Any Democrat thinking about challenging Basar might want to start getting their ducks in a row now. He’s a nice guy (that I happen to like personally) and pretty popular in many circles…but that doesn’t mean he should go unchallenged.
I don’t live in his new district, and don’t have any plans of running in 2014. Basar clearly does. If you’re not sure that you’re in his district, you can go here. He’ll be running in District 13.
If you are in his district and interested in running, drop me a line. I have some insights that might help you.
Basar’s decision to seek re-election isn’t the worst idea to befall Shelby Co. or Tennessee. Here are some of them, from the past three days. This sample is just the tip of the iceberg…
DeBerry received $100,000 from the pro-charter, pro-voucher group Students First founded by former DC Superintendent and “education reformer” Michelle Rhee in his primary contest against former Rep. Jeanne Richardson last year.
Apparently, that was an investment well spent for the group.
Apparently, Shelby Co. Mayor Mark Luttrell doesn’t feel like he needs support from Memphians. In a Commerical Appeal article the inspections stations, mandated by an EPA agreement, and recently abandoned by the City of Memphis, will be taken over by the state rather than the County…even though the EPA now classifies the entirety of Shelby Co. a pollution problem.
The agreement with the State of Tennessee would exempt the 1/3 of Shelby Countians who live outside of Memphis from vehicle inspections for up to 6 years. Folks who live in Memphis will not only still be subject to inspections, but will also have to pay for them.
Way to take care of your largest constituency group.
Yesterday, in the State Senate, the Tennessee Scenic Vistas Protection Act died in committee thanks to no members making a motion to hear the bill. Two Democratic Senators, Ophelia Ford and Charlotte Burks were noticeably absent when the bill came up.
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Minority Caucus Chair, Lowe Finney (D-Jackson), who I have a separate beef with, is a necessary reform if we want to keep the mountains that are a signature of our Eastern Division. Kudos to Finney for carrying the bill, even if he couldn’t muster a motion.
Video of the entire debate on the bill is included below. See also: King Coal Recasts Itself as Friend of Earth After Stomping Environmentalists in Senate
State Rep. Vance Dennis (R-Savannah) thinks he has a way to stop the scourge of Obamacare in Tennessee.
Sit down sir. The moving of your mouth is exposing your ignorance.
As bad as the electoral problems have been in Shelby Co., at least we don’t have a witch hunt going on over our voting rolls (at least not on this scale).
Davidson Co. Election Commissioner Steve Abernathy has taken it upon himself to investigate the citizenship of voters in the state’s second largest county against legal advice.
He says he wants to “Save America”. From what? No reporter had the stones to ask, but one might surmise from his rhetoric he wants to “Save” it from voters who don’t vote like him.
Newscoma has a great post about local control that explores just how deep the State Legislature is willing to wrest control of local issues from local government.
I’m not sure if I’ll make this a regular series, but if you want to know what’s going on in the state on a daily basis, Subscribe to the Daily Buzz. News from around the state, in your inbox every morning.
There have been numerous reports about what’s going to happen to various locales. News outlets in Memphis have focused on the loss of two House seats and one Senate seat…something I wrote was probably going to happen back in 2009.
So while our standing in the State Legislative bodies may have been diminished, as has our percentage of the population, none of this should surprise anyone.
It also shouldn’t surprise anyone that there are a couple of Shelby Co. legislators drawn together in districts. That’s what happens when an area loses a seat or two. It is inevitable. I sympathize with those who are upset at this reality, but honestly, there’s little that can be done outside of court.
I’m not going to opine as to whether or not the districts are fair or not. Certainly, over the years since Baker v. Carr, the court case that made the state start districting based on population rather than land, there have been plenty of examples of bizarrely drawn districts passing muster. A quick look at the current maps in Shelby Co., particularly Dist. 90 as well as Dist. 83, 84, 95, 91, and 92, which run horizontally and whip and curl around in some cases, shows that shapes just don’t matter that much to the courts.
Of course, the old plan just had 6 of 16 districts in Shelby County shaped like a drawing from a blindfolded child. The proposed map has 8 of 14 districts that take a great deal of creativity to explain (84, 85, 87, 88, 90, 91, 93, & 97). That’s not to say the districts are unfair, but to say, at first glance, which is all we have, its very difficult to determine which district you might be in based on the information provided.
Maps Don’t Tell Me Anything
While its fun to look at these pretty pictures provided by the House and Senate leadership, they really don’t tell me much…except that a lot of precincts were split in the production of these maps. Anyone with an internet connection and Silverlight can draw a map if they so choose. It’s not that difficult. Translating a map from a drawing on the other hand is very difficult.
Since neither the House nor Senate saw fit to release the precinct information of the districts, all one can do is make a best guess as to what will happen should these districts be adopted. Putting out pretty maps with not so much as population data by district, tells the end user absolutely nothing except the color choices of the person drawing the map and some general ideas.
Sure, in the more rural areas its easier to determine what’s going on. Districts that include two or three counties to get to (or near) their magic number are pretty easy to analyze. Urban areas, where there are any number of existing and new lines possible (including Municipal boundaries, Precincts, Census blocks, Zip codes, etc.) are more difficult. 35 of the 99 members of the House hail from the top four largest counties in the state (Shelby, Davidson, Knox, and Hamilton). Throw in Rutherford, Williamson and Sullivan Counties and that number jumps to 44. But even those last 9 are relatively easy to determine.
Still, let’s not pretend this is transparency. It’s feigned transparency. Until some lists are released, none of this means anything. In fact, its probably more about cutting the wind out of the sails of last minute fundraisers than anything else.
There are some things that irritate me about the maps, but that’s to be expected. Lumping Sherry Jones and Mike Stewart into the same district in Nashville only to create an open seat is one of them. This isn’t unfair from a legal point of view, just dickish. I’m sure we’ve done the same thing to folks in the past. This action follows the Republican strategy of attacking the oppositions strengths and turning them into a weakness, a strategy that perhaps we might want to think about.
The same can be said of what they did in Shelby. Three of the four Representatives in Shelby Co. that were lumped together in two districts are relatively new to the body. One has been there forever. But these new folks are also pretty strong voices, whether you like them or not. There are a lot of reasons they were targeted, and one of those reasons is that they are perceived as a threat.
Its interesting to me that the Republicans in the State Senate chose to undercut their youth factor. Kerry Roberts, who worked really hard to win last year, is lumped in with Jim Summerville. I have a sneaking suspicion that one of those two men have an exit strategy. Look for an appointment announcement sometime after session.
Here in Shelby Co., Minority Leader Jim Kyle and Serial Bacon Mailer Brian Kelsey are paired up. This will leave Kyle out in the cold for at least 2 years, while we wait for the term of Kelsey to expire in 2014. I’m not sure how this impacts the “even/odd” set up of the senate districts in the future, but at the very least Senate Republicans did what they wanted to do…screw over the Minority Leader.
Its an open question as to whether or not Kyle will challenge Kelsey in 2014. Since we don’t have any real data on the makeup of the district other than a visual representation, I can only guess about the partisan makeup of the district. Pretty sure its not pretty for Kyle.
One mildly humorous thing I saw in the Senate Districts, is what I call the “visual representation of what Senate Leadership is doing to Democrats”. Its made up of Districts 19 and 21. I don’t think I need to expound on that at all but I bet some State Senators are still laughing about that one.
What Does All This Mean?
Most people don’t think twice about this stuff. I’ve said it over and over again. I’ve experienced it as I wrote about City redistricting, and as I’ve observed the County process. Most folks just don’t think about how they end up in the districts they end up in, they think about who they want to represent them from the available choices, and may bemoan those choices from time to time.
Also, because redistricting comes only once every 10 years, its easy for people to forget, or even just ignore it. For the most part, only the most politically engaged geeks even care about it. Most folks feel it doesn’t impact them, but it does. It can absolutely impact those available choices so many bemoan every two or four years.
Now that the TNGOP has had their hand at this process, there’s little doubt that they’ll do everything possible to keep it. In fact, the very act of redistricting itself probably ensures they’ll stay in power for a while…and because political considerations aren’t covered in Federal law, outside of a few exceptions, I expect the maps to stand and generally agree that most people won’t see the problems.
The big takeaway from this is that other than some maps, we really don’t know all that much more than we did before, and won’t know that much more until the thing is passed and real maps and precinct lists hit the streets. Then we’ll have a better idea of where we stand as a state.
Even without more detail, Democrats know something. They know they’ve got an uphill battle. They know that its going to stink. They also know that Republicans came into power under maps drawn by Democrats, and that all is not lost if we get our game together.
There are a lot of ideas about what that means, but I’ll save that for another post.
There are probably more, but that’s a start…
For as long as I can remember Republicans have been crying about voter fraud. Truth of the matter is, it’s not voter fraud when Republicans win, it’s only fraud when they lose because, you know, they’re not supposed to lose with all that unaccountable, unregulated corporate money flowing into the coffers of their private expenditure groups. I mean, it flies in the face of the very tenets of capitalism in their minds.
So when Republicans say we have to up the ID requirements to ensure folks like immigrants or *insert the name of group to demonize of the day* whatever aren’t voting illegally I ask what the cost is to our Republic. See, I’ve been using my photo ID for two decades to vote, so it’s no skin off my nose and it keeps me from having to carry around a voter registration card. But I recognize that I’m not like everyone else, and just because I do it, doesn’t mean that everyone else should have to.
Also, if the intent is to ensure that non-citizens don’t vote, perhaps they should check the regulations. There are all kinds of immigration documents that pass for primary identification in the process of getting an ID. All this law requires is a way to check identity, not citizenship status, voting location or anything else. So for the vast majority of folks who have an appropriate ID of any kind, this isn’t going to be that big of a deal.
But the system of laws we have aren’t set up just to protect the majority. There are laws in place, though many Republicans are loathe to admit it, to ensure minorities don’t get kicked around too bad in the legal process. In fact, those laws served Republicans well in the 100+ years that they were relegated to the minority party in this state. Kinda funny what people conveniently forget when they get just a little bit of power.
Anyway, Republicans have been beating this drum since before the 2000 election debacle that gave us 8 years of stupid. During that 8 years the Bush Administration pushed prosecutors to look for voter fraud. They didn’t find much. In fact, what they found was not some kind of big conspiracy, but mostly local yokels buying votes which one would think would fall right in to the Republicans idea of markets regulating themselves, right?
Nope, over and over again reports find that fraud committed by voters is rare. Some have even called this Republican fascination with fraud a hoax. But the real thing that just pisses them off, more than anything else is not the potential of fraud, but who is both gathering and registering to vote.
See, they know that if there are more people voting and jazzed about voting, their block will lose power at the polls. By making it harder for some to vote, like poor people, they can fight a war on two fronts: by working to get people elected that want to dismantle the social safety net, and working to ensure those who benefit from any part of that social safety net have a hard time voting. That’s also what vote caging, purges and other tactics to limit a person’s ability to vote are ultimately all about.
So yeah, there’s a pattern here, don’t get it switched.
In yesterday’s CA, Brent Leatherwood, the flack for the House GOP leadership said
“The only individuals this bill will disenfranchise are dead people whose votes should never count in elections,” he said.
That’s a good sound bite Brent, but it’s just wrong.
Did you know, the new law allows people over 65 to vote absentee without proving their identity? Yep. If you’re over 65 and you’ve got it together enough to request an absentee ballot you can have it delivered to your door, vote, and move on with your life.
Now I love this for folks over 65. In fact, I think this might be a gateway to voting by mail, which I also think is pretty awesome. However, what would stop someone from ordering an absentee ballot for someone who’s no longer alive? How does this stop dead people from voting? If anything, it makes it easier for dead people to vote…absentee anyway.
If the intent is to stop dead people from voting, perhaps Republicans in the state legislature should focus their efforts on removing dead people from the rolls. There are public records you know.
Another thing this bill doesn’t do is stop people who have moved to a neighboring county or state from voting if they’re still registered in Tennessee. Tennessee has weird laws about this. If you live somewhere else, but call Tennessee you home you can vote here. So say I moved to Olive Branch, MS, but still wanted to vote in Memphis. As long as I called Memphis home, I could do it, which means even though I’m not contributing to the tax base in Memphis in any real way I somehow can still have a say in what goes down here. Same is true if I moved t Tipton, Fayette, or any other place. The ID bill is there to verify identity, not residence.
Nope, this bill isn’t about stopping fraud, it’s about voter suppression. It’s about making sure the “right” people vote by erecting barriers to “other” people exercising their right to vote, in this case, mostly poor people.
If the Republicans who just love this bill really want to stop fraud, they should look at FINALLY implementing TVCA and real live paper ballots. But they’re not really concerned about election fraud, they’re concerned about voter fraud.
This isn’t going to stop fraud, it is a well orchestrated attempt to stop some people from voting. That’s it. Claims to the contrary don’t hold any water.
On Friday the Tri-State Defender published an article detailing just how arduous a task it is to get ANY ID in Tennessee, much less a free one.
Marred by purposefully rigged service times (they don’t start counting wait times until you get in the building, ignoring the 3 hours you spent in the scorching heat) Shelby Co.’s four Driver’s Service Centers already can’t handle the volume. Can you imagine just how much worse the service will be when people realize their vote is about to be in danger.
Further, the locations of the service centers in Shelby County aren’t really all that convenient to the populations that would most likely need to be served.
View 6340 Summer Ave in a larger map
These four service centers are supposed to be able to deal with their current volume, and the additional volume of a County of over 926,000 people. That’s ridiculous.
The fiscal note on this bill (the estimated amount it would cost the state) was supposed to be not significant. I guess they figured, as much trouble as it is to get an ID in Tennessee, no one would bother and just put up with being disenfranchised.
In an article published this morning in the Commercial Appeal, local leaders met to discuss the new law, and considering the inherent challenges of even getting ANY ID in this state they called it like it is, voter disenfranchisement.
The bill was originally intended to address the minuscule problem of voter fraud. According to the CA article, less than 1% of all ballots cast are investigated for fraud, and fewer that half of those actually lead to a conviction. Sounds like a huge problem huh? /snark
But Brent Leatherwood, flack for the Republican House leadership set up his straw man argument and let it fly:
“Even 1 percent, as we’ve seen time and again, can sway an election,” said Brent Leatherwood, communications director for the House majority. “Given that, even one incident of fraud is far too many. We want to stop that and, clearly, Democrats do not.”
Bull part one, but it gets better…
“The only individuals this bill will disenfranchise are dead people whose votes should never count in elections,” he said.
Bull part two Leatherwood.
Apparently Mr. Leatherwood wasn’t in line with all those folks who waited hours to get in the building only to wait almost another hour to get their damn ID and tell THEM this isn’t some kind of disenfranchisement.
And dead people voting is the problem? Really? You mean to tell me that the Election Commission can’t use public records to research who’s dead and who’s alive? Well that certainly restores my faith in them. Seems they’re the ones with the problems, not verifying identity.
The best part of all of this is, barring a special election after January 1, 2012, no one will even think that much about it until the Presidential Primary in March. Then a whole bunch of folks here in Memphis will be confronted with the fact that they can’t vote because they don’t have an ID. It’s not going to be pretty.
But that’s what Republicans want. They don’t want to fix government, they want to make it so difficult to interact with government that you lose hope and just sit down. When you do that, you lose, not them.
Make no mistake, it was designed to happen this way, and they’re making sure it does, to the detriment of the will of all the people.
It’s been three months since the redistricting ordinance passed on second reading. At the time of second read, there were no maps, lists of precincts, or any other information that would assist a reader, or Council member for that matter, in understanding the depth of the changes, or the potential impact those changes might have on the upcoming election for City Council. Despite this, the Council chose to move on the ordinance, to effectively give itself a cushion until the proposal could be solidified. All of this was happening under the backdrop of a challenging budget debate that, despite the beginning of a new fiscal year, may not be over yet.
While the media has finally taken up this issue in the past week, one thing that no one has talked about is the inherent problem with the process and the potential conflict of interest for Attorney Wade in crafting this proposal.
Wade represents the City Council. In fact, Wade is representing the body in several ongoing cases including the school merger case, which, due to the sheer size of the issue, must be consuming a great deal of his time. Because Wade serves at the pleasure of the Council he has a vested interest in ensuring that the body continue to retain him, which also means he has a vested interest in incumbency protection. If you don’t see the conflict of interest in this, let me help you out, his job depends on this body staying as close to the way it is as possible.
Redistricting is mandated every 10 years to ensure that the people are represented as fairly and equitably as possible. At the Federal level that means both reapportionment and redistricting. Reapportionment is what happens when a state gains or loses a seat in the US House of Representatives. Once the seats are apportioned the districts can be drawn. There are some general guidelines that govern the makeup of the districts: that they be contiguous, include “communities of interest”, respect political and geographic barriers to the greatest degree possible, be compact, as well as other criteria as defined by various state and federal laws as well as court decisions. You can read a good primer of the rules of redistricting here.
While all of these guidelines are nice, the reality is few redistricting proposals are put forward absent any intended political outcomes. That’s just not how the world works y’all. As long as self-interest exists, individuals will use their self-interest to guide their decisions to the greatest degree allowed by law, and that’s where the conflict comes in.
Because Wade serves at the pleasure of the Council and he has a vested interest in maintaining that position. When the Council’s attorney is the one conducting redistricting, the entire thing can be shielded behind the wall of attorney-client privilege, meaning no one, and I mean no one, will ever really understand the considerations made in arriving at this proposal. Further, because both the individuals sitting on the council and the person making the proposal have a vested interest in the outcome, there is the possibility of shenanigans, like “proposing” as many as seven challengers who have already started their campaigns are suddenly no longer in their intended districts. I’m not saying that’s what happened, I’m saying that’s what it looks like, and no one will ever really know one way or the other because of attorney-client privilege.
All that said, I’m realistic. Just about anyone tasked with this job would have to consider political outcomes because no one wants an unhappy customer, it’s just plain bad for business. However, had a demographer, or some other professional other than an attorney been employed, those conversations would have to be made public to some degree. Only in the attorney-client relationship is there a shield of public disclosure, and this Council has used that protection to the greatest extent possible.
In this morning’s Commercial Appeal there was an article about redistricting among other things. In it they quote Councilman Shea Flinn:
The cold reality of it is … if you’re waiting now to run against an incumbent, you’re probably too late,” said Shea Flinn, who won office for the first time in 2007 to take the Super District 9, Position 2 seat. “That’s just Politics 101. If someone is going to run for City Council, it’s just the basic rules of the game.”
He’s right. If you were waiting for redistricting to be complete to run and you’re not in yet, you’re probably screwed, unless you have unlimited funds at your disposal or you’re running for an open seat. Incumbents are rarely beaten because they have several inherent advantages: time, money, and experience. They don’t have to introduce themselves to the electorate because they already did that. Their gig is to hold their ground, which is easy to do when the challengers have such a high climb. Add into that the additional uncertainty due to questions about redistricting and you’ve got a great recipe for ensuring incumbents get elected.
The question for voters going forward is, “Is this how you want your local legislative body to operate?” What I mean by that is, are you cool with the City Council using a tactic to make it harder for you to know what’s going on or not? If you are, good on ya, you’ve got the government you wanted. If not, you need to ask yourself and your elected officials a couple of questions:
1. What is your commitment to transparency, and why did you go along with this arrangement for redistricting?
2. Did you, at any time, publicly state your concerns about the transparency of the redistricting proposal?
3. If not, why should I believe you are committed to transparency, and how will you work to make the work of the City Council more accessible?
At the end of the day, we as the people of Memphis, and the US for that matter, have to do more to hold our elected officials accountable if we want them to be truly responsive to our needs. By shielding things from the public, in this and other manners, officials can save themselves a little trouble as long as no one is paying that much attention.
You just can’t expect folks to be completely open and forthright because they ought to. It may not be in their best interest. We have to demand that level of openness, and punish those, either at the ballot box, or via donations, who seek to shield things from the public view. But that’s on us, not them. They can’t do it to us if we don’t let them. Right now, we’re letting them. If you don’t like what’s going down, and you’re not raising hell and asking questions you can point at them all day long, but there are at least three of your own fingers pointing right back at you.
If you want better government, you have to demand it. If you don’t, you get what you get.