NC Senate overrides Perdue vetoes | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: This article originally appeared in the Beaufort Observer.

    The N. C. Senate this afternoon (7-13-11) sent a clear message to North Carolina of what it would be like if Republicans gain control of both houses of the legislature in 2012. Most of Beverly Perdue's vetos, which are growing every day, would not stand. The Senate overrode six of them today. They were:

    • S33 Medical Malpractice Reform

    • S781 Regulatory Reform

    • S709 Energy Jobs (drilling/fracking)

    • S532 ESC/Jobs Reform

    • S496 Medicaid/Health Choice Provider Requirements

    • S727 No Dues Checkoff for School Employees

    The bills now go back to the House where Republicans lack four votes to override a veto. So which of these bills will ultimately become law remains to be seen. You can read more about each at WRAL TV.

    The Observer had a reporter in the Senate gallery today as the Senate voted on these overrides. What struck us most forcefully was the lack of enthusiasm the Senate Democrats showed in defending the Governor's vetoes. Some Democrats even voted to override along with Republicans.

    Governor Perdue has staked herself out in the vetoes. Republicans we talked to outside the Senate chamber indicated that they intend to make the vetoes an issue against Perdue, even though she will not be running in 2012.

    As for Perdue's reaction, her office issued the following statement:

    "The Senate today made the wrong choices for North Carolina -- six times over.

    I remain hopeful that the House will take up these issues and make better choices. I strongly support medical malpractice reform and hope the House will make the small change required for us to reach a compromise. I also feel strongly they have an obligation to fix the two issues I believe are unconstitutional. If they choose to find common ground, the legislation -- and the state -- will be better for it."

    In light of today's events we thought it might be interesting to review John Hood's comments before the vetoes: