Debating skills put to the test

As I write this, it looks like this legislative session will finish its business soon. There is much speculation around the governor’s veto last week of the grocery sales tax bill, and how the House and Senate might respond. Issues of this magnitude can get us home faster or keep us here longer.

One of the Senate pages keeps me hopping. On a regular basis, my Senate phone rings with the message, “Guess who?” Branden will be hiding somewhere on the floor and delights in getting me to answer my phone. The work of the Senate is made more efficient and enjoyable because of the pages. Two sets of 10 students rotate through the process during our session. They bring personality and humor, interject the unexpected, and endear themselves to all of us in a fairly short amount of time.

Monday, I debated against a bill that was our first “radiator-capped” bill. The bill number, title and statement of purpose remain the same but the body of the bill is gutted and a substitute bill is inserted in the amending order. My disagreement was not with the content of the bill but with the process by which it arrived on the floor. This tactic was used because the original bill was being held in the House, thus, a radiator-cap process was the only way to get the bill through the Senate. Although the skids were greased for this bill, I thought it would be a good opportunity to practice my debating skills.

Those skills were further tested when H 250, the bill that will allow funds generated from sales tax at a particular site to pay for infrastructure such as a new interchange, came up for consideration. This was important to the Cabela’s project on the west side of Post Falls. There was substantial debate around the merits of this bill but it did pass and is headed to the governor’s desk. It was a great relief to secure passage of this bill.

This is likely my last column. I thank The Spokesman-Review for providing this opportunity and thank each of you who read my journalist efforts.