Signs

Published November 28, 2015

by Carter Wrenn, Talking About Politics, November 27, 2015

Their facts are the same. But they’re telling two different stories.

The Governor’s folks explain how Graeme Keith got his $3 million state contract this way: The Governor met with Keith and Secretary Frank Perry and Keith made his case – that it would be cheaper for his company to provide maintenance for the state prisons – and Perry disagreed.

Keith did say, at the meeting, that he’d made political contributions and it was time to see what he got in return but the Governor didn’t hear him say it – he was having a side conversation. 

After the meeting, the Governor told the Budget Director to figure out who was right: Keith or Perry and the Director decided Keith was right – and gave him the contract. 

The other side’s version goes like this: Keith asked Perry for a contract. But Perry said No. Keith then went around Perry to the Governor – who called a meeting. After the meeting, Perry still said No. 

The Governor then took the decision out of Perry’s hands and told the Budget Director, Lee Roberts, to decide. Roberts did a brief study and gave Keith the contract.

Same facts. Two stories Who’s right?

There’re no clear answers. But there are signs.

Lee Roberts, the Budget Director, did do a study. And he did conclude Keith’s contract would save the state money. But the study was also only a quarter of a page long.

Roberts never put Keith’s contract out for competitive bids – he just gave it to Keith.

And finally, just the other day, the state did an about face and reversed course – Secretary Perry announced he’s cancelling Keith’s contract.

http://www.talkingaboutpolitics.com

November 28, 2015 at 10:25 am
Norm Kelly says:

How much will it cost the state (read that 'taxpayers'!) to cancel the contract, put it out for competitive bid, and award another contract?

This might be political shenanigans. But it's not new. And it's quite minor compared to the political shenanigans that have occurred in the past. Remember when Gov Mike stole money from counties. It was sales tax money destined for counties, but the Gov decided it was his to play with. Remember when Gov Mike stole money from the E911 fund. It was supposed to create, expand, enhance the E911 system, but the Gov decided it was his money and he stole it to balance his budget.

Remember when Gov Bev had 2 state workers who lived in Charlotte area but worked in Raleigh? They not only were 'on the clock' when they left home, driving to work, but were on the clock while driving home, as well as getting paid mileage for commuting. That was completely above-board!

No, I'm not saying that just because other pols got away with fleecing taxpayers current pols should be allowed to fleece us, but at least the current legislature is doing SOMETHING to reign in state spending. Which prior administration(s) did this? Remember when libs ruled Raleigh? They implemented a 'temporary' sales tax increase. Twice, as I recall. Then converted 'temporary' to permanent. And had the audacity to tell us the state couldn't afford NOT to make this change.

Then there's the gas tax debacle. Another time when lib pols told us the state couldn't afford NOT to raise the gas tax, but drivers could afford the increased price at the pump. What was the lib media ally response when Republicans forced lib pols to deal with a lower gas tax? For that matter, what has the lib media ally response been when Republicans have tried to cut taxes, cut spending, and reign in liberal pols who have fought EVERY cut? Have liberal media allies EVER called out a lib pol (read that demoncrat!) for refusing to cut spending, cut taxes, eliminate wasteful spending? Has any lib ever been in favor of cutting ANY spending or tax? Really? Please provide proof! Which lib pol is it that the N&D hasn't endorsed? Which big-spending demon pol is it that hasn't gotten a solid endorsement from lib organizations around the state, including media allies? Which demon pol has supported ANY spending cut or tax cut? Which demon pol has supported allowing those of us who earn money to be able to keep more of it? Which demon pol has told the truth when they have claimed the state budget had been cut to the bone and there was no more room for cuts? What is Roy's plan for leaving more money in our pockets, reducing spending, reducing regulations, increasing revenue to the state by flattening taxes for EVERYONE? What exactly is Roy's plan for economic development that the N&D endorsed him so strongly just because he announced he's running? Has he even produced a plan that the rest of us can look at? Or will Roy simply take us back to the failed policies of prior liberal demon administrations?