January 31, 2008

A Good Idea

Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum is making sense

Republican Legislators Push DUI Crackdown Legislation

Republicans in the state legislature have introduced comprehensive legislation to combat drunk driving in Tennessee, legislation that would deploy a multi-faceted approach to the problem that includes automatic license revocation, lowering legal blood alcohol content levels for certain offenses, greater use of ignition interlock devices, a ban on open containers, and tougher penalties against repeat offenders and for those who refuse to take the BAC test.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Mae Beavers, R-Mt. Juliet, Sen. Jack Johnson, R-Franklin, General Welfare Chairman Rusty Crowe, R-Johnson City, state Rep. Tom DuBois, R-Columbia, state Rep. Matthew Hill, R-Jonesborough, and state Rep. Jon Lundberg, R-Bristol, announced the legislative package at a press conference Wednesday. You can read the full release, which includes bill numbers, here.

Overselling Pre-K

Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen has a physics degree from Harvard, so it's pretty certain that he knows how to read. The question, then, is did he read the recently published study from his own Department of Education on the effectiveness of pre-K education and not understand it, did he just not read it, or did he read it and decide to ignore it because it didn't fit what what he wanted to say about pre-K in his State of the State address?

"Pre-K remains, dollar for dollar, the best investment we can make in improving the chances for our children's educational success," Bredesen said in his State of the State address in which he annouced he would seek an additional $25 million funding for pre-K. The only problem with that statement: It isn't true.

On December 12, 2007, a report commissioned by the state Comptroller's Office and produced by Strategic Research Group was published that provides data that describes the benefit of pre-K participation as "limited" and with a "short impact," with even negative performance reported. You can read and download that 49-page report, Assessing the Effectiveness of Tennessee's Pre-Kindergarten Program: First Interim Report, by clicking this link.

Did Gov. Bredesen not know what his own administration's study showed? Did he even know the study was done?

The study, funded by the Tennessee Department of Education and the Tennessee State Comptroller's Office of Education Accountability, shows that pre-K education does not help white girls and actually hurts white and minority boys. It helps only minority girls.

Given those facts, it is highly unlikely that pre-K is, as Bredesen claims, "dollar for dollar, the best investment we can make in improving the chances for our children's educational success."

To be sure, there are cases where pre-K is a good thing. But the bulk of the research into pre-K over the past many years shows that its benefits are short-term at best. It is, most certainly, not the silver bullet that Gov. Bredesen pretends it to be.

If the governor isn't going to pay attention to studies his own administration pays for, the least he could do is stop wasting taxpayers' money on them.

Another Day, Another Stupid Utterance From the Governor

Apparently, being a lame-duck second-term governor has freed Gov. Phil Bredesen to say a growing number of stupid and, frankly, offensive things. First, he called Chinese immigrants of the 1800s an offensive and derogatory name. Next he admitted on video that he likes to tax people and give their money away. Now he has insulted the intelligence of 35-40 year-old mothers, suggesting they couldn't handle college-level academic work. ACK has more, including the audio and some pithy comments from readers who, it turns out, are smarter than the governor who has a PhD in physics.

January 28, 2008

Who is Stupid?

"He's spending $12 million for a party room and he's criticizing spending the reserves? How stupid do you have to be to do that?" - That's just one of a list of reader comments below this AP story slamming Gov. Phil Bredesen for his pretending to be a fiscal conservative. Let's be clear about one thing: The state budget has skyrocketed during Bredesen's time in office - rising faster than the growth of the average income of the people of Tennessee. That kind of spending growth is unsustainable without a tax increase - which is why Bredesen raised taxes last year by nearly one quarter of a billion dollars.

It also is why the administration has for six years lied to the legislature about just how much its budgets were actually exceeding the state constitution's spending growth cap, which is tied to the growth of the average income of the people of Tennessee. Last May, the administration lied when it claimed the fiscal year 2007-08 budget was less than $60 million over the cap - in truth, it was $723 million over the cap. The administration simply and deliberately used the wrong baseline number, in order to conceal most of the over-cap spending.

But you can't conceal it forever - eventually the economy slows down a bit and the truth of the unsustainable spending growth rate is revealed.

Just how stupid do you have to be to criticize others for proposing to use reserves to pay for your overspending while you are spending millions to build a fancy underground ballroom at the governor's mansion? You don't have to be stupid. Why, you can be smart. You can even have a physics degree from Harvard. You just have to be arrogant, super-wealthy and out-of-touch with the real lives of ordinary folks who live paycheck to paycheck.

January 25, 2008

Goodbye

That's my mom and dad, Harriet and Milton Hobbs, back in 1955. I wasn't born yet and neither were my two sisters. At 7:30 central time Thursday night my mother's life on Earth was ended by incurable breast cancer and her new life in Heaven, in a body that will never get sick, age or know pain, sadness or loss, began thanks to the grace of God and His Son, Jesus the Christ. She was 77. She leaves behind, temporarily, her husband of 52 years, two daughters and one son, a son-in-law, a daughter-in-law, seven grandchildren and two great-grandchildren, most of whom were at her bedside when she died. I was able to see her last weekend for a few days and look forward to seeing her again in Heaven.

Breast cancer is an evil, evil thing. If you want to help fight it, this is a good place to start.

Update: My mom will be buried Tuesday, my Dad's 80th birthday.

January 24, 2008

Making Sense

Donald Sensing and his co-bloggers - including Nashvillian John Krenson - have moved to a new location on the Interweb. His old blog, One Hand Clapping, has been replaced by Sense of Events.

January 20, 2008

Swift Boats

The New York Times has an interesting article today explaining what Iran is up to with its recent harassment of U.S. Navy ships in the Persian Gulf using small boats.

Op-Ed

The Tennessean has published an op-ed I wrote on their website. I'm 800 miles from Nashville so I don't know if it's in the paper edition or not.

January 19, 2008

Quiet Ride

Here's a driving review of the Honda FCX Clarity, the world's first production-model hydrogen-fueled car. One thing that struck me as I watched it: the world, especially urban and suburban environments, will be a lot quieter once mostly-silent hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles replace most of the gasoline-powered fleet.

Here's another interesting YouTube video on the Clarity.

Walk the Line

Tennessean political columnist Larry Daughtrey put the Democratic spin on the debate over lottery-funded scholarships:

The demographics of lotteries are well known: the poor buy the most tickets and the middle and upper classes get most of the scholarships. The Democrats want to make money available on the basis of need; Republicans, none of whom voted for the lottery in the first place, want to hold the line.

The issues are:

1. Whether the lottery-funded scholarship should remain a scholarship - i.e., something earned via academic performance - or should be turned into an entitlement.

2 Whether academic standards and requirements for earning and keeping a lottery funded scholarship will be lowered or changed.

3. Whether excess lottery revenue will be used to help local governments pay for needed school construction projects, as the legislation creating the lottery envisioned, and if so how much and by what formula or criteria will it be distributed.

On the first, Democrats for the most part want to turn lottery scholarships into an entitlement while Republicans for the most part want to retain the merit aspect of the program in order to keep it a strong incentive for Tennessee high school students to keep their grades up. Republicans understand that turning the program into an entitlement program puts taxpayers on the hook should the number of needs-based students ever eclipse the lottery's revenue. And that reality is more likely if Democrats get their way on the second issue.

That issue is this: Democrats for the most part want to lower academic standards for getting a scholarship. Right now a student must graduate high school with a B average to get a scholarship; Democrats want to lower that to a C average, presumably making thousands more students eligible for the scholarships, which will soak up more lottery revenue.

Republicans such as state Sen. Ron Ramsey, the leader of the Senate, have indicated interest in making it possible for students to retain their scholarships or earn them back if their grades in school dip below a B average, but want to do it in a way that encourages good academic performance. Merely lowering the bar, as Democrats want to do, does not encourage academic achievement.

If the program becomes a needs-based entitlement and academic standards are lowered, as the Democrats want, costs are guaranteed to skyrocket.

If more lottery revenue has to go to scholarships because Democrats lowered standards and made the program a needs-based entitlement, there will be less money for dealing with the third issue.

When voters were considering the lottery amendment a few years ago, they were routinely told that excess lottery revenue would be set aside for helping fund educational programs and school construction. We're already using some lottery money to fund the state's new subsidized day care "Pre-K" program despite a mountain of data that shows that Pre-K has no long term effect on academic performance. Now, it's time to allocate some of the excess funds to help local governments pay for much-needed school construction.

There are other related issues as well. Republicans in the state Senate last year sought to make changes to the scholarship criteria that would make more "non-traditional" college students, including War on Terror veterans, eligible for lottery-funded scholarships. Democrats in the House last year pushed instead to lower the overall eligibility grade average.

This year, Democrats have already begun pushing a separate lottery-funded scholarship for War on Terror vets, but, as I've already demonstrated above, when you tinker with any aspect of the lottery program you impact the money available for other parts.

In the final analysis, Democrats this year will be trying to lower standards and raise costs for scholarships and change it from a reward for academic performance to an entitlement program with no protection for taxpayers against rising costs.

Republicans, on the other hand, will be trying this year to protect the program as a true academic scholarship, protect the fiscal health of the program, protect taxpayers from the cost risks of an entitlement program, and protect the original intent of the lottery, which was to both encourage college enrollment and academic achievement and to help fund educational programs and school construction.

It's a lot more complex than Larry Daughtrey, trotting out tired old class-warfare rhetoric, described it, and that complexity suggests that lottery reform needs a comprehensive approach rather than the Democrats' piecemeal approach in order to ensure a good fiscal and policy outcome for taxpayers and for the students and the higher education system that must accommodate and educate them.

And one more thing: Daughtrey isn't the only Democrat I've heard imply that Republicans who voted against the lottery amendment should not have any say in how the program is structured. That's pure idiocy, like saying that Democrats who opposed cutting the sales tax on food should not be involved in decisions about how the state spends tax revenue.

Republican legislators' constituents elected them to help oversee how the state is governed, and part of that responsibility involves making fiscal and policy decisions regarding the lottery.

Daughtrey got one thing right, though, Republicans do "want to hold the line" - against Democrat lottery reforms that risk bankrupting the lottery funds and putting taxpayers on the hook for an entitlement program, especially one that doesn't encourage good academic performance.

January 18, 2008

Voter ID Debate

Somebody posting on the forums at the newly (and well) redesigned Tennessean.com posted a link to my blog article yesterday on Democrat legislation that would require you to show a photo ID to sell scrap metal to a junk dealer, even though Dems generally oppose requiring voters to show a photo ID before voting. It touched off a pretty good debate in the paper's online comments forum - good enough to land the posting on the paper's home page under "hot forum topics."

Blasting the Ballroom

There is a very well-written letter to the editor at Tennessean.com regarding Bredesen's Ballroom. Writer Garrett Varner of Franklin says, "Perhaps the biggest irony is that a project so blatantly wasteful of taxpayer money is to be named 'Conservation Hall'."

How very true.

Meanwhile, another letter-writer takes apart First Lady Andrea Conte's rather silly recent claim that improvements at the Governor's Mansion will save money in the long run because of energy efficiencies.

January 17, 2008

Putting the Brakes on Excess Spending

My state representative, Glen Casada of Franklin, has announced he will be filing some much-needed legislation to stop a long-standing state spending practice which I and many others believe violates the state constitution.

In a press release from the House Republican Caucus, Casada, who is caucus chairman, announced he would file legislation to stop "out of control" spending by the executive branch while the legislature is out of session.

"With the budget being a little tighter this year, I believe this is a good time to address this issue of out of session spending," stated Rep. Casada. "Let's set a precedent that will create fiscally sound policy for the future."

The budgetary practice works like this: When the legislature isn't in session, the governor or the finance commissioner can appeal to the chairs of both the Senate and the House Finance committees and request that certain excess funds above what is set forth in the budget be reallocated to new projects.

Neither the Finance chairs nor the legislature as a whole can reject the executive branch's proposal - it's merely a courtesy notification.

The problem with that is that it sometimes involves tax dollars, and the state constitution is crystal clear that state government is forbidden to spend a dime that isn't first "appropriated by law," and the way that must happen is that the legislature must pass legislation to do that.

Casada says the money that has been spent this way since 1999 - usually one-time monies, but occasionally recurring funds - totals more than half of one billion dollars.

A budget expansion document shows that since 1999, a total of $530,653,688 has been spent out of session.

He continued, "Spending one-time money is very different from spending recurring funds. I just want to make sure the state is being frugal so that we may head off any type of budget crisis in the future."

I first identified the "unbudgeted dollars" scheme by which the previous administration was inflating the budget several years ago, and have written about it extensively here at BillHobbs.com. Spending "unbudgeted dollars" is how the state routinely spends more each year than the legislature appropriates in the budget it passes each spring.

To its credit, the current administration responded by tightening up the definition of the kind of money it could spend through this process, compared to the previous administration which used the process to spend surplus tax revenue.

In the Bredesen administration's proposed budget for the current fiscal year, the process is described this way:

When notice of unexpected revenue is received by an agency, the Commissioner of Finance and Administration, if he wants to approve the program expansion, may submit an expansion report to the chairmen of the finance committees for acknowledgement. Upon the chairmen's acknowledgement of the expansion report, the Commissioner of Finance and Administration may allot the additional departmental revenue to implement the proposed or expanded program. ... This expansion procedure is not used to increase allotments funded from state tax revenue sources. No appropriations from state tax sources may be increased except pursuant to appropriations made by law.

Bowing to The New Blogged Reality

The Associated Press reports that the state of New Hampshire is getting out of the business of issuing identification cards to members of the news media.

The man who handled the chore - Jim Van Dongen of the state Department of Safety - says the decision is based on the proliferation of online and specialty news outlets and technology that allows just about anyone to call himself a journalist. Van Dongen says that put him and his bosses in the uncomfortable position of issuing cards to all comers or having to decide who is a legitimate journalist.

Lamar's Popularity is Bipartisan

You want to know why the Tennessee Democratic Party can't seem to find a top-tier challenger to take on U.S. Lamar Alexander? Because some of the state's most prominent Democrats are lining up to support Alexander. The press release isn't on the Alexander campaign website yet, so I've included it in the extended portion of this entry. My prediction: Nobody you've ever heard of is going to run against Lamar, and nobody with low name recognition but high net worth is going to blow several million dollars to lose to Lamar by 20 points.

Update: The release is online now.

THIRTY PROMINENT DEMOCRATS, INDEPENDENTS ENDORSE ALEXANDER
Members of Tennesseans for Alexander Praise GOP Senator's Commitment to
Bipartisan Cooperation and Changing the Way Business is Done in Washington

Thirty prominent Tennesseans, active as Democrats and Independents in most political campaigns, were named today as the first members of Tennesseans for Alexander, a statewide group supportive of GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander's re-election.

"We are Democrats and Independents and want to stay that way," said Patsy Mathews, who has been active in Democratic circles for years, "but we admire Lamar's commitment when he was Governor to working cooperatively across party lines to get things done and his commitment now as Senator to change the way Washington does business."

Ms. Mathews' spouse, Harlan Mathews, served as Gov. Ned McWherter's Deputy and was appointed in 1992 by McWherter to fill then Sen. Al Gore's unexpired term after Gore became a Vice Presidential candidate. Mathews filled the Senate seat held by Alexander until Fred Thompson was elected in 1994.

"I'm honored that so many Democrats and Independents are willing to publicly support my candidacy," Alexander said. "I always have tried to be a Governor and a Senator for all Tennesseans, Democrats and Independents as well as Republicans.

"I think it's not only the right thing to do, but it's more important than ever, given the public's loss of confidence in elected officials, to insist on commitments to bipartisan cooperation from all of us in public service instead of petty, immature political games. That's the only way we can effectively address the serious issues facing our country."

The first members of Tennesseans for Alexander include:

Request for Prayers

My daughter and I are traveling to Philadelphia tomorrow to visit my mom who, after a five-year battle with breast cancer that for a few years she appeared to be winning, is now indeed closing in on victory. Not a medical victory over the cancer, which long ago metastasized to her brain and elsewhere, but the victory of passing on to the life that is beyond death. I am requesting your prayers for our safe travel, and for God's blessings on my father, sisters and mother during this time.

And if you haven't called your mom lately to tell her you love her, do it now.

January 16, 2008

Dial Victory

The Bredesen administration has just taken sides in the legislative battle between the cable industry and AT&T. Bredesen's communications director is leaving to join a lobbying firm that represents AT&T, according to NashvillePost.com, and fellow Democrat House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh's wife, lobbyist Betty Anderson, is also now lobbying for a consultant to AT&T, according to the Nashville Scene.

Update: The AT&T/cable battle involves AT&T's desire to be allowed to offer bundled telecom services including phone, Internet and television service on a statewide basis rather than negotiating agreements with local governments the way the cable TV industry did. (To oversimplify, cable had to negotiate such agreements with local governments in order to be allowed to run wires along public right-of-ways. The phone companies, on the other hand, already have their wire networks in place.)

The ultimate goal of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 was to increase competition, to let anyone enter any communications business and to let any communications business compete in any market against any other.

The law wasn't perfect, but ever since it passed we've seen an explosion in competition and in technological innovation in telecommunications and television services. You can't watch TV for more than a few minutes and not see commercials for telephone service via cable, Internet service via satellites, telelphone service over the Internet, and television on your mobile device.

Yesterday, I watched the second episode of a new Fox drama (Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chonicles, it's quite good!) that I downloaded via iTunes to my laptop over DSL service provided the phone company. Is that television, telephone or Internet service? Answer: All three. The lines are blurred and that's a good thing.

The cable industry doesn't want AT&T to be able to do statewide what it had to do one local market at a time, and they're lobbying the legislature on that issue. You can't blame them, of course - they have a business to protect.

Me? I'm for whatever increases competition and reduces the role of government - any government - in deciding what I can buy and who can sell it to me and what price they can charge. While I can empathize with those who think local control is the most important aspect of this complex debate, ultimately free-market economics that shifts control to the consumer ought to be the goal. If we truly are a government "of the people, by the people and for the people," the ultimate "local control" should be the individual.

Decreased government involvement and increased competition always leads to better things for consumers - better service, lower prices, more diverse product offerings, etc. Airline deregulation led to more cities having more service, more airlines, and the rise of discounters like Southwest. It also made flying much more affordable, allowing more people to travel for pleasure or business - a boon to both the tourism industry and the economy. (I know of one Nashville business that based its decisions on what new markets to enter on what markets were served by Southwest, because their business required a lot of travel and it was cheaper to travel to and from cities served by Southwest compared to cities not served by Southwest. Without airline deregulation, I doubt that company would have grown nearly as large as it did.)

There's no reason not to believe that increasing competition in the telecom/internet/phone sector in Tennessee would not likewise be beneficial to consumers and businesses.

Free-market economics is a core principle and philosophy for conservatives, libertarians and Republicans. To the extent that Democrats side with free-market principles and consumer choice in any such battle, I have no criticism.

Democrat Pushes For Photo ID Requirement - But NOT For Voting

A recent edition of The Tennessee Magazine, a publication of the Tennessee Electric Cooperative Association, notes some interesting - and ironic - legislation being pushed by a couple of Democrats in the Tennessee legislature. Senate Bill 1038, filed last year by state Sen. Jim Kyle, D-Memphis, and state Rep. Mike McDonald, D-Portland, would require anyone selling scrap metal to a junk dealer to show a photo ID. The goal: reducing the theft of valuable metals like copper from utilities and construction sites.

Specifically, the law would say that "No dealer may purchase or otherwise acquire scrap metal from a person unless the person presents a valid identification," and lists acceptable forms of
identification as a state-issued driver license; a state-issued identification card, a passport, a valid military ID, a nonresident alien border crossing card, a resident alien border crossing card, or a U.S. immigration and naturalization service ID. Additionally the scrap metal dealer would be required to record the name, race, sex, height, weight, date of birth, residence address and
numbers from the items used as identification of the person selling the scrap
metal and photocopy the document used as identification. Scrap metal sellers with no valid ID would have to provide a thumbprint.

Kyle thinks you should show a photo ID to sell scrap metal, but Kyle and his fellow Democrats think you shouldn't have to show a photo ID to vote.

January 15, 2008

He Needed a Fact-Checker

Former U.S. Sen. Tom Daschle, D-North South Dakota, speaking in Nashville Tuesday night said this:

"(Issues and politics) are more transparent. The electronic media brings it into the living room. Internet and bloggers are another element. There are no editors on the internet ... so we get all kinds of crazy stuff ... and it only ... exacerbates the issue."

Daschle's probably still peeved that a couple of bloggers helped John Thune de-throne him a few years back, but he's just wrong about there being "no editors on the Internet."

The blogosphere is more heavily edited than the New York Times. It's not edited by a staff of paid editors like those at a typical newspaper, but journalism on blogs is edited by an army of fact-checkers, spin-detectors, grassroots grammarians, volunteer copy editors and experts from almost any field of human endeavor. They are called "readers." Sometimes, they are bloggers, too. The more readers a blog has, the more editors it has. The editing is interactive, the spin-detection is ongoing, the fact-checking never stops.

It was the editors of the blogosphere, after all, who took apart CBS's hit piece on President Bush in 2004, the one based on forged documents. The bloggers consulted more experts and brought more expertise to bear than did CBS and it was the bloggers who exposed the fraud while CBS scrambled to prop it up.

Frankly, given the recent track record of CBS and, more recently, the New York Times, you are better off trusting the blogosphere to get it right on important stories.

Sen. Jackson Repeats the Bredesen Ballroom Lies

The report in today's Tennessean about yesterday's Legislative Fiscal Review hearing on the ballroom project at the governor's mansion could have enlightened taxpayers as to the real cost of the ballroom, but settled for merely presenting what each side of the dispute claims is true.

During the discussion, Sen. Doug Jackson, a Democrat from Dickson, observed that $3.8 million of the money for the underground hall will come from taxpayers. That money will be used to install a new driveway and features such as elevators to make the hall and mansion accessible to those with disabilities. The other $4.8 million to build the hall itself is being donated by the foundation.

Susan Kaestner, vice president of the TAG group, said Jackson's comment misrepresented the facts. "It will save taxpayers $8,720,000 if it is not built,'' she said. "So to suggest it's only costing taxpayers $3.8 million dollars is wrong."

Jackson was repeating administration talking points when he said the underground ballroom is being donated by the Tennessee Residence Foundation, using private funds. He is correct from a legal standpoint, but Kaestner is correct in saying that canceling the ballroom project would save taxpayers more than $8 million.

Here's why - and these are facts that Sen. Jackson either willfully ignored, doesn't know, or doesn't understand, none of which would suggest the Dickson Democrat is doing his job well.

The Tennessee Residence Foundation raised several million dollars to pay for renovation of the existing mansion, a project that is almost done. On paper, the Foundation is donating $4.8 million of that private money to the ballroom project. But on the same day the Foundation gave that gift to the state, the state gave the Foundation millions of dollars in proceeds from a bond issue.

Is it technically true that, on paper, the accountants show money being donated by the Foundation to the ballroom project? Yes. But the Foundation, run by Gov. Bredesen's wife, could not have donated that money if the Bredesen administration had not simultaneously given the Foundation an almost equal amount of tax dollars.

It's a financing shell game designed to fool the public into thinking that the ballroom is privately funded.

The private money that the Foundation, on paper, "donated" to the ballroom project was raised originally to pay for most of the $9.5 million cost of renovating the existing governor's mansion. But because of cost overruns and the shell-game move of funds, on paper, to the ballroom project, it is the taxpayers who have paid more than $7.7 million of the mansion renovation, with the Foundation paying less than half a million dollars. Part of that $7.7 million is due to higher-than-expected construction labor and materials costs because of Hurricane Katrina and because the deterioriation of the mansion was more extensive that originally believed. But a big part of it is because taxpayers are subsidizing the Foundation's "gift" to the ballroom project.

That's not partisan political spin, it is fact, documented in State Building Commission minutes and spreadsheets.

TAG - Tennesseans for Accountability in Government - calculates the current cost to taxpayers of the ballroom, including direct costs and the cost of subsidizing the Foundation's "gift" of "private funds" to the ballroom project, at more than $8.7 million. I think it is actually higher than that - after all, the state gave proceeds of a bond issue to the Foundation, and bonds have to be paid back with interest.

Sen. Jackson ought to do better in his oversight role than merely repeat the administration's deceptive talking points. And the Bredesen administration ought to level with the people of Tennessee and tell the truth, for once, about the true cost of the ballroom.

January 14, 2008

Thank You, Gov. Bredesen

The Tennessee Republican Party sincerely thanks Gov. Bredesen for his honesty about taxing and spending. His candor is refreshing, even if the way he said it was arrogant and insensitive to the people from whom he has such "fun" taking taxes from. (But what is this obsession he has with spending millions of tax dollars on old mansions?)

Money Grab

State Rep. Stacey Campfield says that the proposal by a Democrat state Senator from Memphis for a big increase in the "per diem" given to legislators when they are in session is nothing but a grab for more money that legislators don't need. And he's got the numbers to prove it.

The Biggest House in the Neighborhood

Four years ago next month, the members of the Tennessee General Assembly heard an important speech about the future of TennCare. Here's a few graphs from that speech, "Saving TennCare," delivered Feb. 17, 2004:

"I want to begin with a story, the story of the biggest house in the neighborhood.

Once upon a time there was a family, with a mother and a father, and a son and a daughter. They were a fine, loving family, and some years before the time of our story, they had stretched to buy a great big, expensive house - the biggest house in the neighborhood. It had everything they dreamed of; a pool, game rooms, enormous yard, bathrooms for everyone with some left over.

Every month, when it came time to pay the bills, mom paid the mortgage, the property taxes, mom paid the heat, and light, and repairs on their huge house. And each month when she got done, there was practically nothing left for anything else.

They talked about family vacations, but they never could actually go, there wasn't any money left after paying the house bills. The son and the daughter dreamt of someday going to college. But it wasn't likely, they were saving nothing for college. Just keeping up the biggest house in the neighborhood was taking it all.

I want to break this story here, as I'm sure it is obvious where I am going: TennCare is just like that great big house; it's got everything, it's well-intentioned, but we can't afford it, we're in over our heads, and scrambling to keep up with the bills means we starve to death other things that in the end are equally important - like education.

... I'm here tonight to ask you to do the same thing that we did together last year: to apply the commonsense principles of a family budget, this time to TennCare."

Winner

Excellent news from Entrepreneurial Mind blogger Jeff Cornwall.

Bredesen: My Wife Will Have Her Ballroom

Gov. Phil Bredesen says he doesn't care what people think about the ballroom he and his wife are building - with taxpayer's money* - at the Tennessee governor's mansion.

* Yes, I know, on paper it says the ballroom is being built with private funds. But if you walk the project backward you find that it is costing taxpayers more than $7 million. The Bredesens are claiming it is being funded with private money because - on paper - the Tennessee Residence Foundation transferred $4 million in privately-donated funds given for renovation of the existing mansion over to the ballroom construction project. But only on paper.

Much of that $4 million had already been spent on the mansion renovation, which is almost done. If you know anything about lengthy construction projects, you know the contractor gets paid in increments over the duration of the project, which means most of the money the Foundation raised for the renovation has already been dispersed to the various contractors.) So, how can they claim to have transferred $4 million to the ballroom when a significant amount of that cash had already been spent? Easy - on the same day that the Foundation "transferred" $4 million to the ballroom project, the state gave the Foundation a grant of more than $3.2 million, funded by bonds that will be paid off with tax dollars.

State records show that of the $4 million gift from the Foundation to the ballroom project, $2.8 million was funds that had already been promised to the mansion renovation and included in the various cost figures for the renovation approved by the State Building Commission. But on Sept. 14, 2006, the Bredesen administration shifted that cost to taxpayers - allowing the Bredesens to claim the new-construction ballroom was going to be funded by private donations.

In March 2007, the State Building Commission approved $860,000 in new funding for improvements at the mansion necessary "in support of the Conservation Hall project," according to Commission records. Four months later, on July 12, 2007, the Commission approved another $3 million for those improvements - things like a new circular driveway, elevators and other such things necessary only because of the addition of the underground ballroom.

Where did that $3.86 million come from?

The administration claims it is coming from the Tennessee Residence Foundation, implying it is private funds, but the truth is different. State Building Commission records show that the Foundation got the $3.86 million from another state grant funded by bonds that will be paid off wit tax dollars.

At that point, the total cost to taxpayers because of the ballroom had reached $7.06 million.

As the projected costs for the ballroom have continued to rise. Of the $11.1 million that taxpayers are now paying for various projects at the mansion, approximately $8 million is costs that wouldn't exist if the ballroom project was canceled.

But don't bother asking Phil to save taxpayers money by canceling the ballroom. His feeling have been hurt. He is miffed that you aren't laying palm fronds in front of his wife as she marches forward on this project. The Bredesens both consider it an insult if you question any aspect of the project. But the truth is it is the taxpayers of Tennessee who are being insulted.

Fred Rising?

Instapundit thinks maybe so. He may be right. The Thompson campaign had to beg online and shake the bus cushions for spare change to raise about $250,000 to run commercial in Iowa, but in the last seven days - since the Fox News debate in Myrtle Beach, which virtually all observers and analysts said Fred won, hands down - his campaign has raised nearly a million dollars online.

January 12, 2008

Governor: I Like Spending Your Money.

In a moment of complete candor while announcing a $1 million state grant to help restore The Hermitage, the historic former home of Andrew Jackson, Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen admitted what he loves best about being governor:

"One of the great things about being governor is you get to take taxes away and later give it back and people are happy. Is this a great job or what?"

Exit question: What historic house is occasionally the site of the Tennessee Democratic Party's annual Jackson Day Dinner?

January 11, 2008

Thin-Skinned Phil

Tennessee's hyper-sensitively thin-skinned Gov. Phil Bredesen lashed out at Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey yesterday because Ramsey had the temerity to question the spending of more than $10 million in tax dollars to build a lavish underground party ballroom at the Governor's Mansion. WSMV reports...

Gov. Phil Bredesen criticized Republican Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey on Thursday for being the lone holdout in the Tennessee Building Commission's vote to clear the way for construction of an underground hall at the governor's mansion.

The hall is part of a $19 million project to renovate the mansion that has drawn objections from neighbors. Of that amount, about $13 million has been provided by the state. About $9 million has been raised from private donations, but only $6.4 million has been allocated.

"I was disappointed at Sen. Ramsey's remarks at the meeting today," Bredesen said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I thought they were unnecessary and inaccurate, and I think very partisan."

"I thought he was more of a standup guy than that," Bredesen said. Bredesen, a Democrat, attributed what he called partisan attacks on the project to the political climate of an election year.

A challenge to Gov. Bredesen: Demonstrate where Sen. Ramsey was inaccurate.

Ramsey said the project's cost had ballooned. It has. Ramsey said private donations collected for renovation of the existing mansion were later transferred (on paper) to pay for the underground ballroom and replaced with tax dollars. They were - and state records prove it. Ramsey questioned how the underground ballroom project could be considered a state project in order to get around local zoning control, but considered a private project being built by the 501(c)3 non-profit Tennessee Residence Foundation in order to get around the requirement that state construction projects be competitively bid. That is an accurate description of the legal gray area in which the project rests.

Stop being hyper-sensitive, Phil, when the cost to taxpayers of your wife's mansion project spiraling out of control leads to people asking questions and trying to be more fiscally responsible than you. I attended the State Building Commission meeting where Ramsey made the remarks and asked the questions that so irritated the governor. Before it took up the mansion project, the Commission zipped through a lengthy agenda of other building projects around the state, rubber-stamping most of them without asking a single question. Ramsey deserves praise for asking questions.

Rather than criticize Ramsey for doing the job he was elected to do, Phil, you ought to spend some time coming up with a plausible excuse for why it makes sense to spend more than $11 million in tax dollars on the mansion/ballroom project at the same time that the state faces a revenue shortfall and many departments face budget cuts.

Indeed, some departments already are cutting spending on vital services for some of Tennessee's most needy. The Department of Mental Retardation Services recently cut funding for support coordination, residential services, behavior services; physical, occupational and speech therapy; nursing and nutrition and personal assistance for the state's mentally retarded population by $2,479,081, of which one third, or about $800,000, is state dollars.

Priorities, Phil, priorities.

January 10, 2008

The Campaign Game

Here's a fun, free online game for political junkies. Warning: This will cause your work productivity to decline.

I Always Thought The Noise Was Coming From The Other End

Welcome to the fray. That's the last nice thing I'll say about you.

Bucking Bredesen

Bredesen's Ballroom gets some opposition from within his own party. Jimmy Naifeh can stop claiming its a partisan attack now - the opposition is bipartisan!

Update: Here's the Tennessee GOP statement on the budget-busting ballroom today.

Very Few Voters Lack Photo ID

Based on a random sample of registered voters in Indiana, Mississippi and Maryland, a new study by American University's Center for Democracy and Election Management (CDEM) finds, surprisingly, that only 1.2 percent of registered voters lack a government-issued photo ID, and more than two-thirds of all registered voters in the three states feel that the electoral system would be trusted more if people had to show an ID to vote.

The full report, Voter IDs Are Not the Problem: A Survey of Three States, is available online at http://www.american.edu/ia/cdem.

The press release itself is chock-full of data showing that voter photo ID requirements are not the evil that Democrats claim.

"In brief, the fears that ID requirements could disenfranchise many voters appear unfounded simply because almost all registered voters have photo IDs," said Professor Robert Pastor, co-director of CDEM. "Our report notes that the laws and the application of ID requirements have not been implemented uniformly and gradually, and this has fostered the impression that it is designed to disenfranchise. States could transform what was perceived as a problem into an opportunity by sending mobile units to actively register voters and provide them free photo IDs."

This week the Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments about an Indiana state law that requires a photo ID.

Opposition to voter IDs has come largely from those who fear that this requirement will disenfranchise voters who do not have IDs or would find it difficult to acquire them. But they were unable to locate a single individual in Indiana who was prevented from casting a ballot because they lacked an ID. This survey suggests why. Only 1.2 percent of registered voters in the three states surveyed lack a photo ID, and in the Indiana survey, only 0.3 percent lack a photo ID.

Sen. Kyle's Coup

State Sen. Jim Kyle wants to give the governor the power to appoint temporary replacements for sitting legislators who are "unable to fulfill the duties of that member's office." Kyle, a Memphis Democrat, has filed legislation that would authorize a sitting legislator in that scenario to voluntarily appoint their own temporary replacement, or to be involuntarily temporarily replaced by the legislature and governor.

The legislation even would give the legislature the power to prevent the elected legislator from resuming his or her duties. Here is the text of the legislation:

SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 3, Chapter 1, Part 1, is amended by adding the following as a new section thereto:

3-1-121.
(a) If any member of the general assembly is temporarily unable to perform the duties of the member's office:

(1) Such member may make a written request to be filed with the chief clerk of the house to which the member was elected that a temporary replacement be appointed until the incumbent member is able to perform the duties of that member's office, or a vacancy occurs in such office or until the next election, whichever occurs first; or

(2) Any member of the house to which the incumbent was elected may bring a resolution requesting that a temporary replacement be appointed until the incumbent member is able to perform the duties of that member's office, or a vacancy occurs in such office or until the next election, whichever occurs first.

(b) Any person serving as a temporary replacement appointed pursuant to subdivision (a)(1) shall be appointed by the incumbent member. Any person serving as a temporary replacement appointed pursuant to subdivision (a)(2) shall be appointed by the governor.

(c)(1) When the general assembly is not in session, any member who had a temporary replacement appointed and who is then able to perform the duties of office shall automatically be restored to such office upon written notice to the speaker of the appropriate house.

(2) When the general assembly is in session, any member who has a temporary replacement appointed shall file notice with the chief clerk of the appropriate house who shall inform the body that such member is now able to fulfill the duties of office and intends to return to such duties. Any member of the house to which the incumbent was elected may file an objection to such member's return within three (3) legislative days of the notice being given by the clerk. If no objection is filed, such member may return after the three (3) legislative days have passed. If an objection is filed, the incumbent member's house shall vote on whether or not to allow the member to return to the duties of the member's office. For the objection to be sustained, it shall take a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the entire membership of the incumbent member's house. A member shall not be allowed to file a notice of return more than three (3) times in a legislative session.

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to amend or repeal existing laws relating to filling vacancies in the general assembly.

Kyle wants Sen. Ford replaced, whether she wants to be forced out of office or not.

The legislation is an appaling affront to the principle of self-determination in a representative form of government, and the people of Sen. Ford's district, Senate District 29, should be highly offended at Sen. Kyle's attempt to authorize a legislative coup.

Beyond District 29, Kyle's legislation would allow partisan monkey business when the governor and the majority in the legislature were of the same party. Kyle's legislation would enable them to collude to remove legislators of the opposite party and replace them with "temporary" replacements from their own party.

The people of Senate District 29 elected Ophelia Ford and despite the fact that her health prevents her from fully participating in the senate session this year, they have not called for her to resign.

Beyond the boundaries of District 29, Tennesseans of all political stripes should be offended at Kyle's proposal. Consider this: If Kyle's legislation was law and one party controlled both the legislature and the governor's office, that legislature and governor could use Kyle's law to declare legislators of the opposite party to be "unable to perform their duties" and remove them and replace them with "temporary" replacements from the governor's political party.

Although the Ophelia Ford case involves her medical incapacitation, the legislation sets no definition of "unable to perform their duties" - presumably, the law could be invoked for any reason chosen by the majority party and governor. A future Republican legislature could declare Sen. Kyle "unable to perform" if he fell asleep during a committee hearing, and have a Republican governor replace him with a wide-awake Republican.

It's a silly example, to be sure, but it would be entirely legal if Kyle's legislation became law. (At a minimum, the legislation should allow the governor only to appoint temporary replacements for legislators from his own party, but if the member being temporarily replaced is of the opposition party, that party's House or Senate leader or party chairman should have the authority to pick the replacement.)

Kyle's legislation, thankfully, has no sponsor in the state House.

I spoke too soon. The Memphis Commercial-Appeal reports that Senate Democratic Caucus chairman Joe Haynes of Nashville and House Democratic Leader Gary Odom of Nashville both said they support the bill. Odom will sponsor it in the house.

Update: C-A reporter Rick Locker has done a write-through of the above-linked web story to include comments from Republicans and other legislators, and now Locker is reporting that Odom has not agreed to carry Kyle's legislation in the House, but is "interested in reviewing it."

Update: Here is the Chattanooga Times-Free Press reports on Kyle's legislation.

Unexcused Absence

Wednesday afternoon, a link to this story appeared on the home page of the website of The Tennessean, under the "latest news and updates" tag. A few minutes later it disappeared and, as of Thursday morning, it does not appear in the paper's current online list of Tennessee government stories. Strange.

Strike Out

Let's set the scene: There's a war on, against an enemy determined to erase Western civilization's liberty, economic system, and religious diversity and replace it with a 13th-century Islamic caliphate. The American economy upon which 300 million people depend for food, clothing, shelter and their family's future sits teetering between continuing 52 straight months of growth or sliding into a possible recession. The country has a bejillion-dollar debt and a Congress determined to spend our grandchildren's money. We're overrun with illegal immigrants because Uncle Sam can't control its borders.

So what does the Democratic Congress think it needs to do?

You guessed it! Focus the full weight of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the most powerful investigative panel in Congress, to find out whether the great baseball pitcher Roger Clemens used steroids.

What a joke. No wonder the Democrat Congress' approval rating is right down there with something else that ends in roids.

As for Clemens and steroids, I don't particularly care if he took them. Clearly there are baseball players who have used steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs. Nobody who paid any attention to baseball over the past decade or so was surprised by the Mitchell report. Nobody.

And nobody got hurt by players' use of such drugs, except the players who put themselves at considerable risk of a variety of health problems later in life by using steroids.

Baseball fans weren't hurt - they enjoyed watching the athletes, even the ones they were pretty sure were using steroids. Baseball team owners didn't get hurt - enhanced players resulted in more people buying tickets, programs, hot dogs and beer. TV ratings didn't suffer. Nobody got hurt. Nor is the future security, prosperity and liberty of America affected one iota by steroid use in baseball. Determining whether Roger Clemens is telling the truth in denying he took steroids will not make America more secure, more prosperous or more free, no matter what the answer is.

So why is the Democrat Congress wasting time on this?

Because either they don't have a clue about how to really solve real problems, or they know their preferred "solutions" - generally higher taxes, more regulation, and less emphasis on security - will get them tossed out at the next election, or they really don't want to solve problems because that would take away the issues upon which they plan to run for re-election.

Instead of hauling Clemens before Congress to hammer him with questions about performance-enhancing drugs, the Democrat Congress ought to haul themselves before the mirror and question why their own performance has been so utterly and completely dismal.

January 9, 2008

The Opposition Proves The Point

Next time some Democrat tells you that a voter photo ID law is a bad idea, send them this story:
Voter cited by opponents of Indiana's ID law registered in two states.

Update: Supreme Court appears likely to back voter ID law.

Once Indiana's photo voter ID law is upheld, it will be time for the Tennessee Democratic Party to stop thwarting efforts to enact a similar law in Tennessee.

Not an Endorsement...

This is not an endorsement of John McCain, but I thought the Arizona Senator's victory speech upon winning the New Hampshire Republican Primary was brilliant and pitch-perfect. You can read it in the extended portion of this blog entry...

U.S. Senator John McCain tonight delivered the following remarks in Nashua, New Hampshire, on his victory in the New Hampshire Primary:

Thank you.

My friends, I am past the age when I can claim the noun, "kid," no matter what adjective precedes it. But tonight we sure showed them what a comeback looks like. When the pundits declared us finished, I told them, "I'm going to New Hampshire, where the voters don't let you make their decision for them." And when they asked, "how are you going to do it? You're down in the polls. You don't have the money." I answered, "I'm going to New Hampshire, and I'm going to tell people the truth."

We came back here to this wonderful state we've come to trust and love. And we had just one strategy: to tell you what I believe. I didn't just tell you what the polls said you wanted to hear. I didn't tell you what I knew to be false. I didn't try to spin you. I just talked to the people of New Hampshire. I talked about the country we love; the many challenges we face together; and the great promise that is ours to achieve; the work that awaits us in this hour, on our watch: to defend our country from its enemies; to advance the ideals that are our greatest strength; to increase the prosperity and opportunities of all Americans and to make in our time, as each preceding American generation has, another, better world than the one we inherited.

I talked to the people of New Hampshire. I reasoned with you. I listened to you. I answered you. Sometimes, I argued with you. But I always told you the truth, as best as I can see the truth. And you did me the great honor of listening. Thank you, New Hampshire, from the bottom my heart. I am grateful and humbled and more certain than ever that before I can win your vote, I must win your respect. And I must do that by being honest with you, and then put my trust in your fairness and good judgment.

Tonight, we have taken a step, but only the first step toward repairing the broken politics of the past and restoring the trust of the American people in their government. The people of New Hampshire have told us again that they do not send us to Washington to serve our self-interest, but to serve theirs. They don't send us to fight each other for our own political ambitions; but to fight together our real enemies. They don't send us to Washington to stroke our egos; but to help them keep this beautiful, bountiful, blessed country safe, prosperous and proud. They don't send us to Washington to take more of their money, and waste it on things that add not an ounce to America's strength and prosperity; that don't help a single family realize the dreams we all dream for our children; that don't help a single displaced worker find a new job, and the security and dignity it assures them; that won't keep the promise we make to young workers that the retirement they have begun to invest in, will be there for them when they need it. They don't send us to Washington to do their job, but to do ours.

My friends, I didn't go to Washington to go along, to get along or to play it safe to serve my own interests. I went there to serve my country. And that, my friends, is just what I intend to do if I am so privileged to be elected your President.

I seek the nomination of a party that believes in the strength, industry, and goodness of the American people. We don't believe that government has all the answers, but that it should respect the rights, property and opportunities of the people to whom we are accountable. We don't believe in growing the size of government to make it easier to serve our own ambitions. But what government is expected to do, it must do with competence, resolve and wisdom. In recent years, we have lost the trust of the people, who share our principles, but doubt our own allegiance to them. I seek the nomination of our party to restore that trust; to return our party to the principles that have never failed Americans: The party of fiscal discipline, low taxes; enduring values; a strong and capable defense; that encourages the enterprise and ingenuity of individuals, businesses and families, who know best how to advance America's economy, and secure the dreams that have made us the greatest nation in history.

The work that we face in our time is great, but our opportunities greater still. In a time of war, and the terrible sacrifices it entails, the promise of a better future is not always clear. But I promise you, my friends, we face no enemy, no matter how cruel; and no challenge, no matter how daunting, greater than the courage, patriotism and determination of Americans. We are the makers of history, not its victims. And as we confront this enemy, the people privileged to serve in public office should not evade our mutual responsibility to defeat them because we are more concerned with personal or partisan ambition. Whatever the differences between us, so much more should unite us. And nothing should unite us more closely than the imperative of defeating an enemy who despises us, our values and modernity itself. We must all pull together in this critical hour and proclaim that the history of the world will not be determined by this unpardonable foe, but by the aspirations, ideals, faith and courage of free people. In this great, historic task, we will never surrender. They will.

The results of the other party's primary is uncertain at this time, but I want to congratulate all the campaigns in both parties. I salute the supporters of all the candidates who worked so hard to achieve a success tonight and who believe so passionately in the promise of their candidate. And I want to assure them that though I did not have their support, and though we may disagree from time to time on how best to advance America's interests and ideals, they have my genuine respect. For they have worked for a cause they believe is good for the country we all love, a cause greater than their self-interest.

I learned long ago that serving only oneself is a petty and unsatisfying ambition. But serve a cause greater than self-interest and you will know a happiness far more sublime than the fleeting pleasure of fame and fortune. For me that greater cause has always been my country, which I have served imperfectly for many years, but have loved without any reservation every day of my life. And however this campaign turns out -- and I am more confident tonight that it will turn out much better than once expected -- I am grateful beyond expression for the prospect that I might serve her a little while longer. That gratitude imposes on me the responsibility to do nothing in this campaign that would make our country's problems harder to solve or that would cause Americans to despair that a candidate for the highest office in the land would think so little of the honor that he would put his own interests before theirs. I take that responsibility as my most solemn trust.

So, my friends, we celebrate one victory tonight and leave for Michigan tomorrow to win another. But let us remember that our purpose is not ours alone; our success is not an end in itself. America is our cause -- yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Her greatness is our hope; her strength is our protection; her ideals our greatest treasure; her prosperity the promise we keep to our children; her goodness the hope of mankind. That is the cause of our campaign and the platform of my party, and I will stay true to it so help me God.

Thank you, New Hampshire. Thank you, my friends, and God bless you as you have blessed me. Enjoy this. You have earned it more than me. Tomorrow, we begin again.

If You Can't Dazzle 'Em With Brilliance, Baffle 'Em With...

According to press reportsTennessee First Lady Andrea Conte claimed today that the renovation of the governor's mansion - a project now approaching $20 million in total cost, including $11 million from taxpayers - will save taxpayers money in the long run because of its energy-saving features.

Will somebody please buy the governor and his wife a calculator?

The energy-saving features are expected to save $15,000 a year in utility bills, Conte told reporters as she guided them on a mansion tour today.

At $15,000 a year in savings, it will take only 733 years for taxpayers to recoup their $11 million investment. Not counting interest and inflation, of course.

Of course, the ROI would be a lot quicker if the underground ballroom addition - which has added more than $8 million to the total cost of the mansion project - was canceled.

Hillary vs. Obama: Fallout

Open Question #1: What will the coming destruction of Barack Obama by the resurgent Hillary Clinton do to the historically tight bond between the Democratic Party and the African-American community?

Discuss in the comments.

Naifeh Fuzzy on Ethics

House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh's disdain for legislative ethics requirements was on full display yesterday as he opened the 2008 session of the Tennessee General Assembly.

Under a new law passed in 2006, lawmakers are required to attend an annual ethics training session at the start of each legislative session.

Naifeh, a Covington Democrat, reminded his House colleagues that Wednesday's ethics training is mandatory, adding, "We all voted for that, for some reason." (emphasis was his own).

The ethics training requirement was part of sweeping ethics legislation passed in the wake of the Tennessee Waltz corruption sting that led to convictions of five former state lawmakers. Four of the lawmakers convicted of taking bribes were members of Jimmy Naifeh's party, so I can understand if Naifeh is repressing the memory of why the legislature voted for the ethics legislation.

In additional to publicly disparaging the ethics training session, Naifeh yesterday granted an "excused absence" to state Rep. Rob Briley, the Nashville Democrat recently convicted of drunk driving after a September crime spree in which he smashed his SUV into an occupied car in DeKalb County, then led police on a high-speed chase into Wilson County, where he eventually stopped and was arrested at gunpoint, and then vandalized the police car while ranting that the officers were "Nazis."

Briley's own disdain for ethics and propriety were on full display last year when the married lawmaker had an affair with the lobbyist for the Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association while simultaneously chairing the House Judiciary Committee which was considering high-priority legislation important to the trial lawyers.

Naifeh no doubt will call this a partisan attack, but both parties should take ethics seriously, and the people of Tennessee deserve better than to have a House Speaker who disdains ethics and coddles corrupt lawmakers.

---
TN GOP press release here.

Cincinnati Post -30-

In the mail: A package containing two copies of the final edition of The Cincinnati Post, published on Dec. 31, 2007. It's a fine final edition, with a perfect headline. I once thought about collecting final editions of dead newspapers, but it was rather difficult to get papers from cities where I knew nobody. Still, I managed to get copies of final editions of the Knoxville Journal (1991), The Richmond News Leader (1992), and The Anchorage Times (1992), and the Nashville Banner (1988). And now The Cincinnati Post.

Which reminds me, I still have more than a dozen copies left of the final edition of the Nashville Banner, published Feb. 20, 1998. I'll send one to the next 10 people who drop $50 in the PayPal tip jar... Just make sure to email me your PayPal receipt and your mailing address. Send it to bill-at-billhobbs-dot-com.

January 8, 2008

Numbers

Good budget news from the state government today: The state won't get to blow all of last year's surplus after all, and likely won't have one to blow next year either. The Tennessean puts a little different spin on it:

State programs could need $440 million in new funds in the next budget year, but the state may see just $300 million to $350 million in tax growth. The grim financial outlook was presented to the House Finance Committee today by state Finance Commissioner Dave Goetz and state Treasurer Dale Sims.

In addition, state agencies are being asked in an official letter today to hold down their costs even more as the state faces a shortfall in the current budget year that ranges from $147 million to $240 million, Goetz said.

They have until Jan. 22 to tell budget officials where they plan to trim, and they shouldn't expect to get that money back for the 2008-09 budget year. In all, state agencies are being asked to look for another $44 million in savings. Higher education and the BEP are exempt, Goetz said.

And a tight budget will force the Bredesen administration, which has spent profligately over the last few years and even raised taxes to fund a raft of new programs, to restrain its spending appetite just a bit this year.

It may even keep the administration from once again exceeding the constitutional cap on the annual growth of state spending, a cap that this year's budget would have exceeded by more than $700 million.

Meanwhile, if Gov. Bredesen is looking for a place to start the trimming, there's a $10 million state construction project planned in Oak Hill that is frivolous and unnecessary.

January 7, 2008

Up In Smoke

Today we learn from the Associated Press that the Tennessee Department of Revenue's massive law enforcement dragnet to stop Tennesseans from bringing more than 2 cartons of cigarettes across the border - presumably to evade the state's highest-in-the-region cigarette tax - has resulted in the seizure of a whopping 31,000 packs of cigarettes.

Sounds huge, right? Let's do the math. Gov. Phil Bredesen originally proposed a 40-cent per pack tax increase on cigarettes, and said it would raise $219.6 million. If you divide $219,600,000 divided by 40 cents, you come up with a figure of 549 million packs of cigarettes sold in Tennessee in a year.

Those 31,000 packs of Lucky Strikes, Marlboros and Camels represent an incredible
0.005646 percent of the total volume of cigarettes sold in Tennessee each year.

Total revenue loss to the state if those cigarettes had made it past the dragnet: $19,200.

How many millions of dollars the Bredesen adminstration is spending on stopping cigarettes at the border?

Your tax dollars, up in smoke.

Update: The AP reports that the Department of Revenue is halting its border surveillance program to catch folks bringing too many cigarettes into the state at one time. They claim the program has served its purpose of educating people that only 20 packs of smokes can be brought across state lines at one time. My guess is they ran the numbers, did the math, and realized - belatedly - that spending a few million dollars to stop the loss of $19,220 in revenue didn't make sense.

Taking On the Establishment

Another East Nashville attorney is lining up to run against state Rep. Rob Briley, the Nashville Democrat convicted of drunk driving after leading police on a dangerous high-speed chase across two counties after leaving the scene of an accident where he smashed his SUV into a car occupied by a family. That makes two attorneys now lining up to challenge Briley, himself an attorney who, it has been reported, was having an affair with the chief lobbyist for the Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association while he chaired the House Judiciary Committee and she was handling important legislation before that same committee.

The House Democratic Caucus is backing Briley.

Harbinger?

From The Tennessean's preview of the legislative session that starts tomorrow:

Other points of partisan contention will include taxes, with Republicans pushing to lower the state sales tax. Democrats, Naifeh said, have some reservations in a year when the budget is tight and the economy is stalling. "I'd like to see how to replace that with a stable source of income," he said.

January 6, 2008

It Matters Who Governs

I had the pleasure of appearing on This Week with Bob Mueller on Nashville's WKRN Channel 2 Sunday morning - actually, it was taped Friday afternoon. You can watch the segment, which also features City Paper reporter John Rodgers and Tennessee Democrat Party Chairman Gray Sasser, by clicking play.

Toward the end of the discussion, you'll notice Sasser try to tap dance away from the abortion issue as fast as he could. Why would he do that? Politics. Rather than grapple with the "difficult" issue, Sasser wants legislators to work on issues that unite people. He wants legislators to ignore "difficult" issues like abortion.

That's because pro-abortion Democrats are vulnerable on election day in many districts across this state, says former state Rep. David Fowler, now the head of Family Action of Tennessee. He explains in this lengthy piece posted at Chattanoogan.com, which also explains the urgency of Senate Joint Resolution 127. It's a pro-life piece of legislation that has passed the Senate multiple times and would very likely pass the House if Speaker Jimmy Naifeh would let it get to the floor for a vote. He won't, of course.

But a Republican Speaker would.

Pate Update

I have confirmed that the campaign-related email sent by state House Democratic Caucus press secretary Addison Pate to the members of the Davidson County delegation, which you can read here, was emailed from Pate's legislative email account.

I wasn't aware that legislative staffers were allowed to use taxpayer-funded resources to do campaign work.

800 Jobs Open in Springfield, Tennessee, For Americans and Legal Immigrants

More than a thousand illegal immigrants have high-tailed it out of Springfield, Tenn, - including 800 employed at a single factory - after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement began enforcing the law the prohibits employers from employing illegals. But Stacey Campfield is right about the headline on the paper's story, "Immigration raids hit Springfield hard." Springfield is portrayed as the victim of enforcement of the nation's laws against illegal immigration. That's backwards. Fault lies not with ICE doing its job, but with the illegal immigrants themselves, and with the employers that hired them.

Tennessean: Politicians, Blogging!

The Sunday Tennessean says, "Some elected officials aren't relying on newspapers or TV stations to report on local government - they're blogging about it. At least two local politicians are following the lead of state and national reps by setting up personal Web logs to explain hyper-local issues that only a few might care about, like a church rezoning or problems at a school."

January 5, 2008

Running Scared: House Democrat Caucus Reveals It Will Back Briley in '08 Election

An interesting email forwarded to me yesterday that originated with Addison Pate, Press Secretary for the House Democratic Caucus in the Tennessee Legislature. Pate sent the email to state Rep. Mike Turner, D-Nashville, and his staff person Carol Roberts. She forwarded the email to a long list of people, including: state Rep. Ben West Jr; state Rep. Beth Harwell; state Rep. Brenda Gilmore; state Sen. Douglas Henry; state Rep. Gary Moore; state Rep. Gary Odom; state Sen. Jack Johnson; state Rep. Janis Sontany; state Sen. Joe Haynes; state Rep. Mary Pruitt; state Rep. Rob Briley; state Rep. Sherry Jones; state Sen. Thelma Harper, and a group of legislative staffers and others.

The names in bold are Republican legislators. Roberts probably was not supposed to forward them the email, given that it is about an upcoming Davidson County Democrat Party straw poll. But that's not even the most interesting thing about this. The email itself projects an image of a party running scared. Check out the underlined parts of the email, which is included below verbatim.

Subject: FW: DCDP Straw Poll on January 15th, 2008
______________________________________________
From: Addison Pate
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 12:53 PM
To: Mike Turner; Carol Roberts
Subject: DCDP Straw Poll on January 15th, 2008

Dear Chairman Turner,

I wanted to bring to your attention an event coming up in just a few weeks that I believe could be vital to our efforts of protecting our incumbency as well as help strengthen the relationship between the Democratic Party and our members.

On Tuesday, January 15th, 2008 the Davidson County Democratic Party will be holding a Presidential Straw Poll at the Farmer's Market on 8th Avenue North. The event begins at 5:30 p.m.; with the polls opening at 6 p.m. Tickets to the event are $15 and include dinner.
I believe it would be beneficial for as many members as possible of the Davidson County Delegation attend the event in order to continue to foster goodwill and communication within the party. The bottom line: The more we outreach and connect with our local party, the less likely there are to be primary challengers.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about the event or if you would like to discuss additional ways we can strengthen our incumbency in 2008.

Sincerely,
Addison Pate

Addison Pate
Press Secretary
House Democratic Caucus
26A Legislative Plaza
Nashville, TN 37243
(615) 741-6620

Why, none other than state Rep. Rob Briley, whose recent record includes driving drunk, smashing his car into another, occupied, vehicle, trying to evade police on a lengthy high-speed chase across two counties (endangering the lives of countless other motorists along the way), and then, upon his arrest, vandalizing a police car. Oh, and then there's the little matter of Briley having an affair with the chief lobbyist for the Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association while she was lobbying the House Judiciary Committee - which Briley chaired - as it considered legislation of great interest and financial impact for the TTLA and its members.

Rep. Briley has already drawn a challenger in the upcoming Democrat primary, but the House Democrat Caucus is running so scared of losing its majority that it is backing Briley. How pathetic is that?

Metro Blames Wackenhut

The Tennessean has some potentially good news for the 337,000 Nashvillians who have been put at severe risk of being victims of identity theft by the near-total incompetence of the Davidson County Election Commission. Though, given the multiple failures of the DCEC to protect the data, I'm not at all convinced that Wackenhut deserves most or even very much of the blame...

Identity theft is a very costly crime.

According to the Identity Theft Resource Center, the average victim of identity theft spends hundreds of hours to recover from identity theft, costing them thousands of dollars in lost potential income in addition to the average $1,400 in out-of-pocket expenses to clean up the mess left by the identity thieves.

Even after the thief stops using the information, victims struggle with the impact of identity theft. That might include increased insurance or credit card fees, inability to find a job, higher interest rates and battling collection agencies and issuers who refuse to clear records despite substantiating evidence of the crime. This "tail" may continue for more than 10 years after the crime was first discovered.

The emotional impact on victims is likened to that felt by victims of more violent crime, including rape, violent assault and repeated battering. Some victims feel dirty, defiled, ashamed and embarrassed, and undeserving of assistance. Others report a split with a significant other or spouse and of being unsupported by family members.

Hillary's Burden

He ran with Al Gore, She's running with Al Batross.

Tennessee Democrats' Big Donor Goes to Prison for Fraud

Norman Hsu, a major financial benefactor of the Tennessee Democrat Party, was sentenced Friday to three years in prison for the multi-million-dollar Ponzi scheme fraud that earned him chunks of the millions he donated to Democrats across the country. The Tennessee Democrat Party