There are many ways to allow bills to die. 

First, you never write one which is usually the death of an idea.  Second, the Speaker who refers them to committees does not have to refer one.  Third, the committee chairperson does not have to refer a bill to a subcommittee, fourth the subcommittee chairperson does not have to bring it up, if he/she does the committee can vote it down, table it, amend it until it does not look like the original bill, and if it passes, the committee chair on the floor can bring it up and then immediately table it, or not bring it up at all.....

You get the point.

This past week, I had two bill somewhat related in my committee.  The first one would give income tax incentives to businesses and homeowners who voluntarily retrofit, build, buy energy efficient homes or large energy savings devices.  These may be anything from the obvious solar or wind energy generating devices, to specially built water heaters, double paned/gas filled windows, insulation...you get the idea.

There would be income tax credits for each and for solar or wind power devices they could be as high as $12,500.  The bill was double referred and as chairman I wanted

it passed.  The bill came from the Senate.  My committee passed the bill and it is now in the Ways and Means Committee.

There was a second bill.  This one would allow a 10 year ad valorem tax exemption for manufacturers who were forced/required by federal or state government to install some kind of pollution abatement equipment.

I did a pocket veto on this one:  that is, I chose neither to refer the bill to a subcommittee for further study or bring it up myself.

This was another senate bill and one which I wanted to die for several reasons.

First, this bill would not have impacted the state budget as it was an ad valorem, or property tax bill.

Second, the Manufacturers Association both themselves and through the members who support them on the committee (believe it or not, I also support them) vehemently opposed DEQ charging fees for reviewing and monitoring services for application permits for the amounts of pollutants they are allowed to put into the environment.

Their argument:  if the government requires them to perform in a prescribed way,

than the government (taxpayer) ought to absorb the cost of the permitting and monitoring fee.

Three, this would be a 10-year property tax exemption.  I found when I was mayor in

Clarksdale, some of our businesses would bring in a piece of equipment, claim a 10-year exemption on it, ship it off to Mexico after 10 years and then bring in another piece of equipment doing the same thing from another plant and start the 10-year exemption again.

Fourth, there are just things a person and company ought to do to protect the populace and environment and not be required to do by the government.

IF, installing such equipment were voluntarily done as in the installation of alternative energy savings devices I mentioned above, I could see giving some sales tax or income tax exemption that impacted the state budget.

 But, if you are "forced" to add a piece of equipment to protect the environment, should you be given some type of reward for doing that?  This chairman doesn't think so and that is why I chose to "pocket veto" the bill.

God only knows that many of my bills that made sense to me have never been brought up.

Now, all that may be more than you want to know...but that is how over 2,000 bills die every year. And for good or bad, that's how the system works.