Thursday, April 14, 2016

"the 24-hour rule is a 'nonsubject"

Nat Herz has an ADN article today about the Republican majority ignoring the 24 hour rule for notifying people of a committee hearing.  He notes that Jeremy Hsieh, the news director for Juneau’s public television and radio stations,  regularly tweets violations of this rule, though he acknowledges that there is no penalty for the legislature violating their own rules.  The title quote comes from Cathy Giessel (R-Conoco-Philips).
"Asked about Wielechowski’s objections about the oil tax bill, Giessel, the resources committee chair, responded that the 24-hour rule is a 'non subject.'”

What exactly is a 'non subject'?   Here's what the Collins dictionary says:

Clearly, she isn't using it in the first or third sense.  Definition number 2 seems the closest.

It's of no interest or importance.  Obviously, this isn't exactly true because the article says that Hsieh's tweeting
". . . drew a sharp response this week from the Republican-led Senate majority caucus. 
The caucus press secretary, Michaela Goertzen, asked Hsieh to remove one of his tweets that said the Senate’s labor and commerce committee, chaired by Sen. Mia Costello, R-Anchorage, appeared to have broken the 24-hour rule."
So they are interested and pissed at the attention.  They'd rather just do it and no one knows.

I think what Giessel means is that she has no interest in the 24 hour rule and it's not important to her.  She doesn't care.  And she doesn't have to care.

That's the problem we have when one party has a significant majority and can simply ignore the other party and the rules that have been set up to protect the people of Alaska from bills being rushed through with inadequate notice for anyone to prepare a response.  

Giessel has done this sort of thing before.  When it comes to oil issues, she pushes through, because that's her job, taking care of the needs of her husband's employer.

But this callousness to anyone who disagrees with them is having its effect on Republicans nationally and I expect that it will spill over to the states in November.  Giessel's district has proven to be well gerrymandered to protect her, but eventually power leads to enough arrogance that people finally say


  1. What nobody seems to be stressing is the "down line" of the election.
    If the majority of states continue to have Republican Governors, and thus gerrymander their districts to make it virtually impossible for democrats to win -- in some states it takes 3X the votes for a Democratic to win -- the stand-off in congress will continue. We are seeing the death of democracy (& education) in America, at every level, including elected school boards which are anti-science and gut the arts.

    With the "rigging" of DNC primary vote in Wyoming when Sanders wins by 13 points, but is given 4 fewer delegates, voters will give up, feeling disenfranchised as they should feel. There are millions (in both parties) that are mad as hell at this and whoever wins may be take it lying down this time.

    It is hard enough to get any kind of participation in the voting process without such arcane practices. Same with the electoral college business...

    There have already been two stolen elections, don't count the next one as won by the progressives by any means.

    1. Barbara, all important points - particularly redistricting which I mentioned briefly at the end of a long post early March. The Republicans have been smarter than the Democrats in working to control redistricting.


Comments will be reviewed, not for content (except ads), but for style. Comments with personal insults, rambling tirades, and significant repetition will be deleted. Ads disguised as comments, unless closely related to the post and of value to readers (my call) will be deleted. Click here to learn to put links in your comment.