode well for her being any different than her predecessor. The Democrats did not take the capital budget bill hostage. The Republicans did. The Seaford bill got a vote. It failed. If Republicans respected the democratic process, they would respect that and go back to the Seaford City Council and work on the charter amendment further. They didn’t. They took out their gun and put it to the head of the Bond bill. Now if the Speaker and her Democrats want to defend their decision to yield to the hostage takers’ demands and vote for the Seaford bill to end the hostage situation so the Bond bill could pass, fine.

I disagree with it, and I will criticize them for it, but fine. I understand their argument and strategy. Democrats are good government people and this was a good government decision.

I would point out, in reference to my alternative title of this piece, that you are what you vote for, and that vote on the Seaford bill means many Democrats in the House are now on record as allowing corporations to vote in elections. There is no footnote or asterisk in the vote count on the bill explaining the vote. Democrats are now for allowing corporations to vote. That issue is now lost to us, for all time. But fine. You did what you had to do to get the bond bill passed.

But don’t lie to my face afterwards, Madam Speaker. Do not cast those in your caucus who voted no on the Seaford bill the first time or the second time as hostage takers. They weren’t taking anything hostage when they voted. They issued no mob-like proclamations. They just did their job. And you insult them with that statement above.

Such an indignant and false statement tells me that many in her caucus, perhaps even the Speaker herself, are embarrassed and angry that they had to vote yes on the Seaford bill. I understand that. I am embarassed and angry too, but leave out the false recriminations.

Many will say that charter bills are routinely rubber stamped by the General Assembly as a matter of course in deference to local officials. Well, perhaps the reason the General Assembly has to approve these local charter amendments is to put a check on local jurisdictions if they get it into their heads to pass charter amendments that are crazy, such as denying the vote to some residents, or allowing corporations to vote.

Many will say that some towns and cities already allow nonresident business and property owners and even corporations to vote in their jurisdiction as a result of previous charter changes in the past. True, but it was wrong then, it is wrong now, and the General Assembly should go forward and pass Representative Sherry Dorsey Walker’s bill banning the practice statewide. Bad things have been passed by legislatures in the past, all across this country. Slavery was once legal. Black people and women once were deprived of all human and democratic rights. Just because something was approved of in the past does not mean it has to stay the law of the land, or must be approved of by legislation again and for all time.

Many will say that allowing the Seaford Bill or the DNREC bill to pass the House doesn’t mean they will pass the Senate. True. And I hope they don’t. But we don’t know that for sure, do we? Indeed, Republican hostage taking has proven to be a successful tool for Republicans to get what they want. Perhaps their only tool. So they will use it again, especially when the Speaker declares that she will always cave to such tactics. So next year, something will be taken hostage again. Perhaps even these same two bills. So advancing them is not a harmless act. They are one step closer to becoming law, and we will have to wait and see what happens next year.

Eventually the Democrats are going to have to stand their ground on something. Eventually the Republicans are going to issue a demand to do something that will be so outrageous that they will have to. Maybe the GOP will demand that the House and Senate pass a six week abortion ban before they vote to pass the bond or budget bills. Perhaps that will get the Democrats to stand up for a principle.

But one thing is absolutely clear: this will happen again. Bullies don’t stop until they are punched in the face.