CHARLESTON, WV (LOOTPRESS) – The House of Delegates convened Friday for what would become an extended session as members expressed strongly held opinions regarding House Bill 2882, which saw its third reading during the session.
The bill, which also saw extensive discussion during its second reading on Thursday, pertains to a supplemental appropriation to the Department of Economic Development.
Over a dozen Delegates spoke to the bill with a range of views being presented, many of which established relative conflict between members of a shared party.
“I think it’s going to be good for West Virginia. But that begs the question for me, how much am I willing to invest taxpayer money into this project? They’re asking West Virginia to be a large investor into their company, and I’m just not okay with that,” Delegate Worrell (R-Cabell, 023) said of the bill early on.
Delegate Coop-Gonzalez (R-Randolph, 067) was among the first to condemn the legislation Friday and to bring purported party agendas to the discussion, declaring, “I rise against this bill today because I believe it is an assault on West Virginia. I think a vote in favor of this bill is an endorsement of cronyism, climate alarmism and central economic planning.”
Delegate Rowe (D-Kanawha, 052) spoke in support of the bill, pointing out that rather than simply considering the purported turnaround on energy, that the legislature should take into consideration the number of jobs the legislation would create for West Virginia residents, as well as the industrial implications such a move would have for the state on a national level.
“I think we’ve got to look at this from the standpoint of who we are, what we’re going to use some of this surplus for,” said Delegate Rowe. “I think this is not a matter of rhetoric, it’s a matter of just common sense. We want to see jobs in the northern Panhandle, we want to come back as an industrial state.”
Delegate Rowe would move to speak on the bill once more later in the afternoon, but a House vote would result in the denial of a suspension of regulations permitting the Delegate from doing so.
A fair amount of attention was given during Friday’s session to the potential benefit presented to neighboring states through the allocation of funds, though Delegate Griffith (D-Wayne, 027) asserted that members of the House would be remiss to neglect residents in the state’s northern panhandle for the sole purposes of preventing nearby out-of-state residents from benefitting.
“We have two panhandles. We have most of the population of our state along borders. We can’t do any development or welcome anyone that is not going to benefit a bordering state – it’s impossible,” said Delegate Griffith, who went on to acknowledge potential benefits for the State of West Virginia should out-of-state residents choose to take advantage of the in-state opportunity.
“Are we going to abandon the opportunity for development in Weirton and the people of Weirton who have suffered with the loss of Weirton Steel just because somebody on either side of them is going to get a job? They’re also going to work in West Virginia; they’re going to get gas in West Virginia; they’re going to consider living in West Virginia; there will be advantages. I do urge support for this.”
Delegate Kirby (R-Raleigh, 044) was vocal in his criticism of House Bill 2882, addressing both the Democrat and Republican parties by name for purportedly going against their own values in support of the legislation at hand.
“Democrats, while I disagree with a lot of the positions you take, one of the things actually respected about your party at large is the stance you took towards billionaires,” said Delegate Kirby.
“You said tax the rich, tax the billionaires, simplify the code, make everybody pay their fair share, and you went from that to now you want to give billionaires our tax dollars? I’m not just picking on the Democrats, Mr. Speaker. The Republicans, almost every one of you, ran on being good stewards of your taxpayers’ money and against crony capitalism. Yet here we sit. To say I’m disappointed would be an understatement.”
Delegate Hansen (D-Monongalia, 079) seemed to take a measured approach to consideration of the legislation, pointing out the benefits likely to be experienced by residents of West Virginia, albeit ones outside his own district.
“I support this bill. I appreciate the Department of Economic Development negotiating a deal that’s going to bring more manufacturing jobs to the state of West Virginia,” Delegate Hansen stated. “I wish it was in my district, but I’m happy for the northern Panhandle to capture these jobs. These are good manufacturing jobs coming to West Virginia.”
Another outspoken critic of House Bill 2882, Delegate Longanacre (R-Greenbrier, 047) made clear his skepticism at the idea of funneling state tax dollars to an outside operation and questioned the Governor’s judgement in supporting the legislation.
“My constituents hired me to come down here and be their voice and hold the line on fiscal conservatism. This is a bad, risky deal. I’m a ‘no’ vote on this.”
But it was Delegate Brandon Steele (R-Raleigh, 042) who perhaps had the most to say regarding the conflicting views of the members present on Friday. The Raleigh County Delegate took a pragmatic approach to the debate at hand, leveraging references from great philosophical minds such as Yogi Bear, Zig Zigler, Dusty Rhodes, Master P, Wayne Gretzky, and “The Nature Boy” Ric Flair to emphasize his stance.
“West Virginia is not changing the rest of the world. We’re sitting down at their chess table playing Tic Tac Toe right now,” he asserted.
”We’re talking about taking less than 2% of this budget – all surplus by the way. I’m all about coal mining. I voted for five years in here to do the same type of programs we’re talking about for coal. Economic development is the name of the game from here on out,” said Delegate Steele approaching the conclusion of his remarks.
“It’s time for economic development. It’s time to get down to brass tacks and do what the people sent us here to do, and that’s to create jobs.”
Delegates continued to voice both support and concern regarding the legislation. Nonetheless, less the 27% of members voted in opposition of the bill once a vote was finally called.
House Bill 2882 passed after a House vote with 69 Delegates voting in favor, 25 against, and 6 absent from the vote. The bill was also voted effective from passage by a margin of 79 to 15, and was communicated to the Senate shortly after.
