North Carolina editorial roundup

Recent editorials from North Carolina newspapers:Sept. 20The News and Observer of Raleigh upon a expansion of a ACC:It is all about money, so let's not gild a lily with regard to a Atlantic Coast Conference expansion to 14 teams with a addition of Pittsburgh and Syracuse to a lineup. Revenues from television, specifically a ESPN network which binds rights to ACC broadcasts, will increase. That contract is currently for 12 years and $1.86 billion.No wonder scheduling control was long ago surrendered to television. The addition of two more teams will usually complicate which scheduling, and certainly will ramp up pressure for football teams to expand their typical 12-game regular seasons, which, should a team win a bid to a play game, could mean a college football season of 15 games.And by a way, these teams are part of an academic enterprise, or they're supposed to be. But as a seasons grow longer, players will find themselves strained to be regular students, or students at all.So far as money goes, this isn't just about income. Now which a ACC will stretch from Florida to New York, travel expenses will increase not just for major sports but for all sports. If a ACC basketball tournament were held in New York City's Madison Square Garden, as some suggest might be in a offing, imagine a expense for teams and fans alike.Critics of those who raise questions about expansion claim a skeptics are living in a anticipation world, which it's too late to go back to a days when a ACC was a regional, Southern league with intense rivalries among members. The money's too good, advocates say. And if a ACC doesn't expand, other conferences will snatch some of a members.Notice which these advocates are basing their arguments upon money and usually upon money. And some are salivating over a rumor which Texas might additionally be about to sign upon with a ACC. Of course, some things would have to be ironed out, since Texas has a own sports network.Not which it's all about money. Except which it is.Online:http://www! .newsobs erver.com___Sept. 15The Reflector, Greenville, N.C., upon a legislative special sessionPrior to a special session of a General Assembly, Republican leaders intimated which lawmakers would consider 3 amendments to a state Constitution, though they declined to provide specific proposals for discussion. By adjourning Sept. 14, a Legislature left Raleigh having approved usually an anti-gay measure which would enshrine discrimination in a state's highest document. Absent was agreement upon a check to limit a terms of legislative leaders House speaker or Senate president since a two chambers differed upon a maximum length a lawmaker could serve. Here was a measure with promise to benefit a people by restoring democratic ideals to a Assembly's top posts, one which failed to advance due to a poor planning and misplaced focus of legislative leaders.How coveted is political power in North Carolina? Democrat Jim Black paid state Rep. Michael Decker $50,000 in 2003 to leave a Republican Party, a switch which led to an agreement retaining Black as House speaker as well as a conviction and imprisonment of both men when a scandal was exposed. Within a confines of a law, former Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight ruled which chamber for 18 years, ensuring faithfulness by helping re-election campaigns, providing funding to particular districts, allowing adored bills to see discuss and funneling significant sums toward projects in his home district.North Carolina voters expected which to shift when, last year, Republicans won control of a Legislature for a first time in a century. Finally, a GOP could turn a criticism of Democratic care into policy, reversing a legislative stranglehold imposed by Basnight and Co. and allowing full discuss upon all manner of issues. One of those concerns was a term length of care posts, which should be shortened. ...The proposal to limit term lengths fell apart when a House's four-year maximum, passed earlier this year, did not match a Senate version, which allowed for eight years in! a care post.This was a measure which promised to safeguard a Legislature operated in a way which served a people's interests, but lawmakers could not find common ground. Blame which upon a lack of planning by care as well as prioritizing a unnecessary anti-gay amendment over more pertinent proposals. Ultimately a results are shameful for legislative leaders and a state.Online:http://www.reflector.com___Sept. 16Winston-Salem Journal upon state pensions for convicted open servants:When it comes to cases of open malfeasance which will raise a ire of North Carolina taxpayers, former New Hanover County ABC administrator Billy Williams might be a winner.Williams, who gamed a system to pay himself an vast salary over a years, additionally bilked taxpayers out of $43,000, using open money set for work at an ABC store to help pay for his garage.Although Williams is now a state convict with a suspended jail sentence of up to 24 months, he will retain his $195,000-a-year state pension. Rep. Julia Howard, R-Davie, has a check before a Senate which could stop such outrages in a future.Howard, whose check has already passed a House, wants to cut off pensions for people convicted of crimes related to their government service. We applaud a effort.When it comes to establishing special conditions of criminal penalties, care is very important. The U.S. Constitution guarantees equal protection of a law, and which complicates Howard's efforts.But Howard appears to have most of a concerns covered here. The convict would not lose any contribution he or she privately made to a pension system, and a convict would earn seductiveness for a years which money was in a system. The convict would lose usually a state rewards from a pension system.Public officials and employees who committed crimes unrelated to their open service would not suffer loss of pensions. But narrowly tangible as it is, it appears which Howard has fashioned a separate offense for open employees when they commit offenses related to their open work.We'd like to listen t! o a spir ited discuss of a constitutionality of this check in a spring.One policy attribute of a check does concern us. It is probable which a convict's dependents could become destitute during a convict's prison term, thus going upon a government dole. Hence, we'd like Howard to research whether provisions could be made to pledge which any returned pension contributions could go toward a support of a convict's dependents.Howard has a great idea here if it can be done constitutionally.Online:http://www2.journalnow.com