There Is Little Incentive for Lawmakers to Back Down on HB 2 | Soapboxer | Indy Week
Pin It

There Is Little Incentive for Lawmakers to Back Down on HB 2 

For the last two weeks, every morning has seemed to bring another blow: another protest, another denunciation or proposed boycott, another city or state travel ban, another business reconsidering its multimillion-dollar investment, another entertainment company abandoning us for more tolerant climes, another sports event mulling pulling out, another news report that the state has put at risk billions of dollars in much-needed federal aid.

It suffices to say that House Bill 2, the anti-LGBTQ legislation the General Assembly rammed through and Governor McCrory signed March 23, has devastated North Carolina's brand—that is, a lighthouse of tolerance in the anti-intellectual, Bible-thumping void of the Deep South. The McCrory administration immediately went on the defensive, blaming the media for the outrage and outright lying about the obvious fact that HB 2 strips the state's citizens of existing rights—not just gay and transgender people, but also workers and anyone who suffers workplace discrimination.

But by last week, the governor's dam of defiance began showing signs of cracking, which was predictable enough. A year ago, after all, the conservative governor and legislature of Indiana backed down after protests over its anti-LGBTQ legislation, and last month the Republican governor of Georgia vetoed a similar bill under similar pressure. McCrory, a little slow on the uptake, came to realize that when he signed HB 2, he might have signed his political death warrant—unless, of course, he could do something to soften his image.

And so last Tuesday he released a video in which he insisted, "This is not about demonizing one group of people," and said he was open to "new ideas and solutions" to "make this bill better in the future."

The legislature's Republicans, on the other hand, seem determined to ride out the gathering storm. Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger's office told the media that he had no interest in revisiting the law. Representative Paul Stam, a powerful Apex Republican, told The News & Observer he might tweak one technical aspect. Other than that, though, "We're not going to change the policy of the law."

There are, to my mind, two factors at play here: the first is the simple fact that most of the economic damage HB 2 inflicts will be on the state's urban centers, especially the Triangle and Charlotte. And while those metros are powering both the state's economic and population growth—they account for two-thirds of all new residents, according to the U.S. Census Bureau—they are not the places from which the legislature's Republicans derive their power. In fact, the General Assembly has been openly hostile to local governments in recent years.

Put simply, the Republicans can afford to let Wake or Durham to take a hit; Wake and Durham won't vote for them anyway.

And that leads to the second point. As Common Cause North Carolina points out, thanks to the state's partisan gerrymander, nine out of ten lawmakers who supported the bill are running unopposed or won their previous election by a landslide.

Which is to say: McCrory might notice your outrage. But the guys on Jones Street don't have to—and, unless they want to save the governor's bacon, they've got little incentive to back down now.

This article appeared in print with the headline "Won't Back Down"

Comments (8)

Showing 1-8 of 8

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-8 of 8

Add a comment

INDY Week publishes all kinds of comments, but we don't publish everything.

  • Comments that are not contributing to the conversation will be removed.
  • Comments that include ad hominem attacks will also be removed.
  • Please do not copy and paste the full text of a press release.

Permitted HTML:
  • To create paragraphs in your comment, type <p> at the start of a paragraph and </p> at the end of each paragraph.
  • To create bold text, type <b>bolded text</b> (please note the closing tag, </b>).
  • To create italicized text, type <i>italicized text</i> (please note the closing tag, </i>).
  • Proper web addresses will automatically become links.

Latest in Soapboxer



Twitter Activity

Comments

Amazing that many of the people who thought deplatforming Peterson was reasonable continue to double down. Especially so, when the …

by Dean Burkett on Point: With Its Response to Jordan Peterson’s Appearance at DPAC, the Durham City Council Is Playing a Dangerous Game (Soapboxer)

Liberals don't need to read books or acquaint themselves with anything as oppressive as facts (PATRIARCHY !!!!).
They just …

by Kate Lewis on Counterpoint: The Durham City Council Said Exactly What Needed to Be Said About Jordan Peterson (Soapboxer)

Most Recent Comments

Amazing that many of the people who thought deplatforming Peterson was reasonable continue to double down. Especially so, when the …

by Dean Burkett on Point: With Its Response to Jordan Peterson’s Appearance at DPAC, the Durham City Council Is Playing a Dangerous Game (Soapboxer)

Liberals don't need to read books or acquaint themselves with anything as oppressive as facts (PATRIARCHY !!!!).
They just …

by Kate Lewis on Counterpoint: The Durham City Council Said Exactly What Needed to Be Said About Jordan Peterson (Soapboxer)

It is sad and endemic of a growing problem: Outrage about a false narrative. I have been labeled as "liberal" …

by Richie Montgomery on Counterpoint: The Durham City Council Said Exactly What Needed to Be Said About Jordan Peterson (Soapboxer)

Peterson is an ass just like all the alt-right sleaze bags.

by Tony Dockery on Point: With Its Response to Jordan Peterson’s Appearance at DPAC, the Durham City Council Is Playing a Dangerous Game (Soapboxer)

One has to commend Mr. Billman for his honesty: "Full disclosure: I dont claim expertise on Jordan Peterson. Ive not …

by kate777 on Counterpoint: The Durham City Council Said Exactly What Needed to Be Said About Jordan Peterson (Soapboxer)

© 2018 Indy Week • 320 E. Chapel Hill St., Suite 200, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation