vibinc

Karaoke Mishaps I Have Known

Steve Ross — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 15:53:00 +0000

One of my dark secrets is that I am a Karaoke whore. I don't really know what else to say about it. I just am. So, when a client suggested that the entertainment for their event might be a karaoke night I thought that, with enough booze, it could be pretty fun.

What I didn't expect was the song selection. To be honest, it's been haunting me for the past few days. I mean, there was the usual Patsy Cline, and some douchie Creedesque guy and a bunch of pop country, but there was one song that really stuck with me for it's strangeness. That song is "Behind Closed Doors", by Charlie Rich.

You may not be familiar with the song, and if you are, you know what I'm talking about. Just so we're all on the same page, here are the lyrics to the chorus.

And when we get behind closed doors
Then she lets her hair hang down
And she makes me glad that I'm a man
Oh, no-one knows what goes on behind closed doors

I don't know what that says to you, but to me it screams CREEPY.

Click the link above to read all the lyrics if you want, but I just have one question....WHY THE FUCK WOULD SOMEONE, ANYONE sing that song?

Maybe I'm missing some context, in any case, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. Now that I can post again after the "Great Blogger Clusterfuck" expect more silliness in this long suffering, dearth of media coverage they call August.

The GOP Whine Fest

Steve Ross — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:20:00 +0000

Over the past couple of days, I’ve been reading article after article about the GOP whine fest that’s going on in the House chambers right now. Essentially, this is a last ditch attempt by a small group of GOP faithful to put forth the impression that by not voting to allow additional drilling the Democratic leadership is somehow derelict. This small group of Representatives has decided that they will not leave until something is done to make their Big oil donors happy.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the hallmark of the “more of the same” offered by the GOP. We can no more drill our way out of high energy prices than we could fuck our way to virginity. It’s telling that even the White House has poo pooed the idea of a special session of Congress on energy. This is a hissy fit and that’s all. Maybe this is the GOP’s attempt at “differentiating” itself from the Bush White House. Good luck with that one!

The House GOP could be taking a tip (on the hissy fit front) from their presumptive nominee. McCain has been throwing one hissy after another about Obama’s “celebrity”, often going right to the edge of coherence. Hell, he’s acting like some of the girls on Rock of Love pouty lip out and all! Now that’s Presidential!

Will Americans fall for it? Why wouldn’t we? Since 1980 Americans have been just a wrapper and a stick away from a sucker. We want our GOP candy coated non-solution so we can go about doing things the same way we’ve been doing them all the while bitching about the way everything’s all screwed up. We won’t buy compact fluorescent bulbs because they cost too much. Turning the air up a couple of degrees makes our fat rolls stick together. Recycling means we may have to think for more than .5 seconds about what we’re throwing away, and then there’s that extra trip to the curb! Fuel efficient cars don’t pack enough punch, or have enough room for our single person, 15 mile commute from our gated community in ‘burbs. I could go on and on…

What happened to our “Can do” attitude? What happened to American ingenuity? What happened to confronting a problem head on and beating it to death with persistence and elbow grease? That’s the America that I know, not this whiny, entitled, America that John McCain and his GOP lackeys are touting.

This is our moment…our chance to take America back from the soft-serve sycophants that have been doggedly destroying American know how, for PAC donations and cushy lobbying jobs. This is an opportunity to take back a portion of a government that is supposed to be of, for, and by the people, not corporations. This is our time, to take back what is ours, enforce accountability, and once again lead the world with honor, dignity, and ingenuity instead of whining about what we’ve given up. Opportunities like this don’t come around every day, or even every four years. Don’t fall for the easy trap of reality show rhetoric that has taken over the McCain camp and the GOP at large. This campaign is too important to turn it into a High School popularity contest. We shouldn’t allow the media, or McCain, to degrade the process, and by extension, our nation, by turning it into the reality show flavor of the month.

Cashing in at MCS

Steve Ross — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 15:29:00 +0000

In an editorial over a the CA newly installed Superintendent, Kriner Cash lays out his plan to help the districts most at risk students find success. The prescription, 2000 college aged tutors.

I have to say, this is a brilliant idea. It does a lot of things; 1. It gives young people, who may have just recently left the MCS, an opportunity to immediately contribute to the community, 2. It removes the idea that has surrounded MCS, that no solutions have been offered, and 3. With the help of local foundations, it could provide an inspiration for those young tutors to pursue a career in education. We need young people who are committed to educating future generations. Cash has seized on this future need by dealing with a current need, lifting up the most at risk kids in the system.

There are other ideas that need to be explored or expanded as well. In the Little Rock School District, retired volunteers have been brought in to help strengthen basic reading and math skills in elementary school. This strategy works particularly well with younger children, who have high regard for grandparently figures.

Older students may be more resistant to older authority figures. By pairing these students with tutors only a few years their senior, you create a direct mentorship, a situation where the reward seems more direct to a population who may need more instant gratification.

While this is a good idea, it is highly dependent on financing from private foundations. College students have little time to dedicate to tutoring others without some kind of financial help, be it a stipend, or a tuition credit. Further, MCS will have to spend money to provide material support and implement standards by which the tutors can be evaluated. These steps are vitally important and should be open to public comment, and criticism by those who would contribute to the program and the community at large.

Despite a difficult start in the wake of the funding crisis, Cash has shown a good deal of leadership in suggesting this simple, but important program. How Cash implements the program will be a telling example of how he intends to run the district going forward. It’s important that he not fumble early on, lest he loose momentum, or worse, the trust of the community.

There’s still a lot to be done at MCS, and while this olive branch is a step in the right direction, there’s a lot of accountability in the district that needs to be laid down to maintain or gain the trust of Memphians. The fastest way to gain trust is to remove barriers to information. At this stage in his administration, transparency is an opportunity to shine, exposing waste or graft not associated with his new administration. The key is maintaining this openness…something that has proved difficult as administrations become more entrenched. Here’s to hoping Cash is successful, the future of the MCS, Memphis, and the Mid-South at large is counting on it.

Smearing in Absentia – The Tinker Campaign Strategy

Steve Ross — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 18:29:00 +0000

Until about a month ago, the TN-09 Congressional primary has been a quiet affair. Since Nikki Tinker’s announcement in March, she has been strangely absent, often avoiding any statement on her positions and comment to local reporters. Even so, in the past two months Tinker has demurred more often than not when asked to comment to the local press.

For the length of this campaign, Tinker has been vague when asked about her positions. In looking at her issues page, the substance is still quite thin, interesting considering that early voting has been underway for two weeks now. Clearly, Tinker feels that her positions are less important than “other issues”.

By contrast, the Cohen campaign boasts 11 major issues with subcategories on nearly every topic.

Tinker’s lackluster performance in focusing on the issues, and her self-imposed absence from commenting to the media has resulted little interest from the community, as evidenced by her low fundraising totals. Now suddenly, hours away from the closing of the polls, Tinker wants to go all in, and all ugly.

Certainly, TN-09 deserves a spirited campaign, but Tinker’s recent efforts, from the Forrest ad that premiered last week to her latest effort, using religion as a political wedge a la the Rovian tactics employed against Democrats nation wide over the past decade, paint an ugly picture of a candidate who has run out of options.

All of this is interesting considering that Tinker vowed to keep race and religion out of the campaign…

"This is not about my race, it's not about my religion. I'm concerned about where these young people are going to be 20 years from now." (Source)

Below is a transcript of the ad. I will not dignify this attack with a link, or the traffic that it would bring.

Child: Now I lay me down to sleep,
VO: Who is the real Steve Cohen anyway?
Child: I pray the Lord my soul to keep,
VO: While he’s in our churches clapping his hands and tapping his feet…
Child: If I should die before I wake,
VO: He is the only Senator who thought our kids shouldn’t be allowed to pray in school.
Child: I pray the Lord my soul to take
VO: Congressman, sometimes apologies just aren’t enough.

Based on this, and the previous ad, I guess everything is negotiable to Tinker, including her word.

A response from the Cohen Campaign is forthcoming and will be posted in a future update.

Nikki Tinker - Worst Person in the World

Steve Ross — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 01:35:00 +0000

Assassination Ain't a Joke Dude

Steve Ross — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 21:51:00 +0000

Apparently, some bonehead in Florida was charged with threatening to assassinate Barack Obama. CNN has the story.

What an asshat.

During an interview with the Secret Service, Geisel denied threatening Obama, but told agents that "if he wanted to kill Senator Obama he would simply shoot him with a sniper rifle."

He later said that comment was a joke, the agent said in the document.

I thought everyone knew the Secret Service has like, no sense of humor...

Double asshat for you sir...

Getting in a Wreck Teh Suk

Steve Ross — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 23:37:00 +0000

Today was eventful. The image you see here is my beloved 2006 Element, Jerome. He is dead due to a lady with neither insurance, nor brakes, nor common sense or decency.

Yes, we rolled 450 and killed a street light in the process. Smac wants a memorial cone in the place the street light once stood.

The lady tried to make it all about her, which is interesting considering that it was she that was at fault per the MPD.

Lots of people stopped to help me and Smac out of the car. We had to pull her through the windshield. Thank you kind Memphis people.

In other news, I pulled a petition to run for City Council, District 9, Position 1.

That is all.

Meh.

Take Ice Cream off the Menu

Steve Ross — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 13:20:00 +0000

It was turning out to be a great day. I got upgraded to First Class on the entire trip from Green Bay. We landed here in Memphis early, the cab ride to the Downtown Blue Monkey was nice. It was a beautiful day outside. Came home and got cleaned up, then headed off to the Shelby County Election Commission to pick up my petition. I was feeling good.

From there I headed back to the Downtown Monkey to pick up SMac. There was an extreme ice cream shortage that needed to be corrected, as well as some other errands. SMac's been working crazy hours the past week covering for vacations and such. We were hoping to get done with everything a little early, then head to to house for some chill time before our dinner date with Miss Dabney, in celebration of her birthday.

We loaded up the car and headed down to the ONLY grocery store within spitting distance of downtown, Miss Cordelia's. I'm still not sure why that's the only grocery store downtown, or why the city hasn't tried to get another one on the south side of downtown, or even why people would want to live so far away from a grocery store, but that's inconsequential.

We were driving down Riverside Dr., a four lane road that leads to Mud Island, the Pyramid and an on ramp for I-40, when out of nowhere we were hit on the rear quarter-panel of the vehicle. According to people who had a better vantage point of the accident than I, the back end of the car flew up in the air, then landed and sent the car into a roll. We stopped rolling probably more because of a light pole than anything else.

The whole thing was really quite surreal. I never saw the car, but heard the impact. Instinctively, I closed my eyes, but sometime between the beginning of the roll and stopping I opened and closed my eyes. Not exactly sure why.

When the car finally came to a stop, I opened my eyes to see SMac's side of the car on the ground. That left me suspended in a state that I can only compare to being suspended in mid-air by a fall arrest system...somewhat helpless. I managed to get myself unbuckled and SMac unbuckled and opened the driver side door with help from people who had witnessed the accident. I pulled myself out of the car and started trying to help SMac out. By then, witnesses had knocked the front window out and she was climbing out of the resulting hole.

What followed from there was extreme slow motion. MFD showed up on the scene, followed by a bike cop. Lots of witnesses and general onlookers, and an absolutely hysterical lady that hit us. I know she was sorry, but the drama was over the top. An hour after the accident she was still going. It wasn't her fault her brakes didn't work, even though she suspected they were faulty. She wasn't trying to hurt anyone. Really, after the first five minutes, everyone got it.

After about 30 minutes, I started to get irritated. The MPD was done with the witnesses statements, so I thought I'd ask about what they saw. "So, just how Hollywood did the crash look?", I asked. One witness, surprised by my general good humor and the very strange question answered, "I'll tell you what, it was pretty spectacular. I thought you were going to go end over end, then all of the sudden, you started rolling." Hollywood take note, my small focus group has confirmed that this is a neat looking car wreck. I suggest you use it in the next "Die Hard" film.

PawPaw showed up to give us a ride back to Midtown. We stopped at the Midtown Monkey to hug some necks and prove that we were ok to folks. About that time Butch showed up and I told him to take that damn ice cream off the menu, it's just not worth it. I don't think he got it.

Obviously, everyone's fine, though the soreness is starting to set in, and I don't have much of an appetite. Now it's insurance adjusters and car shopping, some 4 years before I had any intention of doing so.

We missed Miss Dabney's birthday, but we're gonna make it up to her at some point.

I want to thank all the people who stopped and helped, the MPD and MFD, the people who designed the roll bar on the Honda Element, all the friends who called and emailed and made sure we were ok, and anyone I missed in the process.

I still think they need to take ice cream off the menu.

Change Memphis

Steve Ross — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:08:00 +0000

I'm not much of one to pimp blogs, but this is one that I really believe in, Change Memphis the blog for Change Memphis coalition. This coalition of Mid-South Peace and Justice Center, New Path Memphis, and Concerned Memphians United is providing real information to Memphians about the charter changes that are being put on the November ballot.

This is important stuff that will affect the way government works here in the Bluff City for some time to come. Give them a look-see and get yourself educated on the issues that are going to be included on the November ballot.

Oversight, or Not?

Steve Ross — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:07:00 +0000

This morning’s CA reports that the Memphis City Council will be considering two charter proposals this afternoon for the November ballot. One proposal would give the Council the authority to approve Deputy Division Directors. The other would put contracts valued over $100,000 before the Council for approval. The Charter Commission addressed then dropped the contract proposal after former Mayor Hackett joined Mayor Herenton in opposition to the increased contract oversight. As for the appointment issue, that seems to be less of a matter of debate. Appointments How is openly discussing the qualifications of a high level appointed official in City government a bad thing? If anything, it increases the perception of openness in government and should remove some objections, such as charges of cronyism. From my perspective this is a no-brainer no matter who the Mayor is. I want qualified people in appointed positions, and I want the opportunity to go back and review that process even if I never use it. Contracts Council oversight of contracts over $100,000 creates a new problem, the possibility of gaming the system. Just how long do you think it would take for shadier vendors to split up their contracts into a series of $99,999.99 contracts? No time. The truth of the matter is that placing an arbitrary threshold on oversight is a bad idea. The second issue is the sheer volume of contracts that cross that arbitrary threshold may create a situation where other Council business is held hostage to the approval process. I would imagine that the contract that covers janitorial supplies for the city gets up near $100,000 a year. Is that really what we want the Council to be dealing with? The third issue is that none of this would allow the Council to deal with contracts that may need to be looked at. Remember this article from the 10th. Some oversight may have saved the City thousands of dollars. Fourth, contracts that deal with city owned buildings or public amenities should, without question, always be brought up before the Council for approval. This means sale and re-development of city land, management of Beale St., convention space, museums, all of that. These Yes, we need oversight, but we also have to strike a balance between the time constraints of a part-time Council as well as the civic interests of oversight and openness. Arbitrary thresholds are not the answer. The answer is complete openness that allows concerned citizens as well as Council Members easy access to information that can then be brought before the Council for further oversight. How this would look is also something that needs to be debated, however, until the question gets asked under the correct frame; that all city contracts should be open to easy public inspection and Council oversight, any specifics are just pissing in the wind.

Promises, Promises…

Steve Ross — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:38:00 +0000

You made me promises promises,
Knowing I'd believe,
Promises promises,
You knew you'd never keep – Naked Eyes

Yesterday, the Memphis City Council decided against bringing two charter proposals up for vote in the November 4th election. Some of the details can be found here.

Basically, there were two items up for a vote. One would give the Council power to approve or deny Deputy Division Directors, the other would give the Council oversight of City contracts totaling $100,000 or more.

Because the minutes of yesterday’s proceedings aren’t yet available, I’m not sure where the individual members came down on either issue, ultimately it’s not important at this point.

Appointment Oversight

On the first issue, the Council chose to take the Mayor at his word that he would provide copies of appointee’s resumes rather than put a Chartered solution that would carry no matter who the Mayor is, in front of the voters. I’m not questioning Mayor Herenton’s word at all. In fact, I see no reason why the Mayor wouldn’t do this, if for no other reason, to remove allegations of cronyism. I’m questioning the logic of a verbal contract that would cease to exist under a new administration rather than a charter amendment that would mandate more oversight.

On this particular matter, there is a great deal of opportunity for cronyism in this and future administrations. Mandating oversight protects the citizens of Memphis from paying for an unqualified person both during the course of the administration in question, and later through pensions, etc. This particular question needs to be brought back up and put before the people. Aside from more work for the Council, I don’t see a down side, though I’m sure someone will provide one for me.

Contracts

The second question is more complicated. This measure would have mandated that the City Council approve contracts valued greater than $100,000. This measure was also set aside in favor of a future resolution that would require the Mayor to provide a quarterly report of contracts over $100,000, recurring contracts, and contracts exceeding 5 years. This future resolution has the potential to be more comprehensive than the question that would have been put before voters, but suffers from many of the same problems.

Problem 1 - Gaming the System: Just how long do you think it would take for vendors seeking no oversight to split up their contracts into a series of $99,999.99 contracts? No time. The truth of the matter is that placing an arbitrary threshold on oversight is a bad idea.

Problem 2 – Volume: The sheer volume of contracts that cross that arbitrary threshold may create a situation where other Council business is held hostage to the approval process. I would imagine that the contract that covers janitorial supplies for the city gets up near $100,000 a year. Is that really what we want the Council to be dealing with?

Problem 3 – Real Oversight: This proposal doesn’t allow the Council to address smaller contracts that may need to be reviewed. Remember this article from the 10th. Some oversight may have saved the City thousands of dollars.

Yes, we need oversight, but we also have to strike a balance between the time constraints of a part-time Council as well as the civic interests of oversight and openness. Arbitrary thresholds are not the answer. The answer is complete openness that allows concerned citizens as well as Council Members easy access to information that can then be brought before the Council for further oversight. How this would look is also something that needs to be debated, however, until the question gets asked under the correct frame; that all city contracts should be open to easy public inspection and Council oversight, any specifics are just pissing in the wind.

And now for your listening pleasure, the song I quoted above…

District 9, Position 1 - Who's in and Who's Out

Steve Ross — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:42:00 +0000

Filed Petitions (Alpha by date filed)
Kemp Conrad, Jimmy Ogle, Mary Wilder, Lester Lit, Arnett Montague III, Richard Stringer, Regina Morrison Newman

Pulled But Not Filed - Deadline to File Thursday, August 21, 2008 12:00PM
Maria Newman, Brian Stephens, Mike Karel, Nicholas Ayers, Steve Ross, Antonio Parkinson, John Willingham

People We Know Won't Be Running
Steve Ross - More on that later...
Carol Chumney - The text of her statement follows (ht LWC)

As you know, I've been devoted to serving Memphis for over 17 years. I will always be grateful for the public's confidence by electing me 7 times as State Representative and 1 time as City Council member, District 5. It was a true honor and will always mean a lot to me.

I put my 17 year career in public service on the line to run for Mayor of Memphis last year because I believe strongly that we can do better in this city. I stand by that decision.

I'm glad to see several good candidates pulling petitions to run for the soon to be vacant City Council At-Large District who can continue to bring needed reforms to the Council. It's good to have some new faces with new ideas on how to make Memphis better.

I thank the many supporters who have called asking me to run for that position. I've had calls from the press and media, and am making this statement in response to those questions.

After prayerful consideration, I have decided not to run for the vacant City Council seat.

I do love and want to serve the people of Memphis, and very much want to be part of bringing the change we need. When the right opportunity presents itself for public service, I'll be ready to again offer my 17 years of state and local government experience, my platform of positive change, my passion, drive and dedication to making this a world-class city, for consideration by the voters.

In the meantime, I'll continue my 21 year private practice as an attorney, volunteering in the community, and spending time with my family and friends.

Why I’m Not Running

Steve Ross — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:32:00 +0000

I’ve been avoiding this post for a week now.

Even though I pulled a petition for City Council District 9, Position 1, I’m not running. This decision came with a lot of hand wringing and hair pulling. While I would like to put the blame on the recent wreck I had, that only played a partial role.

The truth of the matter is, the suddenness of the race, the shortened time frame, the money required, and my travel schedule, all conspired against any hope of a run. Two months is a short time to come from nowhere with no money and half the time on the road. If I had won the lottery or had a mysterious rich uncle, maybe, unfortunately, I don’t.

It was an interesting exercise, even though I probably did everything backwards. I was told over and over that local races are about name recognition first, positions second. I don’t doubt that this is true, but it’s kind of sad.

Over the next few days, while we wait for the Olympics to end, and the newsies to get back from their August slumber, I may publish some of the positions I worked out just for fun. Maybe it’ll inspire someone to take them on, or maybe it’ll be an opportunity for people to point and laugh. In any case, it was a fun exercise and something I’d like to do again. Next time, I’ll stay in.

- Steve Ross

Meet Your Candidates!

Steve Ross — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:18:00 +0000

The filing deadline has passed, and even though we still have a week for people to change their minds (pull out), here are the candidates that have qualified for the ballot. These names started out in a particular order, but ended up all crazy. Order should not be taken as any kind of endorsement or anything else, it just is what it is.

First, lets look as some familiar faces…

Kemp Conrad – Probably the strongest of the “losers” from last year’s election. Conrad lost to Shea Flinn, mostly because he and Joe Saino split the conservative vote. Despite that split, Conrad won one third of the precincts, and came in a close second in nearly every other. 9-2, like 9-3 was a crowded field with no one garnering more that 31% in either contest. If Conrad doesn’t have a challenger on the right, he could take this thing.

Mary Wilder – After last year’s campaign, Wilder was reviled by many, including myself, for “losing runner up Desi Franklin the race”. Whether this is, or is not the case is inconsequential…it’s another year, and another election, time to move on. Wilder’s third place finish in the 9-3 race was somewhat stronger that it appeared at first blush, but will still need a lot of improvement to win. The name recognition that last year’s contest brings may put her within striking distance.

Lester Lit – Lester had an interesting campaign tactic last year. Basically, he implored people who couldn’t vote for his campaign to vote for Desi or Mary. It didn’t work; Lit came in 4th place and neither Desi, nor Mary won. If the ballot ends up looking like it does now, we could have a repeat of that very race on our hands.

Regina Morrison Newman – In 2006 Regina came in second in a crowded field of candidates for General Sessions Judge. In that race, her vote total was greater than any of the 3 previously mentioned candidates. I know, apples and oranges… Still, if her name recognition hasn’t faded from memory in two years, it puts her in a stronger position than this stacked ballot may indicate.

Brian Stephens – Competing against a crowded field in Council District 2, Stephens looked strong. He came in second in the general, sending the race into a run-off. Turn-out, which was low, ultimately decided the fate of Stephens, but the contacts he made, and his strong endorsement from Coalition for a Better Memphis have had people talking since last year.

Antonio Parkinson – “2-Shay”, the 3rd place finisher in the race for District 1, Parkinson made a name for himself. To be honest, I don’t remember anything about him but the “2-Shay” part, but name recognition’s a big part of this game, so he’s got a good start.

John Willingham – Everyone’s favorite grumpy old man of Memphis politics. An election without Willingham on the ballot is like a day without sunshine. Willingham may have only received less than 1% of the vote in last year’s Mayoral race, but that’s 1% he can take off Conrad’s total, so I’m all for it!

Paul Shaffer – Business manager of the IBEW, so we can assume he has the support of labor. Not sure how that translates to votes in the more conservative areas of District 9, but stranger things have, and do, happen…almost daily. Shaffer ran for the Charter Commission, position 6 in 2006 and came in 5th.

There are some newish faces here too. To my limited knowledge, none of these people have run for anything. That doesn’t mean they haven’t, that just means I don’t know about it.

Jim Ogle – The VP of Operations for the Erickson Group recently led a Tour of Downtown Manhole Covers. Interesting platform sir!

Richard Stringer – He retired last year from his long time business. This year, he’s “re-fired” throwing his hat into the ring. Yeah, I know it was cheesy, I’m running out of material here.

Arnett Montague III – If you’re reading, email me with some info, you’re a ghost on the Tubes.

Obviously, there’s a week before the last date to withdraw. I’m sure some of these people will choose to defer, but I’m willing to put some money on some surprise hold-outs. One thing’s for sure, I doubt it will be boring.

Also check out the article from this morning’s CA.

The Second Chance Club

Steve Ross — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:57:00 +0000

I’ve never taken the time to hang out at the Election Commission right around the filing deadline, but I did today. Not only was it educational, but drama filled.

I’m calling this race “The Second Chance Club”. Five former candidates for City Council; Conrad, Lit, Parkinson, Stephens, and Wilder, none of whom should come as a surprise to anyone. There are several other familiar faces as I noted in my previous post, The John Willingham Experience™, and then a few newcomers.

Of all the candidates, Conrad, Lit, Newman, Wilder, and The John Willingham Experience™ have run races that are larger than a single City Council district. That’s potentially a big advantage. Still, none of them won. The lessons learned from that experience are the key to victory. I predict that doing it the way it’s always been done will not be enough to win with the shortened campaign calendar, and that bags of money will be thrown at this from the right like they’re trying to put out a fire (that how Republicans put out fires, right?).

Stephens ran a really good race that landed him in 2nd place in District 2. By some accounts, Stephens never really stopped campaigning. Further, there are rumblings by some Democrats that they may support Stephens. I’ll let them out themselves, but if this is the case it will hurt Wilder and Newman the most.

Right after the John Willingham Experience™ filed he sought out Memphis Daily News reporter Bill Dries to tell his tale. In the article Dries quotes Willingham as saying

“I’m running because of Kemp Conrad,”

The discussion, which was happening nearby, went a good deal longer than that, but that was the gist of his comments. As the article notes, Conrad was standing about 40 feet away. It was hard to maintain any level of decorum. Really, it was funny as hell.

Before the bluster of grumpiness that is The John Willingham Experience™ there were rumblings of Sidney Chism’s support of Antonio “2-Shay” Parkinson. I can’t say for sure, but considering the depth of the field on the left side of the ballot and the demographic breakdown of District 9, it would take a far deeper field on the right for “2-Shay” to have “A Chance”. It’s too early to call for anyone to withdraw, but right now, besides The John Willingham Experience™, I think he’s least likely to win.

In the comments of my earlier post, there’s already been the obligatory allegation of Uptonian influence in Mary Wilder’s decision to join the campaign. I can’t say one way or the other, but considering how fervently Upton defended Wilder’s campaign from charges of ballot stacking it would be hard to believe that he doesn’t support her.

Ultimately, this isn’t about David Upton, it’s about Mary Wilder. Wilder should be judged on her merits as a candidate and potential Council Member, not on personal feelings some may have about her supporters. Wilder has to distinguish herself outside of her base of support in order to win. That’s a tall order considering the shortened time frame, the money required to stay competitive, and her previous outings in last year’s election and the 2006 Charter Commission District 5 election where she lost by 12,000 votes to Joe Brown Jr. You know what they say, three strikes and you’re out!

Other candidates on the left side of the ledger have been contacted about the possibility of withdrawing and rallying behind a consensus candidate. This is the natural order of things. I don’t have any specifics yet, but it would do everyone some good to spend some time researching the past campaigns of their opposition. Strengths and weakness can be revealed very quickly, with very little digging.

From my end, who I ultimately choose to support will come from two things, positions and electability, in that order. This may be a “popularity contest” as those who cautioned me about getting in described it, but for my support, for whatever that’s worth, you gotta have substance.

I’m waiting, and if you don’t have my email, click my profile to the right, it’s right there.

Changing the Charter - Updated

Steve Ross — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:19:00 +0000

Update: New information about Instant Run-off Voting below that section...

Last night, the Memphis Charter Commission wrapped up it’s business before the November 4th election. The Commission is proposing 6 changes on a range of topics. If you want to read the specific language that was adopted, go to the ChangeMemphis site and click on the items to the right of the main column.

MLGW – MLGW is this community’s greatest asset. People here in Memphis don’t know just how good they have it. When I lived in Little Rock I got 3 bills for utilities; Water, Gas and Electric. For my 600 sf ,1br apartment in Little Rock, these bills could add up to $150 - $200. Mind you, during that time I was on the road 225 days a year, and always turned everything off. That’s a lot.

In the 4 and a half years that I’ve lived in Memphis, my utilities bills have averaged 20%-30% less than the ones I had in Little Rock, plus it’s one bill. This is a huge advantage for Memphis. Anyone who thinks selling MLGW is a good idea is nuts. I’m glad to see this on the ballot, and support it fully. I only wish that they had included other assets that shouldn’t be sold off willy nilly to developers…the Fairgrounds and Pyramid come immediately to mind. Maybe next time.

Mayoral Vacancy – This would straighten up the Mayoral Succession problem that Memphis has lived with for some time. Basically, if the Mayor quits or dies, or in any other way vacates the office, it gives the City more time to schedule an election (up to 180 days) and provides for the City Council Chair to become interim Mayor until a new Mayor is elected. Really, this is a no-brainer.

Ethics Amendment – This proposal is probably in direct response to the corruption charges that haunted City Government last year. The amendment states that “Any elected or appointed official charged with official malfeasance shall be suspended with pay pending resolution of the charge.” Simple and easy. Another no-brainer.

Staggered Terms – Under the terms of this proposal we would vote for the entire City Council, Mayor, and other elected city officials in 2011. Then in 2012 we would vote again for districts 1-7 for a 4 year term. In 2014 we vote for the 6 Super District seats, Mayor and other elected city officials for a four year term. Wash, rinse and repeat.

This is smart. Setting our municipal races with normal federal elections is a good idea to keep turnout high. There will need to be a good deal of voter education, to ensure they actually vote the entire ballot, but the savings to the City will pay off in the future.

Instant Run-Off Voting – This is an idea whose time has come. Basically, on City elections voters will rank their choices. If no one gets a majority of the vote, the lowest person in the results is taken off the ballot, and those who voted for him get their second choice. This process continues until someone gets 50%+1. The result is one election and a whole lot of money saved for the city in limiting special and run-off elections.

It may take a little voter education to get people to embrace this idea, but the technology is out there to make this easy. It will be interesting to see how Memphians react to this amendment.

Update: Brad at ChangeMemphis sent this information about IRV

Sadly, the implimentation of Instant Runoff Voting would NOT effect the plurality rules system used in Mayoral or Super district elections. I will see to it that this is explained on the website.

I'm not sure about the rationale for this, but I've asked the question and will post the information as soon as I have it.

Term Limits – By and large, I’m not a big fan of Term Limits. When Term Limits were instituted in Arkansas back in the 90’s, it turned the State House into a sideshow. People like Jim Bob Duggar got elected and took the opportunity to introduce some 12 bills criminalizing abortion in the State House. None of them got far, but it was really over the top.

Another indictment of Term Limits is that it arbitrarily turns away good leaders. If people think someone sucks, they should put them out in the next election.

Finally, this amendment will not stop people from running in a single member district, then once term limited in that district they could run for a super seat. If staggered terms are approved, it would give us 2 years without that individual, but that’s little comfort. I’m on the fence with this one, until someone comes up with a really good argument. Just wanting troubling people out after a specific period of time isn’t good enough.

That’s all folks! The Memphis Charter Commission is planning a 3pm presser to answer questions and officially announce and answer questions about the amendments.

The Veep-Stakes Fiasco

Steve Ross — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:40:00 +0000

Ok, this is starting to irritate me. All the speculation, the wall to wall TV coverage, the waiting. I understand trying to dominate news cycles, but this is bordering on stupid.

Technically, it's not Obama's fault. He's just using the media's flaws to his advantage. This is really a good thing. One has to wonder how long they will allow this to go on.

I disagree with the conventional wisdom. I don't think Veeps necessarily bring much to the table. You can't guarantee that their state will come, once they're in office they're forgotten, except for Darth Cheney. All in all I'm just not loving it.

As for the people supposedly on the short list, I'm not too thrilled.

Biden - I like Biden ok, but he's a media whore. He got no traction in the Presidential race, and I don't know how he helps Obama in anything other than some Foreign Policy stuff. Even still, I'm not sure that he really helps anyone at all. In short, Joe Biden is all about Joe Biden and that bothers me.

Bayh - Bayh is my least favorite of the current media frontrunners. Really, I don't know where to start except that I don't like him at all.

Kaine - The current Governor of Virginia is anti-choice. Way to win over Democratic women! For Coal, there go the environmentalists...ugh, please say it ain't so.

Kathleen Sebelius - She's been mentioned less and less over the past few weeks. I think her lackluster performance in the SOTU response is partially to blame. Too vanilla in my view.

Others who haven't been mentioned in a while...

Bill Richardson - I like him, but he's a loose cannon. No one knows what will come out of his mouth. He's good on the Foreign Policy though, and as a former Governor from a western state it could be a real possibility.

Tom Daschle - Ummm, no. Really, just no

Chris Dodd - If it's Dodd, I'm cool with that. No one's been talking about him, and I don't think it's likely, but weirder things have happened.

And finally...

Hillary Clinton - I just about don't see how this could happen, but it would shut up the "protesters" at the convention. They weren't going to vote D anyway. They're just mad that their Right Wing Attack Machine had to retool after spending all that time coming up with material. Hillary would be alright, so long as she and Bill stay on message.

Now that I've helped make the situation worse, I think it's time for some breakfast.

More Second Chance Club – Past Performance

Steve Ross — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 04:17:00 +0000

For the purposes of this post, we’re going to look at the three candidates that ran in Super Districts last year. These three just did it, and with Election Day just over a year from the last contest they ran, this can be an inside look at their strengths and weaknesses.

To get a more complete picture of support base, I looked at the precinct-by-precinct totals of each contest. These are located here. The precinct-by-precinct totals for Districts 9-2 and 9-3 can be found on pages 561-640. It’s a long and inefficiently laid out document that I had to print to read, but it’s data.

Since I like picking on him so much, we’ll start with Kemp Conrad.

Kemp Conrad

Conrad is strong in all the areas that one would suspect, east Memphis and Cordova. In last year’s election Joe Saino played spoiler. Had Saino stayed out of the race Conrad could have won.

In this year’s race, Conrad has more opposition but it is spread across the spectrum.

Brian Stephens has the potential to take a good deal of Conrad’s support, particularly in Cordova. Further his marginal support by some east Memphis Democrats won’t necessarily hurt a leftist candidate as much as the possibility of losing Cordova.

The John Willingham Experience™ may have only garnered less that .75% of the vote in last year’s mayoral race, but he’s got a bone to pick and plenty of money to pick it with. I suspect he’ll run an “Anybody but Kemp” style race. This will, far and away, be the most entertaining part of the race.

For Conrad, getting hammered from the left and the right is going to make life a little more difficult. He may have his substantial wealth to fund his campaign, but if he gets hit early and often enough he may just get punch drunk enough to screw up. Right now that’s the best strategy to defeat him.

Below is a map detailing the precincts that Conrad carried. He ran strong in many others, but these are the ones he won outright. I know they’re not as pretty as Polar Donkey’s, but it’s all I have right now. If nothing else, it illustrates the areas that Stephens and The John Willingham Experience™ need to target to take him down a notch.

Lester Lit

To be honest with you, I’m not sure what Lit expects to accomplish by running. Sure, he has plenty of money, name recognition and friends to mount a campaign, but his last outing left much to be desired. Everyone may like Lester as a person, but I’m not sure if that applies as a candidate.

Last year he placed 4th behind Hedgepeth, Frankin, and Wilder, in that order. His core base of support is concentrated in just 3 precincts, though he drew well from other areas. Lit draws from both sides of the spectrum, so knowing just how steadfast his support is, or where they would fall if he withdrew, will be hard to figure. His withdrawal from the race seems unlikely, but if he did, three precincts with some of the highest voter turnout (3.6% of the total vote but only 2.8% of precincts) would be up for grabs.

Tread lightly on Lester. If he stays in, he might be able to siphon off support from Conrad. If he gets out, he could be an effective advocate for Newman or Wilder.

Mary Wilder

Mary Wilder’s decision to run again is, on one level surprising. Conversations with some of her more fervent supporters after last year’s election gave the impression that she amassed a good deal of debt to achieve her third place finish in the District 9 Position 3 race. To be honest, I haven’t had the chance to check disclosures, so I can neither confirm nor deny that. If this is true, it could hamper her prospects. As I said the other day, traditional campaigning will not be enough to win this one, lots of money will need to be spent on TV and other media to overcome with the shortened time frame.

From a campaign standpoint, there seemed to be a distinct lack of presence on major corridors throughout the district and at early voting polling stations. 9 is large district, and sticking to traditional support areas just plain isn’t enough. This may be perception versus reality, but while her signs were distinctive, I don’t remember seeing many of them around.

There were some bright spots. Wilder won precincts, as noted on the image below, in and around the Volentine-Evergreen District, as well as several others. Unfortunately, her margin of victory was never more that 45 votes over the second place finish in any one district. Further, these districts accounted for less than 20% of the total vote (18.5%) on this race. Now certainly, this math is a bit fuzzy, but in order for Wilder to win the race, she has to win in her area by a lot more than the 40ish votes she bested Desi Franklin by in her home precinct, as well as pick up some key support throughout the district to push her over the top.

Okay, these are the three people who ran for Super-Districts. Unfortunately, using any data on Stephens in 2 or “2-Shay” in 1 is scientifically flawed. They ran for those districts, not the whole enchilada. Information garnered may show signs of strength, but are not necessarily indicative of how they would draw in all of 9. As for Newman and Shaffer, none of the detail of their races from 2006 is available on the Election Commission site at this time. I’m working on getting that data as well as financial disclosures, but until I return from Seattle, and get to the Election Commission, this is what I’ve got.

Have a Bidenrific weekend!

So Pundits, Where are the Fireworks?

Steve Ross — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:30:00 +0000

I'm listening to the roll call on CSPAN online. We're up to Montana at this point. So far, the only fireworks have been the surprise unanimous allottment of delegates from Arkansas to Barack Obama. I'll write more in a few...

Update 6:30: Okay pundits, I know that you're not going to have anything to talk about once this happens, but if you think Bill Clinton will deliver anything less that a barn burner, enthusiastically endorsing Obama, and beating the hell out of McCain and Bush, you're high. Drop the disunity bullshit, and start talking about policy. I know, it's harder. Stop being punks and do your job!

Update 6:16: Ya didn't have to tell anyone! Apparently Arkansas' unanimity was a clerical error.

Update 5:50: Hillary moves to suspend vote, and blahdy blahdy blah. Where's your divided party now MSM? SUCKIT!

Update 5:40: Yeah, way to gin up some conflict MSM. Punks! New Hampshire just gave all their delegates to Obama, even though Clinton won the state. Not to be outdone, so did Jersey...

The Crowd Thins, the Plot Thickens - Updatedx2

Steve Ross — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 11:52:00 +0000

Update 3:10PM: So I go out to run some errands and what happens? Lit and Parkinson get out, as did Ogle. Now it's a four man race, Kemp Conrad, The John Willingham Experience™, Paul Shaffer, and Arnett Montague III. Memphis Democrats, it's time to get behind Paul. I hope to have more soon.

Update 9:18am: Just got an email that Mary Wilder has withdrawn from the race. This is very surprising, but considering the mountain of cash she faced, a very good move on her part. The original text of this post follows.

As reported in this morning's CA, three people have decided to drop out of the City Council District 9 Seat 1 race; Brian Stephens, the second place finisher from District 2, Regina Morrison Newman, and Robert Stringer. This brings the count down to 8, but only 4 or 5 candidates will probably bring anything to the table.

There are rumors flying around that some of these candidates will spend a couple hundred thousand bucks to get elected. In order to stay competitive, the following 5 are either going to have to rob a bank, win the lottery, find that long lost rich uncle, mortgage their homes, tap into the bags of money they've been hiding all these years, or run an absolutely brilliant campaign with no mistakes, sleep, food, and probably a bunch of other necessities.

Here's the list, in order of Money to burn:

1. Kemp Conrad - I've heard he's putting his house up to pay for the campaign. Watch out for shady lenders Kemp! I'm working on something really entertaining to call the former chair of the Shelby County Republican party, but I'm waiting for the censors in DC to clear it. Damnable bureaucracy! In the meantime, here's his questionnaire from last year's race, courtesy of The Coalition for a Better Memphis

2. The John Willingham Experience™ - Who loves ya baby? You know he has bags of money, that's all well and good, but The John Willingham Experience™ has something even better, a true, deep, resentment for Kemp Conrad. Hate may be too strong a word, but you get the distinct feeling that The John Willingham Experience™ would rather not trifle with the likes of Mr. Conrad. Hit him hard and over and over! The John Willingham Experience™ did return a questionnaire in last year's Mayoral race, so have at it, if you aren't just following him to watch him beat Conrad bloody.

3. Lester Lit - The other day I said I didn't know why Lit was in the race. Since then, I've come to the conclusion that Lester just really wants to win. He really really wants to win, like, really bad wants to. Looking at his handwritten answers to last years' questions, he may not be a bad choice. He'd be a helluva lot better than the first two jokers mentioned. I'm sure he'll join The John Willingham Experience™ in taking some of the shine off Mr. Conrad, and I hope to be in the general vicinity when that happens.

4. Mary Wilder - She may be fourth in the money race, but don't let that fool ya. The top three guys have A LOT of cash to throw around, I'm not sure Mary does. Money is important in politics but policy is what it's all about...unless you're up against a WHOLE LOT OF MONEY, then no one gives a shit what you think. This is the candidate that would have to run that "absolutely brilliant campaign with no mistakes, sleep, food, and probably a bunch of other necessities".

5. Antonio "2-Shay" Parkinson - I know you're in Denver, and aren't going to withdraw, but you should at least think about just sitting this one out, or campaigning with someone who has a chance. I agree that it's wrong that, between all the frontrunners almost a quarter a million dollars will be blown on a race for a job that pays about $30k, in a city that has declining wages and rampant poverty. I'm with ya on that one. Seriously, it's beyond criminal. But you have a lot of potential, and you shouldn't blow it on this one. Here's your questionnaire from last year. I don't know what else to say.

6-8. I don't know about Montague or Ogle. Shaffer doesn't have piles or money hanging around. I'm withholding any rankings from this point down, because, well, what's the point? (No offense intended guys). The timeframe for this race is so short that fundraising will be nearly impossible, counting out both money and time for these guys. Ideas are great, but they don't put food on the table, unless you invent something that's really cool and have enough money and time to promote it...get where I'm going here? Yeah.

Democrats of Memphis, it's time to pick your consensus candidate if you want to win. I'm taking nominations at this time. You know what they say, " a house divided ensures some Republican punk from east Memphis wins".

City Council Race Comes into Focus

Steve Ross — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:29:00 +0000

Well, it's been an interesting day, and I missed the best part. As I noted this morning several people dropped out leaving the field at four: Kemp Conrad, The John Willingham Experience™, IBEW BA, Paul Shaffer, and Arnett Montague III.

This is the opportunity we longed for last year in the District 9 Position 3 race, one Democrat against a divided Republican field. The only way this could have been better is if Stephens could have stayed in and only drawn support from Conrad. As it stands right now, the math has shifted dramatically in Shaffer's favor.

Despite all this "feel good" there's a good bit of work ahead. Money is going to be a big issue in this campaign. Shaffer will be fighting for name recognition against two well known, well funded opponents. Boots on the ground are going to be critical, both canvassing neighborhoods, and outside the polls. People don't volunteer for City candidates in the same numbers that they do for State and Federal races, but this one is so close to home and so important for our future. We need to get out there and make it happen.

Congratulations Paul, and thank you to all the people who worked together to thin the field and make this possible. As Holt says over at WTL

Let's come together and elect a great labor leader to the City Council!

Pre Speech Feel Good Friday Post

Steve Ross — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:26:00 +0000

I'm planning on sleeping in tomorrow, so in honor of Stevie's appearance at the Convention tonight, here's one of my favorite songs by Stevie...

Playing for the PUMA's - Updated

Steve Ross — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:51:00 +0000

Update: Older Updates are below. I just found this article from a native Alaskan about Palin. Go check it out.

Since I slept in late, I haven't had a chance to write about Obama's amazing speech last night. Just moments ago, I was awakened by the screeching of Pat Buchanan about John McCain's selection of Alaska Governor Sara Palin.

This is an interesting move on several fronts. First, Palin is from a small state, whose Republican Party is in disarray, between the investigations of Senator Ted Stevens and Representative Don Young. Second, Palin is under investigation herself, as noted in this post from Talking Points Memo. Third, and what will be the most talked about by the MSM, is the bald faced play for PUMA's, angry that Hillary was not selected, and ready to vote for McCain because of it. If he solidifies the PUMA base, he's on tap to win states he already held by a margin that's 20-30 votes greater.

This is a poke in the eye to some Clinton supporters, fresh off their new found unity. I don't have much more to say about this right now, but if I were going to try and steal Obama's thunder, I think this pick would do it.

Now, WWELD?

Update 12:25PM: Sara Palin on CNBC questioning what the VP actually does (2:00 in) (h/t JohnnyNYC

Palin: "[A]s for that V.P. talk all the time, I’ll tell you, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the V.P. does every day? I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. We want to make sure that that V.P .slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here for the rest of the U.S., before I can even start addressing that question."

Governor Palin, I suggest you figure out what the Office of Vice President does, and quick. This sounds like an ad to me! I can't believe that the McCain campaign didn't see this as a negative.

First read has three articles about Palin up at this time: Pro's and Con's, Reaction, and Praises Obama's Energy Plan.

Once the draft or a video of her speech is up, I will post it here.

Text of Speech

Video. Palin starts talking around 10:50.

Media Culture Wars

Steve Ross — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 04:37:00 +0000

Roger Simon over at The Politico apologizes for being meansies to Palin.

Give it a look.

Change Republican Style

Steve Ross — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 14:34:00 +0000

I watched as much as I could stomach of the speeches at the Republican National Convention. Admittedly, I didn’t watch as much as I probably should have, because some of the speakers make my skin crawl.

I listened to Giuliani, and Huckabee and Fred Thompson. I caught most of Sara Palin’s Speech that sounded like a Mad Lib Mix-up of past Republican speeches. Last night I’d had enough and chose football over convention coverage. Then came McCain. I listened to the whole damn thing, and still don’t know anything about what he wants to do except “change too” and that he’ll fight me.

Change is something anyone can agree to as long as that change is ill defined, or something environmental that does little to nothing. Speaker after speaker harkened back to the ideas of the Reagan years. Over and over the attendees were peppered with old ideas, old skewed reality, old logical fallacies, and outright lies. Apparently, Republican change is something that means a new person dolling out the favors. I guess that’s the easiest kind of change to accomplish.

As a person who makes a living doing events such as these, though with a decidedly smaller audience (the media doesn’t usually dedicate 4 days of broadcast time to my events), the Republican Convention lacked cohesion with the message of the candidate whose message is less about us and more about him (Maverick, POW, etc.). This event was homage to the past, thrown for a guy that has occasionally stuck his finger in the eye of the establishment dead set on maintaining that past. Seriously, the Kool-Aid must have been strong in St. Paul.

McCain will get a slight popularity bump from the coverage, but in the end people need to ask themselves if they learned anything more about his campaign than they new before…that he’s a Maverick, a former POW, and dislikes the status quo so much that he hopes to be the one to help maintain it.

Now I need a shower, because even talking about this has made me feel dirty.

Joementum to Educate Palin

Steve Ross — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 16:21:00 +0000

It would appear that our good friend Joe Lieberman has volunteered his services to help Sara Palin with her lack of foreign policy experience, even though her state is right next to Russia.

Palin will also not be available to the media for an undetermined time while she gets her affairs in order back in Alaska. I guess they’re going to use some of that time to get her up to speed on their Cold War era worldview of foreign policy. Personally, I don’t think she needs it.

Palin is an expert at repeating long bellowed Republican talking points that are neither reflective of reality, or reflective of what the US has actually done in foreign policy under Republican Presidents, much like that of the person she would replace, George W. Bush (we all know Cheney runs the place over there for Christ’s sake). What more does she need?

On the flip side, why not have a VP also ran educate the current VP pick. Makes perfect sense to me. I mean, no hard feelings right?

Questioning Patriotism

Steve Ross — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 14:42:00 +0000

One theme that has reared its ugly head since the beginning of the Presidential cycle is that of questioning the patriotism of particular candidates. More often than not, the subject of this theme has been Democratic Presidential nominee, Barack Obama.

The most recent example of this was brought forward by Senator Jim Inhofe (R – OK). While it should not be surprising that Inhofe, a Global Warming denier and serial legislation blocker, would attack a Democrat in such a brazenly partisan way, it illustrates one of the hurdles that Obama faces in the last 57 days of the campaign.

One thing that both McCain and Obama have stressed for weeks now is that neither questions the other’s love of America. There has been, from the principals in both campaigns, a certain level of reverence reserved for each other in terms of the other’s love of country. Yet, it seems that Republican surrogates for McCain have, and will continue to try to call into question, Obama’s devotion to a nation that has given him the opportunities, probably unavailable anywhere else in the world.

This line of attack illustrates a disconnect, that no one in the media seems willing to acknowledge; How can one spend two years of their life running for the top job in the nation without loving their country? Would someone dedicate themselves and their future to a campaign to lead the United States without a certain level of patriotism?

This is the most ridiculous line of attack out there, and one that the media could and should debunk easily with this simple line of logic…one that seems fleeting in an environment that has the media on it’s heels, defending itself from attacks of bias from the right, despite it’s continual exultation of McCain as the consummate patriot.

Questioning patriotism, like calls of media bias, are distractions from the real issues of the campaign. As voters, it’s time to reject these distractions and focus on where the candidates intend to take us if they are elected. Without that focus, electing a President who is accountable to us, the electorate, is virtually impossible.

The Flood

Steve Ross — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 03:02:00 +0000

The past couple of days have been a flood of analogies, metaphors and other devices that neither fully express my frustration, not illustrate the situation with the Presidential race as I see it.

The Republicans spent the last week pulling every old tired rabbit out of their hat; liberal media, tax and spend, family values, you name it. From my perspective it was a truly pathetic display of desperation.

During that time, the Obama camp opened, and closed, and opened it’s war room, which got absolutely NO PLAY in the national media. I don’t want to fall into that category of the Chicken Little, but the response has been flaccid to say the least.

This is a “fool me twice” election in my mind, except it’s the third time. In the past 8 years we’ve fallen victim to jingoism, deception, criminal partisanship, and a litany of other abuses of power that I just don’t have the time or the inclination to get into.

Both candidates have taken on the mantle of change, McCain more recently than Obama.

Obama has chosen to refuse money from lobbyists, has held back supportive 527’s, much to the disappointment of many on the left, and generally run a transparent campaign…more than would normally be expected anyway. Honestly, it’s been a pretty clean campaign on his side of the fence, and I don’t just say that because I support him, I don’t think you can find a successful national candidate in the modern age that has as little financial support from K street as Barack Obama. Please try and prove me wrong.

On the other hand, McCain is taking money from anyone who will write him a check and some who didn’t. 527’s are a big part of his campaign, even though they can’t officially coordinate. Seriously? McCain’s brand of change is like wiping the shit out of the diaper then re-applying it to the baby…Good as new!

It’s time to start a fight.

The harsh reality is that we don’t live in a fact-based world. We live in a world where empty rhetoric and prejudicial buzzwords drive the emotions of the electorate at large and color their decision making process. After 1992, with Clinton’s brilliant question, “Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?” political rhetoric has shifted from some semblance of reality to a fantasyland of bullshit. Right now, the McCain campaign is engaged in bullshitting the “average” guys and gals of this nation with a story that has been both oft told and successful. Truly, it is the clarion call of our time, “Government wants to take your money, liberty, hot button issues of the time, etc.”

It’s bullshit. It’s been bullshit and it will always be bullshit, and the Obama campaign should call it what it is, bullshit.

If Obama really wants to strike a chord he’s got to get out of the fact-based world and to the world of emotion, not a World of Magic. Americans don’t want aloof leaders we want passionate leaders. If they’re fuck-nuts, so be it. If they’re not, it’s a bonus. Show some passion Obama, like not that crazy passion, but the kind that makes us remember just how boring McCain is and all his fucking bullshit liar stories. Or vote for this kitten.

One more thing, don’t remind us that we’re stupid. We’re dumb as a pallet of bricks on the bottom of the ocean with a stack of 1040 forms on top. They don’t think we’re stupid, they know we are.

How about calling them stupid? That works for me. That’s a change that we can all believe in.

More Fun with Finance

Steve Ross — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:07:00 +0000

In the wake of the big Fannie, Freddie bail out, announced Sunday, you would think that few companies would want to jump on the bandwagon. You’d be wrong.

Ford CEO Alan Mulally thinks Washington is ready to give the big three $50 billion bucks. Apparently, willful incompetence does have it’s rewards.

Now, this is a big political football. The big three employ hundreds of thousands of workers, mostly union workers. Not giving them the money means a lot of these people will get laid off. Giving them the money means that the douchenozzles at the top, who have been bleeding the company dry for years, will derive benefit from their incompetence. Honestly, I don’t want to see either thing happen, but I don’t have much faith in Congress’ ability to hold GM, Ford, and Chrysler accountable.

In all honesty, this is the perfect time for the big three to punt, politically. We’re 2 months from an election. It’s a Presidential election. If it comes up before the election and fails we will hear, “Democrats hate business” followed by one of the largest layoffs in US history. If it succeeds before the election we’ll hear from “The Maverick” that it’s the same old Washington politics, even though his policy would be to do the same. If it gets tabled, we’ll see a slowly increasing tide of layoff announcements from now until November followed by a chorus of “Why won’t Washington help you?”.

My sense is that it will pass with 80% support.

There is one thing that differentiates this from what’s going on at Fannie and Freddie…this is a loan, not a gift. It’s a gifty loan for sure, but it’s still a loan.

Ultimately, I don’t know where I stand on this particular bailout. I’m very much against the “Privatize Profit, Socialize Losses” crowd we have in DC, though I know it’s more complicated than that, now that we’ve created the regulatory equivalent of the Wild Wild West in our financial markets. On the flip side, I’d like to see these folks have some criminal accountability for playing fast and loose with sensible decision-making. Unfortunately, the big three bailout ain’t that. They’ve made one bad decision after another, don’t get me wrong, but bad decisions and criminal mischief, or outright fraud, are two different things.

We’ll see what Congress has to say about all this. My hope would be that McCain would oppose it, and Bush would Veto it, but I’m sure they’ve coordinated this much better than that. Nope, we’ll have some hearings and call the CEO’s of the big three in and slap their hands, then hand them the cash and pretend like something happened. That will be that, and we’ll still probably see massive layoffs.

The key to this is how the money is offered. Will the money come with any strings or not? If it’s just free money, it’s like give a fifth of vodka to a drunk and asking them to not drink it. If it comes with strings, they’ll whine and figure out ways to avoid whatever regulation imposed. That’s the culture of George W. Bush’s America.

My Story is Better than Your Issues

Steve Ross — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:38:00 +0000

The Politico has front-paged a story that illustrates just how stupid John McCain and Sara Palin think we are. In McCain, Palin push biography, not issues we learn of the McCain campaign’s brazen strategy of “aiming for the gut, not the heads, of voters.”

This can be a good strategy for a campaign that is suffering from “brand fatigue”. Republicans across the country are running from their damaged brand like rats from a fire, and it’s working to some extent. Oregon Senator, Gordon Smith has endorsed Obama in the Presidential race, despite being a Republican. Unlike Democratic turncoat, Joe Lieberman, Smith has enjoyed little pressure to change his endorsement. In the world of the Republican Party, they’d rather win than be right.

McCain intends to win by appealing to voter’s emotions rather than their minds. McCain hopes to extend the courtship long enough to get their name on the marriage license. That’ll be a big task, 56 days can seem like an eternity in campaigns…the past 18 months sure have! The key for McCain is to keep that good feeling going until the first debate on the 26th. If he can keep the emotional momentum going and pepper in some facts for flavor, that’s a tough combination to beat. On the other hand, the McCain campaign has the message discipline of a rambunctious puppy. You can only stay at Disney World so long before your feet hurt and your wallet is empty. They’ll find a way to fuck it up, probably by pushing it too long.

Obama, on the other hand, needs to keep hammering the issues home, just like he’s doing now. Issues, unlike puppy love, don’t go away until they’re solved. If people get tired of hearing about one issue, give ‘em another! Still, this doesn’t change the fact that people make more decisions with their gut than their heads. So the task is to personalize issues, bring them home. Obama is doing this in smaller, less visible settings, where he can address actual questions from actual voters if he wishes. Obama is on task, hitting back when he needs to, and keeping on message with the voters, despite the chickenlittling of some in the blogoshpere.

The polls and the media will eventually equalize. National tracking polls are nothing more than distractions from reality. It’s the state-by-state polls that matter. The media is getting annoyed with the sequestering of Sara, the honeymoon will soon be over. (h/t Paul Anderson at DailyKos)

McCain is trying to double down by introducing Palin again to the American people with a Charlie Gibson interview later this week. How that plays out will be interesting to watch, but I’ve got my money on a bunch of leading questions that ultimately tell us nothing. Gibson was no doubt chosen because he's already in the bag. One need only remember the loaded questions and tabloid style from the Democratic debate in the spring to come to that conclusion. Reports are saying nothing's off the table...of course we won't know what's ON the table until the interviews hit the airwaves.

If Gibson actually questions Palin on anything even mildly controversial or substantive, expect that liberal media line of attack to come back big time which will ignite the base, but alienate many of the people who are just now getting involved in the race and want some answers. If he doesn’t, the McCain camp will call this a fair interview, and it will become the standard across the media. Crossing the imaginary threshold will result in loud protests from the McCain camp. Considering the spinelessness of some of the networks, I doubt any threshold, real or imaginary will be crossed.

The media’s handling of the campaign going forward represents the greatest challenge facing the Obama campaign. Obama’s strategy is sound, but apparently, didn’t take into account a rehashing of old worn out talking points like the mythical “liberal media”. If the media stays on the sidelines, it will fall to the ground game and other messaging devices to debunk the false messaging of the McCain campaign.

It’ll be interesting to see what shakes out.

Answers on the Copyright Flap

Steve Ross — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:36:00 +0000

Last week there were several articles and blog posts alleging the McCain campaign was using artist’s intellectual property in violation of copyright protections. I decided to ask the people who would know, BMI and ASCAP. So far, ASCAP has not responded, but this morning I got a response from Jerry W. Bailey, BMI Senior Director, Media Relations & Business Communications. First, the question I asked:

I have a question about licensing music to be played at live events, such as political or corporate events. It is my understanding that if the producer of the event secures a license with BMI or ASCAP for the event, they can use any music they want (within the limits of the license) at the live event, so long as it is not synched to any edited video.

Assuming that this is true, what is your organization's position on calls from artists for the McCain Campaign to stop using their songs as reported in the link below?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/05/heart-van-halen-orleans-j_n_124264.html

Mr. Bailey responded:

The Republican National Convention and Sen. McCain are licensed to perform the 6.5 million musical works in the BMI repertoire at their campaign events. Songwriters and artists are free to protest if they don't want their songs used in such a way at these events. When music is synchronized to video, or when songs are played to the extent that they become identified with a person or product, additional copyright questions may arise that don't involve BMI. It appears to me that your understanding of these copyright issues is generally accurate.

So, there it is, McCain is doing nothing wrong or illegal with respect to the copyright as it pertains to the interests protected by BMI.

If the McCain campaign doesn’t abide by the artist’s requests to not use a song, they may sue the RNC or McCain’s campaign. This doesn’t have anything to do with the BMI license; it goes to people identifying the song with McCain, or vise-versa.

It would take multiple viewings of events, coupled with the same song being played over and over to identify a song with a person or vise-versa. This is where Broadcast complicates matters. Broadcast takes this “more intimate” situation of the live event, and sends it to potentially millions of people around the world on a seemingly endless loop, that, can eventually lead to a song being identified with a candidate, and possibly pissing off the artist in question.

The solution is two-fold: 1. Immediately stop using songs by artists who have requested that you stop. The last thing you want to have to do is have any kind of conversation with the likes of Lars Ulrich of Metallica, that petulant prick who is probably a McCain supporter anyway. 2. Before you do another round of big ass events contact the artists’ whose songs you want to use and find one that likes you. This may be hard for the McCain campaign, as there is no national organization of musicians that shows any support for McCain except for this tool. Maybe he has some songs. If not, I suggest a royalty free library.

For my part, I’m torn. On the one hand, I want McCain to keep pissing off musicians, and those musicians to band together to start thumping him on the head publicly and frequently. It would be cool to see someone say, “John McCain doesn’t respect my property, what makes you think he’ll respect yours?” On the flip side, I don’t want even the douchiest musicians to suffer any loss of intellectual property, or worse, have their song associated with someone that they don’t want it to be associated with. Whether you like the song or not, it belongs to someone, and they’re well within their rights to protect it.

So, there ya go. The only way McCain fucks this up is by continuing to play the songs by artists that have asked him to stop. Sounds simple enough…we’ll see.

Alaska Knows Palin

Steve Ross — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:37:00 +0000

(h/t TPM)

Ok, so Alaska's not afraid to call Palin out, why is the MSM? Just questions.

About

Steve Ross — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 00:03:38 +0000

My name is Steve Ross and I am the author of this little blog. Most of what I write concerns politics, politicians and policy, but occasionally I diverge from these topics to talk about something that's on my mind that may or may not have anything to do with anything. I'm not a politician, or a paid consultant or anything in the political realm, I'm a concerned citizen with an opinion and, perhaps, too much time on my hands. I believe that good government is an open government, and that for the majority of my life on this planet, the Untied States has suffered from not only poor leadership, but also policies that have hindered us from realizing our full potential. In short, I'm one of those damnable liberals. I won't apologize for this. In fact, I'd more likely dog cuss you than apologize for anything I have to say as it relates to the 3 p's mentioned above. I can be blunt and rude, but it's not for sport. I say what I say because I believe it needs to be said. If you don't happen to agree with me, you are more than welcome to tell me about it. Enjoy your time poking around my little piece of the web. You can be nice if you want to, but I'd prefer that you skip the bullshit and just be honest, it'll be better for all of us. Cheers, Steve Ross (aka vibinc)

Moving the Bar

Steve Ross — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 04:20:11 +0000

Since the end of the Republican National Convention, national poll after poll has shown John McCain with a growing lead. These numbers have left many, particularly those on the liberal blogs, in a state of shock. The worry expressed by many in the liberal blogoshpere has been met by cool confidence from the Obama campaign. Perhaps they have something to be confident about. Earlier this evening, Huffington Post contributor Seth Walls offered this assessment of what’s going on and why these polls are, as suspected, at least “outliers” if not statistical fabrications. Since the beginning of September, polling outfits have shifted the weighting of their polls to reflect more Republicans than previous polls. In a year that saw record Democratic turnout throughout the Primary season, and huge gains in Democratic identification and Democratic voter registration, polling outfits have decided, suddenly, to increase the number of self identified Repulicans in their samples by up to 6%. Further, in a poll taken by Gallup, not only did they increase the number of Republicans sampled, but they decreased the number of Democrats. Now, this tells us something about polling. As the old saying goes, “there are lies, damn lies, and statistics”. Political polls are a statistical sample of the electorate based on a special kind of voodoo. Sometimes they poll “registered voters” other, the more fluid “likely voter”. The difference in a poll of “Registered” and “Likely” may not be much, probably within the margin of error, but adding an arbitrary number of one flavor of party identification or another will obviously net a more favorable result for the party that benefited from the gain. Look, I’m not a big poll watcher. I pay attention to them, because they’re there. If they weren’t, I probably wouldn’t miss them. Hell, the daily tracking polls are just about useless. We’re not watching the frickin’ stock market here. On the flip side, from a news standpoint, polls seem to be the only indicator that gets any play, and that’s where it gets dicey. If news organizations are going to focus on polls then they need to inform the public about the dirty secrets they hold. If we’re going to elect a President on something other than issues, like “story” or “popularity”, then at least tell the real story behind the sudden shifts in polling. I know facts turn people off, but they’re necessary, no matter what the McCain campaign says. Further, nothing pisses me off more than something that brings the concern trolls or the “I told ya so’s” out from under the bridge. Yeah, I know we need them to get out and vote as much as anyone else, so I won’t go off and call them a dirty name, but these folks are unstable. You’re messing with their mental health here. The last thing we need is a bunch of depressed manic-depressives out there freaking the fuck out about something that they have made a conscious decision to not understand. Finally, there’s a smell in the air of shenanigans. All of the polls mentioned in the article are either paid for by, or in cooperation with a news media outlet. Now I know boring assed politics can’t be driving eyeballs to their newscasts, but nothing excites Americans like watching an underdog rise up, or some smarty-pants pol fall from grace. What’s going on here smells a lot like national media outlets ginning up a horse race to drive ratings. I know, it’s out there, but remember, just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.

John McCain: BS that’s Unbelievable!

Steve Ross — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 14:55:19 +0000

I gotta tell you, the McCain campaign has some balls. Way back in April, McCain pledged to run a respectful campaign. Notice the date on that report…APRIL FOOLS! McCain’s campaign has gotten so mired in the mud that even his greatest former fanboys are turning their nose up at the Senator. I know, I know, it’s just that “liberal media” again. The fact of the matter is that the McCain campaign has shown in the past few weeks that it will leave no distortion unturned, no bullshit charge untrumped, no dog whistle issue unexploited. Don’t even get me started about the lies. When the DC punditocracy starts asking if the truth matters, you have to wonder if the world has turned upside down. As I said the other day, John McCain and the Republican Party is more interested in winning than what the distortions, flip-flops, and outright lies that have become the foundation of their campaign rhetoric do to the country. That’s the kind of patriotism no one should believe in. Joe Klein, Joe Klein! That guy that liberal blogs eviscerated several months ago, called yesterday’s attack ad ”one of the sleaziest ads I’ve ever seen in Presidential politics”. Way to go Joe. I hope John McCain finds his honor again. It’s sad to see a man who once garnered the respect of so many on both sides of the aisle, fall to this level of sleaze. But if winning is all you’ve got, then I guess anything goes.

McCain Campaign Running Off the Tracks

Steve Ross — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 22:25:19 +0000

So, today makes day three of the McCain campaign driving the news cycle with a bunch of manufactured, irrelevant drama. I’m sure the students of Rove are basking in their own personal brilliance at their ability to take over the airwaves with their baseless drivel. The fake lipstick flap, sex ed ad, and the stunning lack of a narrative focused on the issues that face America going forward is what the McCain camp has become, and in doing so they not only damage their own campaign, but also the brand that John McCain has worked so hard to nurture. Simply put, the McCain camp may be attracting some attention, but it’s not the attention that will elevate him from the deadlock in the polls. Further, by going all in with the gutter politics that he himself has been victim to, and railed against, John McCain is playing fast and loose with his credibility. This may not hurt him today, or tomorrow, or next week even, but there’s little doubt that the American people will not like 55 more days of gutter politics, and if that’s all McCain’s got, he’s got a big problem in the most important place to his campaign, with independents. Independents are the most fickle of voters. They have the same problems as Republicans and Democrats, but they don’t necessarily have any allegiance to either. They want solutions. So what will independent voters do when they see the McCain camp waste two weeks of news cycles on rhetorical rubbish? Some of them will start to wonder why there’s only one person talking about the issues. Some of them will get mad a John McCain for not being serious. If it keeps up, many of them will get tired of it and stop listening to McCain. This means that even if he did change his messaging, once people have checked out, they won’t hear it. Now, I know that there’s this conventional wisdom out there that negative attacks, or other devices that distract from real issues work. Maybe they do, maybe they don’t. My question to that conventional wisdom is, when was the last time there was such a negative opinion of one party or the other as this year? I can’t think of one. So while McCain may try to do everything he can to distract from the fact that he is a Republican with Republican positions, when voters go into the booths, as soon as a month from now, what’s going to be on their minds? Lipstick on a pig, or their friend who just got their house foreclosed? Are they going to remember an ad that ran for a day distorting Obama’s record, or that their kid is overseas fighting a war that they no longer understand or support? Whaddya think it’ll be? I’m putting my money on issues, and that’s precisely why I’m glad that the Democrats have a candidate who is both keenly focused on the issues, and still willing to call the McCain campaign and their surrogates out as serial distorters, liars and the very same people responsible for the mess we’re in right now. There’s another line of conventional wisdom that says that if Obama doesn’t attack in the same way that he’s attacked he’ll look weak. I reject that line of reasoning also. It doesn’t matter how you attack, it’s the effectiveness of the attack within the framework of your overall messaging. Obama would look like a fool out there gettin’ all mad at people and callin’ people names, just like the McCain campaign looks foolish right now doing the very same thing. Just because someone takes a swing at you doesn’t mean you have to swing back. How you react determines whether a punch was landed or not. I’ve seen more than my fair share of people beat their own ass while trying to beat someone else’s. It’s a beautiful thing. This is exactly what John McCain is doing to the brand he has so steadfastly sought to build over his time in Congress. In less than a week he’s taken his image turned it upside down and started emptying the contents on the ground so his campaign people can stomp all over it. He’s taken his public image from that of a reformer to a conformer. He’s done a complete 180. Earlier today, I linked to several people who’s opinion of McCain has shifted over the past week. I’d like to add one more. Andrew Sullivan, an Obama supporter who has held McCain in high regard over the years, said today,

McCain has demonstrated in the last two months that he does not have the character to be president of the United States.

That’s good enough for me. When the guy who helped torpedo universal healthcare in the 90’s, and argued against affirmative action, both conservative hot button issues, leaves you, you’re on the way to being all alone. It’s disappointing really. I wanted Obama to be able to dismantle many of the right-wing talking points that have been the focus of so many campaigns in my life. John McCain, and his diversional line of attack won’t give him that chance. But Obama will have the chance to strike down some of the conventional wisdom that has become so pervasive in our political culture by beating McCain with one of the cleanest campaigns in my lifetime. That’s change I can believe in.

Yes, They Think You’re Stupid – Day 3

Steve Ross — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 08:09:38 +0000

On Wednesday, the McCain campaign released an ad so inaccurate it was pulled from YouTube. The ad, which can be seen here not only misrepresented the words of Senator Obama, but also those of CBS News Anchor Katie Couric. I guess that’s one way to get the “liberal media” to work for you. This comes on the same day that the site Factcheck.org released a statement calling McCain’s representation of their analysis in his TV ad, Fact Check“Less than Honest”. In fact, the header at the top of the page says, “McCain-Palin Distorts Our Finding - Those attacks on Palin that we debunked didn't come from Obama.” I can’t wait to see what they have on tap for today, the 7th anniversary of 9/11. I’m sure it’ll be a gem. P.S. Yes, I am linking directly to McCain’s site for the videos for 2 reasons. 1. Linking to YouTube is perilous at this point. These videos are so inaccurate and scurrilous there’s no guarantee that they will keep them up. 2. I’m hoping to cost him money on bandwidth, why the hell not?

Bureaucrats Gone Wild!

Steve Ross — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 14:28:32 +0000

Maybe I should go for a job with the at Interior Department Employees, charged with overseeing our mineral rights out west partying like it’s Spring Break in Daytona Beach. Here are a couple of my favorite passages:

…Their alleged improprieties include influencing contracts, working part-time as private oil consultants and having sexual relationships with _ and accepting golf and ski trips, snowboarding lessons and concert tickets from _ oil company employees, according to three reports released Wednesday…

Intriguing…tell me more.

"During the course of our investigation, we learned that some RIK employees frequently consumed alcohol at industry functions, had used cocaine and marijuana, and had sexual relationships with oil and gas company representatives," the report said. Two government employees who had to spend the night after a daytime industry function because they were too intoxicated to drive home were commonly referred to by energy traders as the "MMS Chicks."

Naughty Naughty…What else?

One worker admitted having a one-night-stand with a Shell employee. That same individual allegedly passed out business cards for her sex toy business, Passion Parties Inc., at work, and bragged that her income from that business exceeded her salary at the Interior Department.

That’s entrepreneurship for ya, play to your strengths Ms. Sex Toy seller!

One of the reports claims that the former head of the Denver royalty-in-kind office, Gregory W. Smith, purchased cocaine from a co-worker, and one occasion had it delivered to the office. He also allegedly had oral sex with subordinates.

Cocaine huh, so that’s why gas is so “high”. Looks like there might be some positions opening up out there. Get your resume’s in early and often. Hell, a donation to a key Republican might help in getting the job as well.

Seven

Steve Ross — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:59:05 +0000

On my way in to DC from Memphis today, we flew past the Pentagon. I don’t know how many times I’ve been here, but I don’t ever remember flying past the Pentagon, of course normally I’m asleep during final approach. Looking at it from the window of the A320 I was in, I tried to imagine what it must have looked like for a plane, nearly the same size as the one I was on, to slam into the building at over 500 mph. I thought about what must have been going through the heads of the passengers. Even just trying to imagine what they experienced sent me down a line of thought that I haven’t considered for a very long time. Seven years ago today, I was in Tallahassee, FL doing a show. Zig Ziglar was on stage when the private speaker security lead for the show, and former Green Beret, came to me and told me he had heard on the radio a plane hit the WTC. Tom had always been a joker, and because we were completely cut off from any media (this was before everyone had a crackberry, or laptop cards, or WIFI was everywhere) I though he was pulling my leg. Emphatic, I eventually believed him, but since we had no TV, I just assumed it was a single prop Cessna or something. 5 minutes later he came back and said another one had hit the other tower. His words were haunting, “This is no accident, this is an act of war”. That’s a lot to digest before 10am. Within minutes cell phones in the audience of the Florida State basketball arena started going off en masse. People were hurriedly collecting their belongings and leaving. By the end of Zig’s presentation only 800 of the original 5000 people remained. The rest of the day is a blur. For some reason, the promoters of the event chose to continue, even though nearly everyone had left. By the end of the day there were just 200 people left in the audience. We loaded the show out, crammed the entire crew, all of whom had flown in to Tallahassee, into the cab of the truck, and started driving back to Little Rock. In the past seven years, we have seen one thing after another justified by the attacks of 9/11; two wars, domestic spying, torture, and a full frontal attack on the civil liberties that are the foundation of our nation. All of these things slipped by a nation rapt in a feverish nationalism masquerading as patriotism. It does no dishonor to the memories of those who lost their lives on 9/11, or the people who have lost their lives representing America in Afghanistan and Iraq, to point these things out. We honor the dead by using this day as a moment of reflection, an opportunity to look at where we are and what we, as a nation, have done. How have our actions impacted, not only the “War on Terror”, but the future of our nation? What avenues have these actions opened, what avenues are no longer available? Where is America now, and where do we want it to go? It is just in the past 18 months or so that a growing majority of Americans are coming around to see the things we tacitly surrendered in the name of nationalism. It’s a slow awakening from a deep slumber, but those whose eyes are opening are seeing a nation that looks very different from the America that was on September 10th, 2001. Some wake up angry, some sad, and some just want to know what the hell happened. For me, the question is not, “What Happened?” but “How do we honor the memories of the dead and move into the next chapter in American history?”. For seven years our nation has been consumed by this event, partially because of the horror, partially because it has been a politically expedient device for this administration. Every lie, every justification, every time they invoke this day for political gain they do dishonor not only to the nation, but to the people who died on this fateful day and those who have died since. How do we honor the memories of the dead? By turning back the clock on summary destruction that has been laid on our nation by an administration only interested in winning politically. We honor the dead by rejecting the emotional rhetoric that has highlighted the past seven years of political discourse, and turned these poor souls into a political hot potato used to spread fear and disinformation from the highest corridors of our nation to the hearts of our brothers and sisters. We honor the dead by remembering them with reverence, correcting the ills that have been done to this nation and letting them rest in peace, knowing that no harm has been done to America in their names. The way America looks at the world was changed on this day seven years ago, of this there is no doubt. Our challenge, our opportunity now is to honor the dead by taking what we’ve learned in these seven long years, taking our new perspective and using it as an agent for change, not only in our nation, but throughout the world. Not by force, but by reclaiming our mantle of leadership and dignity from the people who traded them off for jingoism and political ploys. This is how a nation honors it’s dead. That’s how a nation that has been in mourning for seven years, moves on, never forgetting what happened, but working for a better future for everyone.

Let's Talk Convention Centers

Steve Ross — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 07:12:19 +0000

As my good friend LeftWingCracker has alerted you, and the CA reported this morning, the city has put together a panel to study a new convention center. This is an interesting development indeed. As some of you know, I spend a lot of time in convention centers, Arenas and Ballrooms all over the country. In July I was at the America’s Center in St. Louis managing an event for 10,000, for two weeks. Until recently, I had worked in every primary arena in the top 100 markets in the US. I’m not bragging, that’s just what I do. I know a thing or two about convention centers and I work the one here in Memphis just about every month of the year in one capacity or another. Convention Centers are a tricky thing. This is no Field of Dreams, just because you build it doesn’t mean they’ll come. In order for a city to compete with premiere convention cities like Orlando and Vegas, there has to be a level of coordination that Memphis has yet to demonstrate in my experience. But, before I go too far too soon, let’s look at the idea from all the angles, what we have, what we want, and what needs to happen to make it work. Size and Layout Despite the renovations at the Cook, the space is limited to an event in an end stage arrangement of about 8000 people in the Expo area (NW Hall, SW Hall, East Hall 124k sq. ft.). This is including the bleachers, and additional chairs rented in because the chairs in the Expo Hall at the Cook are as old the building, are wider than current standards, and are in a sad, sad, sad state of repair. You may be able to get more people in, depending on your level of production, but I’m not sure that anyone has tried in the past 4 years or so. The web site says you can do 10,000, but that’s just if you grease up the last 1000 or so. These estimates are notoriously incorrect at EVERY CONVENTION CENTER IN AMERICA. Really, it doesn’t matter. There’s not enough parking to support 10,000 people anyway without spreading it all over downtown. The other rooms in the Cook are the new Ballroom (28k sq. ft), which is nice and does banquets of 1500 or theater of about 2500 with any kind of stage. The site says it’ll do more but that’s gotta be without a stage. There are also all the little rooms on the Mez and Lobby levels. For larger events, these are breakout rooms, for smaller local stuff they make good meeting rooms even though they look like they were designed by Blanche from Golden Girls. So, the answer to your question is yes, the Cook is limited by space. The Cook is also a HUGE PAIN IN THE ASS TO GET INTO. Every room of ANY size is, for some stupid reason, on the top floor. This means unloading hundreds of cases into a freight elevator, and then pushing them some 200’-300’ to wherever they need to be. For the Expo Hall, should you have a full tractor trailer or two of gear, you have to put it on a TRAILER ELEVATOR that requires a special guy from Chicago to bless it, then if it doesn’t get stuck, you can unload it and do that as many times as you have trucks. Sounds like fun huh? So the next answer is yes, the Cook is…antiquated. However, the Cook is PAID FOR, and while it’s got some not so darling quirks, to my knowledge the building itself hasn’t kept anyone from coming back…usually that task is handled by the management. What would I want, as a guy that will have to work in this proposed building? 1. Big assed rooms on the ground floor with dock access, easy rigging (no drop ceiling) and lots of power options. This makes your boat shows and expos, and big conventions easier. Keep the airwalls to a minimum folks, that just gets in the way of rigging and provides more opportunity for failure. Low steel should be no lower than 35’ on 30’ or less centers (that means a 30’ box made by the beams overhead), high steel should be free of as many obstructions as possible to allow for bridles so people can put things where they need to go instead of where they have to go. 2. Smaller rooms close by for breakouts, perhaps on an upper level ala the America’s Center in St. Louis or the George R. Brown in Houston. America’s Center requires an elevator push to get your gear there, but aside from 1 large room, most of the rooms are for less than 100 people, so it’s manageable. At GRB, you have the convenience of an elevated drive that has plenty of dock space for even the largest truck. GRB also has many room options, though I would advise against the theater…it’s just a weird room. 3. Fixtures that are consistent with current industry standards. Don’t go out and buy the wide assed chairs, even though we know Memphians are a little wider than people that don’t have food as good as ours. That 19” standard chair will work just fine. I know, I know. Now I’m just dreaming. I don’t care what the rooms look like inside, that’s not my concern. Pretty them up all you want, but the space has to be laid out in a way that makes sense and gives us the opportunity to run two or three BIG shows at once without having people bumping all in to each other. Location If anyone is thinking about putting this thing anywhere other than as close to the FedEx Forum as codes allow, they need to have their head examined. Dock access needs to be on the part of Danny Thomas that isn’t completely and totally stupid for a big truck to get into. When you’re planning this part, go to Diesel Driving Academy and get the dumbest guy in the class to try and make the turn, or, I know a guy your can fly in from Florida. Seriously though, the largest event I do is somewhere between 10 and 15k people for a week. They need an arena, or else it just gets unmanageable. We’ve done this event at indoor football stadiums, but arenas work too. The key is getting that convention space for breakouts as close to the arena as possible so the client doesn’t have to pay for bussing to and from the venues. That can be a deal breaker. One more thing, in the article Lee Jackson mentions a space across from AutoZone Park. Unless you’re going to buy out the bus station and move it somewhere REALLY FAR AWAY FROM DOWNTOWN LIKE WEST MEMPHIS, and you’re willing to tangle with Lester Lit, and you want lose 4th street between Union and Beale you may need to reconsider. Also, they just built all those apartments right there, are those people going to want a convention center across the street? Just askin’. Ok, so there are some technical things that have to happen in order to make this proposed new building even marginally better than the Cook. Unfortunately, that’s not all you have to do to make this thing work. Nope, that was the easy part. Memphis the Destination Orlando is a Destination, as is Las Vegas. Atlanta is even a destination in many ways. Hell, Nashville is a destination. What has Memphis done to create and reinforce the idea that it is a place to COME? Seriously what. CVB, what are you guys doing to get people to come here? Is there an ad campaign? Is there…anything? Do we have a slogan that I should know? I mean what? What are we doing to get people here. I travel all over the country and the ONLY PLACE I EVER SEE ANYTHING ABOUT MEMPHIS IS IN MEMPHIS. Are we marketing to ourselves? What are we doing? For YEARS the state of Arkansas has been advertising on national TV (CNN, ESPN, Travel Channel) to get people to come CAMPING…CAMPING. C-A-M-P-I-N-G. What are we doing? We’ve got Elvis, we’ve got the Blues, we’ve got Beale St. we’ve got more frickin museums than we know what to do with, we’ve got a BIG ASSED RIVER. Seriously, I want to know what we are doing? In order for Memphis to be able to even marginally compete with the convention powerhouses in the nation, we have to stop thinking about Memphis the way locals think about Memphis and start thinking about Memphis the way we want other people to think about Memphis so maybe they’ll decide to come here. We have to have amenities close to the Convention area that are nice things to do. Not every convention turns into a Beale Street Bender. Ugh, this part is pissing me off. Before a dime is spent on a single drink at a single committee meeting someone needs to explain what the hell we’re doing even talking about this when we’re either not EFFECTIVELY marketing ourselves to the scary outside world, or worse, we’re not doing ANYTHING. Just sayin’, now, on to the next topic. Hotels One thing is for sure, we do need more beds downtown. That’s just undeniable, and so far the only thing that makes any sense right now is getting more beds in downtown Memphis. The new Westin is nice, the expansion to the Peabody will be cool, but why is it we have a Hilton corporate headquarters here in Memphis, and there ain’t no downtown Hilton? Huh? Any answers? Anyone ever approach them? I mean, we’ve got a DoubleTree, and a Hampton, but no Hilton. Ok just wondering. Memphis loses thousands of dollars in taxes every year to W. Memphis Hotels. Make some rooms. Seriously, so far this is the ONLY thing that makes sense. Conclusion Actually I have more but 2000 words is my self-imposed limit, so once I get my ass handed to me for this post, I’ll put that one up. The point is that yes, I know this is just a panel to study stuff. I get it. This is your first assignment. If you can answer all of this with something other than “but I want it” then I’m sold. If not, once again the allure of a big old building that’s all shiny and new, and sure to cure all the ills in this city will get built and nothing will happen but higher taxes and a lot of developers laughing all the way to the bank with our money. We’ve had big plans before, and just because they didn’t work out doesn’t mean this one won’t, but we’ve had big plans before that got shoved in a closet because someone didn’t get paid or we just lost the faith. Seriously, I’m just sayin’.

Welcome to the New vibinc blog!

Steve Ross — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 23:23:16 +0000

If you just arrived from the old blogger site, thanks for coming over. If you just stumbled upon me, take a look around. Cheers, V.

Every Trick in the Book to Suppress the Vote

Steve Ross — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 15:00:41 +0000

Over the past several days there have been many stories about attempts by State Republican Parties to use every available option available, and some whose viability is in question. Foreclosing the Vote On Wednesday, an article in the Michigan Messenger detailed one such plan. The Michigan Republican Party in Macomb Co. is using foreclosure lists to challenge voter registrations. There is some question as to whether this method is legal, there’s no question it is unsavory. Different states have different laws governing how up to date voter registrations have to be. However, as the article points out, a foreclosure notice is not necessarily an indication that a person has moved to another location. Foreclosures can be resolved before the foreclosed buyer has to leave the property. This “insult to injury” tactic smacks of class warfare. It will be interesting to see how it all shakes out in the weeks to come. Indiana ID Imbroglio As pointed out in this article by Jonathan Alter (h/t LWC), State Republican Parties all over the country are gearing up to contest voters based on the Supreme Court ruling Crawford vs. Marion County. The ruling affirms Indiana voter ID laws that require a valid state issued photo ID or US Passport. Read the entire article, it lays out the strategies and efforts of State Republican Parties in many key states to disenfranchise voters, including…wait for it…Florida. Florida has some of the most ridiculous election policies in the US. Alter points out

Even after the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and worldwide attention, the Florida software is still flawed. It requires only an 80 percent match to the name of a convicted felon. "So if there's a murderous John Peterson, the software disenfranchises everyone named John Peters," Andrew Hacker writes in a recent New York Review of Books.

Brilliant! Voting is a fundamental right that segments of the population have tried to take away from other segments of the population since the beginning of our nation. First, you had to be a white male landowner. Over the years, it’s become less and less restrictive, opening up the process to all citizens. Still, there are those who wish to disenfranchise some for political gain. Alter asserts that this effort is “…political, not racial…”. In one respect, he’s right. These efforts may just be outwardly motivated for a desired political outcome. Regardless of the intent, the effect in elections past has been to disenfranchise more African-American voters than those of other ethnicities. You can call that what you want, but if it looks and smells like a racist, it probably is.

Clusterf**k in Clarksville

Steve Ross — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 01:44:06 +0000

I’m not going to go into any of the details. I want to talk about something that both Newscoma, Goldni and LWC touched on, as well as just some common sense that doesn’t seem to be very common in just about every corner of Tennessee Democratic Party. First, three truths that EVERYONE can agree on: 1. Rosalind Kurita betrayed the Democratic Party by voting for a Republican for Lt. Governor. 2. She was challenged in a primary, probably (definitely) as a direct result of item 1. 3. She won the primary within the bounds of the rules as they stood at the time of the election. I’m as pissed off at Rosalind Kurita for what she did as anyone. However, the simple fact remains that no matter how much people are pissed at her, she won the damn election. Since when did Democrats start using party unity as a test for being the nominee for anything? Come on, we’re Democrats! We’ve had one side of the party screaming bloody murder for some 20 odd years that we have to act more like Republicans and another hootin’ and hollerin’ that we’re not acting like Democrats. Where did this sudden call for party purity come from? If the powers that be on the in the TNDP and throughout the state wanted to “take her down” they should have used their connections and influence to organize an unbeatable campaign behind Barnes. I have seen no evidence of anything resembling coordination from any of the party functionaries. I certainly never got an email from ANYONE associated with the Party asking me to give him my support. Had this been solved in this manner, we all would have been giving each other high fives back in August when the election happened. If her disunity disqualified her from the Democratic ballot, then that should have been dealt with BEFORE the election. Once the votes are cast, it does more of a disservice to the communities in question than it does any benefit to the party to have her removed from the ballot. In case I haven’t made myself clear, I’m still mad at Kurita and don’t think she deserves to be the Democratic candidate for State Senate, but this smacks of sour grapes. Removing her from the ballot almost certainly assures that her supporters will turn on the State party and vote for the Republican (ed note: I guess I should have checked the race first, there are no other individuals in this race besides the Democratic candidate). Further, should she be allowed to stay on the ballot, you’ve created the Tennessee equivalent of a Lieberman, except this one will continue the charade of being a Democrat. What has happened here is someone in the party, or a group of someone’s, have decided out of the blue that the party has to grow a pair. They’ve chosen a hill to die on, and I feel confident that they will get their wish. Should Kurita get pulled from the ballot, a seat that was probably safely Democratic will probably fall to a Republican (ed note. again there are no Republicans or independents on the ballot for this election, however that doesn't exclude this possibility in the future). Despite Kurita’s actions in the last session, I believe that when it came to brass tacks she would have done the right thing and made sure a Democrat was the Lt. Governor (her problem with Wilder now solved). Now that is far less certain. There is one thing for sure, the party does need to grow a pair. But that doesn’t mean using technicalities or smoke filled rooms to get the desired result. That means BUILDING A PARTY that is competitive in as many counties as possible instead of just focusing on the urban areas. Tennessee is a rural state. There are a lot more voters in the rest of Tennessee than in Shelby and Davidson Counties. The failure here is on the apparatus of the state party and their seemingly stubborn determination to maintain a paternalistic oligarchy in its affairs. If you want to build a party, you have to go for a groundswell. That means bringing in all types and allowing them the opportunity to own a piece of the party through some other means than giving money. This means having get-togethers and functions and stuff and things more than just asking for a vote and some money now and again. If you want to build a party, you have to address their needs like you want their vote. That means not budgeting an arbitrary number of signs for a county, or just abandoning an area because it’s too hard or you’re too whatever. If you want to build a party, you have to take these first two things, and use them to build a relationship with people, build their trust, so when you do have to do the occasional unpleasant thing, they, at the very least, don’t turn against you. Right now, all the TNDP seems to be is an ugly web site and a couple of high falutin’ dill weeds that couldn’t organize themselves out of a shoe box. It’s way past time to step up folks. Give us a reason to trust you and we will. Give us a reason to support you, and we will. Keep doing what you’re doing and you’ll eventually lose everyone. I’d say you’re well on your way.

The Coming Financial Disaster

Steve Ross — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:42:00 +0000

So far this year 11 banks have failed. 14 since February of 2007. In the past 2 years 27 banks have closed. Some of those came under FDIC control long ago. (Source) Back in March, Bear Stearns, one of the largest investment banks in the world was sold to JPMorgan Chase for $10 a share. Its 52-week high had been $133. Just last week, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac got rescued by the federal government. This weekend, we learned that Merrill Lynch will be purchased by Bank of America, who also purchased the troubled Countrywide Financial back in January. To add insult to injury, Lehman Brothers may file for bankruptcy tomorrow. This news has led to the dollar falling in international trading. John McCain thinks the ”fundamentals of the economy are strong”, even though he has said he doesn’t know much about the economy, and his economic advisors have called the American people a nation of whiners. I’m not trying to whine, but if the fundamentals of our economy are strong, why has unemployment risen to 6.1%? Why are banks failing at the highest rate since 1986? What does this mean for the rest of the economy? Ian Welsh at firedoglake says that a lot more bankruptcies may be on the way due to these failures, but not all of them in the financial markets.

…The banks and the remaining brokers have a lot of this toxic waste on their books, and they don't have it on the books at market prices, because there is no market price. A market price is about to be created for a ton of it, as Lehman is forced to sell during its bankruptcy liquidation. That will force banks and brokerages and other holders of this crap (like municipalities, States and pension funds) to also have to value it. A lot of them are going to find out that they're bankrupt….

The fundamentals of our economy are strong? Really? That’s interesting, because what I’m hearing is that our cities could go bankrupt because these million dollar douchebags have stacked and gamed the system for big money, but gambled and lost? Strong? I think I need a drink. How much longer can this go on? How much longer can we borrow from other nations to support our wild flung fantasies? How much longer will the American people allow our nation to be run into the ditch by people who have nothing more than self-interest in mind? Remember, just because you don’t understand it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t effect you.

The Blog, and Other Such Concerns

Steve Ross — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 14:46:15 +0000

I know I've been MIA for a long time. Let me just say that this past 17 days has been long and trying. Hopefully, the next several days at home will prove to be fruitful here at the blog. Unfortunately, traveling for weeks on end, working long hours, and being largely cut off from any news is the nature of the business that I'm engaged in. Ideally, I'd prefer to do something that forces me deeper into the news, but as of yet, I've not found anything that can replace my salary doing that, so, expect posting to be spotty over the next several months as I build up my savings to deal with the slow months that will follow Thanksgiving. It's the nature of the business. Despite all this, I have been working on several things here at the blog. I'm trying out a new twitter plug-in, and have a couple of posts rattling around in my head. I hope to have these out soon. The financial crisis has been the primary focus of the news, and for good reason. I'm not economist. In fact, macroeconomics is not something that my education in Music prepared me for. There are several places that I go for more information; Bonddad and Calculated Risk are just two sources. I also rely on advisorjim a Memphian, for occasional Q&A sessions. These are always enlightening. Later today, I'll have a post that is the result of our discussions earlier this week. Thanks for sticking around, I'll have more later in the day.

It Worked

Steve Ross — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:17:49 +0000

"I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub." – Grover Norquist

Grover Norquist may have not been able to fully realize his homicidal dream that is the cornerstone of movement conservatism, but the effect, at the hands of his adherents, is that no one trusts government to do anything anymore, which, is almost the same result. Americans are angry. We’re angry that government isn’t working for us. We don’t understand why someone, or a group of someone’s with so much, would ask for, and get a bailout when there are so many that have been left behind. The whole tenor of this “crisis” has been fevered, but no one has bothered to explain it to the average person. Why, after 28 years of economic policy that has favored the wealthy, should anyone want to go further into debt to help those very people? No one wants to answer that question, and so, many people are even angrier than they were that they have been seemingly forgotten for people who have gained so much. If you look at the long string of government failure, much that begins before Katrina, which was the grand awakening for most Americans, it’s easy to understand why people are angry. At every turn, the 80% of us that make up middle and lower income earners have been given the shaft. We’ve been fed a shit sandwich with different condiments, told to eat it, and like it. Some of us have. Others have been shouting from the mountaintops that tilting the balance of government oversight and intervention to unbridled “free market” reforms places greed over community. Suddenly, those pushing for the very same “free market” reforms are asking for a safety net. The winner is greed. This crisis has been building. National unemployment is up to 6.1%. That’s nine months of consistent job loss. New numbers are expected tomorrow, and will no doubt be worse. Hell, the southeast lost 2500 jobs just last week with the closing of Bill Heard Auto. Despite this condition, nothing has been done to help workers. Nothing has been done period. We’re an afterthought. That’s reality. I’ve been reading about this “crisis” for two weeks and still don’t understand it. I’ve asked people in the business, I’ve asked policy wonks, I’ve asked economists, and no one can seem to get to the crux of the problem. No one has an answer. More importantly, no one knows if the bill passed by the Senate last night will do anything more than expand the debt at the fastest rate in my lifetime. If our elected officials want us to stand behind legislation, they need to break it down in a way that we can understand instead of resorting to “end times” rhetoric to scare us into supporting something we don’t understand. They need to treat us like adults, instead of a group of anonymous children at some overcrowded day care. Tell us what’s up and why we should care. Listen to us when we say we don’t understand, and try to explain it to our feeble little minds. We want to know. Do you want us to know? The answer to this is no. They want us to be stupid. They want us to jump at their rhetoric rather than be a part of the solution. We want to be part of the solution. We want to be a part of something greater than ourselves. It’s your job to help motivate, inform, and mobilize us. Most importantly, we want to know that we can trust you. We don’t anymore. None of you. Prove yourself, and we will stand behind you. Fail, and you will wonder where all your support went. Make us part of the solution, in some way other than asking for our vote. Inform us of the conditions and situations that made this happen so we can understand. Most importantly, if you want our continued support, you have to include us in the discussion, make us a part of the process. Norquist and his buddies may not have killed government, but he helped kill our faith in it. The only way I see that faith being restored is to engage us. It's way past time.

Crisis of Confidence

Steve Ross — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:28:07 +0000

Bonddad reports that the Federal Reserve is considering an interest rate cut…

Rates are currently at 2%. Rates have dropped from 5.25% to 2% and we are currently in a credit crunch. The interest rate isn't the problem. The problem is is confidence in whoever you're lending to. If you think a borrower is about to go bankrupt -- or may be bankrupt between the time you lend him money and the time he pays it back -- you're not going to make the loan.

Our whole financial and governmental system is based on confidence. Right now there’s not much of it in either. The question becomes, how do we increase confidence? Accountability. Accountability, through regulation, open and honest accounting, and by using the good parts of the free market to value things at their actual value, and knowing that based on market forces that value is fluid, rather than some imaginary value that the Treasury Department may divine. This means that some people are going to lose and some are going to win, but that’s the free market remember? This is the thing that the Republicans have been selling you for 28 years. This is the thing that’s better than government until it fails and asks government to fix it. The key here is to make sure that the people who were used as cannon fodder for this implosion, people whose credit should have prohibited them from buying houses outside their means, get hurt as little as possible. They did what they have been told to do by the “masters of the Republican free market”, and they wouldn’t have if no one would have been willing to lend to them. Remember, these guys have been taken advantage of. While some would rather blame the victim. The people to blame are the ones who allowed this condition to persist for so long, and that falls squarely on the President and the Republicans in Congress who, up ‘til now, refused to do anything. We’ve been in a foreclosure clusterfuck for at least 3 years. When I bought my home just over 2 years ago, getting a loan was hard. It took a lot of arm-wringing and leg work to get it done, and I’ve got better than average credit. Lenders were already feeling snake-bit. Now that people are losing their jobs left and right, it’s even harder. Two weeks ago, I bought a car to replace the one that was totaled for me. Financing wasn’t a problem, because my old car got totaled and paid off, but the interest rate was high. When I asked about it, I was basically told the old sad break-up tale of, “it’s not you, it’s me”. The Finance guy at the lot told me that the finance company was tightening because of all the people defaulting and that my good credit and payment history meant little in the face of the number of repo’s. Two weeks later, we have this crisis pop up that no one was warning about. I mean no one was warning about any of it. We’ve been told for like 9 months now that this is just an economic slowdown, not a crippling financial crisis. We thought it was an economic cold, not financial polio. None of the doctors said shit about financial polio, why would we think it was that bad? Like I said in my last post, we want to know what the hell is going on, and if the government doesn’t tell us what’s up, then act like there’s some emergency, we’re going to get pissed.

Palindrome v. O’Biden

Steve Ross — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:30:25 +0000

I watched the debate last night, and I gotta say that the whole thing was bizarre. Palin exceeded her expectations, but that’s a pretty low bar considering that my expectation was for her to be a complete and total blithering idiot. If you chose to watch the debate, ignoring the questions, Palin performed pretty well. If, like the format dictated, you wanted to see how the candidates performed when asked questions, this was culmination of two bad interviews (Gibson and Couric) with no commercial interruptions or editing. Palin’s stated refusal to answer Ifill’s questions struck a chord in me and many other observers. Basically, this was a reflection of Palin’s participation in the “Troopergate” investigation back home in Alaska, “If the questions don’t fit, just talk some shit”. Palin called Joe Biden, “O’Biden” at one point, which made me want to see him run off with his “Lucky Charms”. Actually, Biden did exactly what Obama wasn’t able to do last week, state, chapter and verse, McCain’s positions and past voting record. Sure there were some mistakes, and factcheck has them, but on substance, Biden actually answered the questions asked instead of trailing off into some cue card, talking point babble. The highlight for me was when Palin called for sweeping new powers for the OVP. As if Cheney hadn’t already muddied the waters enough, the last thing we need is another veep making a run on power. Everyone’s calling this a win for Biden. I don’t know if I totally agree, but one thing is for sure, nothing good happened for the McCain campaign last night. They made no headway whatsoever. With 32 days until the election McCain’s fortunes are going to have to change drastically if he has any hopes of winning. Pulling out of Michigan may be the tip of the iceberg for McCain’s bad news, the Troopergate report comes out in 7 days. I can’t wait to see that!

How Dare You Get Involved

Steve Ross — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 13:23:23 +0000

The RNC announced it will file a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against the Obama campaign. (Source) The complaint centers around all those small donors that have given nearly half a billion dollars to the campaign. The RNC asserts that there’s no way to prove these donors are legit, because they fall under the $200 disclosure limit. According to the FEC website:

The FECA requires candidate committees, party committees and PACs to file periodic reports disclosing the money they raise and spend. Candidates must identify, for example, all PACs and party committees that give them contributions, and they must identify individuals who give them more than $200 in an election cycle. Additionally, they must disclose expenditures exceeding $200 per election cycle to any individual or vendor.

In essence, any donor that contributes a total of $200 over the course of the campaign must be disclosed. This rule seems to refute part of the claim by the RNC that “little is known about many of Obama's donors because the campaign is not required to disclose detailed information about people who give less than $200.” The small donor explosion started back in December of 2007. From Q4 2007 to his disclosure covering the month of January, Obama’s fundraising jumped dramatically. The Q4 disclosure shows $23.5m for the months of Oct.-Dec. Obama’s January disclosure shows $36.7m in one month, a huge explosion of donations. This trend has continued since. His last disclosure reports some $57m of donations. (Source) Newsweek reported on Saturday about two donors that donated more than the federal limit allows, and under false names. The money from both donors has been returned. "While no organization is completely protected from Internet fraud, we will continue to review our fund-raising procedures," said Ben Lablot an Obama Spokesman. McCain has had his own fundraising problems. Back in August the Washington Post reported that bundlers may have used names of people who, in fact, did not donate any money to the campaign. The McCain campaign returned the money. The RNC is well within their rights to raise questions about Obama’s donors, but in doing so, they also raise questions about themselves. Considering the Republican Party’s history of voter suppression tactics and Tom DeLay style attacks based on unsubstantiated rumors (I don’ know if candidate x is a {list of rumors}, but I can’t prove he/she’s not.) this attack on small donors seems to fit their modus operandi nicely. Of course, when you’re getting your ass kicked in the polls I guess anything goes.

Belmont Debate - LIVEBLOG!

Steve Ross — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 01:11:45 +0000

And it opens...Before I go further, let me say HAPPY BIRTHDAY to Newscoma. 29? I thought 25 at the most! All questions that are asked will be paraphrased... Question 1 - How will you fix the economy for people who are about to retire? Obama does the obligatory opening thingy, then goes into his general plan. I think people want specifics, though Obama looks better on this first question than I thought he would. McCain didn't say anything. On the follow-up, McCain talks about corruption and cronyism...I'm sure you know where I stand on that. Obama starts off good with teh Buffett thing, and states that opportunity isn't going to trickle down. Goes on to his middle class tax cut. Question 2 - What about the bailout will actually help people? McCain - Hammers Obama on fannie Mae contributions. Then gets to the answer, which he states is to buy up bad loans that are somehow Obama's fault. Obama - Talks about freeing up credit for small businesses. Blames deregulation. Slams McCain campaign chair for lobbying for Fannie and Freddie. Talks about keeping people in their homes. ---aside - I know they're trying to stay civil, but just two questions in, I feel like McCain is about to lose it. Question 3 - How can we trust either of you, when both parties got us into this mess? Obama - I understand your frustration, and there's a lot of blame to go around. Pre-Bush there was a surpluss, not a deficit. Debt almost doubled. Calls McCain out on voting for Bush Budgets. blah blah blah Ok, this isn't working for me...time to try and bring the funny. The camera work on C-Span is weird. McCain is talking about pork barrel stuff. I think he's gone over time, but I feel pretty sure Brokaw isn't going to cut him off. McCain "I don't know much about the economy" says he knows how to fix the economy. brilliant! Did McCain just say that some of the 700b ends up in the hands of terrorists? huh? I was drifting off there...in the shower of "my friends". A question about sacrifice? Americans don't sacrifice anything but education! McCain brings up the 767/EADS tanker thing. I don't know that this is really a winner for him....

Seven Top McCain Aides And Fundraisers Helped Air Bus Secure Multi-Billion Air Force Contract Over Boeing. At least seven top McCain advisers and fundraisers - Thomas Loeffler, Susan Nelson, John Green, Kirsten Chadwick, Kirk Blalock, Aleix Jarvis and William Ball III - have all lobbied for EADS, the parent company of European airplane manufacturer Air Bus. McCain's EADS lobbyists were influential in steering a multi-billion Air Force contract to Air Bus instead of Boeing. [Senate Lobbying Disclosure Records, accessed 5/30/08] (Source)

Obama is going after the class war. This is good. "It's hard for a teacher making 30, 35,000 dollars to tighten her belt, when so many others are living high on the hog." McCain goes off on tax increases...oh somebody just shoot me in the head. What McCain is saying about small business tax increases is BULLSHIT. That only counts if you're a sole proprietor, and making more than $250k. If you're a sole proprietor making that much cash your a complete and total dipshit! STRAIGHT TALK EXPRESS LOST A WHEEL! McCain is a broken record with this maverick thing. I never knew McCain had a bald spot. Interesting... McCain is a broken record with EVERY FUCKING THING HE SAYS. Here's my question, does Senator have a new, original thought in his head? Hell, does he have on old original thought? Ahhh, the opportunity, is that anything like the rusty trombone? Why is Obama talking like Captain James T. Kirk Should we fund a Manhattan Project for energy, can someone make a joke about Manhattan Transfer? Please? Healthcare as a commodity? interesting... Let's see...Declaration of Independence, Life...AWWW DAMMIT. I guess healthcare as a commodity is unAmerican, but we'll try it anyway. And that's what we've done. I still don't think that we should have to "buy" healthcare, but in the current environment, a huge expense on the federal government is out of the question. I'm glad Obama is beating McCain up on the whole 5000 dollar healthcare bullshit thing. As a side note, I just wish someone would say the word "bullshit" on this debate. It would make me less sleepy. Let me give a shout out to the D'San Corporation, provider of the timers that the candidates are TOTALLY IGNORING. Healthcare - McCain says "responsibility" and puts the responsibility on business. Obama says healthcare is a right. Good deal. I think it's funny that Obama is working against the camera director. I fucking fight that shit every damn event I do! All this talk about healthcare makes me wanna smoke. bbiab. Peacemaker v. warfighter...I'll get to that in a minute In every DOD, or DOD related event that I've done over the past several years, our soldiers are called warfighters, not peacekeepers. This is a huge difference. When military leaders talk about supporting our "warfighters" it's code for avoiding all those "peacekeeping" missions that were largely successful in the 90's. It's a lot easier to rally the organizations that support the military like the VFW, etc. behind the notion of the warfighter, than the peacekeeper, but the difference should not be ignored. The military establishment over the past 8 years has been working toward a warfighting footing, or an aggressive posture rather than the defensive posture that should be the posture of a nation that is the "last remaining 'superpower'". BTW, this whole "We will kill bin Laden" thing is really disturbing. Are we really going to dedicate the full force of the US military against a single man who will be looked upon by his followers as a martyr upon his death, emboldening his followers? That's FUCKING STUPID. Capture the fucker and put his ass to trial, and let him rot slowly in a supermax prison. Remove the martyr thing. At this point I would just about love for this to devolve into an "Ultimate Fighting" thing. I wanna see who bites who first. McCain is wetting his pants at the prospect of a new Cold War. He's using all the code words. Unfortunately, in a world, partially sustained by McCain's penchant for deregulation, Russia is in the catbird seat. They have more upside with energy than we do unless we start becoming more independent. Questions about Russia Russia hates being in the position they're in post USSR. They want to be in contention for the top dog. Bringing these old protectorates back into the fold is a big deal for them. Further, McCain is right about the whole KGB thing. Putin is all about the old Russia. He is pissed about former states trying to join NATO. It's a tightrope act. WWIIIsrael How the hell are either of them going to deal with this question in 2 minutes? League of Democracies? Wha? Isn't that NATO? WTF? Okay last question. sorry but at this point I'm worn out. Sorry about the funny too. Funny's harder when the anger is boiling over. This will be the longest 28 days of my life. Thank God it's over...that was painful. I have no idea who won, but I know it wasn't America. Cheers.

The Only Poll That Matters

Steve Ross — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 11:08:09 +0000

On Wednesday, early voting in Shelby County will begin. The dates, times, and locations of early voting can be found here. This election will be history making, but despite all the hoopla surrounding the Presidential election there are several races and questions here in Shelby County that every voter needs to record their decision on. City Council District 9-1 I don’t want to take anything away from any of the races, but if there is one race that’s buried at the bottom of the ballot that will directly affect Memphis more than any of the others, it’s this one. Four candidates are vying for the seat; Kemp Conrad, Paul Shaffer, John Willingham, and Arnette Montague III. I won’t go into any great detail now, but suffice it to say, Paul Shaffer is my choice. I’ll write more about this race soon, I promise. Memphis and Shelby County Charter Amendments You’ll find these just under the litany of unopposed State house and Senate races. Here in Memphis we have 10, count ‘em, 10 amendments to vote on, 2 for the County and 8 for the city. Here’s a brief rundown… County Amendments… Ordinance 364 – Makes the offices of Sherriff, Trustee, Register, County Clerk and Assessor charter positions, and insulates the county government from the problems that happened in Knox county. VOTE YES. Ordinance 365 – Institutes term limits on all county elected officials. I’m no fan of term limits, so I’m voting no on this one. Memphis Amendments Ordinance 5232 – Recall Amendment – This gives the people of the city of Memphis the opportunity to recall a member of the City Council. Unfortunately, it establishes arbitrary time lines (no recall before 2 years into term), still, there needs to be a way to remove Council Members if necessary. VOTE YES Ordinance 5265 – Residency Requirements – In short, if you’re going to work for the Mayor, or the City Council, as well as some other areas, you have to live in the City. Seems like a no brainer. Does not apply to emergency response like police and fire department. VOTE YES Amendment 1 – Terms Limits – Puts a two term limit on all elected city officials. Again, I hate term limits, I think it puts good people who know what they’re doing out of office prematurely. If your Council Member is a dickweed, don’t wait for him/her to be term limited, elect someone else. It’s simple. I’m voting no. Amendment 2 – Staggered Terms – This would allow for more consistency on the Council by electing the single member districts in one election, and the super districts 2 years later in another. If you’re voting for Term Limits, you need to vote for this one too. We don’t need 13 new council members trying to figure out how to legislate all at once. If you’re not voting for term limits, this is still a good idea. VOTE YES Amendment 3 – MLGW Sale – Makes the sale of the utility dependent on a referendum. Voting yes doesn’t mean there will be a referendum, or that we are selling MLGW, it means that if someone wants to sell MLGW, they have to ask us first. VOTE YES Amendment 4 – Ethics – If you are an elected official in Memphis and you are indicted, you will be suspended from duty until the legal case is resolved. VOTE YES. Amendment 5 – Instant Run-off Voting – This may seem a little complicated, but it’s really quite simple. Rank the candidates in order of preference. If no one gets a majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and redistributed using those voters 2nd choice. If there is still no majority, the process is repeated until there is a majority. VOTE YES Amendment 6 – Mayoral Vacancies – This amendment cleans up the process of Mayoral succession. VOTE YES If you want more in-depth analysis of the Charter Amendments, go to Change Memphis they have the actual text of the amendments and everything. There are more races on the ballot, but in the interest of space, I’ll have to get to them later. Remember vote early and often!

An Argument Against Term Limits

Steve Ross — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 13:45:15 +0000

In my last post, I talked a lot about the Charter Amendments that are included on this year’s ballot. In that post, I came out against Term Limits. The position I stated in that post was really just a “quick hit” on my overall position as I noted in this comment. In this post I intend to clarify my position further, and dispel some persistent talking points that are the foundational arguments of Term Limit supporters. First and foremost, my opposition to Term Limits centers around legislative positions such as City Council, County Commission, or State Legislature. Legislators in these positions are the most direct link between constituents and the government bodies on which they serve. While this link may not be utilized to it’s fullest potential by legislators, placing arbitrary limits on service runs counter to the fluid functioning of legislative bodies. Term limits cripple legislative bodies, undermining the institutional memory that enables these government bodies function properly. Good legislators don’t grow on trees, they are built through experience. Much of this can comes from their campaigns, but no campaign can truly prepare an aspiring legislator for actually operating in a legislative environment, or the way the body actually works. This is further complicated by the “part time” nature of nearly all the legislative bodies in Tennessee. Executive Term Limits By contrast, I have fewer problems with Executive term limits for offices like Governor, or Mayor. Executive positions are full time affairs in many instances. Further, executive positions wield far greater power than legislative positions. Placing a time horizon on service in an executive position makes it less likely that the official can get “dug in” to the office. While it is true that Executives have as much or more of a learning curve upon taking office, the full time nature of the office gives them the opportunity to become effective and build a greater understanding of all the circumstances more quickly than legislators. Skill Positions In the comment I posted on my last piece, I noted my opposition to Term Limits for positions like Trustee, Assessor, Sheriff and other positions. I call these “skill” positions because they are focused on a single function of government that requires certain skills to accomplish them effectively. I should add to these positions elected judgeships. With the exception of Sheriff and Judge, most people have little or no understanding of what people in these positions do, or the qualifications necessary to be effective in their positions. Placing arbitrary limits on these positions is misguided for many of the same reasons that term limiting legislators is misguided. We need continuity in these positions, and in order to maintain continuity, putting these officials out of office simply because they have reached a certain level of tenure is counterintuitive to maintaining the consistency of service necessary in their positions. Dissecting the Arguments There are several arguments that are consistently floated in support of Term Limits. Here are some of the most common. Getting it Done in 8 This argument goes something like the last line of an email I received several days ago…

“If after eight years, a politician can't get the job done for his constituents, common sense would say, it's time for him to move on, and let someone else give it a try.”

From an emotional perspective, I understand why this argument resonates with people, but from an intellectual standpoint, it’s just counterintuitive. If after 8 years a politician hasn’t done the job for his or her constituents, then the constituents should vote him or her out of office. Period. If they don’t, shame on the voters for not voting their interests. What this argument doesn’t address is if the politician is actually doing the job their constituents want them to do. What happens to these politicians? Under this logic they get put out just like the bad ones. How does this serve the interests of the constituents in question? It doesn’t. The Corrupting Influence of Government This argument relies on the notion that government is inherently corrupting. Unfortunately, just as not all people who consume alcohol become alcoholics, not all elected officials become corrupt. Government, in and of itself is no more corrupt than any other large institution. Corruption is more the result of failed individuals than the fabled shadowy hand of a corrupt system. That is not to say that there aren’t corrupt elements of government, but that officials who fall prey to corruption are the ones who enable corruption rather than the other way around. This argument plays on the actions of certain “bad apples” and the fear of constituents who are either disengaged from the process, or have ideological objections to the influence of government in people’s lives. The Power of the Incumbency It is true that unseating an incumbent is far more difficult than vying for an open seat. Incumbents have networks of donors and name recognition that upstart candidates do not. Further, incumbents in federal elections enjoy a 95% re-election rate. It’s hard to believe that this figure is much less for local elections. Incumbency, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad thing. You probably don’t go to a different place every time you get your hair cut, you go to the guy or girl that does it the way you like it. What if you were forced to go to a different barbershop or stylist every other time? You might be happy with the results, you might not, ultimately, you’ll never know until it’s too late. If your incumbent politician is doing the job you want them to do, why should you be forced to vote for someone else? You shouldn’t. While challengers may have a higher bar to cross in getting their name and message out, there’s nothing inherently unfair about that. They may be largely unknown quantities to the general public who should have to prove themselves to assure the public that they will work in their interests in the absence of an established record. The reality is, if an incumbent politician isn’t doing the job their constituents want, the voters will term limit them with their vote. That’s America, that’s the way it should be. Conclusion While I’m sure I’ve left some arguments out on both sides of the Term Limit issue, I think I’ve, at the very least, clarified my position. As always, I encourage discussion. Post a comment or drop me an email.

Shenanigans at the SCDP

Steve Ross — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:34:49 +0000

There have been a flurry of posts concerning the ballot printed by the SCDP. While I cannot speak to the specifics of what actually happened, and don’t want to get involved in the speculation or finger pointing, what is clear is that the SCDP, like many other state and local party organizations, is suffering from a crisis of leadership throughout the organization. Really, it’s a sad state of affairs, and it speaks to why people feel disillusioned with political parties in general. If, for instance, this was the result of an individual bad actor that used their position to push an agenda, then it illustrates why people feel disconnected from and suspicious of political parties. If, as some noted in private conversations, it was the result of an honest mistake or misunderstanding, then it gives people the perception that the party apparatus is either covering it’s ass for the previous hypothetical, or so dysfunctional that they can’t even get one of the most basic jobs it has right, informing the electorate of it’s positions. I’ve been critical of the Democratic Party apparatus at all levels from time to time. Recently, I haven’t had much to say about the SCDP, because the SCDP hasn’t done anything that I’ve seen. The current Exec. Com. seems to believe that if they don’t do anything no one will criticize them. Maybe they were right, first thing out of the gate and people are screaming bloody murder. As Brad at WTL and LWC note, there is most certainly something fishy about the whole scene. Even if it was a mistake, at this point it’s going to be a tough sell for Keith Norman to come out at 11:30 and plead incompetence, but that’s probably EXACTLY what he’ll do. The reality is, perhaps incompetence is really to blame. The party has been stunningly absent throughout the entire campaign. If the SCDP is doing anything, the members of the Exec. Com. are the only ones that know, and many of them don’t even know. By all accounts, the whole County Party apparatus has ground to a halt. This election season is almost over, so doing anything to make a big change at the SCDP right now seems impractical. Going forward, the members of the Exec. Com. need to think about how the past two years have gone. From the very first meeting of this group back in May of last year (where Richard Fields’ membership was called into question) there has been controversy and strife. Rank and file Democrats need to ask themselves about the role of the party going forward, and ask themselves if the same old people that have been involved for so long, need to stay involved or if there needs to be a top to bottom overhaul. Personally, I believe that an overhaul is in order and the most important part of this overhaul needs to be communicating to rank and file Democrats in a manner other than back channels. There is a wealth of options out there, if the SCDP is willing to use them. All of the funding challenges that the SCDP was experiencing at the beginning of this term could be dealt with if rank and file Democrats felt engaged in the process, even if that engagement is merely as an audience member (audience meaning, email recipient, or blog reader, etc.). It’s time for the SCDP to take charge of its destiny instead of falling prey to the factionalism and discord that has marked the organization. Finally, I want to make sure people understand that I respect and admire the individuals who dedicate their time to the local party apparatus. Despite the challenges and the screw-ups many of these people are dedicated to making Shelby County as well as the surrounding areas better. It’s easy to beat these people up on a blog, or in the paper, but the majority of them are really trying to make the party better for everyone. I wish my schedule would permit me to serve along side them on the SCDP Exec. Com., unfortunately, at this point that is not the case. In any case I hope that Norman can come out today and level with the people of Shelby County. I hope that the Democratic Party apparatus will learn from this mistake and move forward in a positive direction. Most importantly, I hope that in the coming years the many factions that make up the SCDP can unite under a common cause, and realize their potential as a strong and thriving local party organization.

The SCDP’s New Clothes

Steve Ross — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:57:58 +0000

So, this morning I mentioned a press conference that was to be held and attended by SCDP Chairman Keith Norman. What happens when the one person everyone wants to talk to fails to show up? They schedule a super secret meeting at the Whitehaven Branch of the Memphis Public Library for 6pm tonight, that’s what. I was fairly nice to the folks that created this debacle in my last post, but that niceness is running thin. Rank and file Shelby County Democrats want answers, and we want them RIGHT NOW. This is your chance to come clean. This is your chance for redemption. This is your chance to beg forgiveness and pray like hell that these foolish actions don’t harm the candidates who will surely suffer from the clusterfuck that has been created at the hands of certain individuals on the SCDP Steering Committee. Will you swallow your pride, take your lumps and deal with the circumstances or will you puff out your chest and proclaim your innocence, or lack of assistance, or a printer error, or any number of bullshit excuses I’ve heard so far? The cat is out of the bag folks, and it’s pissing all over the new carpet. Every move that has been made since the unveiling of these ballots has led to the conclusion that there is a cover-up going on, whether there is one or not. You’re fighting public perception at this point. Basically, by Norman not showing up today, you further fed the perception that something underhanded is going on, so even if this was an honest mistake, any charity that might have been given is gone. Someone’s head has to roll now, that’s the only solution. This is what secrecy gets you. Look at how well it’s served our current President. Secrecy ≠ Democratic values. It’s time for the process to be wide open, anything less is simply inadequate. So the SCDP is running balls out in the street searching for cover now that the perception has shifted from hapless buffoonery to naked, backroom maneuvering. Enjoy your new clothes, but as it gets colder, and any cover you might have found before is quickly disappearing.

I See a Blame Storm on the Horizon

Steve Ross — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:04:09 +0000

The fun with the SCDP ballot power grab, just keeps getting funner. Jackson Baker reports this morning on the “bash-Mulroy” session that was last night’s SCDP Super Secret Honeycomb Hideout Steering Committee meeting. For those just joining us, the meeting was called in the wake of SCDP Chairman Keith Norman’s failure to show at a press conference he called to address the ballot faux pas. Classy. So, last night the Steering Committee got together in Whitehaven, to “address the issue” which looks more like it means, get their story straight, and find a person outside of their little club to blame. Some on the committee are none too pleased that ANYONE voiced some dissent, much less an elected official, on the now illustrious ballots printed and distributed by the SCDP, but it seems they doth protest too much. Commissioner Mulroy is the victim of the committee’s ineptitude. He has championed IRV (Instant run-off voting), something that would save the city thousands of dollars in run-off elections each cycle, which just happens to be one of the “referendums” that the “Officially not approved by the full Execom of the SCDP, ballot” says to vote no on. Blaming Mulroy on this is like blaming a robbery victim for their house just being too nice to resist. Let there be no mistake, Mulroy’s protests, and the protests of people like me who just want to understand why this was done without the consent of the full SCDP Execom didn’t cause the problem, the Steering Committee, who printed the ballots without full consent did. So, it would seem, we’re right in the same spot we were yesterday. No answers, a bunch of stonewalling, and a committee committed to covering their ass at every turn. Ain’t that Democracy! If you want to read more about the most current foibles of the SCDP, take a look at my previous post which links to many of the other concerned bloggers. They’ve written new stuff since then, so give their blogs’ front page a looksee while you’re at it. If you’re pissed at the SCDP for operating in an undemocratic manner, give the Chairman a call, I’m sure he’d love to hear your concerns. His information follows below. KEITH NORMAN, CHAIR 751-7154 (home) 830-0601 (cell) 751-0156 (fax) keithnorman65@aol.com PS. Before you fly off the handle about publishing someone's phone numbers, this information is also located at the the SCDP website location, so it’s not like it’s not public information.

Paul Shaffer for City Council

Steve Ross — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:23:54 +0000

Here is the commercial that Paul Shaffer is running in support of his City Council Bid. Feel free to distribute.

Smells like Leadership

Steve Ross — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:28:05 +0000

We’re up to day 8 of the screwed up ballot mess. Keith Norman released the following statement:

I have been in contact with Commissioner Mulroy as of about 9PM on Tuesday night and I have left 1 message for him as of 8 AM Wednesday morning. I have charge of the ballots (i.e., with respect to their location) and I am waiting for his team to set the date for the press conference so that any misleading statements regarding the ACTIONS of members of the Party can be clarified. However if I have not heard from him by a reasonable hour I will proceed with releasing the ballots as they are with a written statement on our position to the media. (h/t WTL)

Apparently, with the SCDP, you only get solutions on their timeframe. If that doesn’t jive with your timeframe, you must be okay with it. Last night I heard that the ballots have been taken back to the printer to have the offending section blotted out. The kicker is that the SCDP would not pay to have the ballot run through again, someone else had to. Yeah, that’s right, the SCDP didn’t have the sense of responsibility, nor the common decency to correct something that was never approved by the body’s Execom. Smells like Leadership, really bad leadership. Situations like this throw organizations into some weird finger pointing, groupthink, and “hardening of the attitudes”. These reactions illustrate why there is a growing distrust in this country of political parties. How hard is it to just publicly admit a mistake, work to fix it, and move on…very hard, apparently. This thing still looks like shenanigans, and until there’s some plausible explanation, in the public eye, it is shenanigans. SCDP, you are a Democratic organization, but democracy (little d democracy) is not the way you operate. There is no transparency anywhere in the SCDP. Information, no matter how benign, is held in strict confidence. A party cannot operate as an exclusive club AND expect regular people to give it money and time. What big secret has the SCDP been cooking up for the past 18 months that no one could know about? Is this it? What great idea, that if exposed, would damage the future of Democratic candidates, has to be so guarded? Why won’t you even tell your delegates what the heck is going on with your organization? We actually took the time to get selected and all that. It’s not as if we’re not interested. It’s almost as if you don’t want anyone to know you’re not really doing anything! I know there are a lot of good people who are actually working hard for the SCDP. As much as I want to insulate them from my criticism, I can’t. Objections have been internalized, and summarily pushed under the rug. Where’s the public outrage and indignation? Why are no current members of the SCDP Execom screaming bloody murder publicly at this in the wake of inaction from the Chair? Why is it that, other than some email traffic at the beginning of this screw up, it seems to be just an accepted reality, and that nothing can be done about it? I guess I’m just naïve, or overly emotional, or any of those other dismissive things that people call people when they get mad at something they have every right to get mad at but it doesn’t suit the agenda of the maker of the mistake, but I’m tired of the SCDP treating Democrats like they’re part of the problem when they get upset with the actions of the SCDP. Remember Ececom members; you’re there to represent us, the Democratic voters of your districts, the Democratic voters of Shelby County. It’s unfortunate that several of you just don’t see it that way. SCDP, I’ll be glad when this election is over so I can get back to ignoring you again. It’s unfortunate that I feel that way, really. The SCDP has the potential and the general support to be the second biggest and powerful Democratic Party organ in the state. Some of you are so paralyzed by potential success that you just won’t let yourselves, or the party succeed. As we approach the Convention next year, I suggest that those of you who fear success examine whether your involvement in the party has been a net positive or a negative, if you can stomach that kind of close introspection, and give someone else a shot at it. In all honesty, after watching the performance that’s been going on the past 8 days, I doubt you have it in ya.

Blame vs. Flaw

Steve Ross — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 18:34:12 +0000

Following the trend that has led so many Americans to further distrust public officials and the “gubament” in general, Alan Greenspan said yesterday that the current financial crisis is not his fault, but merely a flaw. If there’s one thing about Americans, it’s that we want someone to take responsibility for their actions.. Someone needs to be blamed in the eyes of Americans, and when the somebody responsible does everything in their power to deflect that responsibility, it angers people even more. Really this is simple stuff. I don’t understand why people won’t own their actions and just move on. It’s so much easier than the long extended dance mix of finger pointing. The “blamers” seem to forget that every time they point the finger at someone else, there are three more fingers on that hand pointing back at them. Further, people that point out mistakes are not to blame for the mistakes. The mistake was there before anyone pointed it out. There’s been a lot of noise about the SCDP ballot thing that they refused to fix on their own, and how it’s the people, like myself, who deserve blame for publicizing the mistake. It’s unfortunate that we have leaders who are so wrapped up in being right that they cannot accept their responsibility for something even if it was a subordinate, or subordinate body that actually made the error. As Chairman of the SCDP, Keith Norman is responsible for everything the SCDP does. If he doesn’t like that, he should step down. Finally, I think it’s important that people who are not to blame, not accept it out of convenience or attempted consensus building. If accepting blame is the sole condition for consensus, walk away. You do not need them. They have failed not you, and hopefully you have learned a valuable lesson in the process. People who wish to deflect blame to create a false consensus are not your ally, they are the enemy of the change this City, County, State and Nation so desperately need. Ultimately, they have a personal need for you to take the blame more than you need anything they have to offer. My final word on the Ballotgate imbroglio…I’m glad the ballots are fixed, I’m sad the situation that created the problem was left unresolved.

Incompetence

Steve Ross — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:14:50 +0000

incompetent |inˈkämpətənt; i ng-| adjective: not having or showing the necessary skills to do something successfully.

Sometimes, things just don’t work out the way they were planned. Sometimes they work out exactly as planned, returning surprising results. Brad at WTL alerts us that the SCDP is still distributing the incorrect ballots to potential voters, despite a press conference last week stating that they were to be collected, corrected and redistributed. Way to follow through folks. What first looked like hapless incompetence has shifted to willful negligence, or worse, pushing an agenda. Regardless of which is actually the case, there is no doubt that no one will be held accountable. The SCDP Execom meets on November 6th, two days after the election. By then, either the joy of a Democratic President-elect will overpower any calls for accountability, or another stunning loss will leave the body defeated and deflated, perhaps pointing fingers at each other, perhaps not, with nothing to hold on to, retreating to the little fiefdoms of power that have helped sustain the SCDP’s dysfunction for so long. I’ve never been much of a joiner, but I’ve never seen an organization of supposedly like-minded people work so hard against their own organization for their personal self-interest, or the interests of their faction leaders. In fact, it is this kind of factionalism that turns me off. Still, as a Democrat, and a delegate to the last county party convention (even though I was unable to attend the convention), it saddens me that the party is in this pathetic state. One thing is clear from this whole imbroglio, the SCDP Execom has chosen to be and remain broken. Somewhere, somehow, it is in someone’s interest that the SCDP be a marginalized body, pliable enough to be manipulated when deemed necessary. But let’s not marginalize what’s going on in the SCDP by calling it a conspiracy. Allegations of a conspiracy put us in the “tin foil hat” category that has marginalized activists for years. From selecting a weak, disinterested leader, to stacking the steering committee with devotees of a single faction, this is an organized and public effort to marginalize the party. There is no shadowy hand, or Carliyle Group, or Illuminati manipulating this thing. There is a group of people either more motivated, or just louder than the rest who have successfully worked the system to the advantage of their faction, period. My hope going forward is that those who currently serve on the Execom will voice their outrage, and demand accountability from the Steering Committee and the Chair, but I’m not counting on it. Consensus building is not something that comes easily in the SCDP, and there are plenty of people who have more to gain from maintaining the current ineptitude of the party than from doing anything to make it everything it could be.

Schadenfreude, Stevens Style

Steve Ross — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 22:13:17 +0000

schadenfreude |ˈ sh ädənˌfroidə| - noun - pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune.

Senator Ted “Series of Tubes” Stevens (R-AK) was convicted today on seven counts of false statements related to his Senate disclosure forms. In this case, the cover-up was the crime. Stevens will most certainly appeal, though he will likely lose his seat to Democratic challenger Mark Begich, ending his run as the longest serving Republican in the Senate. As a side note, just how screwed up is it that Alaska may elect a Democratic Senator, and Tennessee probably will not? Very screwed up, that’s how.

Chairman Norman, It Was Not a Printer Error

Steve Ross — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 14:11:28 +0000

So the Ballotgate thing finally his the pages of the Commercial Appeal, some 10 days later. Unfortunately, the paper continues to spread, what is the defining fallacy of this whole affair; that the printer made an error. Having worked in print, though back in the days before digital presses, I know for a fact that NO SINGLE PRINTER IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD PRINT ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE FILE GIVEN TO THEM. That’s right, no one. Several years ago, I sent a printer a pamphlet that had a couple of typographical errors. The printer called me to tell me there were errors, but would not fix them, without me being there. His reasoning, “I don’t want to do something that blows the job”. In other words, he wanted to make sure I was happy with everything so he couldn’t be blamed for any other mistakes. When printers go freelance, they don’t get paid, PERIOD. The printing business is a competitive business. There is plenty of competition here in Memphis, and with Nashville and Little Rock so close, there are a wealth of other options. So why does the printer keep getting blamed, and, if the printer is to blame, why did ANYONE have to pay to have the ballots run through the press again? And that’s where this bullshit lie that Chairman Norman is using to deflect blame off the people who used their position in the SCDP without authorization, falls apart. By placing blame on the printer, Chairman Norman seeks to deflect blame from the people who most certainly had an agenda, from the Chism devotees on Steering Committee to himself. In doing so, he is tarnishing the reputation of a local business that has received accolades in the past for their work. In the printing business, as in so many other businesses, your reputation affects your ability to get future work. You have to wonder how the printer feels about taking the blame for something he did not do. Chairman Norman, perhaps you believe that this was a mistake. Perhaps you believe that no harm was intended. Perhaps you believe that whomever put that little box on the ballot was doing so thinking they reflected the views of the SCDP. If you believe these things, then fine, just say so, but don’t besmirch the reputation of a local businessman to cover up what can only be described as an abject lack of leadership on your part. Most importantly, accept responsibility for your role, whether it be action or inaction in this situation. Like it or not, you are the Chairman, the face of the SCDP, and everything that the SCDP does comes back on you. Remember, forgiveness comes with repentance:

I am warning you! If another believer sins, rebuke him; then if he repents, forgive him. Even if he wrongs you seven times a day and each time turns again and asks forgiveness, forgive him, Luke 17:3-4

Freedom Awards

Steve Ross — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:21:37 +0000

I don’t talk about work much here on the blog, mostly because the majority of the events that I do don’t move me in any spiritual or intellectual way. Just like most of you, I go to work, and do the best I can to my ability even when I’m not particularly interested in the content of the event or the overall message. Occasionally I get to do an event that is both intellectually and spiritually engaging. Last night was one of those occasions. Last night the National Civil Rights Museum held it’s annual Freedom Awards Banquet at the Convention Center Grand Ballroom. It was the culmination of a day full of events. I was fortunate enough to be working the event and it was an inspiring occasion. The honorees were Vice-President Al Gore, Dianne Nash, and BB King. All three of the honorees were entertaining and engaging, but the message of Dianne Nash has stuck with me more than anything anyone else had to say. Paraphrasing part of her message;

The oppressor and the oppressed are co-dependent. Until the oppressed rise up and challenge the supremacy of the oppressor, the oppressed are an active participant in the oppression.

Ms. Nash acknowledged that many people view this as blaming the victim, but I get where she’s coming from; We have no control of our destiny until we TAKE control. Until that happens, we are the victim of our own inaction. Hopefully, in the coming days, the NCRM will post some of the video from the event, but in lieu of that, here is CA video coverage of some of the events leading up to the evening. Video from The Commercial Appeal

Early Voting is Over

Steve Ross — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:43:35 +0000

Yesterday was the last day of early voting here in Memphis. While yesterday’s numbers haven’t been released, the total number of votes recorded as of yesterday morning was 226,929, 60% of the total votes recorded in the Presidential election here in Shelby County in 2004. Looking at the trend lines of participation, we could see 67% to 70% of all the Shelby County votes cast in the 2004 election, cast before Election Day. That’s pretty impressive. 31 states have some form of “No Cause” early voting, be it absentee, mail in ballots, or the Tennessee style early voting. I early voted for the first time in Little Rock back in 2000, and have been early voting since. Elections in the US have been held during the workweek since the beginning of the nation. While other countries vote on Saturdays or Sundays, we chose Tuesday. This may have been more manageable back in the early days of our nation, when there were fewer people who could vote, but now some 232 years later, it’s a logistical nightmare. Few States and Counties can support the cost of distributing and maintaining the number of voting machines required to keep the lines flowing smoothly for the tens, if not hundreds of thousands of potential voters in one day. This is one of the key reasons early voting was adopted in Ohio. 2004’s legal challenges and voting machine shenanigans (several areas, populated largely by African-Americans got far fewer machines than more sparsely populated areas with a different demography) showed a weakness in their system and was an embarrassment to the state. Giving people two weeks to vote gives them an opportunity to make sure they have time to do so without the last second “whoops I forgot my ID” (something I just can’t imagine. I carry my ID everywhere, who doesn’t carry a DL or something with them everywhere they go?), or arriving at the wrong polling station, etc. Further EV takes pressure off local election commissions, by spreading the turnout over two weeks rather than concentrating it in one day. Most importantly, early voting equalizes the playing field for thousands of workers who, for whatever reason, may not have been able to make it to, or wait in long lines at the polls next Tuesday. I know there are plenty of people, including a large number of Republicans, who feel that early voting tips the playing field against them. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I do know that any party or ideology that works to exclude anyone from the process, overtly or covertly, is working counter to the ideals, many of which are still not fully realized, that make this nation great. For my part, I’m glad we have early voting here, and hope that it increases participation, even if that new participation comes from people who are my ideological opposite. The more people get involved, the better our nation can be.

Innocent Until Out of Appeals

Steve Ross — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:06:02 +0000

Oh the irony. Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) contends that he is not a convicted felon until he exhausts his appeals process. Nice. This is an interesting standard from a guy who voted to restrict the number of appeals that death row inmates can utilize. Does the Senator believe that a convicted sex offender, murder, or other unseemly character appealing his or her conviction, is not a convict? I doubt it, but under the standard espoused by the Senator, that would be the case. Stevens may not be in federal custody, or in jail, or anything else, but that doesn’t make him any less a convict. The long hard truth of the matter is that Ted Stevens has been convicted, and until that conviction is overturned, he is a convict, period. I love the way Republicans will do just about anything to keep from being held accountable for their misdeeds, or from being labeled something that they would have no problem labeling someone else facing the same circumstances. Senator Stevens, you’re a convict, whether Alaska has let you vote or not. Get used to it.

Wherein I Reconsider my Career Choices and Other Options

Steve Ross — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:59:22 +0000

I don’t write about myself a lot. This is due to a lot of things, but today I’m feeling introspective, so, as with Newscoma’s Annoying Autobiographical Pauses, if you don’t want to read me writing about me, enjoy these stories about former Darwin Award winners. I’m a 36 year old college drop out. I left college the first time almost exactly 16 years ago. The reasons aren’t really that important right now, but let’s just say that financial and personal problems led me to believe that college was no longer a priority for me. I moved back home and began working odd jobs, I worked in Fast Food, and as a tuxedo inspector at one of the largest tux rental facilities in the US, and then, as a fulfillment manager at a local book publishing company. All three of these jobs occurred between 1993 and 1995. Somewhere in 1994 I met up with some kindred spirits in the theater world, this led to an 8 year working relationship that eventually brought me into the industry that I now work in. I opened a business with one member of that troupe, and wrote and performed in all kinds of productions. There were a lot of good things in that time that engaged me personally, and helped make me who I am today, but the abject poverty that I experienced at that time eventually became too much to bear. By the end of the 90’s I had decided that poverty just wasn’t working for me, so I took a job in the event production industry, which is the industry I work in today. As with any job, there are trade-offs. I find myself out of town for long stretches of time, which puts pressure on relationships of all kinds, and makes it difficult for me to be involved in many of the civic activities that I was involved in during my more impoverished days. On the flip side, I’ve been able to buy a home, and live a fairly comfortable, even slackful life when I am at home. Because my “office” is someplace new nearly every week, there are few of the long term, or deep seeded internal struggles that make up many work environments. Now, some ten years into this career, I’m starting to question what I’m missing. I’ve lived in Memphis for nearly 4 and a half years, and in many ways, still feel like an alien. Part of this comes from the logistical challenges of cultivating new friendships while maintaining a schedule that keeps me out of town some 200+ days a year. Part of it comes from the cliquish nature of Memphis. Still another part comes from having the social graces of a wood chipper. I like what I do, by and large, but I don’t like not being able to immerse myself in the local political culture, warts and all. Despite my long-term fascination with politics, I haven’t found myself to be any more or less jaded than most people. I believe that, while some may involve themselves in politics for personal gain, that most people get involved because they feel they can have a positive impact. I still believe in the positive potential of political involvement and activism, and that is, in large part why I write this blog. If I can’t be here, perhaps I can, at least, add something to the conversation. So now I want to be here more. I want to get physically involved in the process. My intellectual involvement, but physical detachment from local politics is no longer satisfying my desire to try and make a difference in the community. I want to get down in the trenches…there’s just this one problem; how do I do that, and maintain a travel schedule that I can barely keep up with? Or, if I ditch much of my travel work, how do I maintain even a portion of the financial security that I’ve worked for the past 10 years to achieve? It seems like a Catch 22 that makes me nervous. So, I don’t guess I’m writing this for any kind of advice or anything, but to flesh out the balance between what my wallet, brain and heart think I should do. All three of these “internal entities” are in varying degrees of conflict, to a point that I may just have to do something, and deal with the consequences, or do nothing, and enjoy the financial gains, while feeling that my desire to be a part of building transformative change here in Memphis is hamstrung by my inability to fully integrate word and deed. Anyway, if you managed to read this “poor little rich boy” (I am by no means rich) story and not make a mocking tiny violin gesture in my general direction, I guess you’re either sympathetic, or not used to mocking people nearly enough. I would be mocking the hell out of me right now if this weren’t bugging me so much. So yeah, that’s it. Thanks for dragging yourself through my miniature string quartet of self-pity. Have a good Halloween.

It’s the Accountability, Stupid

Steve Ross — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 19:14:07 +0000

Tomorrow is election day, though you could argue election day has been happening here in Tennessee for weeks, and no matter who wins or loses, there are going to be some general conditions, particularly here in Shelby County, that won’t change one bit. The biggest thing is access to information about our representatives in City and County Governments and what they are doing in our name. What’s Goin’ On? The Memphis City Council has made great strides over the past year in distributing the minutes to their meetings. Now there is an rss feed that you can subscribe to, as well as the relatively timely publishing of minutes. Unfortunately these are distributed in a manner that requires Microsoft Word instead of a simple PDF that could be more easily viewable. The Shelby County Commission has a more detailed information system located here, but the system doesn’t seem to record any voting information for the individual members. I called the County Commission to find out, and, as of this writing, no one immediately knew. This information is vital in finding out what the City and County government is doing, particularly in the absence of detailed coverage by the local media. What there isn’t, is a searchable database of votes and voting records. I don’t know if this is a financial consideration, or if there is the sense that there is insufficient interest. In any case, this may meet, or even exceed the current open meetings/records standards, but as a resource for constituents, it’s not all that helpful in finding a vote on a particular issue. Of course, the business conducted by the legislative branches of City and County Government is only one part of the story. The executive branches have all kinds of things going on that few people know about, and even less is available on the Internet, particularly for City government. Follow The Money There are all kinds of resources out there for tracking down campaign contributions to candidates and organizations. OpenSecrets has a database for federal candidates, Follow The Money has a less comprehensive, but useful database of state candidates throughout the nation. Considering the scope of the latter project, it’s no wonder it lags a bit behind. Currently, there is no way to “follow the money” for local candidates in Shelby County. All financial disclosures are filed on paper. Viewing these disclosures requires a trip downtown to the Election Commission, filling out a form, and paying for scads of photocopies. Tennessee state law allows for electronic filing of financial disclosures in local and county races, but according to the Tennessee Registry of Election Finance, no county election commissions in the state of Tennessee currently have such a filing mechanism. Connecting the Dots From my perspective, these two issues, easy access to voting records and campaign finance disclosures are critical to connecting the dots between the influence of money and politics, or conversely, disproving any fabled connection. Further, having such resources at the fingertips of voters, whether they use them or not, is a critical component in keeping constituents informed and a part of the process. In short, while the legislative bodies of the two largest governments in West Tennessee may be doing all that is required of them legally to inform the voters, they are hardly doing all they could to make that information accessible. As we close out this national election, and move back into the now unfamiliar grind of talking heads talking about something other than the election, governing, something the wind bags on TV aren’t so good at talking about, I think it’s a good time to refocus ourselves to the governments that affect us most, local and state government. These are the less sexy, but vitally important positions that we will be voting on, again in some cases, in just two short years. It’s time to start thinking about that future now, how it should look, and what information will be readily available when that time comes. That’s my focus. In the coming weeks I hope to have information about projects coming down the pike. Until then, get out and vote, if you haven’t already, and enjoy election night.

Results Thread

Steve Ross — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 23:35:51 +0000

We Need to Make it a Right Now Project

Steve Ross — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 15:28:33 +0000

Several Days ago Kos wrote this post:TN-Pres: Worse than Kerry. Kos made a call for Tennessee to be a long-term project. I think it needs to be a “Right Now” project. I’m half a world away from Tennessee right now (Hawai’I, I feel your crocodile tears), and haven’t had a chance to look deeper into the results yet, but from what I’ve seen happen in the state races, I’m sure it’s ugly. Someone needs to take Tennessee under it’s wing and teach it’s Democratic institutions how to function, because all our Democratic leaders are doing is pointing the finger at the Obama campaign for not spending enough money in the state. I call bullshit. It’s not Obama’s job to flood every state with money that thinks it needs it. Obama was trying to win the Presidency, and did a pretty damn good job of it. It’s the local and state party’s job to keep the state competitive and make a case for spending money in the state. Look at the money spent in Georgia, there was a case made, and they took a shot. We made no such case to the Obama campaign. Right now, I’m not sure if they boys at the helm of the TNDP can even tie their shoes, much less make a compelling case for anything other than their ouster. But I’m not pointing fingers, really, just pointing out realities. So, what happened to the TNDP? When did it happen? Has the TNDP always been spinning in a circle desperate to find its ass, or is this a new condition? Honestly, I’m new(ish) here, I’m asking. I don’t know how incompetent the party was before 2006, but it just seems like something happened, and 2006, from what I’m hearing, seems like about when it happened. What pissed off Kurita in 2007 so bad to hand the State Senate over to the Republicans? Could it be the combination of the way she was booted out of the US Senate Primary, only to be rebuffed by the Democratic establishment once again in the State Senate? Or was she just a single bad apple that saw nothing but her own future? I’m not defending her, I’m wondering aloud. As a partisan, I’m glad the TNDP stepped up to the plate and removed Kurita, but they screwed themselves by waiting until after the primary as I’ve stated before. They had to take their eye off other races to deal with something that should have been dealt with before a single vote was cast, and that left a bad taste in the mouths of many Tennesseans. I sent money to Barnes up in 22 (I think, hard to remember now) before the primary at the urging of LWC not the TNDP, or any other Democratic functionary. I probably would have sent money to more if I’d been asked. I never was. In fact, I have not received one single email from the TNDP this entire cycle. I checked. Still the TNDP had some pretty good fundraising as far as I can tell. The TNDP started out 2008 with $195k in the bank. In it’s pre-primary disclosure, the TNDP had $12k in disbursements, in support of Shelby County Trustee Paul Mattila. In the October Disclosure we find $33k of in-kind for Randy Camp, $33k for Becky Ruppe, $37k transferred to the federal account and $70k spent on voter ID calls, and ended the period with $330k in the bank. Between 10/1 and 10/29 the TNDP raised $1.5m, and spent $1.66m on scads of candidates throughout the state. Question: If the TNDP could raise all that money and do all that stuff in the last month of the campaign, why couldn’t they have spread that same effort out over some time to build up the candidates they knew were at risk to build them up over time? I know that a lot of money gets raised/spent in the last month of a campaign, but last-ditch efforts do not make up for long term planning. The TNDP should be engaged in candidate building, not wild, last second ass covering. So now, in the wake of our defeat in the state legislature, and I call it our defeat because we, as Democrats have to own it to move past it, we have some critical decisions to make: 1. Who is the future face of the party? Bredesen is done in 2010, and has never seemed too interested in anything but his own ass. Who will take over his role as the highest Democratic figure in the state? Who will emerge to make the case for Democratic ideals? What are the unifying issues that make our ideals compelling to Tennesseans? How do we communicate these ideals to Tennesseans in a way that moves them to vote against newly installed Republican incumbents? 2. What do we want the party to look like? We have to start right now, positioning ourselves as the underdog, exposing any shenanigans from the Republican Party. But we also have to examine our local and state operations, and make strategic decisions on how to strengthen them instead of tactical decisions on how to not fail. 3. How will we be structured? Will we continue to operate as a top down organization, or will we exploit our natural resources, our passion, our resolve, and move into the uncharted territory of a groundswell type of organization that values local issues and activists, and utilizes their passion, under the umbrella of a statewide framework, to bring more people in, rather than keep people out? This is our challenge going forward. It’s easy to blame, it’s hard to work for a better party and a better future, but right now is the time to start doing that. We have one year to turn it around before the next cycle starts up. We have no time to waste.

A Message From an Anonymous Blogger

Steve Ross — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:28:14 +0000

Chairman Sasser: It’s been a tough couple of days for Democrats here in Tennessee. We lost the State House and Senate. Our US Senate candidate was soundly trounced. Our Presidential candidate lost the state by a greater margin than John Kerry in 2004. I’ve pointed all the fingers I’m going to point on this thing, but he buck stops with you sir, that’s not meant to assess blame, that’s the reality of leadership responsibility. But maybe I come on too strong, allow me to introduce myself. My name is Steve Ross. I live in Memphis, TN. I grew up in Little Rock, and Osceola, Arkansas, and have been involved in Democratic politics on some level since I was 16 when I walked the picket lines in 1988 with my mother and her fellow LRCTA teachers. In recent years (the past 10) my level of direct involvement with the party and campaigns in general has been far less than I would like it to be. I travel some 200-250 days a year. This has relegated me to the role of a simple donor, rather than the boots on the ground guy I would like to be. Still, despite the challenges, I remain a faithful and loyal Democrat. I suppose if I was doing something more that just “sitting on the sidelines” as you suggest, I would find some way to emerge from my business travel and immediately thrust myself into an activity that would somehow support the party, other than merely financially supporting Democratic candidates here in Tennessee and across the country. Instead, I sit here in front of this computer screen, some 5000 miles from Memphis, anonymously (well not anymore) engaging in a conversation, via my blog, with you and Democrats throughout Tennessee, in search of a strategy to return a Democratic majority to the Tennessee Legislature in 2010. I write this blog, not because I want to anonymously attack people, but because I care deeply about Democratic ideals. My hope is that perhaps my words can inspire people to action in my absence. I can be critical, even brutal at times, but that criticism is rooted in a “tough love” that I have for institutions that support my ideals, but are, for whatever reason, underperforming. The TNDP, and my local SCDP are underperforming in my view, and I feel that this is evidenced by the losses we experienced statewide on Tuesday. Candidates in Shelby County often win despite the SCDP, not because of it. There is a lack of strategic vision from both institutions. There is a lack of communication to the base from both institutions. Just this morning, I subscribed, again, to your email newsletter, and, as of yet, have not received even a confirmation email. I even checked my spam box to make sure it didn’t get misplaced. At this point it’s too late to undo the losses we experienced on Tuesday, but it’s not too early to start working on a strategic plan for 2010. So let me make this pledge to you. I will give the TNDP 50 days over the next year, that’s over $15,000 out of my pocket, if you will give me something to do. I don’t want any payment for this, I just want to help make a difference. Here are the conditions, I need regular updates, I don’t do toilets, if there is travel involved, a per diem to cover my expenses and a place to stay overnight would be necessary (if it requires an overnight stay), and finally, because my business schedule is somewhat crazy, some flexibility on my assignments may be required. Chairman Sasser, I’m serious about this and I hope you will take me up on my offer. You can contact me here, on my anonymous blog via the open comments section. From there I will reply to your email address with my upcoming schedule. I look forward to your reply, and to working together to turn Tennessee blue. Sincerely, A Formerly Anonymous Blogger

PAC’d

Steve Ross — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 00:07:08 +0000

Kleinheider links to a post from the Knoxville News Sentinel detailing the lengths the State Republican members have gone to, to build the newly minted majority they will enjoy in the next session through the use of leadership PAC’s. I have my own personal, moral and ethical views on leadership PAC’s, as I’m sure most of you can imagine, but I’m not writing the rules. If leadership PACs are fair game, then they should be exploited as a tool to win elections. Period. I haven’t done any research on who has one and who doesn’t. Frankly, finding that out right now is more time than I have to dedicate to the subject, but as the article details, there are far fewer Democratic members with Leadership PAC’s than Republican Members. So, I‘m just wondering, what’s the deal here? Why aren’t Democrats utilizing this tool? They most certainly knew about, and probably wrote into law to help maintain their majority. Do most state Democrats have the same personal, moral, and ethical problems with PAC’s that I do? If so, why hasn’t there been a push to restrict them in some way? This is what I do, I ask annoying questions! Anyway, now that Democrats are in the minority, I guess it’s going to be harder to get the cash, PAC’s or no PAC’s, to win back the State House and Senate by the next term. Still, if we want to hang on to 3 of the 5 US House seats we have right now, we better get started.

Blog Notes

Steve Ross — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:31:56 +0000

Hey faithful readers, a couple of things to note: 1. If you posted a comment and it hasn't shown up, please use this thread to post one again. I'm tweaking out my comment spam filter, and well, it's less than perfect right now. Post here, and if it doesn't show up, post one on the old site so I know to check my spam filter. 2. I'm working on my blogroll. Back when I first launched the WP blog, I didn't take the time to organize and add all the blogs out there that I read regularly, or that I feel have something to add to the conversation. If your blog isn't included in the blogroll right now, just know I'm working on it. I may even put a place for conservative blogs...way at the bottom. /snark 3. I'm looking for help with an online database. If anyone out there has some real life experience with mysql (I have plenty of theoretical experience, just like I'm a theoretical astronaut), or knows someone, I'd love to hear from you. Projects and stuff and things coming down the pike. Thanks for reading. Steve Ross

The Lieberman Imbroglio

Steve Ross — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:44:54 +0000

Josh Marshall at TPM is reporting that President-Elect Obama wants to keep Joe Lieberman in the Senate Democratic Caucus. I can hear the screaming from Hawaii. To be honest, I dislike Lieberman as much if not more than most people on this planet. I didn’t like him during the Clinton Impeachment, nor during the 2000 campaign, and since then, he’s done just about everything he could to continue to piss me off. I say kick his ass out, but it’s not up to me, really. From the perspective of Obama, it may be hard for him to push for any kind of sanction against Lieberman when he’s calling for a “post-partisan” political climate. Political retribution and “post-partisanship” don’t really go hand in hand. Further, this could be an example of “keeping your enemies closer”. Lieberman hasn’t demonstrated much government oversight in his role as the chair of the Homeland Security Committee, perhaps Obama thinks this trend will continue if he cuts him some slack. On the flip side, Lieberman is a cutthroat MF, for all his public posturing as the Senate’s own Droopy Dog. I doubt that Lieberman would feel any sense of loyalty to Obama’s olive branch. I’m sure he wants to kick the asses of the people who are even thinking about putting him out on his ass, and that may include Obama, despite any posturing. So the reality goes like this. Obama has done his part to posture in Lieberman’s favor. “Post-Partisanship” saved. The Democrats would do well to just shut the hell up about this until the new Congress is sworn, lest Lieberman jump ship now allowing all kinds of hell in the Senate. Once the new Congress is sworn in, they can rat fuck him all day long, and he can jump ship if he wants to, or get in line and try to redeem himself. For now, we need to let this one go. We need to have something to be pissed about in January. /snark

120k Well Spent?

Steve Ross — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:16:27 +0000

If you’re a political party that is already experiencing challenges communicating to your constituents, what’s the first thing you do? Let you Communications Director go of course. Kleinheider says he has an explanation for the personnel move, but I don’t think it passes the smell test, and I’m not sure that Munday was part of the 50 state strategy thing anyway. Don’t all party organizations need some kind of media and outreach liaison? One would think so. Anyway, in the absence of any transparency, or even an explanation of any sort, it gets people to wondering, which is what I do more often than not. So with the help of Al Gore’s internet, I did a little digging into the federal disclosures of the TNDP at the FEC. I’m no Campaign finance expert, but the disbursement portion of the federal filings is telling. Since the beginning of the year, Chairman Sasser, and several other staffers have received compensation from the TNDP. No surprise there, though Wade Munday does not appear on the federal disclosures as an employee, which is interesting to me. Another thing that’s interesting is the amount of money disclosed. Sasser receives $3646.67 twice a month. Simple math tells you that this adds up to $87k/year, but that’s the income he actually sees. Further in the disclosures we find that individual payments to the US Treasury for payroll taxes go out at the same time. That would make his gross around $10k/month, for around $120k/year. Now, I believe that people serving as the chairman for a medium sized state party should be compensated. And even the compensation amount isn’t completely outlandish, if there was some real progress to show for it, but right now, I’m not seeing it. So the question has to be asked…how can the TNDP afford to pay Sasser this amount, but not be able to keep a communications director on staff? It defies logic. Even if Munday is a DNC staffer, wouldn’t it make sense to put him on the state party payroll, to at least aid in the transition, and provide us little folk out here wondering what the hell is going on with some information? Again, I ask annoying questions, it’s what I do. Deal with it. I’m not sure who all the potential candidates for TNDP chair are, but I suggest they campaign as if they were running for public office, instead of a secretive and dysfunctional organization. Spend some time out in the state. Come talk to Democratic organizations, do something other than just lobby TNDP Execom members. Regular Democrats like me want answers and solutions. We want to know how a future chair will handle the party and what role we will play in the party. In short, we want to know if we will be treated as potential partners, or if we’ll be treated with scorn, the unwashed masses to be ignored. Mostly, we want to be inspired. We want to know that someone out there is doing something and interested in involving us in the process. We want to help build something great here in Tennessee. Doing what we’re doing now isn’t working. It’s time to flip the script and turn the TNDP into the grassroots organization that it should have been to begin with.

The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves

Steve Ross — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:31:20 +0000

I know I’m pissing some people off, and others think I’m bitching prematurely, but this is easy. We want to be talked to. We want to be told it’s going to be ok, and be shown some kind of ANYTHING that leads us to believe we’re not just going to get our asses handed to us again in 2 years. The truth of the matter is that the TNDP’s actions have done nothing to quell the discontent. The email that was sent to a few select bloggers was a start. Then the rug got pulled out from under us (for the record, I didn’t even get the forwarded email…/pout). How is this supposed to be in any way reassuring? It’s not that hard. You want people to get off your ass, do something to achieve that result. I understand that with the selection of a new Chair just weeks away the TNDP can’t start working on a transformational strategy to win back the state House and Senate right now. I don’t understand why it’s apparently so mystifying that Tennessee Democrats might want some reassurance in the wake of our losses last week. Is that so hard? We don’t want our version of Bill Hobbs, putting out dumb assed press releases every time his name drops from the top of the Google search for ”Right wing nutjob”, we want someone who will be honest with us, not create a blame storm, and give us hope for the future. It’s that simple. The lesson to be learned here is that inclusion and information are the solutions not the problems. This solution is easily handled, but has yet to appear. No matter who the Chair is going forward, he or she is going to need some help, we stand ready to provide some of that help if asked. By not addressing the problem now, it will just get worse going forward making it even harder in 2010. We don’t need a new Chair to start talking to state Democrats, we need our current Chair to lay the groundwork for some communication so we can be successful in the future.

Start Now

Steve Ross — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:17:34 +0000

It may only be 9 days since the election, but despite what some think there’s plenty that can be done now to begin the process of reclaiming a Democratic Majority in the Tennessee State House and Senate. First of all, this ain’t gonna be easy. It’s a pretty steep uphill battle, particularly in the State Senate. In 2010 there will be 9 Republican Seats and 8 Democratic seats up for grabs. Picking up the 3 seats necessary to flip the Senate is going to take a huge statewide effort, but it’s not impossible. Get involved in your local party - If you don’t know anything about your local party, the TNDP has this handy search tool. Go out of your way to find out what your local party is doing. Go to a meeting. Contact your State Execom members. Most importantly get and stay involved and informed. Support Democratic Organizations - I’ve been pretty damn critical of the TNDP over the past several days, but despite my unhappiness with what’s happened, or hasn’t happened in the past, I’m still a Democrat. Politicking is an expensive business, and if we want the state and local party to be something more than a dependent of the national party we have to give time and money. So I’m putting my money where my blog is. On the right side there are links to the TNDP, the House Democratic Caucus, the Senate Democratic Caucus and the Shelby County Democratic Party. We can’t expect these organizations to be strong if they’re lagging behind in the funding department. Do Some Research - Finding out information about what your government is doing can be difficult. While Tennessee has open meetings/records laws on the books, the rules governing, or the processes by which the information is made available can be…interesting. Start on this now, so later on in the process you don’t get caught behind a lengthy process. Consider Running for Office - Making the decision to run for office, even in a smaller market, is a big commitment. There are lots of things to think about and even more work to be done to build a viable campaign. Right now, when you basically have a year to do some of the legwork and soul searching you’ll need to be successful, is the best time to get started. Contact your local Election Commission to find out what is necessary to run. Be nice, because you’ll be dealing with these folks a lot if you throw your hat in the ring. Stay Involved - Just like everything else in life, from the diet you gave up on months ago, to any other new activity you introduce into your life, keeping the faith is harder than initially “feeling the spirit”. It’s easy to feel discouraged, but don’t let that discouragement stop you from staying engaged in the process. Make it a habit to do the little things, and the bigger things will get easier and easier. This list is hardly comprehensive, but it’s a start. If we can get people involved throughout the state now, we will have a much better chance of winning back the State House, the Senate, and retaining the Governorship in 2010.

What Happens When Lieberman Keeps His Gavel?

Steve Ross — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:28:41 +0000

I know I've already said my piece on Lieberman, but I'm just wondering. It's 3:30 and going through my rss reader right now, I see some 15-20 odd things about Lieberman, and how he's going to keep his gavel, and how that's unacceptable and all that stuff. Obviously, I agree, but is there really anything we can do about it? The 110th Congress has voted against the will of the Liberal Blogosphere over and over and over. From unconditional funding, to FISA, to you name it. I'm not trying to belittle the blogs, or anything like that, but the reality is that Senators and Congressmen are going to do whatever they damn well please, and apparently, keeping a backstabbing, whiny, self-absorbed, douchenozzle in charge of the Senate's version of an executive oversight committee is what they want to do! This has less to do with the blogs than it does with the Senators themselves. If they slap Lieberman around for disloyalty, they're opening themselves up to the same fate, or so the excuses go. The reality is that I can only think of a few Senators who would have the gall to go Lieberman on the caucus; Bill Nelson (FL), Mark Pryor (AR), Blanche Lincoln (AR), Mary Landrieu (LA) and Jay Rockafeller (WV). Notice where almost all of them are from? The thing here is that they haven't. They may have voted from time to time against certain things, but they haven't gone out on the stump for Republican candidates. They haven't called or associated with those who have called the Democratic President-Elect a "terrorist sympathizer". They haven't colluded to immediately undermine this incoming administration...unless you call being part of the Lieberman Whip team collusion. Lieberman made a choice. He chose the losing candidate, something he should be familiar with. Lieberman chose the candidate that votes against his values 80% of the time. Because Lieberman is not a Democrat (remember he's an independent), that's ok, but actually going out on the stump for the opposition candidate AND expecting to keep your plumb chairmanship? That's asking an awful lot. In most other countries that'd get your ass booted to the back bench. And that's what needs to happen here. Lieberman can vote with the Democrats all he wants, he can caucus with them if he chooses, he can keep his subcommittee crap if they let him, but he needs to be put out of the Chair of Homeland Security, if for no other reason than to regain a certain sense of party loyalty within the caucus. If people don't think there are consequences to their actions, this would be a sharp signal that there are, and if that pisses Lieberman off so much that he leaves the caucus, then so be it. Will it happen? Probably not. Senators are just too damn collegial to kick someone out of the bed for crapping on it. I don't know if this is spinelessness, or what, because I've personally never had a problem calling someone out when I felt they had demonstrated disloyalty, or done something contrary to the values that they purport to hold. In short, if the Senate Democratic Caucus votes to keep Lieberman in his seat, then they are voting to absolve Lieberman of any accountability for his actions, which is dangerous to the long-term viability of the caucus. So what happens when Lieberman keeps his gavel? I think you end up seeing a leadership challenge, if not this year, in 2010. I think Lieberman apologists like Ken Salazar (CO) get primaried. I think you see a Senate Majority that splinters along the lines of the vote. I know you'll hear all sorts of loud and angry hollerin' from the liberal blogosphere, but we should know better. The Senate will do what it thinks is best for the majority of it's Senators, not the party, not the country. That's the reality. That's really sad.

Is Memphis Ready For Another Indictment?

Steve Ross — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:15:11 +0000

I’m not saying it will happen, or that anyone’s guilty, or anything like that. To be sure, I don’t know enough of the facts surrounding the Mayor’s personal and professional doings to speak intelligently on the matter. I am pretty sure that Memphis isn’t ready for another indictment. The Feds here in Memphis have a mixed record when it comes to political indictments. On the one hand you’ve got John Ford. He and his other Tennessee Waltzers are either in jail, or on their way out of jail. On the other hand, you’ve got Edmund Ford Sr., who was found not guilty. I’m not going to make any judgments on the quality of the indictments, but it is interesting that former U.S. Attorney Kustoff left the office (May 16th was his last day) before the Edmund Ford Sr. case concluded (May 21st). I’m not saying it had anything to do with any weakness in the case, because I don’t know that and I recognize that US Attorneys are political appointees and do not actually present the cases. I just find it interesting. The latter trial involving Edmund Ford left a bad taste in the mouths of many Memphians. A lot of people, including some who initially thought he was guilty, felt the Government’s case looked like entrapment, even if it didn’t meet the legal standard of entrapment. Many people in Memphis looked at the latter indictments as a witch hunt. Perception vs. Reality being what it is, there is a perception in the community that because the majority of the Memphians indicted in both Tennessee Waltz and Main Street Sweeper were African-American, that this amounted to a racially driven hit job on African-American civic leaders. Remember, in the battle between perception vs. reality, perception often wins. So now the Memphis US Attorney’s office has a perception problem, and while the Grand Jury is still out on the Mayor, the Mayor most certainly understands this and will use this perception problem in his upcoming campaign to turn any potential indictment into a racial, rather than legal issue. The Mayor has plenty of public perception to back him up. 1. The perception that only African-Americans were targeted in both operations as I mentioned above. The reality is that this is not the case. That said, the fact that so much of the media coverage in Memphis centered on the Fords ultimately reinforces this perception. 2. Neither Tennessee Waltz, nor any other operation, uncovered individuals who may have sought to buy influence. Certainly, people seeking to buy influence don’t advertise in the classifieds, but while it’s easier to investigate the demand side, the supply side is usually where it begins. 3. There is a perception in Memphis, right or wrong, that wealthy whites consistently buy influence in the city or use their influence to discredit African-American leaders. Herenton effectively planted this seed back in June of 2007. Remember this?

"I think the city of Memphis should know what so-called powerful businessmen are doing to their leaders," Smith told The Commercial Appeal on Wednesday. "I think it should upset not only the African-American community, but the whole city.''

4. The Mayor, who has fought off charges of corruption for as long as I’ve lived here, knows how to work a situation. He’s doing it right now. In yesterday’s CA we learned that the Mayor had summoned people to serve as character witnesses on his behalf. Publicly, this looks like solidarity between the Mayor and his current and former appointees. Publicly, this discredits any impression of wrongdoing on the Mayor’s part. It will be interesting to see how many people actually sign the affidavits, but from a PR standpoint, the Mayor has won this round. So, aside from the evidentiary challenges the government faces, there are some pretty significant PR challenges. Now, that doesn’t seal the deal against the government’s case, but it does raise the standard for them. If the government presents a case rife with circumstantial evidence, they will lose, and be called out by just about every quarter of Memphis as racially driven partisan hacks. If the government can dot all the I’s and cross all the T’s and create a narrative of corruption, they may still lose. The reason, this case will be tried in the court of public opinion more than any other corruption trial in recent memory. The Mayor has a platform, and he’ll damn well use it. It will be difficult for the US Attorney’s office to counter the Mayor, without giving away the store. So, where to go from here? The US Attorney’s office has a duty to investigate and prosecute individuals who break the law, regardless of the public perception. I’m sure if they feel they have a case, they’ll go with it despite any PR challenges they may face. At the same time, a great deal of caution needs to be exercised so they don’t further diminish the public faith in the local office. If this one gets screwed up, any attempts to reel in corruption could be devastatingly crippled in the future.

To Protect and Serve, But Not Necessarily Reside

Steve Ross — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 13:26:09 +0000

God love Twitter, I got this update in my feed this morning.

The debate continues over whether Memphis Police Officers should be allowed to live 20 miles outside Shelby County. The Memphis City Council is divided over the matter, but is holding a meeting Tuesday, November 18, 2008, to vote on a resolution.

I don’t want to start a law enforcement debate, but I’m not positive that “more cops” = “less crime”. Washington DC has a whole lotta cops and a whole lotta crime. Do does Detroit. What do these two cities have in common? A whole lotta poverty. That’s not to say that poverty causes crime, or that the impoverished are criminals, but that poverty reinforces conditions that allow criminal behavior to flourish. Memphis, like DC and Detroit, has a whole lotta both too. So will hiring more cops really lower the crime rate in Memphis? Probably not. Still, that’s what politicians do, hire more cops to try and stop more crime because fixing the conditions that make crime more likely (like lack of education, opportunity, hope, etc.) is just too damn hard to sell to the voting public. But this debate is about whether to open up residency restrictions, not whether hiring more cops is necessary. Personally, I’d rather the cops here in Memphis at least live in Shelby County. I think people are more likely to stay cops in a community that they share a stake in. It costs a lot of money to train a cop, and I would hate to see Memphis put all that money into training just to have an officer leave after a couple of years to someplace else, taking all that training, and training dollars with them. At the same time, I don’t want to lower the bar any further on who can or cannot be a cop, because I think it’s plenty low right now, so maybe looking outside our borders is an answer. If Memphis wants to look outside our borders for the current or future law enforcement professionals necessary, we need to create a system where we reward them for eventually moving into the city. I’m not sure how to do this structurally, but it’s something to think about. Ultimately, Memphis needs to think about why we consistently rank so high in violent and property crime, and what current conditions exist to maintain that circumstance. Most people don’t turn to crime because it has any great upside, or for the benefits package, or any of the other reasons people make career choices. Maybe, just maybe, we’re thinking about this all wrong. I don’t know what happened here in Memphis, but in the mid to late 1990’s in Little Rock, after years and years of some of the highest murder rates in history, something happened. Everything slowed down. Strangely, the unemployment rate also went down. It’s funny. People who have relatively good jobs with some hope for the future don’t rob people or businesses, or try to kill each other, by and large. Sure Little Rock had more cops on the street, but not significantly more. Not enough to cause the decline in crime. Over the past several years, as the unemployment rate in Little Rock has climbed, so has the crime rate…could there be a connection? Surely not. /snark Another thing, I’ve never really understood how more cops on the streets magically prevents crime from happening. The immediate presence of law enforcement officers may motivate some ne’er do well to move elsewhere, or wait ‘til the coast is clear to commit a crime, but it doesn’t necessarily stop the crime. Cops can’t just pick people up because they look like criminals. Can you imagine how many lawsuits the city would face if law enforcement just started detaining people who “looked like” criminals? Hell, what does a criminal “look like” anyway, if they’re not carrying a plasma TV down the street at 2 am, what is the distinguishing characteristic of a “criminal”? My point here is not that we don’t need more cops. I don’t know if we do or don’t. My point is that if we really want to reduce crime in Memphis and Shelby County, we have to look at the root. Smart City has a good post on this too. Until we stop ignoring the conditions that maintain the status quo, we’ll never deal with our crime rate.

EPIC FAIL - Lieberman Keeps Chairmanship - UPDATED

Steve Ross — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 17:13:26 +0000

Yeah, that's right. The vote was 42-13. Since Twitter is down right now, I'll post it here. Wimps. Update: On the bright side, today is "International Laugh at Joe Lieberman Day! You can participate by calling his office, and laughing. If you have a video camera, tape yourself doing this and share it with your friends! Lieberman's office number is (202) 224-4041. Enjoy!

What We Have in Common

Steve Ross — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 20:01:47 +0000

I’m probably going to get yelled at for saying this, but I’ve been thinking about it off and on for a long time. Hell, I may have said it before and I just don’t remember, but today’s events brought it back up in my mind, so here we go. What do the liberal left and the religious right have in common? Frustration. The religious right worked for years to attain a majority for the Republican Party in the House and Senate, spending countless hours working for people that purported to share their views, giving money and all that stuff. They did this to get rid of “activist judges” so they could get their own “activist judges” that reflected their views. They were faithful warriors in the “Cluture Wars”, fighting for their long-held beliefs. What did they get in return? Nothing. The majority of conservative legislation that passed had more to do with the real power holders of the Republican Party, the Club for Growth guys than anything the Religious Right ever really pushed for. Gays are still in the military, abortion is still legal, and the 10 commandments still can’t be displayed in courthouses. If the Republican Party is wondering why they lost their asses the past two elections, blowing off their “boots on the ground” base may, just may have something to do with it. On the flip side, since 2001 liberal activists have been working to help build a Democratic Majority. The loss of the White House under dubious circumstances in 2000 ignited the liberal left. While the party may have taken a hard right turn in the post-911 environment, by the end of 2003 the liberal left was working it’s way back into the hearts and minds of Democrats, still fearful of the term “liberal” but willing to use us when it benefited getting the Party back into the majority. While our gains in 2006 were largely attributed to dissatisfaction with the Bush administration’s handling of the war, it was the liberal left that led the charge on that front. Criticizing the Bush Administration was something that struck fear in the hearts of rank and file Democratic candidates. By September of 2006, the chorus was growing, and it was fashionable to be critical, finally. Since 2006, with a majority in the House and a slim majority in the Senate, Democrats have flipped and flopped their way on issues of great concern to the liberal left. By and large, we on the liberal left, while unhappy, have still gone out of our way to make sure that Democrats get elected. In some cases we worked to primary candidates deemed too far to the right. Still ultimately, we worked for Democrats. Liberals aren’t exactly getting what we want either, but we’re still working for Democrats, for now. Eventually, we’ll get tired of not getting what we want, or getting mocked, and once again the Democratic Party will be wondering where their base went, just like the Republican Party is doing right now. Religious Right, we may disagree on just about everything, particularly as it relates to policy, but we know how you feel. It sucks, but the reality is, it’s not gonna change for either of us anytime soon.

Revenge Vs. Reward vs. Accountability

Steve Ross — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 20:59:52 +0000

This is my third and last Lieberman post of the day. On the Big Orange Devil there’s a post by Argyrios that argues the Lieberman vote is the “Change We Need”. I get what the author is saying. I argued about a week ago that Obama may want Lieberman to keep his post for many of these very reasons. But let’s not confuse what this vote is about. This vote is not about revenge, it’s about accountability. Instead of holding Lieberman accountable for his actions, Senate Democrats have chosen to reward Lieberman for working for Republican candidates in the elections. As I said earlier this morning, he would have been booted from the party in just about any other country in the world for his actions. So, Democrats have chosen to not hold their members accountable for working against the party. What does this say about Democrats’ dedication to Democratic principles? Sure Lieberman has been a democrat for 45 years, but his actions in the past several years have effectively undermined Democratic Principles. We’re supposed to feel good about rewarding that? We’re supposed to feel good about not holding someone accountable for their actions? Are you kidding me? Here’s the real question going forward. How will Lieberman act toward his detractors? Sanders and Leahy spoke out against him in the caucus meeting. Anyone want to be Lieberman works against those three? See, if Lieberman actually feels bad about any of this, other than that fake “politically” bad, he’ll go out of his way to work with those three in particular. In reality, I think we’ll see Senator Lieberman go out of his way to obstruct these Senators, and anyone else he deems to be on his “enemies list”. That’s “Change we can Believe in”. Below is the press conference after the vote.

It’s About the Plan

Steve Ross — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:47:33 +0000

Last night GoldnI posted about the NCDP’s Plan of Organization. GoldnI notes:

At the top of the page, in one of the drop-down menus, are links to the contact info for every single county party.

The TNDP has it’s problems, but getting someone’s contact information isn’t one of them. In fact, I downloaded just about every single Democratic Official’s contact info to an Excel spreadsheet this morning. Be warned, I just might use it! That said, knowing anything about what the state party or any of the various county parties are doing or how they’re structured or any of that, yeah, you’re better off asking someone, the TNDP site doesn’t even have an “about” page. How the hell do you make a web site without an “about” page? GoldnI’s overall point is spot on about having a plan, and making it known. How can an organization that relies on people getting involved expect people to get excited about said organization without communicating an overall strategy? I’m not saying give anyone and everyone every single tactic you may or may not employ, not that those tactics are any real secret either, I’m talking about an overall strategy that gives people something to do and keeps them involved for the long term. This is, perhaps, the single greatest failing of the TNDP in the last election cycle. More than anything else, the TNDP did a crappy job of communicating a plan. I don’t put this responsibility on Communications Director Wade Munday as it was his job to communicate the message, not craft it from the bottom up. I put it on the entire governing apparatus of the TNDP, and the general belief in old school “Trickle Down” politicking. “Trickle Down” or “Top Down” politicking is just like it sounds; people at the top make decisions, those decisions “trickle down” through the ranks to the people. Just like “Trickle Down Economics”, few at the bottom of the information stream ever get wet. At some point, the information gets soaked up closer to the top and never makes it to the rest of the people. Elected officials and political parties have used this method for years, and to a certain degree it’s worked. It can work, as long as people never age, have any personal crisis, or organized opposition. The problem with “top down” is that you never build any bench players to step in should the starter have to step out. The people at the top hold all the cards. When that person leaves, he/she leaves a vacuum in their wake, a prime target to be exploited by the opposition, which is exactly what happened. The “Groundswell” method addresses the issue in a very different way. Groundswell campaigns actively enlist as many people as possible, making those people stakeholders in the campaign. Groundswell campaigns give people activities and information to keep them a part of the process. We saw this, on a national level, with the Obama campaign. They had scads of volunteers working, building an organization all over the country. They built this network by informing, and in some cases, bugging the shit out of donors and volunteers with email and print marketing. But this method can’t originate in a vacuum. There has to be some kind of organization to build from, and the Tennessee had several strikes against it from the beginning; being a traditional “Red State”, a weak state party largely organized around personalities rather than principles, and a largely rural population made it impossible for the Obama campaign to sink enough resources throughout the state to really make a dent in the state. Add to that the effective attacks of the TNGOP, coupled with a decidedly anemic response from the TNDP and well, Gov. Bredesen, Chairman Sasser, you have no one to blame but yourselves. So, how do we correct this? We start with a plan from the state party that includes training and outreach, consistent communication, coherent organization, and activation of the field. We build an organization around principles rather than politicians. We spread the field and give as many people as possible a voice so that collective voice will carry the party forward instead of a single voice, or a group of single voices dragging the party along. Here’s how it works: 1. Build a Curriculum – In order to build an organization you have to be willing to train them. Put together a curriculum that teaches people how to organize their neighborhoods/communities into smaller community groups. 2. Go out and Train – Start with areas that have been traditionally competitive, as well as old standby’s like Shelby and Davidson Counties. These areas probably already have more of a bench that can be utilized than anywhere else. Use this opportunity to connect people with their Execom members and other local party functionaries. Building this relationship now will pay off big time come election day. 2.5 – Go Local – In areas that Democratic candidates sometimes have more difficulty, or areas that are VERY rural, train up the county party. Give them tools to help organize people, encourage activities that engage others. Visibility is key. Visibility breaks down barriers and minimizes objections. 3. Communicate to the Masses – Using the mailing list that you have collected through these training exercises, communicate frequently to your new army. Give them somewhere to go or something to do that’s trackable (a page on the site, a general activity). Encourage them to forward the email to new people, offering a means for these new people to get on the list and sign up for eventual training. ALWAYS ask for money. If you don’t ask, you don’t get. Encourage small or recurring donations. 4. Expand the Field – Once you have your core group, team them up with a State Execom member or two and send them into less “blue” counties to train up the base. Remember, you’re building constituents not candidates. The candidates will come, and if they’re smart they’ll see what’s going on an work to duplicate. 5. Keep the Mo – Once you get this started, you can’t stop. Any interruption in this plan will yank the foundation out from under the base you’re creating. Don’t let personalities get in the way of progress. Remember, this is about expanding the field not concentrating power. Some old timers may have a hard time with this. Newbies will sense this and react negatively. Keeping it about the constituents is the key. 6. Mine for Gold – Use the resources you’ve built to find out what concerns your constituents most. That’s your platform, and many of these new people will eventually be your candidates. 7. Build Candidates/Organizations – Start training people to be good candidates and build good organizations that further support Democratic ideals and principles. Remember, this isn’t about creating a specific line of succession, it’s about building a bench of potential candidates, from local office up, any of whom could step in and move the ball down the field. 8. Encourage Constructive Primary Contests – This will probably piss more people off than anything, but it’s vital. No team can win without competition. No team can grow without opportunity. The current system of discouraging primary contests thins the bench, and leads to people checking out. If a primary contest weakens a candidate they were weak to begin with. Primary contests should be focused on the issues and be civil. People who break this rule should be called out. Some feel that they should be given a pass because they have been serving a community for a long time, but how can we build a great party organization and stifle competition? It defies logic. 9. Rinse and Repeat – After each election, bring people together, on a statewide and a county level. Talk about what worked and what needs work. Be honest and open. Listen to people who feel disenfranchised and talk openly and honestly about how to better include them. There will always be people who fall through the cracks, your goal is to minimize the number as much as possible. As we move forward to the selection of a new TNDP chair, we need the potential candidates to talk about their plan. If I was chair, this would be my plan, but different people may have differed worldviews/priorities. In any case “A PLAN” is better than the “NO COMMUNICATED PLAN” we seem to have been operating under. If candidates for TNDP chair can’t lay out a plan then they will suffer the same fate of the current chair, and the state will suffer along with them. No matter what, doing what we’ve always been doing isn’t working, it’s time to try something new. Hopefully the candidates for Chair see this, and will respond accordingly. Update: I recognize that my site does not have an "About" page either. The irony is not lost on me. I'm working to correct it, so no one can say I'm just another "Annonymous Blogger".

Winning Where No Democrat has Won Before

Steve Ross — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:33:25 +0000

We have less than 2 years. 2 years to contest 10 Republican held Senate seats, and defend 7. Think it’s too early to start on this? Think again. That plan I posted yesterday is just one part of a prescription for the party that includes a seismic shift, from being the party of here and there, to EVERYWHERE in Tennessee. In 2006 we fielded NO candidates for State Senate in Districts 3,5,7, and 9. In districts 1,11,13,17, 23 and 31 we did field candidates, but lost, despite a hotly contested and close statewide election for US Senate, and a runaway win by Governor Bredesen. In 2008 we actually did a good deal better in terms of fielding candidates, leaving only one seat uncontested (32) and two others with no Democratic challenger (4 and 8). On the House side, we have a lot of challenges. This year we left at least 26 seats uncontested, or with no Democrat in the race to Republicans. That’s a lot of seats left on the table. Democrats have to do better at putting people out there, even if the chances are long. If we don’t compete, we can’t win. I want to thank those candidates who chose to contest those red seats for putting yourself out there. I’m interested in your experience, what support you received from the state and local party, and some key insights about the districts and any other information that might be helpful for a campaign in 2010. If you’re interested in making a go at it again, I’d like to know about that too. In 2010, we may not have the benefit of a sitting Governor running for office, or a Senate campaign, but we still have to work to contest all of these seats. I understand that east Tennessee is Ruby Red. I understand that there’s a very good chance we won’t win. I also know for damn sure that if you don’t play you can’t win. Tennessee Democrats have to start working now, to be able to play everywhere. Believe it or not, there are Democrats in East Tennessee. State House District 2 used to be held by a Democrat, and Democrats hold House Districts 10 and 11. That may not seem like much, but it’s a start. As red as East TN is, there have to be Democrats in City or County Government somewhere out there. These are the people who we need to approach to run first. Ultimately, this is a trust building exercise. The TNDP and County Parties have to put a good faith effort forward well in advance to convince our friends in the east of the state that they can compete and will be supported by the party at all levels. In some cases, the local party may be suffering from malaise or lack of leadership. While the State party can’t necessarily directly fix this problem, it can work to create conditions where the problem can fix itself by training up motivated and interested area Democrats. Ultimately, that’s the root of my criticism for the TNDP. I understand that a state party can’t go into every county and make the local parties better, but it is the job of the state party to create conditions and opportunities where the local parties can make themselves better, involve more people, and ultimately play a role in bringing the party back to a majority in the state House, Senate, as well as in the local contests. We can build a strong and inclusive party apparatus here in Tennessee. It may take a while in some areas, but if we focus on building from the ground up, we’ll build a foundation that can help turn all of Tennessee bluer. Ultimately that’s the goal of Democrats throughout the state. That’s what we should be working for. I’m glad to see that one of the candidates for chair is thinking this way. I can’t wait to learn more of the details as of his and other candidates’ plans as we go forward.

A Thanksgiving Message from Vibinc

Steve Ross — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:31:48 +0000

Thanksgiving is, perhaps, my favorite cold holiday besides New Years. It involves two of my favorite “deadly sins” sloth and gluttony, and ultimately leads to a great deal of imbibing once the family finally leaves. This year, will be the third year my mother and uncle have come over for Thanksgiving. I like this because I get to cook, which is one of my secret loves. In fact, I’ve been preparing for this for about two weeks (in my head), coming up with side items, thinking about my grocery list, etc. As is the usual case with Thanksgiving, we are having turkey, though ours will be slow smoked over hickory and charcoal. I’m making my Grandmother’s dressing, which ultimately ends up with a couple dozen “stuffin muffins” (dressing poured into muffin tins that make great TCS (Turkey, Cranberry and “Stuffin”) sandwiches. We don’t do actual “stuffing”. I’ve never understood “stuffing”, possibly because it was never something my family ever engaged in. I also don’t do stuffing because there’s only so many times I can stick my hand up a birds ass before it stops being “special”. I’ll save that for retrieving the giblets and turkey neck. We’re also having “green bean glop” (S.Mac’s specialty), garlicy mashed potatoes, and asparagus. I love asparagus, as a general statement. Add this to my mom’s deviled eggs (her best dish), the pie we didn’t make because we’re lazy, and whatever Uncle Frankie brings and well, we’ll be asleep by 2pm. There are a lot of things that I’m thankful for this year; S.Mac, and the Bruiser pup, and all the friends I’ve made in the past several years. My health which keeps holding on despite all the dumb things (like smoking) I do. All in all, we’re pretty lucky, and I’m thankful for that too. Happy Thanksgiving folks, enjoy this special time with family. I intend to, and remember, they drive you crazy because they’re just like you…unless they’re not.

Somebody Gets It

Steve Ross — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:57:53 +0000

I’ve been suffering from the “post-Turkey Day” blues, and a whole lot of stuff to do, so I apologize for the lack of content. Right now I’m in Anaheim, CA, spitting distance from Mickey Mouse, and well, I can honestly say I’d rather be at home, but I can’t be so, it is what it is. Normally, I wouldn’t get into this right now, my mind when I’m traveling usually has to stay focused on the task at hand, but David Oatney wrote something this morning about one of my posts that really just hit the nail on the head more directly than I did:

However, I do understand from a raw political point of view why Democrats-especially liberal Democrats-do not want to write East Tennessee off. As someone who has been involved in several political campaigns and who has even run for public office himself, I believe it to be an insult to the voters to simply write anyone off.

I couldn’t have, and didn’t say it better myself. This is the key, in my mind, to a Democratic resurgence in Tennessee. We have to put people out there to represent Democratic values in unfriendly places in order to ultimately get Democrats elected. This won’t be quick or easy. We have a lot of things going against us in East TN, as well as the much of rural TN, but if we act like TN is just Shelby and Davidson Counties, we’re screwed. This means a lot of things, but mostly it means being ready to work for and support a candidate like Travis Childers in MS to get a D seat. Many West Tennesseans did, and now our bedroom community, North Mississippi, has a Democratic Representative. We need to be willing to do the same in rural TN. It won’t immediately pay off. In fact, it may not pay off for quite some time, but we have to do something. The way to turning TN blue is not by ignoring districts deemed “too hard” to contest. The way to win is by vigorously contesting those “hard” districts, as well as the soft ones, and that may mean we have to get behind Democrats who may not be the fullest expression of our personal definitions of “Democrats”. Don’t misunderstand me. I’m not arguing for pragmatism over principle, I’m arguing against surrender. When we surrender districts we surrender our values to a bully pulpit that ultimately undermines our values. By running someone who represents the Democratic platform, we affirm our values, even if the candidate in question may have certain contrary positions. I would rather have a part-time ally than a consistent adversary. And while I’ve been hard on the Blue Dogs and other groups in the US Congress, I know that without them, we would have no majority to speak of. The truth of the matter, as Newscoma so often details is that rural America is losing so much so fast. They’re losing jobs and people and the richness of their community to forces that are hard to understand. To add insult to injury, by not contesting the 26 State House seats we left open in the last election they are losing one of the foundations of our Republic, debate. We are duty bound, as Americans, to rectify this situation. This is my deep thought for the week. As a guy who grew up in rural Arkansas, and moved to the city, once external forces out of our control crippled my hometown, I get it. It is insulting to write off ANYONE. We need everyone, to keep our towns, and cities, and counties, and state, and nation strong. That’s what being a Democrat is all about. That’s what America is all about.

Put this Punk Away

Steve Ross — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 23:13:05 +0000

The news is buzzing with the arrest of Illinios Governor Blagojevich and his Chief of Staff John Harris for trying to sell the seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama. Let me echo LWC’s sentiment. Blago has been under a microscope for a long time. Still, this dipshit had the temerity to try and profit personally from the selection of Obama’s successor in the Senate. What an idiot. US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was on TV this morning talking about the indictment, and he’s right, this is a sad day for government. It doesn’t matter what party a person is a member of, if they are trying to personally profit from their position they have no business being anywhere but in the pokey. There is a belief by some in positions of power, that they can act with little or no regard for the rule of law, for their personal enrichment. This belief is not limited to public officials, but also people in the private sector. I think we’ve seen a lot of this recently with corporate executive’s actions and reactions to calls for the return of unearned or questionable income in the face of massive losses. All forms of corruption, no matter how hard they are to investigate, should be pursued in order to maintain faith in the rule of law by holding those with little or no regard for the law, accountable. I have a great deal of faith in Patrick Fitzgerald’s ability to remove his personal political views, whatever those may be, from executing his duty as a US Attorney. Even though he didn’t give me everything I wanted for Fitzmas several years ago, I hold him in the highest regard. However, this administration has a history of using the US Attorney’s office for political gain. The prosecution of Former Gov. Don Siegelman in Alabama, the US Attorney controversy featuringMonica Goodling, and several other situations involving former AG Alberto Gonzales, have left a stain on the department that needs to be corrected. This means holding those who have damaged our justice system accountable, something Obama may not want to spend political capitol on.

"If crimes have been committed, they should be investigated," Obama said, but added, "I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve." (Source)

Obama may be right that there are a lot of “problems to solve”, but restoring faith in the Federal Government is one that must happen, and must happen soon, if Obama is to accomplish even half of the things on his agenda. This means returning the DOJ from the grip of the political arm-twisting that it has engaged in for the past 8 years. Other institutions, the VA, CIA, and FEMA come to mind, need to be freed of the taint that this administration, and that’s going to take some tough admissions of wrongdoing and active efforts to change in a very public way. It may be uncomfortable for Obama, and may, in the minds of some, run contrary to his “post-partisan” rhetoric, but prosecuting people who have behaved badly in the course of the past 8 years will probably also be the only way to really restore public faith in the rule of law. None of this, of course, has anything directly to do with the Blago-gate scam, but for Obama to not get caught up, even tangentially, in the scandals of those in or outside his sphere of influence, rebuilding our mantle of “A Nation of Laws” internally is the first step, no matter how uncomfortable it might be.

Feeling Dirty…

Steve Ross — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 13:53:16 +0000

Apparently “Joe the Plumber” said in an interview with Right Wing nutjob Glen Beck”felt dirty” during and after campaigning for Senator John McCain. (snickers) I guess “good old Joe” is having some seller’s remorse. Whoring yourself out like he did is only fun until you realize that; they’re not really that interested in you, and…you’re just a whore to them. Sorry dude. He’s still all rainbows and unicorns on Sara Palin. I wish this douche would go away. Huffpost has the audio that I don’t have the stomach to listen to.

Chip’s Vision

Steve Ross — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:25:21 +0000

Kleinheider posts on a letter from TNDP candidate for Chair, and current Treasurer, Chip Forrester. The letter gives scant new details on how Forrester plans to turn the party around, but does give just enough to make one want more, an appetizer or general vision, if you will, giving Democrats a tantalizing taste of what Chip wants to do for the Party. Last week while I was out of town, Forrester met with several Memphis Democrats, and let some of his plans be known, though still in a very general way, for the party. All in all, I think most people came away from it with a pretty good feeling. Since I couldn’t attend, much to my displeasure, I didn’t benefit from this “feel good”. In fact, just moments before Kleinheider posted his report I was wondering just what was going on with our current Treasurer’s campaign for TNDP Chair. I’m glad to see he’s making inroads with several constituencies. Unfortunately, as is my nature, I’m still not convinced. At this point, I may be the only one in the state, but I’ve seen the good, bad and ugly of party politics both here and in Arkansas for some 20 years and I’m skeptical. To be fair, I’m a perpetual skeptic, and I’m unrealistically hard on everyone, including myself. That said, I’m one of the most optimistic skeptics you’ll ever find anywhere. I want to believe that things will get better, but have lived through the reality that it rarely does. We can talk about broad ideas and gimmicks to turn the party around, and some, hell many, of them may work. But the devil’s in the details. Many of us want to know specifics. I don’t have a vote in this thing. I’m not a state Execom member. I am a stakeholder, as is everyone in Tennessee. As much as conventional wisdom would like to say that nothing happens in Nashville, really quite a bit happens there that affects our daily lives. Who our representatives will be, will shape unseen details of life in Tennessee for years, perhaps decades to come. Ultimately, that’s why this is important, that’s why we need more than a vision. I hope that whoever becomes the chair of the TNDP, most likely Mr. Forrester, can turn that vision into a plan, and coordinate that plan with the county parties throughout the state. Still, I’d like to see a detailed plan, and soon. I don’t think I’m being melodramatic in saying that the position is of great importance to the future of the state of Tennessee, and the TNDP. As for Mr. Forrester, should you be selected Chair, remember, we are your soldiers and we are ready to fight. Let us know your plan.

Bredesen’s Bone to Pick

Steve Ross — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:36:24 +0000

Apparently, there was some action on the race for the TNDP while I was in a full-scale internet blackout late last week. Over at Post Politics, we saw our Governor exhibit his traditional “no position taken” position in endorsing Charles Robert Bone. Another post, quoting a Democratic insider with a very lively comments thread, and a litany of other posts about and around the subject. At this point, I’m not ready to come out swinging for anyone. Forrester is saying the right things, but without a solid action plan, I’m still not sold. Mr. Bone, on the other hand, sufferers from the support of our Governor, whose Democratic credentials become more questionable every time he opens his mouth. Further, Mr. Bone hasn’t released ANYTHING to my knowledge detailing anything he intends to do at the TNDP, so that isn’t very reassuring. One comment from this post really stands out in my mind

Frankly, I don’t think any of you people have a clue. Campaigns and caucuses run elections, not freaking parties. I have friends that are Democratic political operatives in North Carolina. They told me that the campaigns in that state are completely separate from the state party because the state party is run by a bunch of worthless crazies.

First, the commenter is generally correct, state parties cannot “work” every campaign. It’s just impossible. The state party can help tie campaigns together, or provide an overarching framework for campaigns to piggy back on. Secondly, I’m not sure what he means by “crazies”, but if “crazies” means minimizing your role to somehow create success, well, that sounds like crazy to me. Has the TNDP been run by crazies all this time? Maybe. And didn’t North Carolina get a new Democratic Senator and go for Obama? Well maybe a state party being run by crazies isn’t so bad after all! I don’t think anyone is calling for the TNDP to work like the Politburo, expelling, or otherwise disciplining those who veer from its vision. I do think most Tennessee Democrats would like a party that seems outwardly engaged, something that was not evident in the last election cycle. Selecting an insider for the chair of the TNDP would seem to be a contrary position to that circumstance. The reality is that no one will get the chair of the TNDP without being an insider. Insiders run politics at all levels. Even newcomers have to have some inside support to be successful. So the question for the TNDP may be, “What kind of insider do we want?” In order to answer that question, it may be helpful to determine what kind of insider we don’t want. I don’t want a whiner who spends the bulk of their time blaming the top of the ticket, or tossing around straw men to somehow strengthen their diminishing position, I want a fighter. I don’t want a person that relies solely on their inside ties to run the party, I want someone with a broad vision willing to include people from all walks of life in innovative ways. I don’t want someone who views the role of the TNDP as that of a fiscal parasite, leeching off the national party for existence, I want someone who will make the party strong and sustainable. Of the two announced candidates, I don’t know if either are the right choice for the party, but I do know that the party is not in a strong enough position to provide the support necessary to bring a Democratic majority back to the state ledge. Another comment that I thought was interesting came from Nate de Salvo

By the logic you people throw around, Howard Dean and the DNC won the presidency, not Barack Obama. And I guess the RNC and whoever their chairman is lost. How ignorant is that?

I would submit that the RNC, NRCC, and NRSC DID lose over the past two cycles. They had a President that was relatively popular until he proved himself utterly incompetent to the rest of the nation (most Democrats were painfully aware of this long before) in 2005. The result was losing the majority of the Congress, as well as the White House. That seems like a failure on a party level to me. I would also argue that, while Howard Dean may not deserve all the credit for the gains that Democrats have made nationally, he does deserve some credit for setting up a system that works to involve as many people as possible in the process. Dean’s 50 state strategy laid the groundwork for Obama’s fundraising and organizing bonanza. I credit Dean for opening our eyes to a new potential that doesn’t deny the effectiveness of old campaign methods, but incorporates new ways of communicating into them. Ultimately, that’s the same type of role the TNDP should work toward; laying the groundwork for campaigns to be successful. Finally, I want to talk about our Governor. I don’t blame him for the losses in 2008 any more than I credit him for anything in 2006. He’s the Governor. I understand the impact top of ticket races can have on down ticket contests, but unlike the Governor, I don’t blame the top of the ticket for the problems at the bottom of the ticket. Every race is unique, with unique opportunities and challenges. Still, as the head of state, and the highest elected Democratic politician in the state, he has a leadership role. Being an effective leader requires a lot of skills, accountability is one of them. Blaming the top of the ticket for problems down the ballot is childish. Each contest stands on its own, and the individual campaigns, including the coordinating campaigns of the Democratic Party and Caucus apparatus should be nimble enough to provide support in this challenging year for the state. Perhaps the top of the ticket created additional challenges for down ballot contests, but we knew who the Democratic Presidential nominee was going to be by state primary day here in Tennessee, and some of the challenges that had to be overcome. That left plenty of time for the individual candidates, and the Democratic leadership to adjust their strategy. Blaming Obama for the losses in the state is like blaming Toyota for the broken car you never maintained. Had the powers that be spent as much time building the party as they have taken credit or passed blame, depending on the situation, the party would be in a position to weather these storms. Unfortunately, the Governor chose to focus on "sage advise" to the President-elect, like visiting a Waffle House, or Wal-Mart. In doing so, Bredesen "accidentally" reinforced right wing talking points that Obama was somehow an elitist. Now, I'm no strategy guru, but it seems like if someone is calling you an "elitist" the last thing you want is your "friends" saying anything that might reinforce that message, particularly if that "friend" is freelancing a message on a level that's just way out of this world. Maybe the Governor should have followed his own advise with State candidates, showing up at Wal-Marts and Waffle Houses in hotly contested areas instead of providing material for Bill Hobbs. Just a thought.

Rumors of My Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated…

Steve Ross — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:29:36 +0000

The Wall Street Journal reports on a Russian foreign policy analyst that predicts the end of the United States sometime in 2010. Funny thing is, he’s been predicting this for some 10 years. Further he predicts that the nation will split up into 6 “regional nations”. Igor Panarin isn’t considered a crackpot in Russia. In fact, he’s the Dean of the Foreign Ministry Academy that trains future diplomats, and a former KGB agent, which is just one of the areas where his theory (aside from the general crackpottiness as a whole) falls apart. For some reason, the career foreign analyst is looking at the US through a lens skewed by the disintegration of the former USSR. Panarin’s analysis ignores our national identity as a whole. Unlike Russia, the states that make up the US were never nations with hundreds of years of history and unique cultural identities, unlike many of the states that once made up the USSR. As such, most Americans view themselves as Americans first, and natives of their states second. Few people, with the possible exception of Texans, view themselves as Tennessean-Americans, or Illinois-Americans. In fact, state identity rarely comes up when Americans talk about their American-ness. Strike 1. Strike 2 comes from the “economic and moral collapse” that Panarin describes. Certainly, the current financial crisis is a blow to the nation, but it still hasn’t proven to be anywhere as deep or wide as the “Great Depression” of the 1930’s. Unemployment is nowhere near 25%. Vast wealth has been lost, but by and large, the wealthy are still wealthy, and even though the working class is suffering the bulk of the hurt, there is little chance that enough of them are willing to take up arms and fight a government that they generally identify with. Nationalism in the US is still high, though far lower than in the initial post-911 environment. If no one shows up for the 4th of July, I’ll worry. Until then, not so much. As for the moral collapse, well, that ends on 1/20/09 when we replace our despotic President through a peaceful Presidential transition. Russia, on the other hand, can’t even seem to get rid of their despot (Putin). Strike 3 comes when the actual purpose of the whole theory is revealed. From the article:

He presented his theory at a recent roundtable discussion at the Foreign Ministry. The country's top international relations school has hosted him as a keynote speaker. During an appearance on the state TV channel Rossiya, the station cut between his comments and TV footage of lines at soup kitchens and crowds of homeless people in the U.S.

Does any of this sound familiar? Sounds an awful lot like US characterizations of the USSR throughout my childhood. During the Cold War the US used characterizations similar to this (long bread lines, etc.) to instill a level of national pride as a hedge against anyone who would seek to nationalize anything, and as a propaganda tactic for those living behind the “Iron Curtain” that had access to western media. I was too young to know if any of these reports were true at the time, or if the scope of the food shortages in the USSR were as widespread as they were reported to be, but it doesn’t really matter. This was a tool in the execution of the Cold War, just as it is a tool in the execution of Russian nationalism right now. Since the ascension of Putin, the Russian Federation has sought to reclaim the “glory” of its former incarnation. Once the oligarchs in Russia had divvied up all they could for themselves, leaving many ordinary Russians in the lurch, they faced a great deal of internal challenges. Building nationalism is one way to distract a population that has largely been poorly served from the problems they face. That is all this theory is about. Enjoy your fame Mr. Panarin. I imagine in 18 months, when your theory doesn’t come to pass, that the crow you eat will be might tasty. Hopefully by then you’ll be relegated to the sidelines like all those apocalypse predictors from times past.

Purity Pledges – A Policy of Ignorance

Steve Ross — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:16:52 +0000

In a new study by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health the truth about Purity Pledges and Abstinence Only Education is revealed… They don’t work. Of the individuals studied, a full 82% had reneged on their promise to refrain from sexual activity (this includes the full spectrum of sexual activity). Further, comdom usage by those who made purity pledges is 10% less than those who never made such a pledge. The study attributes this to, “negative views about condoms”, by those who participate in Abstinence only education. Ever since the first report of the Purity Ball, and the increased reliance of Abstinence Only Sex Ed that has dominated the Bush Administration’s policy, I’ve had a sinking feeling about the fate of teens who are largely being used as political pawns in a game that has their future at stake. The notion that somehow telling a teenager to “Just Say No” when their body is saying just the opposite is mad, but that’s exactly what Abstinence only and these Purity Pledges are unsuccessfully trying to achieve. To be fair, I haven’t explored the entire curriculum that is employed in Abstinence Only Sex-Ed. Different places likely have different versions of the program, but in polling my family members, nearly all of whom are current or former educators from elementary to secondary schools, they report that abstinence only education is a foul joke being played on the youth of America at the hands of those who are more interested in scoring political points, or bringing back some nostalgic religious fantasy of days gone by, than the health of the teens. The truth of the matter is that people make better decisions when they are better informed. By giving in to the false notion that abstinence is the only way to protect against teen pregnancy we are effectively arming our teens with a hammer and calling the problem a nail, but it’s not that simple. Arming our teens with as much information as possible, from condoms to other contraception, as well as abstinence, is the best way to prevent teen pregnancy. Short of locking them up from age 13 until they graduate, nothing is going to stop teenagers from having sex, nothing. The feelings are too complicated, and new. Emotion and “the heat of the moment” will almost always trump any rational decision-making. Abstinence only education ignores this completely, making it a “Good person/Bad person” situation. The long-term consequences of this false choice are detrimental to the individual. The message should be, “You’re not a bad person if you have sex before marriage, but you are putting yourself at risk. Here’s how to better protect yourself.” Abstinence only presents a problem for those who subscribe to the “Family statement” from the 1998 Southern Baptist Convention: “A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ.” There is no doubt that teen couples are not married, but the relationship can mirror “marriage” on an emotional level that complicates the issue. By telling young women that they are to “submit” to their spouses, then telling them to “Just say no” fundamentalist Christians have created a conflict that most teens are ill-equipped to solve. Finally, abstinence-only proponents should be required to disclose that even abstinence isn’t foolproof, unless they deny the Immaculate Conception. Seriously folks, you have to be consistent. The truth of the matter is that we, as a people, have to stop relying on ignorance to shape attitudes and drive debate, and work to make the best information possible, available to all our people, including teens. This means not relying on abstinence as the “only way”, but also informing them of the full menu of protections against pregnancy. It has been proven we can’t stop the behavior, so it is our duty to give our teens the tools to protect themselves from the worst consequences of sexual activity. When ignorance fails…educate!

"Stunningly Superficial"

Steve Ross — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 18:10:09 +0000

It's the phrase of the day...

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

JoeScar sets 'em up, ZBig knocks em down. I love it.

Contact

Steve Ross — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:30:06 +0000

[contact-form 1 "Contact form 1"] All communications will be held in the strictest confidence, but please use your real email address or I'll just dismiss you as a crackpot.

When Bloggers Attack

Steve Ross — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 18:49:11 +0000

A long, long time ago, BC (Before Clinton was President) I was a college student. During that time a well-respected member of the faculty was removed for reasons that were, at best, suspect. In reaction to this removal, I and several other students from the department took it upon ourselves to talk to the Dean of Student Affairs, to express our dissatisfaction with the removal, and seek some plausible explanation to help stop the swirling rumors. None was forthcoming, which merely compounded the anger and dismay. Despite our good faith efforts to peacefully and politely express our opinion, pressure was put on the faculty of the department to shut us up. This, along with statements I and other students made in the school paper made many members of the faculty angry…at us. In the midst of the emotion and drama that almost always follows issues that one feels passionate about, one faculty member asked me, “We know what you’re against, but what do you stand for?” Well, that shut me up for a while, but it didn’t, ultimately, solve the problem. To this day, I do not really know what happened or why. From time to time I think about this event, now some 16 years later, and wonder both how we as concerned students could have acted more effectively and how the administration could have saved themselves a lot of trouble by proactively communicating to us at least some of the issues of concern so we could better understand and inform ourselves. Once again, this question, “We know what you’re against, but what do you stand for?””, has come up to the blogging community. The question gets asked a lot by people who end up on the wrong side of bloggers, the intent often being more about “getting the hell off my lawn” than anything truly constructive. It takes on certain significance, particularly in the wake of the fairly recent criticism of the TNDP and losses that spawned that criticism. So maybe, just maybe it’s time to clarify some things. First, there are some things you should know about me. I don’t do this because I’m paid to do it. In fact, I don’t even have advertising of any kind on my blog. Truth is, most TN bloggers don’t make a dime off their blogs. This is due to laziness on my part, and that I want to keep my “loves” separate from a “job”. I tried to “monetize” my love of performing music throughout the early 90’s and burned myself out. Making this a job is not something I’m interested in at this point. Secondly, I truly want what is best for the people of our nation, state, counties and cities. My worldview may be further to the left than most in the state, but that doesn’t change the reality that when I write something about policy, I’m thinking about the political ramifications and the personal ramifications that will touch all the citizens of those respective jurisdictions. Third, and most importantly, I work with the best information I have available, but sometimes that information doesn’t reach the standard that I would like. As newspapers pull back coverage and lay off reporters, and broadcast media becomes more like Extra!, focusing on the more sensational aspects of politics than the steady and staid Evening News with Walter Cronkite, getting good and accurate information about what is going on anywhere other than national politics is getting harder. This is a bad thing for Tennessee and every other state outside of the top 20 media markets. Finally, I am not a journalist. I’ve never claimed to be. I’m a guy with enough time to bang out 3-4 posts on a good week with a lot of passion and a great deal of interest in politics. Saying this is my passion understates the reality. I read upwards of 500 posts and news articles a day. For me, this is an obsession. Now, I can’t really speak for anyone else, because they would probably snatch my head off my neck and use it to bowl a 37, but speaking for myself, I can say with no reservations that much of my criticism of Democratic politicians and institutions is rooted in the frustration that comes from said politicians and institutions doing generally dumb or lazy things, such as; voting against long-held Democratic ideals, using Right-Wing talking points under the guise of conventional wisdom, calling our Presidential Candidate a terrorist, (as some elected Democratic officials and their surrogates chose to do earlier this year). Let it be known, that people who call themselves Democrats and do these kinds of stupid things will incur my wrath, and the wrath of others…you don’t get rewarded for stupid. At the same time, I’m not looking for a fight with Democrats, I want to affirm Democrats and Democratic principles and discredit Republicans, which isn’t that hard because they damn near do it for me. I want to react to the “Press Release Pornography” (I’ve never seen someone exploit a press release quite like him) that Bill Hobbs engages in. But when Mr. Hobbs lets loose one of his ridiculous screeds and I hear nothing from the Democratic establishment, I wonder if anyone is listening, and that’s frustrating. Further, when I don’t hear anything from anyone in the Democratic establishment for months on end, even though there’s a lot going on (like an election), questions of competence invariably come up, leading to a general belief that members of the establishment are coasting and all the other things that make people frustrated when they are feeling ill served by people who are supposed to be representing their views, even if that’s in the broadest sense of the word. The key thing to take away from this is that old quote by Benjamin Franklin, An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The prevention is basic communication. I don’t want to be catered to, I want to know that I’m not living in a vacuum. I want to know that elected officials and party organizations are paying attention and proactively working to defend against Republican attacks on our values, and move the ball down the field with our values. So, there you have it. It’s really quite simple. There are times when we (me or the “lefty blogosphere” and members of the Democratic Party Establishment) will agree, and there are times we won’t, but that’s not a reason to not communicate. If anything it’s more of a reason TO communicate. Communication will help get us past some of the miscues and misunderstandings. Communication will ensure that the message reaches more people. Communication, not just with bloggers and activist, but with regular constituents, is how we win in 2010. Thanks, and Happy New Year.

Automatic for the People

Steve Ross — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:36:43 +0000

The TN State legislature debuted a new website today. The CA has the story. I haven’t had the chance to check it out fully, but if it does all that it says it does it’s a huge boon for the people of Tennessee and the cause of transparency in general. One of my chief complaints over the past two sessions is the difficulty in tracking the “real” bills and the bills that will never see the light of day. Under the old site, you could search a topic and come up with more bills than could ever be considered. Maybe now we’ll see something that makes the process a little easier. Perhaps the best improvement is the prospect of setting up a personalized rss feed for bills or subjects that are of personal interest. If this actually works its good stuff, a great tool for bloggers, activists and concerned citizens alike. One of the best things about it is the ability to make lists of interests. These lists populate the three rss feeds that users can customize. Each list can have multiple keywords or subjects. You can set up a local feed (select your city and county and surrounding counties) or a budgeting feed (budget and appropriations) of any number of personalized feeds. It’s also easier to see the bills that your legislators have sponsored or their voting record. All in all, this is a positive step for the state. I’m looking forward to seeing it in action. Tomorrow is the first organizational session, according to the House Schedule. Streaming video support for sessions should be pretty interesting too. Mac people may need the Flip 4 Mac plugin to view the WMV streams in Safari (the free one should work, but I’ll know more tomorrow). I’ll report my experience with the site throughout the session. This could make my life a lot easier, particularly considering my stupid travel schedule. Can’t wait to watch TN-Span.

Ninety-One Thousand Dollars

Steve Ross — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 11:46:22 +0000

Over at the CA Marc Perrusquia’s been doing some digging. You’ll have to go read the article yourself for all the gory details, but here’s the gist, from the article’s timeline:

April 9, 2002: Greyhound CEO Craig Lentzsch tells Mayor Willie Herenton in a letter that his proposal to move the bus firm's Downtown Memphis station is too expensive. Herenton proposed a land swap that would move Greyhound to Airways and Winchester. Instead, Lentzsch suggested getting federal or state grant funds to build an "intermodal station'' to be shared by Greyhound and the city bus agency, Memphis Area Transit Authority. Oct. 2, 2002: Herenton meets with MATA officials to discuss the intermodal station. June 2004: Memphis attorney Florence Johnson pays Greyhound $10,000 for an option to buy its Greyhound property -- an option then held by Herenton. May 17, 2005: The city buys 8.8 acres near the airport as a site to build an intermodal station. The deed says the land is for "the use and benefit of Memphis Area Transit Authority.'' MATA later repays the city. September 2005: The option to purchase the Greyhound site is transferred to the mayor's friend, Elvin Moon. May 2006: Moon sells the option. The buyer pays $116,000. Moon keeps $25,000 and passes the rest -- $91,000 -- to Herenton's private real estate firm, Herenton Investment. Nov. 12, 2008: A federal grand jury hears testimony from Moon and the mayor's special assistant, Pete Aviotti, who helped negotiate discussions to move Greyhound from Downtown.

Just looking at the timeline alone, it seems evident that the Mayor is treading on the margins of ethical behavior. He personally financially benefitted from “inside information” relating to the possible sale of some prime property (Remember his new Convention Center Committiee from last September?) If this were a stock trade, the SEC might have investigated…back in the day when they did such things. Instead, the Memphis US Attorney’s office is investigating, and hopefully crafting a better case than their last major outing, lest they further damage their reputation. Memphis, you deserve better, but you’re not going to “get” anything better until you “demand” something better. I’m not saying anything Herenton has allegedly done is illegal, but it sure stinks to high heaven. Memphis deserves leadership whose motives aren’t constantly in question. That’s part of a big nasty pie of issues that keep Memphis divided, but it’s a big part. I may have more on this later after I consume some piping hot coffee product.

Shenanigans in the State House

Steve Ross — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:23:34 +0000

My internet died right about 11:30am yesterday, so I didn’t get to see the streaming coverage of the bloodless coup in the TN State House. The written reports were plenty descriptive for me, and the Republican response was, well, priceless! For those of you living under a rock, or nowhere near a Republican, the TN State House elected the first Republican Speaker in 40 years…unfortunately for the Republican Party, it wasn’t the speaker they nominated, it was the one the Democrats nominated, Kent Williams of Elizabethtown. For those of you even deeper under said rock, or perhaps buried under a quarry, the Democrats nominated a Republican because they lost the majority 50-49. They new they probably couldn’t win with a Democrat, so why not shoot the moon? Really, it’s a brilliant play…a “Flea Flicker” that hasn’t fully developed yet. We’re still waiting for the “pass down field”. Hopefully it won’t be intercepted, but it probably will. Williams will be thrown out of the Republican Party, Kurita style, without all the last second asshattery that marked that action. I doubt that he’ll care considering he was primaried by a devotee of the same man he defeated for the Speaker’s chair. What goes around comes around. I think the Republicans are overreacting, I mean, they got their damn speaker, why not take advantage of the opportunity? This is like complaining about the position of engagement during the sex act. You’re getting laid, shut up! Oh, you didn’t want to be on bottom? Sucks to be you! I suggest you relax, it’ll make it easier for everyone, but mostly you. I know I’m being flip about this whole thing, but there are two truths that are undeniable: 1. I agree with Roger Abramson, this is not necessarily a boon for Progressives. The progressive agenda will not be served by ANY Republican speaker, period. 2. The Republicans still have the majority, and can still use it to bludgeon us with their agenda. I’m not taking off my helmet until there’s more evidence the coast is clear. Still, it’s funny stuff that I’ll be giggling about for weeks. My internet is spotty right now as I wait for our local monopoly to find the time to come out and fix it, yet still charge me for it. I’ll be looking for reports from the hill today, but mostly, I’ll be giggling like a schoolgirl. Good going TN State House Democrats. You won the battle, keep pushing to win the war. Republican sour grapes will be your biggest ally for a couple of days. Use that to your benefit now, because I’m sure there are plenty of ugly fights coming down the pike.

Andy’s Choice

Steve Ross — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:13:04 +0000

Update: I've been having internet problems, and apparently this post didn't quite make it all the way up earlier. Below is the full version, sorry about that. With all the news from the TN State House yesterday, one story didn’t get the coverage that it might have under different circumstances. Zach Wamp (R-TN03) announced he would surrender his seat in the 2010 election. This presents an interesting choice for Democratic up and comer Andy Berke (D TNS-10) from Chattanooga. Berke has been mentioned as a potential Gubernatorial candidate in the 2010 election. In an email blast to supporters last week, Berke confirmed that he was exploring a run for Governor. Wamp’s decision to abandon his seat in the US House to run for the Governor’s office in 2010 creates two opportunities that Berke could explore. Advancing in politics is not something that necessarily comes on your schedule. Opportunities often arise at the whim of the current office holder, or as the result of Term Limits (in the case of the Governor). Unseating incumbents, while more common in the past two cycles, is still a huge undertaking. The opportunity to run for an open seat in either position in the same year is something to carefully consider. Since the Civil War, the 3rd District of TN has been represented by Republicans about 1/3 of the time. However, the 3rd has been strong Republican territory since Wamp’s election in 1994. Looking at the voting consistency in the 3rd district for statewide elections, only one Democrat in the past two cycles has won any of the counties that make up the district, Phil Bredesen who won all of them handily. The margin of victory for candidates in the counties that make up TN-03 over the past two cycles has been pretty daunting. Aside from Bredesen’s win, the closest contender was Harold Ford Jr., who lost those counties by just under 29,000 votes. The counties that make up TN-03 constitute about 12.2% of all the votes cast in Tennessee in the 2006 Gubernatorial election and 11.74% in the 2008 election Presidential election (Shelby was 15.4% to 15.5% in the two elections and Davidson was 9.7% to 10.1% for comparison). Despite assertions that Barack Obama was a drag on Tennessee Democratic Candidates, Obama lost the district by 32,000 fewer votes than the Democratic challenger for the TN-03 seat, Doug Vandagriff. Still, in both cases it was a Republican landslide. Running for the US House seat represents a challenge, but in a year with an open seat, it may be an easier hurdle than the Governor’s race. Berke already has strong support in Hamilton County, which represents half of the total vote in TN-03. Determining the strength of Berke’s potential opposition would be the biggest factor, and is probably an unknown for weeks at the very least. On the Governor’s race side, Berke’s potential Primary opposition is already taking shape. Kim McMillan from Clarksville is in. Lincoln Davis, from the neighboring 4th District has been rumored to be seeking the position, as well as and a whole bunch of other Democrats including Harold Ford Jr. and Jim Kyle from Memphis (or wherever Ford claims to live now), Roy Herron of Dresden and Doug Horne of Knoxville. If the Primary race is this thick, Berke will have a steep hill to climb in the Gubernatorial Primary. Davis and Ford will be strong statewide. McMillan and Herron will be fighting for supremacy in the TN-07, and 08, Ford and Kyle will be strong in TN-05, 07, 08, and 09. Berke and Horne would be competing for dominance in TN-01 through 03 and parts of TN-04 and 06. Davis and Ford have the most statewide name recognition of any of the candidates mentioned, and by extension, and instant leg up on everyone else with Kyle a very distant third. If any of these big name people (Davis or Ford) jump in, Berke probably doesn’t have a chance. If they don’t, it’s 50-50 at best. Berke doesn’t really have anything to lose, but money, should unknowns dominate the field. Berke isn’t up for re-election in his State Senate seat until 2012. On the flip side, if Davis gets in the Governor’s race, it may behoove Berke to go for the TN-03 seat. As much as I dislike Davis, he could be a powerful ally in the rural areas of TN-03 that shares a border with the 4th. By thinning the field, Burke could have a campaign partner for the general, and one that has the look and feel of a good old country boy. I’m not sure about Davis’ popularity in the 3rd, but he keeps winning the 4th, which is decidedly more rural. Doing this could also set Berke up for higher office in the future. If Davis or another Democrat is successful in his bid for Governor, Burke could have a long term and powerful ally. 2012 could pit him against Corker for Senate, 2014 against an open seat left by Alexander, or Governor (should a Democrat lose in 2010) or Governor in 2018 (should a Democrat win in 2010 and 14). The opportunities are endless. Berke is young (40) and has a lot of upside, as well as plenty of time to cultivate a greater statewide presence. Chattanoogans have dominated TN-03 since Reconstruction, winning 68% of the time. Democratic candidates (James Fraizer Jr. of Chattanooga and Marilyn Lloyd of Winchester) held the seat 24 of the last 50 years. On the flip side, timing is everything, and if Berke thinks it’s his time to run for Governor, then he has a duty to himself and the state to make a go at it. No one said it would be easy, but having so many options is a good thing for Andy Berke. Right now he has to choose between running for Governor, Representative, or staying put. It’s his choice to make, and I don’t think any of them are bad ones for him, or the state.

Whereupon I Break My Longtime Self-Censorship and Duck for Cover

Steve Ross — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:21:33 +0000

I haven’t written anything about what’s going on in Israel for years. Mostly this is because there’s so much emotion, both of my own, and by all parties concerned, that the issue gets muddled and bogged down. Further, I don’t spend a lot of time following Israeli internal politics, so for divorcing myself from that emotion is difficult. I do read a lot of people who follow such things in far more detail than I. One is Juan Cole. Several days ago he posted this letter which was printed in the Times of London. I agree with a lot of what this letter argues, particularly the last paragraph:

We condemn the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel and suicide bombings which are also contrary to international humanitarian law and are war crimes. Israel has a right to take reasonable and proportionate means to protect its civilian population from such attacks. However, the manner and scale of its operations in Gaza amount to an act of aggression and is contrary to international law, notwithstanding the rocket attacks by Hamas.

Then there’s this article in today’s New York Times. You should really read the whole thing because it lays bare the one of the most useless, yet long-held beliefs of American foreign policy. From the article

Ever since Hamas began its one-party rule of Gaza, in the summer of 2007, Israel and the West have tried to turn Gazans against Hamas through an economic embargo and diplomatic isolation. While there is certainly anger at Hamas among Gazans, it pales beside the anger at Israel, the West and what some see as Fatah’s collusion with those enemies.

Does that sound familiar? It should, that’s exactly what we’ve been doing with Cuba since Castro took over. Castro may be “gone” now, but it’s not because of anything we did, it’s because he got old. The point here actually has to do with the way we handle “rogue states” in general, but what’s going on in Israel is a good case study for our failures throughout the Middle East. If we want secular moderates in power throughout the Middle East, we have to work to create conditions that would help support such governments. This means working diligently with Fatah in Palestinian controlled areas, and strengthening their institutions so they can build and maintain a foothold in Gaza. This means removing one of Hamas’ rally cries by not carpet-bombing Gaza. This means marginalizing Hamas not through blockading Gaza economically, but by supporting moderate groups in building economic development and prosperity. I’m not saying any of this is easy, I’m saying it has to be done. People who have a bright future don’t strap a bomb to their body and blow up busses. They just don’t. Hamas’ rocket attacks into Israel are a political/strategic action to maintain the status quo, which is where Hamas’ power lies. Attacking all of Gaza reinforces Hamas’ power on several levels, leading to a never-ending downward spiral, or maintaining the status quo. The key here is acting in the best interest of humanity, rather than the perceived best interest of Israel, the US, Muslims, Jews, Christians, or any other political/ideological division. If we act in the best interest of humanity, humanity will show us it’s best. Of course, the converse is true in this scenario. It’s time for the people of the world to stop thinking in terms of “us vs. them”, and more in terms of “all of us”.

That Sound You Hear is the Quiet Before the Storm

Steve Ross — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:09:19 +0000

So yesterday, the state House recessed until February 9th. I hope they enjoy their time on the jungle gym, because I have no doubt that once they reconvene all hell is going to break loose. I have to say, the events of the past week have been pretty amusing to watch, but happy fun time is just about over. Come February 9th, the business of legislating will come falling down like a bag of hammers. I suggest the new Speaker take this time to get fitted for some kind of protective gear. Pretty soon there’s gonna be more poop flying in the House chamber than at a monkey display at the zoo, or more preaching…whichever. Working out the committee assignments might be nice too. Back in November, our state, turned out in far higher numbers than just about any other state to elect Republicans to state government. I don’t know why, but I have my suspicions. Now we’ve got Republicans in charge of the legislature, even if it’s not the Republicans that Republicans wanted. They ran on a 3G platform; Guns, Gays, and God. Why this playbook was more successful here in Tennessee than in the rest of the nation says more about Tennessee than it does about the Republican Party, but I won’t go there right now. Republicans, how are you going to make Tennessee better? How do you intend to use these three planks to benefit the people of the state of Tennessee? How will your 3G platform provide economic development and jobs to the thousands of Tennesseans who are either out of work or underemployed? How will the platform you ran on ensure that Tennesseans are safe in their homes from the predatory lending practices that have contributed to these unstable economic times? What will your platform do to educate our children, not only for the jobs of the 21st Century, but a job market that is contracting? An increase in violent crime almost always follows uncertain economic times, what does your 3g platform do to keep our communities safe? Seriously, I want to know. From a practical standpoint, your 3G platform doesn’t say anything about these issues. Nothing. If we go beyond the 3G platform, we find that it gets even thinner. As a general statement, Republicans want to reduce taxes, and government spending to keep the budget in balance. We don’t have an income tax, we have a consumption tax (sales). We also have a deficit staring down our throats. Some might argue that reducing the consumption tax would spur spending. This of course assumes that people have money to spend. People have to have stable good paying jobs to have money to spend. If no one’s spending money, employers can’t hire people. Do you see the Catch 22 yet? Maybe the 3G platform does answer these issues…Pray you keep or get a job, arm yourself heavily to protect against those who don’t have jobs, and don’t worry about decorating your home tastefully…strike that…you already don’t do that…ummm, be suspicious of anyone that tries to get in your foxhole? I dunno, I’m still working on that. The point is, you may have won on old dumb ideas, but you won’t stay in power long with those old dumb ideas, which suits me just fine. Unfortunately, I have to deal with you bozos for at least two years, so try not to wreck the place, even though I know that’s what you guys do best. Until then, I’m wearing a poncho whenever I go to Nashville to protect against the poop you guys’ll be throwing all over the place. Cheers!

Hobbsian Economic Stimulus

Steve Ross — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:53:48 +0000

As GoldnI and Kate Granju point out, TNGOP mouthpiece Bill Hobbs has suggested people send 30 pieces of silver to new House Speaker Kent Williams, as a sign of his disloyalty, selling out the TNGOP. Nice, but couldn’t Hobbs have found a company from TN to supply his childish fantasy? The link eventually leads to a company based out of Livonia, MI. I’m sure they’re nice people, but should the mouthpiece of the TNGOP be sending our hard earned money out of state, particularly a ROYAL BLUE ONE? Party City has 11 stores statewide in every major city in TN, and look they have coins too, though they are gold, not silver. I guess you’ll have to go to your local hardware store to get some silver paint or something. Still, think of all the sales tax the state is losing sending that business out of state, 27 cents an order. I mean seriously, with all the pull Mr. Hobbs has nationwide, that could add up to I dunno, 15 bucks or something. Mr. Hobbs, you have a duty to your party and your state to keep this business local. I’ll let this one slide, but the next time you come up with some dumb idea, I expect you to make sure as many Tennesseans as possible can reap the rewards of your all powerful reach. vibincblog has no affiliation with Party City, other than shopping there from time to time for random goofy things.

Check Out This Poll

Steve Ross — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:32:06 +0000

I just got an interesting email. It's interesting because it's the first email I've received from any state political party. It is not from my party of choice. In the email, there is a link to a poll. I call on all my fellow liberals and other malcontents to vote in this poll and let your voice be heard. Let the giggling re-commence!

2.3 million Forclosures, Thank God He’s Almost Gone

Steve Ross — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 19:23:18 +0000

Barry Ritholtz at the Big Picture posts the state by state foreclosure stats. Currently, Tennessee ranks 12th nationally in foreclosures. The rate of foreclosures in Tennessee has increased 127% since 2006. Looking at surrounding states, only Georgia ranks higher at 8th. There is no question that the housing market was deeply flawed. There’s no question that some people got into homes and mortgages that they probably couldn’t afford. How they got there is a matter of debate. One thing is for sure, no one in their right mind would have entered into an agreement of this magnitude knowing they would be hung out to dry by the terms of the deal or the economy. Compounding this issue is unemployment, which has increased almost 2% in Tennessee between November 2007 and 2008. Tennessee lost 19,500 jobs in that time. Considering the number of seasonal jobs that are in place in November, I feel certain that once the January numbers come out (in mid-February) we’ll see unemployment rise further. Back in October, or whenever it was, that Congress authorized the first $350 billion of the TARP, the idea was that the government would buy up bad assets to help the balance sheets of the affected institutions. That soon shifted to, purchasing stock in the institutions because buying paper assets that were not worth the paper they were written on wasn’t making any sense. Now the talk is doing some of what we should have been doing in the first place, using the TARP to directly help people in need. In a Daily Kos Diary newly elected Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley talks about why he voted for the TARP, while opposing it in the campaign. Merkley is taking some heat over his vote, but he explains the rationale nicely.

…I spent the last several days arguing this case at the highest levels of the Obama team, meeting with and calling repeatedly Rahm Emanuel and Larry Summers, and talking once directly to our incoming President, as well as consulting with mortgage guru Professor Blinder and the Center for Responsible Lending. I asked for a strong multi-dimensional program to directly address families in troubled mortgages. Several other freshman senators, including Tom and Mark Udall, joined in this effort and made an impact on the administration’s outlook. The Obama team heard us. Mostly. You saw an evolution from the FDIC $25 billion plan to the possibility of doing $40-50 billion to the final commitment in writing to a minimum of $50 billion and up to $100 billion.

This means at a minimum 250,000 households will not be put out of their homes. That is a drop in the bucket considering over 2.3 million properties had foreclosure filings in 2008, but it’s better than what the Bush Administration ever did. Bush put all his TARP money into companies that would rather not pay taxes in the US. Hell, they can’t even figure out where the money went! Strong work there Bushie! The key for the Government right now needs to be helping those who are paying taxes, not helping multi-national companies that can shift money in creative ways to far away places that make things look better or worse depending on who they’re talking to. If they want our tax money going forward to help them through their managerial mistakes they need to pledge to play a fair game.

Put on Your Boxing Gloves

Steve Ross — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 06:10:05 +0000

So today the Tennessee Democratic Party selected a new chair. The race wasn’t mean spirited or contentious or anything like that, from my perspective. It featured two longtime Democrats who are genuinely concerned for the future of the party. I had the opportunity to speak with both candidates, and honestly, I felt both were adept at expressing what was needed, and the challenges that the party faces. Some of my cohorts out here in the boonies of the left expressed more than a little distaste for some of Mr. Bone’s supporters. Ultimately, supporters are like family, you can’t always pick them. In reading over the coverage, there are a lot of “anonymous bloggers” commenting at Kleinheider as if the selection of Forrester was giving the party over to an Ogre like, power hungry, scorned and angry baby eater (sing that to the Purple People eater song). Get over yourself people. I don’t know what objections certain elements in the “status quo” component of the party had to Forrester’s candidacy, but the status quo helped us lose majorities in both houses, asked our Presidential candidate to stay out of the state or thought he might just be a terrorist. I could go on, I won’t. The point is, the status quo is what got us here. I don’t give two shits what they have to say. I’m reminded of a post from days of yore… Still, what’s done is done, now it’s off to the races to win elections people. You remember doing that right? Back to the positive stuff…I’m still waiting for text or video of the speech Forrester gave to emerge, but Braisted says it was a barnburner, and I believe him. We need passionate leadership in the party and I hope that Forrester can provide that passion to reignite Democrats throughout the state. Passion is nothing without a plan, but passion is more than we’ve had since I moved to Memphis in 2004. How the plan takes shape depends on how much support, financial and otherwise, the party receives. This means that if you’re a Tennessee Democrat, it’s time to crack open your wallet and start clearing out time in your calendar. For the record, my offer still stands Chairman Forrester. We’ve got a long road ahead of us, it’s time to get to work. I look forward to finally getting an email from the TNDP, but I’m still waiting. (The TNGOP sends me an email weekly, fyi).

Madoff Takes Down the ACLU

Steve Ross — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 07:11:22 +0000

As reported by the Huffington Post, the Bernie Madoff ponzi scheme has crippled the ACLU. Several prominent donors to the organization have suffered huge losses as the result of both the economic downturn and Madoff’s shenanigans. Say what you will about the ACLU, it is one of the primary defenders of the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. I urge you to donate to the organization now. Just because we have Democratic majorities in 2/3 of the federal government, doesn’t mean we don’t need an ACLU. The ACLU does all kinds of good work in state courts as well. Take a minute and give to the ACLU. Democracy depends on it.

Patronage and Privilege

Steve Ross — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:41:34 +0000

Today I want to discuss two elements of society that are eating us away at the core; Patronage and Privelege. By “Patronage” I mean “the power to control appointments to office or the right to privileges”. By “Privilege” I mean “a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people.” In the US we have seen, quite recently, the manner in which these two intertwined cancers have divided us as a nation, multiplied our suffering, subtracted from our opportunity, and added a great deal of distrust in the institutions that make up our great nation. Perhaps the most universal example is that of the former Administration. Using it’s power, largely unchecked by the other two branches, it allowed institutions to profit at the peril of the American people, riding a tide of unregulated bets that companies and individuals would fail, and somehow believing that said bets would in no way damage their long-term viability or the viability of the economy upon which their ultimate success depended. These and a whole host of other actions have led us down a path of economic and social destruction, not only in America, but in the global economy, that will take years for us to fully recover from. In 2006 and 2008 We saw the beginning of an uprising. Republicans lost seats at a rate that dwarfed the 1994 “Contract on America” revolution they are so proud of. This was borne of a strengthening DNC and a populace that was sick of being screwed. The comedian Chris Rock joked after the 2008 election, “George Bush has messed everything up so bad a white man can’t even get elected President.” Perhaps not his exact words, but you get the idea. What we have seen over the past two cycles nationally is the definition of an uprising. An electorate, whose needs have been sorely ignored, rose up to remove the elements of stagnation that have been hampering their ability to secure, or maintain, their collective definition of the American Dream. But these things aren’t new. These cycles of unbridled selfishness have taken down empires, and humbled even the most self-assured individuals throughout human history. Sometimes the result is like the current economic crisis where the guilty fall on the sword of their arrogance. Sometimes, is the beginning of a new idea. Once upon a time, there was a young upstart politician who challenged an unretired former Governor, and the current millionaire Governor. While the current and former Governors of this state fought with each other over whom had installed this young upstart, said upstart embarked on the most media savvy campaign in state history at the time, and ultimately defeated them both. Change Governor to Senator, and you would think I was talking about the current President, but I’m actually talking about Dale Bumpers. Bumpers moved beyond the conventional wisdom and beat Orval Faubus in the primary, and Winthrop Rockafeller in the general because he saw a new way, a new technology, and rejected the politics of the past by igniting a populace once again with ideas. Bumpers turned out to be one of the most respected Senators from any southern state in his time, which was too short. The birth of ideas and the recognition of injustice are the things that fuel and fire the uprising. They are also the very things that strike fear in the hearts of those who benefit from patronage and privilege. Here in Tennessee, we are seeing the beginning of an uprising of our own. A resurgent TNGOP has gained a majority in the state legislature, however tenuous over the past several cycles. This surge in seats has no relation to the uprising. This has more to do with an incongruous state Democratic Party than any great organizing feature that the TNGOP has come up with. For instance, the Senate would not have fallen to the Republicans in the last session had Kurita not voted for Ramsey. Understand, Kurita deserved what she eventually got, but her frustration with the entrenched elements of the party should be noted. A strong state Democratic Party would have never allowed something like this to happen. A strong state Democratic Party would have helped make opportunities for Kurita. In the absence of opportunity, she made her own. On the flip side, the TNGOP’s arrogance that a one seat advantage would somehow wipe away any hurt feelings of a twice primaried Sophomore Representative, and their ultimate lack of creativity, led to the dashing of hopes to a man who would be, but never was Speaker. Williams will eventually suffer the same fate as Kurita. The culprit in both cases, a long held sense on the part of individuals in both parties that Patronage and Privilege somehow in some way protected them from the unwashed masses that ultimately hold the key to their success. The uprising isn’t party specific, it’s specifically a reaction to the privilege and patronage that follows an organization that has lost its way. Tennessee has the pleasure of being served by two such organizations, both political parties. How this plays out depends on how the “Just Us” club reacts to the influx of the uprising. Right now they’re whining like a bunch of babies. The people of Tennessee are tired of the bullshit and ready for action. It’s time for a new day in Tennessee. The people of Tennessee are ready for the kind of leadership that has ideas and will fight the injustice that is sustained by those who seek a leg up thanks to the benefits of status or class. I’m sorry that your era of patronage may be over in the TNDP. I say may, because I don’t know for sure if it is, but you sure seem to. I suggest you heed the words of Ice Cube Check yourself before you wreck yourself. All this hollerin’ won’t be good for business…but I guess you’ve realized that you’re losing your patronage…and the privilege that has come with it. No wonder you’re so scared.

Wait a Minute Mr. Postman

Steve Ross — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 00:20:25 +0000

As reported by Yahoo!, the Postmaster General has asked Congress to remove a rider from the appropriations bill for the USPS requiring 6 days of mail delivery. Last year alone, the USPS lost $2.8b due to declining volume and increasing costs. By cutting delivery by one day, they argue they could save a bundle. Unfortunately, the day mentioned in the Article is Tuesday, which just doesn’t make any damn sense to me, unless the American work week is split up similarly…which would be fine with me. Let’s think about this from a economic stability standpoint for a minute. If mail delivery, or worse, all mail operations, get cut by one day a week, how many man-hours are lost? How many people are laid off, or lose a percentage (one would assume 17%) of their wages? This proposal may help the USPS trim their deficit, and keep rates from climbing, but doesn’t it hurt the economy at large? Isn’t the overall effect for the nation more of a negative than a positive? Governments and government agencies nationwide are talking about doing this very same thing. Back in December the City of Memphis offered buyouts to employees to trim costs. The savings, $6 million dollars, or ¼ of the projected budget shortfall for the current year. At the time, I wondered if they were opening it up to anyone, or just targeting people near retirement. That would make sense. But apparently it’s up for anyone who’s worked for the city for 5 years. That seems dumb. No one wants a budget shortfall, but we shouldn’t make the “perfect be the enemy of the good”. So the question is, what impact on a city, outside of more output than input financially, does a 4% budget shortfall have? If you have reserves, you decrease them, if you don’t, you have to borrow, which is a bad idea right now…I get that part. Finally, back to the USPS thing…Can’t we just cover the shortfall to keep as many people employed as possible? I mean hell, we’ve given some $2t in bailouts and loans and security away already, $3b seems like small potatoes. Just askin’.

The Audacity of Rush

Steve Ross — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:40:55 +0000

So Rush has this Op-Ed in the WSJ detailing HIS plan for a bailout. The long and the short of it is that Rush wants to split the money up along the lines of the Presidential election results…54-46. That works out to $486b for infrastructure, and $414b for tax cuts (Rush, as usual, uses a fake number, $900b for his breakdown instead of the actual $819b in the House bill). What’s interesting is that Mr. Limbaugh’s plan is not that different from the ACTUAL plan. According to USAToday, the money breakdown gives $544b to spending and $275b to tax cuts. This works out to a 66% for spending and 34% for tax cuts. The difference, Mr. Limbaugh, between your plan and the actual plan is the difference between victory and defeat. You guys lost. You barely supported your own candidate. You have no one to blame but yourself for the position you’re in, but your feeble attempt to grasp any little bit of attention is almost as entertaining as watching Humpty Dumpty hold on by his fingertips just before the big fall. When it comes right down to it, Limbaugh really wants his Republicans in Congress to be in control of who gets the tax cuts. See, if regular people get a tax cut, that would shift the proportional burden to the upper class. Further, they are also about to see their Bush tax cut expire in 2010 further shifting the burden up. When it comes right down to it, just like it always does, Rush is advocating for class warfare: the rich against the poor, the privileged against the regular folk…all while playing that regular folk line, at the expense of regular folk. It’s worked over and over again since 1980, and I’m sure he thinks it’ll work again. What’s the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. Yeah, I suggest Rush stick to the kind of stimulus that he actually knows something about...importing illegal viagra and pain pills.

“Post-Partisanship” or “Can’t Buy Me Love”?

Steve Ross — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:16:46 +0000

Partisan:a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person. So what is “Post-Partisanship”? Is it a coming together? Is it an attempt to blur the traditional lines or roles of our current two-party system? What is the effect of pursuing “Post-Partisanship”? Is it compromise? Is it holding the hand of the opposition party to appear less partisan? Apparently, it’s all of those things. I don’t want to jump out of the gate too soon and call President Obama’s attempt to heal some of the divisions in our country a failure, but certainly he must realize that for this “Post-Partisanship” to work, both sides must be willing to give something, and right now it appears that the only side giving anything is the President. This puts the President in a position far weaker than the one his landslide victory should afford him. Take a look at this video from The Rachel Maddow Show

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

For all the Republican attacks on infrastructure spending, in order for our nation to compete globally and protect its citizen’s vital interests, our infrastructure, much of it built in the 60’s and 70’s, must be updated to meet the needs of the 21st century. Further, this infrastructure spending creates jobs, that puts that money right back into the hands of the people who most desperately need it, the American worker. As Maddow rightly points out, the President gave Republicans just about everything they wanted in an effort to win some votes from their side. This did not happen. In fact, the President couldn’t even keep some of his own party members (12, including Jim Cooper (TN-05)) from voting against the bill. So what has President Obama gained from this exercise? Nothing, in fact he may have lost quite a bit. By spending the majority of his time courting Republicans, he has ignored his own party, much to their chagrin, and gained nothing. The question has to be asked; does courting an unwilling partner really gain you anything? I’m all for dialogue, but not at the expense of party unity. President Obama is starting down the path of some bizarre, upended Can’t Buy Me Love scenario. It is a fine and noble cause to try and bring as many people as possible into the solution, but there has to be some willingness on their part to be a part of the solution. If you’re just bribing them, they’re not your friends they’re using you. And if you’re forgetting about your REAL FRIENDS in the process, you may find that you have fewer REAL FRIENDS in the long run. Post-Partisanship is fine, collaboration is fine, but not at the expense of the ideas and values that we elected you to represent. President Obama, don’t give away the farm so soon. You have a lot of political capitol at your disposal, but perhaps, not quite as much as you think you do. Update:TPM has the Republican definition of Bi-Partisanship

Fiscally Conservative when it’s Convenient

Steve Ross — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:34:54 +0000

Bonddad has a fun post at the Orange Devil about the Republican Party’s dedication to “fiscal dicipline”. The long and the short of it is that since 2000 the national debt has increased by over $4.4t. While the Republicans had control of the White House and the Congress, not to mention the budgeting process, the national debt increased some $3.2t. The final $1.2t came largely in the last year or so of an administration that was hell bent on destroying any stability in the US economy over its 8 years in office. The truth of the matter is that fiscal conservatives, this includes ALL Republicans, and many of the Blue Dog/New Democrat folks, are only interested in being fiscally conservative when it suits them. If they like spending on the Military, then all that PAYGO nonsense is out the window until someone asks for healthcare for children, then it’s back to PAYGO. We need to start calling things what they are. Either you are unconditionally a fiscal conservative, or you have some other motive that moves you to play a fiscal conservative when it suits you politically or socially, or whatever. That conservativeness may be rooted in assisting corporate interests, maintaining class structures, or in a level of true fiscal discipline that we haven’t seen since the Clinton years, and didn’t see before the Clinton years in any Republican administration from their hey day (back to the 1981 Reagan years). But you either are or you’re something else. That something else may make you feel uncomfortable when you get called it. Just saying.

Bonus – From the Latin, to Bone…Us

Steve Ross — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:40:30 +0000

So, by now you’ve probably heard about the shameful bonus situation on Wall Street. The TARP bailout, which may or may not have been necessary, or effective, or even what it was originally sold as, looks to regular folks, like corporate patronage at it’s worst. The long hard truth of the matter is that you can look at a long list of corporations who have been hit hard this year, and see a whole lot of executive bonuses in the face of layoffs and regular folk pain. So why is it that these guys, who are either running their companies into the ground, or victims of their cohorts actions in other companies, getting bonuses when everyone else is getting the shaft? They think they deserve it. Performance only matters when it’s a good performance. When it’s bad, well, “we need more because without it we can’t meet expectations”. Of course, “expectations” doesn’t have anything to do with shareholder expetations…no that’s code for executive expectations. They don’t believe in suffering or accountability. It’s a sad state of affairs. I know I’m generalizing. There are a lot of great executives out there who are really interested in the success of the company, and their employees, but it seems like there are fewer and fewer examples of such people. I’m tired of hearing about this shit. I look around me and see neighbors and friends and acquaintances either getting laid off, or losing shifts, which means losing money. These are blue collar and white collar people, all working hard to stay afloat. Then, there are these douchenozzles running our financial system into the ground, begging for money, acting like they’ve done nothing wrong, and then, the gall of it all, giving themselves BONUSES! Are you frickin’ kidding me? The lack of accountability, or even a sense of responsibility is sociopathic. It’s time to clean up corporate America. It’s time for shareholders to rise up and demand accountability. That’s right, I’m advocating a grassroots shareholder revolt. When corporate America says “Let them eat cake”, it may be time for corporate America to get their heads handed to them.

Hurt Feelings…

Steve Ross — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 19:39:40 +0000

Yesterday, in my long day of travel from the left coast back to Memphis, I was watching, with some interest the events unfolding with the RNC Chairman’s race. Most intriguing to me was the fact that Katon Dawson, who until recently was a member of a Whites Only Country Club stayed in the balloting and eventually came in second. If you’re interested in how the balloting played out, you can read some “after the fact” play by play here. Once Michael Steele, the former Lt. Gov. of Maryland, and the RNC’s first African-American chairman, was selected, I wrote a tweet that may have been offensive to some of my “twitterpeeps”.

I guess Republicans are finally abandoning all that old school racism that helped make them so successful over the past 28 years.

followed by

It will be harder for the GOP PR people to produce coded dog whistle messages for the class war that will most certainly ensue.

These two tweets, but probably the first one most, set some people off, and caused them to challenge my assertion. Unfortunately, since I was following along on my phone, where copy/paste isn’t really possible, and, I was sitting on the tarmac at Houston International Airport, waiting to take off, defending my assertions wasn’t an option at that point. Now it is. Case in point 1, The Southern Strategy: Here’s a darling little quote from the man who popularized this tactic Kevin Phillips of Connecticut:

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.

Harnesing ill-will held by segregationist Democrats from the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the Republicans flipped the script on the previously dominant party of the south, the Democratic Party. This alone does not make a political party “racist”…I guess…but it sure makes them look like they are. As former RNC Chair Ken Mehlman noted in speeches during his term “Republican candidates often have prospered by ignoring black voters and even by exploiting racial tensions” and “[B]y the '70s and into the '80s and '90s, the Democratic Party solidified its gains in the African-American community, and we Republicans did not effectively reach out. Some Republicans gave up on winning the African-American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization. I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong.” (bold emphasis mine (Source)) In apologizing for the use of racism in politics, the former RNC chair affirms that it was indeed part of the strategy. Certainly, during the 20th century, there have been Democratic officials who have used racism as a tool to elevate themselves to office. No one denies that. However, the modern Democratic Party has never used such a tactic in a national campaign. Case 2, Adopting the Language of Segregation: States’ Rights has been called a “code word” for the segregationist positions of Dixiecrats like Strom Thurmond and George Wallace. From Wikipedia:

The term "states' rights," some have argued,[who?] was used as a code word by defenders of segregation, and was the official name of the "Dixiecrat" party led by segregationist presidential candidate Strom Thurmond. George Wallace, the Alabama governor—who famously declared in his inaugural address, "Segregation now! Segregation tomorrow! Segregation forever!"—later remarked that he should have said, "States' rights now! States' rights tomorrow! States' rights forever!" Wallace, however, claimed that segregation was but one issue symbolic of a larger struggle for states' rights; in that view, which some historians dispute, his replacement of segregation with states' rights would be more of a clarification than a euphemism.[7]

Clarification or euphemism, when coupled with the “Southern Strategy” euphemism seems the far more appropriate conclusion. This was further affirmed by the comments of former Senator Trent Lott during the 100th birthday celebration of Strom Thurmond where he declared, “When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either.” Coupling this sentiment with the voting records of southern Republicans since the advent of the CRA of ’64 and the VRA of ’65, one could conclude that, even if the Republican Party at large was not seeking to affirm racists or racially insensitive goals, that many of their party members were throughout the latter part of the 20th century. Case 3 Policies that Affirm Exclusionary Goals: There are several instances of Republican Party policies that affirm exclusionary goals. The effect of these goals is the disenfranchisement, or disempowerment of a populace still struggling for equal opportunity. More often than not, throughout the recent history of the US, this has disproportionately affected African-Americans. Here are just a few of them: The Myth of the Cadillac Driving Welfare Queen: One of the oft repeated myths of the Reagan era, the former President asserted that Welfare fraud was so pervasive that the entire program should be scrapped, leaving millions of poor Americans, with no safety net. The media was never able to uncover this “Welfare Cheat” and eventually discovered that she didn’t exist, however, the folklore of this person lived on and became a part of the prevailing “Conventional Wisdom” as originally defined by the economist John Kenneth Galbraith. This myth became so pervasive that it eventually led to former President Clinton, using studies promoted by Conservatives, to agree to cut welfare benefits, despite several scholarly studies to the contrary. Affirmative Action: Affirmative Action was originally implemented by Executive Order 10925 during the Kennedy Administration for Federal Employees. President Lyndon Johnson took up the cause after Kennedy’s death. In explaining his support for the policy Johnson noted:

…You do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: Now you are free to go where you want, and do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please. You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, 'you are free to compete with all the others,' and still justly believe that you have been completely fair...This is the next and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity. We seek not just legal equity but human ability, not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result. (Source)

Affirmative Action sought to level the playing field, giving those who had suffered at the hands of racial, religious, gender and class discrimination. Since the release of the Philadelphia Plan under Richard Nixon in 1969, Affirmative Action opponents have asserted that the policy discriminates against more qualified Caucasian candidates for jobs and University admissions. Once again, this is an example of the conventional wisdom overtaking fact. Affirmative Action is, and always has been a guideline for hiring. Nowhere in Affirmative Action law or policy does it state that quotas are to be maintained throughout the entire system. Organizations under review are given a benchmark to achieve based on a series of local data that includes racial breakdown and estimations of qualified candidates. As an example, if a city has a racial breakdown of 15/85, but only 5% of the total the benchmark is set at 5%. Assuming the company makes a good faith effort to reach the stated goal, no penalty is assessed. Only after multiple years of repeated failure stemming from blatant discrimination are quotas applied by the courts. Unfortunately, the Conventional Wisdom often spouted by Conservative opponents of Affirmative Action, denies this fact, and has used this conventional wisdom over the years to smear and distort Affirmative Action. More recent arguments against Affirmative Action state that it benefits middle and upper class minorities at the expense of lower-class Caucasians, or that the policy serves as a detriment to reconciliation, replacing old wrongs with new wrongs. To once again quote President Johnson:

Men and women of all races are born with the same range of abilities. But ability is not just the product of birth. Ability is stretched or stunted by the family that you live with, and the neighborhood you live in--by the school you go to and the poverty or the richness of your surroundings. It is the product of a hundred unseen forces playing upon the little infant, the child, and finally the man.

In this statement, President Johnson affirms the imperfection of Affirmative Action as a vehicle for universal social justice. Race, gender, creed, and other social divisions are imperfect benchmarks for attaining equality in a diverse society. That said, making the perfect the enemy of the good, to paraphrase Voltaire, is not really a solution, but compounding of the problem. In order for the inequity of class to be adequately addressed, other more readily recognizable benchmarks may need to be attained. Conservatives actually weaken the plight of Americans, regardless of the social divisions outlined in the policy of Affirmative Action, to rise above the conditions of poverty; be they financial, educational, or any other measure. The goal of Affirmative Action is to create an “equality of possibility” for all who suffer external challenges to their ultimate success. That benchmarks or attributes are currently focused on more recognizable attributes, such as race or gender, speaks more to a condition of American society that has not evolved to recognize such issues rather than any failing of a policy whose ultimate goal is to erase inequity. Further to that point, by pushing to remove protections based on these attributes, Conservatives ultimately do a disservice to the very people they claim to fighting for, as well as all those included in Affirmative Action protections. Vote Suppression: From photo-ID laws and random purges, to the less blatant, but just as effective tactic of sending less or less reliable equipment to areas with large minority representation, voter suppression has long been a tactic of the Republican Party. Back in the 80’s the RNC signed a consent decree in response to a lawsuit that alleged the party violated the Voting Rights Act by using tens of thousands of returned mail pieces, mostly targeting minority or Democratic areas, and using those as a justification to challenge, or remove voters from the rolls. Despite the prohibition by the RNC to engage in this tactic, other Republican organizations and candidates continue to use the practice. In 2004, a document generated at the RNC surfaced detailing their caging plans

At whatever point registration in the state closes, a first class mailing should be sent to all new registrants as well as purged/inactive voters. This mailing should welcome the recipient to the voter rolls. It is important that a return address is clearly identifiable. Any mail returned as undeliverable for any reason, should be used to generate a list of problematic registrations. Poll watchers should have this list and be prepared to challenge anyone from this list attempting to vote.

If you would like a list of all the most recent work of the Republican Party to disenfranchise voters by “caging”, take a look at this page which details their “Greatest Hits” more than the whole catalog. A simple search of “Voter Suppression” nets hundreds of instances of Republican efforts to disenfranchise voters nationwide. A simple look at the Voter Suppression Wiki page, gives us only one instance of Democratic efforts at said tactic

in 2004, 4 Kerry staffers, slashed the tires of 25 vans used to transport vote monitors and voters to the polls.

As this was not a widespread problem in 2004 one could conclude that this was the act of individuals who should have known better, more than something ginned up by the campaign or any Democratic Party institution. I think I’ve made my point. In closing I want to make a couple points about my original statement, which I will now repeat:

I guess Republicans are finally abandoning all that old school racism that helped make them so successful over the past 28 years.

First, I think for a party that has engaged in so much divisiveness and racially motivated tactics, to elect a man whose ethnicity is that of their targets in the past, is either one of the most positive things in American politics in some time, or one of the most mindlessly manipulative things. I’m hoping for the positive, because even though I disagree with Republicans on just about every issue of substance the faces America, I still believe that we are stronger with a diversity of opinion. Secondly, I didn’t call Republicans racists. I called the actions of the party, racist. Calling 30 odd percent of America, including some people I consider friends and colleagues racists is just plain stupid. However, the racially motivated actions of certain Republican candidates and party organs must not be ignored. Certainly, there have been, and probably are Democrats who have engaged in similar tactics, particularly during segregationist times. Because I limited my claim to 28 years (though in truth it should have been 40) I acknowledge that I was able to avoid some of the ugliness that took place in my party…and eventually moved to yours. Doctor, heal thy self. Finally, if my arguments aren’t compelling, or you just want to get yourself up in a lather about my initial statement or no matter what I say you don’t care because your feelings are hurt and I’m an asshole, please fill out the following form. Thanks, and have a nice weekend.

Unrequited “Post-Partisanship”

Steve Ross — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 16:48:01 +0000

It's time to take a look back a couple days to a post I wrote about "Post-Partisanship". Now that the RNC has new leadership, one would think that, perhaps, for the sake of uniting the country, helping the economy, or some other high minded purpose that Republicans may want to lay off the obstructionist tactics. One would be wrong... Speaking at a retreat of Republican legislators, newly installed RNC chair Michael Steele remarked:

I thought it was very important to send a signal, and you sent it loudly, very clearly, that this party, the leadership of this caucus, would stand first and foremost with the American people. You made it very clear that in order to grow through this recession that you not redistribute the wealth of the people of this nation.

This is an interesting quote. I don’t see anywhere in HR 1 that “wealth is redistributed”. Looking again at the way the funds are appropriated I see $225b to help people who have lost their jobs and states who have lost tax revenue, $319b is for construction and upgrade projects that will help private business and workers alike, $255b in tax cuts to middle income earners, and $20b in cuts to business. Where’s the “redistribution”? In the midst of a recession as bad or worse than ANY recession in my 36 years the new RNC chair is ready to set his party down the well-worn path of the POUM Hypothesis. The “Promise of Upward Mobility” hypothesis states that individuals earning lower incomes will not support tax increases for the wealthy on the “promise of upward mobility”, fearing that they too may some day have to pay the new tax rate. Most people I talk to are more worried about maintaining their income levels than increasing them. In the wake of the financial crisis that exacerbated the unemployment increases we’ve been experiencing for over a year now, and the irresponsible actions of many of the executives that helped these institutions tank, few people give two shits about how much these “Me first” millionaires are going to have to pay in taxes. Then there’s the fact that there ARE NO TAX INCREASES anywhere in this bill. None. So where’s that redistribution again Mr. Steele? The Republican Party has no interest in anything that may look like “bi-partisanship” unless it’s their “bi-partisanship”, and their “bi-partisanship” looks suspiciously like a party whose ideas, or lack thereof, have been rejected by the voters of this nation over the past two election cycles. If Republicans want to act in good faith, then I welcome what they have to offer to the conversation, but if they are just interested in making anything and everything like a twisted version of the old Peanuts Lucy/Charlie Brown/football scenario, then they can blow their dog whistles to high heaven, I don’t care. The American people are sick of the games, and until the Republican Party recognizes this fact, they will continue to marginalize themselves, which is just fine by me.

That Sound You Hear is a Waaahmbulance

Steve Ross — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:25:20 +0000

Pronounced (WHAM-bewwww-Lance) Last week I was getting annoyed at the unrelenting Republican bashing of the stimulus package, now I just find it pathetic. They really don’t have anything else to hold on to do they? I mean, this is it. It’s tragic when a well-crafted mythology falls apart. Not so much for the society at large, but for the adherents of the mythology. The “tax cuts now, tax cuts forever” wing of the Republican party has been laid bare. They’re writhing on the ground like a screaming toddler, intent on holding on to their now defunct mythology. Take a look at this post from firedoglake. While there’s no doubt that Reagan cut taxes in 1982, the mythology of the Republican Party believes that Reagan NEVER raised taxes, and also cut government spending. This is an inaccurate representation of Reagan’s record. As the article shows, Reagan “raised taxes a grand total of four times just between 1982-84.”, and increased the number of federal employees by 61,000, thus expanding government, AND, effectively tripled the national debt (from 1980 to 1990 the federal debt increased from $.93t to $3.23t(Source)). Read the rest of the quoted article and you will find that in Reagan’s second term he raised taxes on corporations, after stating “"there is no justification" for taxing corporate income” some $420b. Tax and spend anyone? Ahh, but we don’t remember such things these days. The Reagan mythology of the great tax cutter, the great bastion of supply side economics, has been pounded into our brains for so long that conventional wisdom has taken over reality. So, what do you do when the facts don’t support the myth? Repeat the myth ad infinitum! The truth of the matter isn’t that Republican objections to the stimulus package aren't rooted in any real policy difference. Republicans have been burning through deficit money like a trust fund baby since the 80’s. No the objection is that it’s not being spent where Republicans want it spent, and under Republican leadership that would serve to maintain the mythology they’ve so carefully crafted over the past 30 years. Let’s look, once again, at the facts. Republicans want tax cuts, they get $255b in tax cuts, nearly the same amount of Bush’s first cut the EGTRRA. Taken all together, both the EGTRRA, the JGTRRA and the current stimulus plan have lowered tax revenues immensely, but had little effect on the economy at large. The biggest thing that brought the economic “boom” from 2003-2006 was a monetary policy that made money cheap, and a white hot housing market. The problem, Bush’s boom was a bubble, and when it popped, unlike the .com bubble of the late 90’s, it rippled through the entire financial system in ways that few, outside of the financial services industry, could imagine. What is needed is sustainable and equitable growth. I’m not sure that the current stimulus package actually does that for the long term, but I know for sure that tax cuts alone will not. Further, the speed at which the tax cuts in the current bill would arrive in the economy may or may not be fast enough to stop the dramatic slide we’ve seen over the past several months. The spending, on the other hand, will. If individuals and corporations do not want to spend money, it’s incumbent on government to pick up the slack to get people working again. Republican’s are calling the current bill pork, because they call EVERYTHING that is outside their narrow spending worldview pork. Pork is only pork if it’s unnecessary (Bridge to Nowhere anyone?). Building up infrastructure that has long been ignored is not pork, it’s insurance against potential failure. It’s time for the Republicans in Congress to listen to Republican Governors, who widely support the measure currently before them. Your mythology is dying. It’s time to be a part of the solution, instead of being part of the problem by clinging to a mythology that has long since past it’s prime.

Residency Requirement Motion Dismissed…for Now

Steve Ross — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 12:48:28 +0000

As reported in the Commercial Appeal, Chancery Court Judge Arnold Goldin dismissed a motion brought by local attorney Jay Bailey (Source). The motion sought to chalenge the new residency rules passed by the Memphis City Council on January 27th. Under the rules, which do not take effect until the minutes of the prior meeting are agreed upon, presumably, at today’s Council meeting, allows the Memphis Police Department may hire officers who live up to 20 miles outside the city limits if they pay an annual fee of $1400. Bailey, and his plaintiffs claim

"On its face it appears that the actions taken under (the residency resolution) are clearly designed to hire more white police officers," Bailey said in court papers. "If this is the hidden purpose of the resolution and resultant actions of the defendants, it violates both the city Charter and the United States Constitution wherein racial purposes are prohibited."

Let’s stop and think about this rationally. If your house gets robbed, do you care what race the cop is that comes to make the report? If you’re physically attacked, does the race of the cop that responds to the 911 call matter? In a city where violent crime is on a huge upswing over the past several months, this article appears two spaces ahead of the article on the failed motion, shouldn’t we be more concerned with making the city safer than the possible race of new hires? Come on Memphis, we can’t be this trite about things. Seriously, are you really more concerned about the RACE of a potential new hire than GETTING a new hire for the MPD? It defies logic. I’m sensitive to the concerns of the plaintiffs. Certainly, I see how individuals could believe that this is an effort to disenfranchise African-Americans seeking employment at the MPD. Unfortunately, no one has come forward with credible evidence that this is either currently happening, or has any real potential of happening. Further, easing the residency requirement doesn’t exclude any qualified Memphis based candidate for the MPD. Last I heard, the MPD was about 200 officers behind recruitment goals. Opening up the process may bring enough qualified candidates into the mix to meet that deficit. Of course, the notion that just hiring more cops is somehow going to decrease crime is silly, but considering the state of public safety in Memphis, and the economic and budgetary crisis that all levels of government are experiencing, something has to be done immediately. As the economy goes down, crime will go up. You can look throughout modern history, in any city in America and see this trend. Memphis, which has a poverty rate of some 30%, is going to feel it worse than most places, both in economic impact, and crime. While you’re thinking about it, go read this editorial at the CA from Sunday. It pretty well sums up what we’re facing from a staffing standpoint, and some of the objections in a pretty even-handed manner. The big point to take out of this whole thing is; do you care what race your cops are, or is your primary concern that they are the best candidates for the job, regardless of race. I’ll take qualified over any color, be it black, white, brown red, or pasty, any day of the week.

The Healthcare Recession

Steve Ross — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:38:04 +0000

When people think about a recession, they primarily identify with purely economic measures. Considering the current economic climate, it’s easy to understand why people are thinking about their financial future. But more and more people in this country are experiencing a “Healthcare Recession”. What is a “Healthcare Recession”? It is the steady diminishing of the availability of services and the health of a populace due to increasing costs, restrictions, or loss of coverage. The US spends $2.4t a year on healthcare, or 17% of our GDP, yet we have some 47+ million living with no insurance. Other nations, such as Germany, France, and Canada spend between 9% and 11% of their respective GDP and they still manage to cover everyone. Healthcare expenses are, at least partly responsible for 50% of all personal bankruptcies in the US. That’s right, 50% of the people who declare bankruptcy aren’t the deadbeats some in government would paint them to be, they’re sick people. Insurance premiums for employer-based health insurance have increased at least 5% in each of the past 3 years. Imagine the impact that expense must be having on employers as we weather this economic recession. The average employer-based health insurance plan for a family of 4 is $12,000/year. Multiply that by 25 employees and that accounts for some $300,000 of either raises, or business expansion spending taken out of the economy, and put into a system that is retracting benefits at an alarming rate. Employer-based health insurance premiums have increased 120% since 1999. This compares to a cumulative inflation rate of 44%. A survey of Iowa consumers found that in order to cope with rising health insurance costs, 86 percent said they had cut back on how much they could save, and 44 percent said that they have cut back on food and heating expenses. My question is, how many have cut their insurance as the result of a receding economy? All these statistics come in whole or in part from the non-partisanNational Coalition on Health Care. As we contemplate the economic recession, we have to consider the impact it will have on the healthcare industry. Since July 2008 there have been nearly 2.5 million new unemployment claims (Source). Think about how that impacts the healthcare system, and the health of those affected. We now have 2.5 million new people who have either lost, or are about to lose their health insurance. That’s 2.5 million more people who may lose their home, or their savings, or both, as the result of a catastrophic illness or injury. What impact will those losses have on the economy? What impact will those losses have on society? How much of that loss can our current healthcare system absorb? The long hard truth is that we can no longer afford our current health care system. It was ill considered from the start, making healthcare coverage dependent on employment or affluence. Doing so neglects several segments of the population, including children, who through no fault of their own, may just happen to be the child of an unemployed, or uninsured worker. What about Medicare or Medicaid? Both have been political footballs since the “Reagan Revolution”, subject to the whims of those who chose to demonize or vilify it for political gain. There’s a misguided sense that people who use these programs are somehow failures, or deadbeats, but that’s hardly the case. Most are retired workers who are no longer or were never covered under employer-based healthcare plans, or the working poor, who are also, by and large, not covered by private healthcare. Consider this, a minimum wage earner makes $13,000/year, if they work 40 hours a week. What employer is going to double their employee cost to cover them and their children? One of my favorite responses to this “reality” is the retort, “No one only makes minimum wage.” Well, if that’s the case, then what was the big deal about raising it? In talking to friends in the healthcare industry, they report that they have had to either take on additional costs or staff nearly every year since 1992 to manage the 3 dimensional puzzle that is our healthcare system. The US spends some $480b/year more than other Western nations with universal coverage on ADMINISTRATION ALONE. The result is that the availability of healthcare and healthcare coverage has become a tool in a class war that is driving all of us further and further down the ladder, both economically, and medically. I’m not demanding universal single-payer coverage, though some argue that’s the only real solution. I realize that at this time it may be a bridge too far for those politicians too weak to be bold, or to pompous to think beyond their narrow political future. I am asking for people in Washington to stop making the availability of insurance or healthcare a political football to be bandied about like as if it doesn’t affect anyone. I’m asking our elected officials to start treating this like the crisis it really is, instead of the “carrot on a stick” stupidity that it has become over the past 16 years. Streamline the process. Take away some of the ridiculous hoops that our hospitals and physicians have to jump through to get paid. Take away the barriers to getting care. Build a system where all insurers use a standard form instead of creating their own standard, and by extension, raising the bar on receiving coverage or payment, and lowering the quality of care in the process. Most importantly, do something for God’s sake! Any reform that may have come has taken a hit by the withdrawal of Fmr. Senator Daschle from his nomination to HHS. I’m not sure that he really was the right man for the job, but his withdrawal, at the very least, delays any progress on reforming healthcare, and at worst, makes the prospect of reform even more of a political football than it was at 8am this morning. I know there are a lot of people out there supporting Howard Dean for the post, but to be honest, I don’t care who it is, as long as they are an honest arbiter of positive change, and have the political skills to make some meaningful reform happen. We can reform segments of our economy as much as we want to, but if we do not have a healthy populace to support these industries, both with labor and spending, our economy will neither recover, nor grow with any sustainability. It’s way past time to make some sense out of healthcare, and restore our place in the world both economically and medically. Update:HR 676 The United States National Health Insurance Act. Co-Sponsored by our very own Steve Cohen Related: Paul Krugman

Things that Happened in Memphis 2/4/09 Edition

Steve Ross — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 11:49:16 +0000

Ed Note: This will not necessarily be a regular feature. In fact, I’ll probably forget about it by tomorrow. Still, I felt it was necessary. City Council Passes “Basic Human Living Standards” Law Yesterday the Memphis City Council passed a law requiring landlords to maintain basic standards at rental properties. *record scratch* You mean, there wasn’t already a law that did that? Hooooo-boy. The NEW law mandates that landlords do things like; keep glass in the windows, keep pipes and wire entries sealed, insulate attics, maintain heating and cooling equipment, and keep the pipes from leaking. I find it interesting that some rental properties in the city may not provide “heating or cooling equipment”. Do people move with their furnaces, or are these slum lords preying on poor people? Just a question. For a less snarky description of this NEW 1970’s era basic standards of living law, go to the CA. I just can’t manage to contain my snarkiness this morning. Aside…You know, just a few weeks ago, I was talking to my brother. He lives in San Francisco, STOP, STOP, I know, very different, yes, I know, just listen for a minute. Sheesh. He lives in San Francisco. Until recently, he lived in a house that was being foreclosed. Under city and state laws, he was allowed to stay in the property because his rights as an individual to not be evicted for the failings of the landlord so long as he was holding up his end of the bargain, trumped the rights of the bank, or any other lein holder. I submit that if we are just getting around to legislating that people don’t live in substandard conditions, that such protections are also probably not available. Further, in an economic climate that has seen foreclosure auctions become the only real boom business, other than Cash4Gold and payday lenders, it might be a really big problem. Just a thought./Aside Residency Redux In other news, by the time you read this, we’ll be getting sued again. Yes, that’s right, as I wrote, in a far more serious tone, yesterday, local attorney Jay Bailey has pledged to re-file his injunction to stop the new residency policy at the MPD. Just read what I wrote yesterday, it still applies. Water, Air, and Food to Get Dirtier A new study finds that the $14m the Memphis City Council voted in December to withhold from the Memphis and Shelby County Health Department, may result in loss of services. Whoda Thunkit? Following the emerging theme of withholding City funds because they are not mandated by the state, City Council Members argued that City residents pay twice for services that County residents pay only once for. The basis of this argument revolves around property taxes. The majority of City and County funding comes from property taxes. Since Memphis residents pay both City and County property taxes, we are effectively taxed twice for the same level of service received in unincorporated or county covered areas. Unfortunately, the $14m may cost the department another $57m in state and federal funding that requires contributions from local governments. Ahh the power of multiplication. The Health Department administers such niceties as restaurant inspections, as well as tests for air and water quality control. They also provide early childhood exams and vaccinations, write death certificates, and maintain other such standards of modern society. I wonder how this is going to affect Memphis’ dubious distinction of having a higher infant mortality rate than some Third World Countries? Herenton Looking For 100 People Who Want to Quit Finally, Mayor Herenton presented the Council with a plan to “buyout” 100 city employees in an effort to cut costs. His plan comes at a time when the City is facing a $12m to $25m budget shortfall. Employees who chose the buyout plan will receive four months’ salary, compensation for years of service, accrued sick leave, and six months of health benefits. The plan comes in the midst of a nationwide economic downturn that has seen some 2.5m new unemployment claims in the past six months. Some Council members ridiculed at the idea. “The city of Memphis don't need a buyout plan,” said Councilman and English Aficionado Joe Brown. Councilwoman Brabara Swearengen Ware asked if there were 100 employees that the city didn’t need. Herenton declined to answer, but I think we all know that there are at least 100 city employees that most Memphians don’t WANT. If 100 people don’t take the voluntary buyout, layoffs may be necessary. I’m not sure if the Council has to approve any buyout plan, but if so, I’m sure Councilman Brown will dazzle us with his rock solid grasp of the English language once again. -- I'll be at Drinking Liberally tonight, 7-9 at RP Billiards, 525 S. Highland, and you should be too! That’s all for this morning. Have a Great Day Memphis!

Bank Nationalization

Steve Ross — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 12:41:54 +0000

Barry Ritholtz over at The Big Picture, debunks the arguments against Bank nationalization. Ritholtz and company have been arguing for nationalization for some time now, as an alternative to the current "Bad Bank" scenario that Treasury is pursuing. I don't know enough about the Macro effects of this, but I agree with the basic premise; if we're going to spend our money stabilizing institutions that have made a multitude of bad choices, we might as well benefit from that investment in some REAL way. This is currently not happening. If you don't read Ritholtz regularly, and are interested in an insider's view on what's happening with the economic crisis, I suggest you add him to your RSS feed. About Barry Ritholtz

Chip In! UPDATED

Steve Ross — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 13:00:56 +0000

Update 11:28 CST: You guys are AWESOME! We hit our initial $1000 goal in just four and a half hours with 21 donors. Let's keep the momentum going and up the ante. We want to see if we can get 50 donors, totaling $2000 by Friday. Any amount is appreciated. The goal is to hit, or exceed BOTH benchmarks. Thanks for your support! Just under two weeks ago the Tennessee Democratic Party elected a new chairman, Chip Forrester. In his remarks to the State Executive Committee, Forrester pledged to "...open up this party to everyone who believes in the ideals of the Democratic Party...". In support of that goal, several Tennessee bloggers have come together to launch the "Chip In" fundraising campaign for the TNDP. Our goal is to raise, at least, $1000 dollars for the party. To donate, simply click the banner above, or the Act Blue icon to the right. Any amount is appreciated, and you can schedule recurring donations if you like. Thanks for your support of the TNDP. With your help we can make the state Legislature and keep the office of Governor blue. In the Media Post Politics
No Silence Here NOTE: Act Blue does not take any revenue from your donation, however if you would like to leave them a tip, you may do so in the donation process.

Keep On Chippin' UPDATE

Steve Ross — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:38:08 +0000

UPDATE: 6:15PM: We hit $2000 and 50 supporters, but we still have two more days! Let's keep this train a goin' and shoot for $3000, maybe even like....100 supporters? Come on, we can do it! --Original Post Follows-- A couple of minutes ago we received a note from TNDP Chair Chip Forrester thanking us for our efforts. The response today has been amazing. With your help we made fast work (4 hours 20 min.) of our original goal of $1000. It happened so fast, we upped the ante to $2000 and 50 donors and we've almost made THAT GOAL. We certainly want you to give what you can, but mostly we want you to be a part of the process. Even $5 isn't too little. This is an investment in the future of Tennessee. By giving, $5, $10, $20 or whatever you feel comfortable giving to this fundraiser, you're affirming the power of individuals, perhaps of modest means, to come together and make a positive impact. Give what you can, but most importantly, get involved in the process. You can do so by clicking the image above, or the Act Blue icon to the right. Thanks for your support! In the Media Post Politics
No Silence Here NOTE: Act Blue does not take any revenue from your donation, however if you would like to leave them a tip, you may do so in the donation process.

What First 100 Days?

Steve Ross — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:21:26 +0000

In my experience, the honeymoon never lasts as long as it should. I’m sure President Obama feels the same way right about now. Just 14 days in office and the Right Wing Chatterbox has taken over the airwaves in opposition to a stimulus package that is intended to help our damaged economy recover from the worst downturn since the Great Depression. Only in America. I say that because, only in America would the media specifically seek out these nay-sayers, and the nay-sayers only, to put the kaibosh on a plan to help regular folks. Only in America would a group of far right ideologues be given a front and center platform to try, once again, to persuade the American people to turn against their common interest. Only in America, could the unsubstantiated claims of Millionaire Mitch McConnell, who has a vested interest in derailing Obama’s agenda, mean anything to the public discourse. Seriously, it’s unbelievable. I haven’t read the entire bill. Honestly, I don’t have that kind of time. But the reporting on it, some balanced, some swayed one way or the other, including this article that gives the appropriations breakdown tells me that there’s enough of what’s right in the current bill to counteract anything that’s wrong, no matter what Jim Cooper says (which he can’t seem to get straight). So why are they so intent on the failure of this bill? Because they’ve lost power and will do anything to get it, even if it’s not all of it, back. That means following the Limbaugh Directive. Is that what America wants? Did Americans show up in droves on and before Election Day in November to elect someone they want to fail? Well, that’s what the Republicans seem to want right now. They’re gunning to see him fail, and they don’t give a damn who it hurts, including you. Go and read that USAToday article about how the money is spent. Before you pass judgement, think of the things that the money is going to:

Expanded unemployment and healthcare benefits, in the wake of 2.5m new unemployment claims in the past 6 months.
Increased education spending, to help municipalities suffering from drops in tax receipts, and students who are struggling to stay in college.
Infrastructure spending on new bridges, buildings, and the modernization of our energy grid.
Finally, $275b of tax cuts and credits that show up in your pocket every time you get a check.

Does this sound like waste? Does this sound like pork? Or does this sound like a plan to put money back in your pocket and people back to work? Sounds like people going back to work to me boss. It’s time to turn off the Right Wing Chatter boxes and nay-sayers like Millionaire Mitch. It’s time to start work on building a stronger America, with a stronger economy that puts you ahead of the millionaires that don’t need any help getting ahead. Call our Tennessee Senators, and tell them that Americans need help now, and they should get to helping instead of just talking. Their phone numbers follow. Lamar Alexander (202) 224-4944 Bob Corker 202) 224-3344 When you’re done with them, give our nearby Democratic Senators a call, they may need some re-assurance: Blanche Lincoln – AR (202) 224-4843 Mark Pryor – AR (202) 224-2353 Mary Landrieu –LA (202) 224-5824 Claire McCaskill - MO (202) 224-6154 Kay Hagan – NC (202) 224-6342 Bill Nelson – FL (202) 224-5274 If your Senator isn’t listed go here to get their contact information

Chip In Day 2

Steve Ross — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:07:12 +0000

As of 8am this morning we've raised $2554 with 63 donors. That's pretty awesome for whipping something up in 24 hours, huh? Last night we raised our goal to raise $3000 and have 100 donors. We're closing in on this new goal. Help us reach it so we can help turn Tennessee Blue! In the Media Post Politics
No Silence Here NOTE: Act Blue does not take any revenue from your donation, however if you would like to leave them a tip, you may do so in the donation process.

It’s About the Effort

Steve Ross — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 20:51:37 +0000

The past few days have been really exciting. About 20 Tennessee bloggers got together, led by Knoxville blogger R. Neal to work for a common goal: to Chip inraise funds for the TNDP and elections coming in 2010. Our expectations were low. We wanted to make a statement, but not overpromise and underdeliver. Tuesday, when the conversation first started, $1000 seemed like a doable goal. Over the course of the past 28 hours we’ve expanded our goal twice and supporters of the TNDP have responded, giving over $2700. Honestly, we’ve been pleasantly surprised by the response. Truth be told, we don’t have any illusions about this effort. The TNDP raised and spent $1.9m dollars in the last cycle, and still lost. While our current effort may only account for .2% of that fundraising cycle total, it’s something. It’s a step in the right direction. I believe we’ve all learned something about not only the process, but about the power of people, with similar goals, banding together to achieve a common goal. It doesn’t matter that the dollar amount is called “insignificant” by the nay-sayers. The important thing to take from the exercise is that you can make a difference if you’re willing to try. As Braisted notes in the linked post, there are a lot of nay-sayers out there. Let them talk. While they’re talking, we’re doing something, no matter how small, to strengthen the Democratic Party in Tennessee. Help us reach our new goal of $3000 and 100 supporters by giving what you can today.

Andy Card STFU

Steve Ross — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:45:12 +0000

Andy Card, former Bush Administration Chief of Staff, and one of those people who helped screw up the country so bad that it’ll take the better part of the NEXT decade to fix it, is criticizing President Obama for not wearing a jacket in the Oval Office. Are you serious? Well, late tonight (actually it’s about 3:30 am) pictures surfaced of President Bush Jacketless in the Oval Office, as well as several of his predecessors. I understand that there is a level of formality that surrounds the Office and the Presidency in general. I understand why that is important. Part of the formality lies in respect for the office, and the officer. Part, has more to do with a respect for the authority that comes with the Presidency. But the truth of the matter is, a suit jacket, or a tie are mere symbols of formality, not actual formality. The former Administration may have “played at” more respect for the office, by keeping a relatively strict dress code in the White House. Unfortunately, it’s only a “play” at respect, because despite their dress, their ACTIONS did more to harm this country than anything a jacketless President could ever hope to muster. Seriously Andy, crawl back into your hole. You and your Neoconservative buddies are like the 4 geeks in the Alltel commercials…ALWAYS WRONG. Andy, it's you, you're the Ding Dong.

Chip In - Final Stretch

Steve Ross — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 11:48:43 +0000

It's the last day of our "Chip In" fundraiser, and we've met one of the goals we set, but we still have another to knock down. Early this morning we passed $3000. As it stands right now we're just 23 donors away from our second goal of 100 supporters. I know we can get this done by the end of the day. Yesterday was a busy day. The TNDP unveiled a new home page. It's still a work in progress, but if this is the direction they're going in, it's a step in the right direction. Also, TNDP Chair Chip Forrester gave a video message via YouTube. The message follows: Also, you can follow the TNDP on twitter or Facebook. All of these developments are positive for the party. The more means of communication we have at our disposal, the more effectively we can get our message out. We've met our financial goal, but we want more of you to get involved in the process. Click on the Act Blue icon to the right and give to the TNDP!

Out of Touch

Steve Ross — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 15:19:40 +0000

You're out of touch, I'm out of time - Hall and Oats Yesterday, the US unemployment rate reached its highest level since 1992. 600,000 jobs were reported lost in the previous month. There has been no significant job creation since January of 2007. We’ve experienced two years of stagnant or increasing unemployment. (Source) The reality is far worse. The Real unemployment rate, the rate that not only accounts for new job losses and current claims, but also those who have lost unemployment benefits is hovering around 13%. With unemployment running rampant and with no sign of slowing, and an economic recession making the hope of any new hiring a pipe dream, making sure that the people who are getting left behind, through no fault of their own, might be a pretty big priority right? Wrong. Since HR 1 passed the House, Republicans in the Senate have been railing against the bill. Of chief concern to the Republicans has been some $5 billion of supposedly “pork barrel” projects contained in the original $800 billion dollar stimulus. .7% of a package designed to provide assistance to the people who have suffered at the hands of irresponsible management and absent regulation has been screwing it up for the 3.6 million people who have lost their jobs in the past 12 months, and the likely several million more who will lose their jobs in the upcoming months. .7% of one of the largest, most comprehensive stimulus package of my lifetime, is being held hostage by 41 individuals more interested in furthering their ideology than helping the average Americans who have been hurt by a former Administration’s policy where ideology trumped common sense in nearly every case. Arguing for more tax cuts, focused once again on those who need the money least, the Republicans in the Senate have used straw man argument after straw man argument to derail the process, and have been largely successful. This rejection of everything the recent election was about amounts to a minority of ideologues holding the fate of millions of Americans hostage to petty differences. As of yesterday afternoon, the bill looked stalled, a cadre of amendments seeking to diminish the impact of the bill snarling the process. Last night, details emerged of a coalition that might just push the legislation through. A bi-partisan “gang”, has come together to help get the stimulus bill passed. This “gang” led by Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson, and joined by Republicans Olympia Snowe (ME), Susan Collins (ME) and Arlen Specter (PA) has, to quote Senator Nelson, "…trimmed the fat, fried the bacon and milked the sacred cows." I’m not sure what the Senate’s fascination is with creating the legislative equivalent of thuggish and mildly terroristic coalitions, but the nearly $100b in cuts to the bill before the Senate includes huge cuts in unemployment benefits and $60b in funds to stabilize state governments who are suffering through the recession, and often cannot engage in deficit spending. The hope of “Post-Partisanship” has been dashed by a minority caucus in the Senate and House, hell bent on maintaining ideology over effectiveness. The effect, a bill that will help some just enough to need more help, and leave state governments in a financial bind that cripples their ability to provide the additional help that the original stimulus needed. We have to start asking ourselves several questions: 1. Why is it, that when it comes to “compromise” the only ones interested in real “compromise” are the Democrats? When Republicans talk compromise, they mean, “do it our way” 2. After eight years of some of the most bitter and divisive partisanship in US history, initiated and led by the Republican Party, which resulted in the most stunning reversal of power in the Senate over two elections since before the “Contract on America”, why are Republicans holding on to their partisanship and ideology so tightly over seeking solutions? 3. Does anyone in the House or the Senate Republican caucus really have any clue what the hell is going on outside of their bubble? Republicans have to start asking themselves these questions if they don’t want to be marginalized by a “supermajority” in the US Senate in two years. I personally hope they don’t ask themselves this question. They’re out of touch, we’re running out of time, and I’ll be out of my head with happiness when fewer of them are around. In the mean time, we’ve got people out here that are hurting. We need to get this bill, even in it’s weakened form, out there to stimulate the economy and help people in need. If we don’t do this soon, the fruits of this Republican obstruction will be born in the form of double digit new unemployment and 20% REAL unemployment. I don’t think ANY ideology supports that.

Doing Nothing is an Act of Aggression

Steve Ross — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:50:54 +0000

Yesterday the Senate passed it’s version of the Economic Stimulus bill. The passage came after over a week of debate, and a great deal of arm-twisting. Now the measure goes to a conference committee to resolve the differences between the House and Senate versions. While passage in the Senate is a positive step, the differences are great enough that the measure could, once again, be held up in the Senate, depending on what happens in Conference. Both versions of the bill have been opposed by the majority of Republicans in Congress, as well as 12 Democrats in the House. Republican objections to the bill focus primarily on what they call “pork barrel” spending in the bill. Assertions by Republican members that spending is not stimulus, is like saying government employment is not a job, a bizarre notion that has been pushed by newly elected RNC Chair Michael Steele. Republicans seem to have adopted a “do nothing” strategy for Economic Recovery. They are opposing limits on bailed out CEO pay, and have worked to push tax cuts for the wealthy over the middle class tax cuts included in the current stimulus package. While there has been a lot of polling, using several methods and questioning techniques, Americans support the stimulus bill by a narrow majority in just about every poll. Further, a Gallup poll released yesterday shows that the majority of Americans not only favor the President’s approach, but also disapprove of the way the Republicans have conducted themselves in the debate (a href= http://www.gallup.com/poll/114202/Obama-Upper-Hand-Stimulus-Fight.aspx>Source). Americans are starting to realize that Republican “Do nothing” and obstructionist tactics are a thinly veiled act of aggression that follows the, “I hope he fails”, Limbaugh Doctrine. Republicans are playing a dangerous game of chicken with the American economy, and the futures of average Americans. By holding firm to the arguments that have worked in the past, though not the recent past, Republicans have chosen a fantasy over the reality that we are here, in large part due to the VERY POLICIES that Republicans claim are the prescription for our troubles.

Trying Out the iPhone App

Steve Ross — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:41:56 +0000

I just downloaded the Wordpress app for the iPhone. I can't really see writing one of my 500 word screeds on this thing, but it could be a neat tool when traveling. Now if the iPhone just had copy and paste I'd be in business!

Anonymous Sources

Steve Ross — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:51:32 +0000

After all that the previous Administration wrought on journalism with their “Anonymous Sources”, one would think that the use of said “sources” would be met with more than a healthy degree of skepticism. Apparently, this is not the case. There is no question that some in, and/or around the TNDP are dismayed or angry about losing the race for the Chair. There’s no way around this. Displaced power has two choices; 1. Seek to discredit the newly installed power even if it ultimately hurts the organization that the displaced power once ruled, or 2. Work to ensure the success of said organization because the success of that organization is more important than the success of the displaced power. Unfortunately, from reading the comments on some of the state blogs, it has become clear that elements of the displaced power have chosen option 1. So, in the wake of this shake-up, reporting on the internal strife may be something that journalists would be interested in. This may mean using “Anonymous Sources”. But if all you have is “Anonymous Sources”, how does anyone check the credibility of those sources? Further, how are we to know if this “Anonymous Source” is reflecting the views of a larger group of people, or pushing a personal agenda? Are we to just assume that the writer has done their homework? There’s been plenty of evidence in the past several years to suggest that Journo’s haven’t been doing their homework. This is the crux of the argument against using these “Anonymous Sources” without any verifiable source to back their claim, particularly when the report is grounded more in tabloid-esque reporting than the “hard fact” reporting that got it’s ass handed to it thanks to former Administration officials’ use of their anonymity to push a larger agenda. Is a journalist duty bound to report something if it’s unverifiable, or is it just the manifestation of laziness and sensationalism? What about the cowardice of the “Anonymous Source”? If one truly believes something should they not be willing to stand behind their words? To be honest, this kind of reporting actually hurts the credibility of the writer. Writers can use these sources for background, but when it comes right down to it, relying solely on “Anonymous Sources” is shaky ground. These sources, like cockroaches, seem to scatter when the lights are turned on. The strife, be it internal or external, at the TNDP is a story that people in Tennessee may be interested in, but there needs to be a greater level of responsibility and accountability when reporting on issues such as this. The writer is in danger of becoming the tool of a small, unrepresentative group of people. Simply stating that no one was willing to go on record would have put this “Anonymous Source” in it’s place, right behind the refrigerator with the other cockroaches. Unfortunately, the aim was more to stir up controversy than to actually report on any conflict within the party, which puts this story on the checkout stand rack, right next to the stories about the coming alien invasion and Oprah’s new diet.

What About the Rest of the Mess?

Steve Ross — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 18:16:11 +0000

It’s been a week hasn’t it? The StimPack passed, with new bailed-out CEO pay limits. Three Republicans in the entire Congress voted for it, though they supposedly all support it. What a cop-out! Geitner dazzled the…well…nobody with new but few details about the TARP II package. Judd Gregg realized he was incapable of any kind of partisanship that had a prefix (bi, post, etc.) and pulled out of the running for the Commerce post. On the Tennessee meets Washington side, our Governor managed to stay in the headlines for HHS, despite professing not seeking the job. I would be surprised if his name didn’t come up again for Commerce, since, apparently, the administration is running out of right leaning Governors and Senators to appoint to something. Maybe they’ll put his office in a Wal-Mart so he can connect with the regular folks for President Obama. Despite all this activity, just under 4 weeks into the new Administration, there’s still a bunch of mess to clean up. At this point, we’ve just managed to collect all the visible bottles and cans left over from the frat party that was the last administration, and there’s no doubt there are plenty more hiding, and plenty more to do. Just dealing with the economic situation, I’m wondering what kind of new, or revitalized economic regulation is going to come out of the administration. I’m also interested in what Congress plans to do with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which repealed the Depression era Glass-Stegall Act. It seems evident in the wake of the clusterfuck that went down in September that doing away with Glass-Stegall was a bad idea, but I don’t hear anyone on the Hill talking about that yet. Maybe I’m just too impatient. The reason I’m interested in those things in particular, is that I firmly believe that the lack of regulation, and the effects of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act are directly responsible for the decay of confidence in our financial system, and the mass exodus of capital that caused it’s downfall. The only way to bring that confidence back is to reinstitute many of the rules that kept us from falling victim to financial cannibalism. This isn’t Highlander, there can be more than one. Another thing that needs to be addressed is a strengthening of rules surrounding the sub-prime mortgage providers. When I bought my house in 2007, I didn’t experience this, but a friend of mine, who makes about the same money but lives in a city with far higher cost of living, told me that he had offers from lenders for up to nearly $400,000, even though he knew he couldn’t pay it. That’s crazy. I’m all for people being responsible for the risk they enter into, but lenders shouldn’t be in the business of helping people into bankruptcy. Which is another thing I’m interested in. The Bankruptcy Bill of 2005 that made it harder for individuals to file Chapter 7. How is that screwing up middle-class families caught in the economic downturn? 73 Democrats in the House and 17 in the Senate voted for the bill. Obama was not one of them. He may want to revise this law, but it will be an uphill climb. Every member of the TN delegation (from 2005) voted for this bill (remember, Ford was representing the 9th at that time). Keeping the Blue Dogs on board, despite the current bill’s negative effect on their largely rural constituency, may be tough. On the Senate side, even though many of the Republicans that made the bill possible are gone, keeping those 17 Democrats, 3 of whom are serving in the Administration. Finally, what about GWOT. We’ve heard a lot about the financial situation. We haven’t heard very much about any foreign policy. I understand that much of this is due to the Administration being only 25 days old, but I’m interested in what they have planned for Iraq and Afghanistan. Further, I’m concerned about the India/Pakistan thing in the wake of revelations this week that the attack on Mumbai was planned on Pakistani soil. India seems to be reacting positively, but I don’t have a lot of faith in the Pakistani’s to actually clean up their act. ISI’s fingerprints are all over the maintenance of the extremists in the hinterlands of Pakistan. Then of course there’s the killer peanuts, the new RNC poster mamma for that old tired Reagan Myth, and God knows what else I forgot. We've got a lot of mess yet to clean up, but passing the StimPack was a good start. Here's to hoping we can maintain the momentum. Oh yeah, and Healthcare!

That’s What I’m Talking About

Steve Ross — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:16:21 +0000

Way back in the dark ages of the post election kerfuffle, I wrote about crafting a plan to build the party. I stand by that, and was glad to see that TNDP Chair, Forrester sees the value. While the article doesn’t get into the details, but the idea of building a “farm team” isn’t anything new. The Republicans spent much of the 80’s electing people to city and county positions, as well as state office to help build their “Contract on America” majority, elected in 1994. Putting this together in the next two years will be a big challenge, but I’m still convinced that there are people, all over this state, who would be willing to run if they felt they had the technical, ground and financial support. That’s a tough nut to crack, but the key is to hit the ground running after the County Reorganization taking place March 28th – April 5th, in every county in Tennessee. (In Shelby, Ward and Precinct is on March 7th, the convention is on the 28th). By working in conjunction with county parties the TNDP could, in relatively short order, make some real strides to revitalize the “old hats” and the fresh blood that’s out there. The reality is that we will not build a real farm team in the less than two years we have before the 2010 elections. We may be able to get some new faces in front of the voters, particularly in the 26 House races we left open in 2008, but building a vibrant organization takes a lot more than just supporting candidates, it also takes supporting communities. That means helping the county parties connect to constituents before we start asking for their votes, and taking interest in interested people, to help them grow into the future staff people, and even candidates that our party needs to grow. Real growth is what the TNDP needs. The only way to do that is by strengthening current relationships and building new ones through outreach and communication. This can be hard to do, but the most important part is to stay ahead of the nay-sayers, and keep the information flowing to all the interested individuals and groups that believe in Democratic values. If you can’t communicate, you can’t grow. They’re on the right path with new twitter and Facebook feeds, but in order to get a handle on the majority of Tennessee, broader media outlets will have to play a big role. Ultimately, it’s the comprehensive strategy, not the tactics that will make Tennessee and the TNDP stronger. I’m looking forward to see how this strategy materializes over then next several weeks.

Kim McMillan at DL Memphis Tomorrow

Steve Ross — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:34:10 +0000

The race for Governor of Tennessee is well under way. Several candidates for both parties have either declared, or been putting out feelers in the state. So far, only one Democrat has officially thrown their hat into the ring; Kim McMillan of Clarksville. Mrs. McMillan will join us at Drinking Liberally in Memphis on Wednesday, February 18th. We kick off at 7pm at RP Billiards, 525 Highland and go until 9. She'll be showing up a little later, but get there early and enjoy a libation before the festivities begin.

News Intervention

Steve Ross — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 13:23:57 +0000

I know it’s fallen out of vogue now that most of the cabinet is seated, but I still keep hearing this “Team of Rivals” nonsense from elements in the MSM, most recently from Andrea Mitchell of NBC. I find the whole conversation misleading. The implication that President Obama is somehow surrounding himself with people that hold views contrary to his is disingenuous. While the President’s selections may be from a larger, more diverse pool than previous administrations, the notion that a President would surround himself with cabinet members whose positions contradict the President’s in the departments they are tasked with administering is reaching. Certainly, his appointments have been less partisan from a strict interpretation of partisanship than other modern administrations, but it’s hardly the case that he’s put an isolationist at the State Department, or a global warming denier at the EPA. He’s put people in places where their strengths suit them, based on his belief in their ability to carry out his agenda. Did the President have a long and contentious primary fight with Sec. State Clinton? You betcha, but that hardly makes them rivals some 7 months after the fact. Truth of the matter is, Clinton campaigned for Obama in the general, as did her husband. They are seeking a common goal, and just like Democrats always seem to do, they fight like hell during the primary and get it together in the general or they don’t win. So while at one point they were competing for the same job, they are now working for the same ends. The rivalry ended when the campaign ended (actually a little after that, but you get my point). Why is that so hard for the media to get? I’ve long been a critic of the “conventional wisdom” spouting chattering class that seems to dominate national politics, but seriously, the past four weeks has been just plain nutty. Everything they sell on the TV screen is skewed in some way to somehow support some flimsy talking points. Reality is ignored for fanciful declarations of something or the other that somehow challenged their limited belief system or self-interest. More shit has “died”, been put “on the ropes”, or somehow “not all that it should be and isn’t that a shame” in the past four weeks than the first 7 years of the Bush Administration. It’s been four fucking weeks, give it some time people! So yeah, I’m sick of all the bullshit. I’m sick of the distortions, I sick of the wealthy chatty Cathy’s and their idle declarations. Maybe I just consume too much news and it’s all me, or maybe I’m losing patience with a national media that is so blind to it’s own dysfunction that it can’t see its running itself into the ground, and multiplying it’s irrelevance. Maybe the national media needs an intervention (or I need one for my news addiction). The point is, when people are presented on television as experts, it should be known what they are experts in. Most fall into the category of “blind guessers” or “sameness peddlers” or worse, “outright distortion dealers”. The line between “News” and “hyperbole” has been crossed in a lot of ways, on both sides, to be honest, and I fear that actual “News” will be the one that suffers the most.

Fighting For Their Lives

Steve Ross — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:01:18 +0000

On November 5th 2008, everyone knew that Senate Republicans were a shrinking minority. The question was by how much. By the end of November there were, for certain, 58 Democratic seats, 41 Republican seats and 1 yet to be decided; Al Franken vs. Norm Coleman for Minnesota Senator. A recount process was set in motion, as required by Minnesota state law. The process was exhaustive, and largely transparent, thanks to streaming video provided by The Uptake. By January 5th, the Minnesota Canvassing Board had finished the recount and declared Franken the winner by 225 votes. Coleman’s camp immediately filed a lawsuit claiming that some ballots during the two month recount process were counted twice (which has been disproved), and, that some 12,000 votes were improperly rejected (most were absentee ballots that did not meet 4 legal requirements). So far the Minnesota Election Contest Court has ruled that; 1. The majority of the 12,000 votes failed to pass the legal tests required, 2. There are only some 3500 votes that may or may not pass all four tests to be counted, 3. The burden of proof is on the Coleman campaign to prove that these votes should be counted individually, the court will not intervene as the ballots have already been inspected at least 2 times county and state election officials. Even though Coleman’s case is weak, Minnesota law states that the necessary papers to seat the winner cannot be processed until all legal challenges are completed. This means that should Coleman lose his case in state court, the Coleman camp will appeal to the Supreme Court on “equal protection” grounds citing, wait for it, Bush v. Gore. Classic. While the case is still in front of the Minnesota Election Contest Courts, the NRSC and individual Republican Senators have been holding frequent fundraisers for Coleman’s legal defense, and have raised some $5 million. Senate Republicans are scared to death that their irrelevance may become even greater with 59 Democrats in the body, even though Minortiy Leader McConnell agreed to a committee assignment schedule that reflects a 59:41 split. Coleman, and his former Senate Republican colleagues are playing a game of “prolong the inevitable” by using every possible method they can to not allow Franken to get seated, including arguing that the election was invalid and there should be another one. The notion that one of their own got beat by a comedian/author that spent some 3 years on a syndicated liberal radio show making it known that he intended to move back to Minnesota for the explicit purpose of winning back Paul Wellstone’s seat is just killing them. In the mean time, the people of Minnesota have but one vote in the US Senate. It all comes down to obstruction, pure and simple. The only real cards Senate and House Republicans have right now are obstruction and obfuscation. They’ve been playing these cards constantly over the past 4 weeks to try and derail anything that might be seen in the public eye as progress. In the process they have shown themselves to be anything and everything but the “party of ideas”. They’re fighting for what they perceive as “their lives”, in the process they’re killing their brand. Doin’ a heckuva job guys, heckuva job!

Meeting McMillan

Steve Ross — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:44:45 +0000

Last night, the Memphis chapter of Drinking Liberally was graced by the presence of Democratic Gubernatorial candidate, Kim McMillan of Clarksville. 21 months out from the 2010 Gubernatorial election, McMillan is traveling the state, meeting with Democrats and talking about her ideas concerning government, governance, and the future of Tennessee. The meeting was really more of a “meet the candidate” than anything else. Because we are 21 months away from the election, she was short on specifics. We still have a long way to go, and the economy being what it is, a lot of tough choices ahead of us. How her policy positions pan out will likely be determined by the state we find our state in as the election approaches. Despite all this, McMillan impressed me. She is articulate, positive, resolute in her decision to run, and armed with a “why not” worldview that is inspiring. At the same time, she acknowledged that the campaign ahead would be tough, particularly in the face of two Republican candidates that could either self-fund, or who are raising millions of dollars. This could be further complicated by the possible ascension of Governor Bredesen to HHS, though speculation about that has been dying down over the past several days, and by the possible entry of some well known Democrats like Harold Ford Jr., though he may also be up for an Administration post. Right now, she’s the only one running, though in addition to speculation about a run by Ford, there’s been talk that State Senator Andy Berke of Chattanooga may throw his hat in the ring, as well as State Senator Jim Kyle of Memphis. Because it’s so early, it’s too soon to get behind any one candidate, but I’ll tell you this, Mrs. McMillan has set the bar pretty high. People looking to get in the race better get off the fence soon and bring their A game. She’s ready to go all 12 rounds. The meet and greet was attended by the local media, so there should be more comprehensive coverage coming in the next few days. All in all, I really enjoyed getting to meet Mrs. McMillan, and I’m looking forward to hearing more specifics in the coming months. Needless to say, I’m looking forward to the race ahead of us.

Meeting the Speaker

Steve Ross — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:50:35 +0000

My good friend LWC gave a rundown of the busy social calendar that has been Memphis politics over the past couple of days. I’m not usually one for social affairs, or crowds, but the event last night at Playhouse on the Square was really too intriguing to ignore, so, I made the long 4 block trip. The actual event was a pretty short affair, but I got the opportunity to actually speak with Speaker Williams and I have to say, I was impressed. Based on some of the commentary from GOP leaning bloggers and writers throughout the state, I came into the event with the idea that Williams was merely a naïve puppet. This characterization greatly underestimates the Speaker. Speaker Williams may not have the time logged in the State House that others have, but instead of a handicap, I feel this actually helps him. The truth of the matter is that there are any number of people who can run the day-to-day business of the House. While Williams may prove to be an efficient manager, his sense of “doing what’s right for the people of Tennessee, despite partisan considerations”, to paraphrase him, is what flipped the script for me. The over-reaction of the state GOP in response to his ascension to Speaker, says more about what is wrong with that party than anything about Williams. Certainly, his vote represents a great deal of self-interest, but it is also a vote against the partisan problems that have marred the body in the past. The detailed account of what really went down, presented by Memphis' very own Jackson Baker, bears out this reality. I have no doubt that Williams and I will be on the opposite side of many issues before the State House, but his willingness to put pure partisanship aside for the good of the state actually makes those disagreements easier to stomach, even though I will still scream to high heaven. So, while I’m sad that Democrats lost the House, I’m hopeful that the experience will give them pause, and help keep them together in new and ultimately more balanced ways. Further, I think they’ve learned a valuable lesson that power that sits too long becomes stale, and eventually decays. The world is moving too fast for lifelong legacies to endure, and there are plenty of arguments to prove that even in slower times they served to obstruct progress as much as anything else. The world operates better when people are forced to be better through vibrant competition. I think we’re seeing that era dawn here in Tennessee, and even though my side lost this time, I’m glad it’s happening.

Overwhelming, but not Overwhelmed

Steve Ross — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 01:40:25 +0000

September seems like a million years ago, but that’s when the financial mess was laid bare, right in front of our eyes. The recession may have technically started back in December of 2007, but now people are pointing to the summer of ’07 as the real start of the downturn. We’ve had a TARP, and the StimPack, another TARP (II) in the works. Heard about auto bailouts, Fed loan guarantees, underwater mortgages, foreclosures, ponzi schemes and rising unemployment. With all these acronyms and individual actions, it’s hard to keep up with where all the money is going or what it’s going to do. Politicians and pundits have blamed Fannie and Freddie, predatory lenders, Credit Default Swaps, poor people, rich people, upwardly mobile middle class people, the government and God knows who else, but when it really comes down to it, does anyone really know what the hell is going on and how to stop it? Honestly, there are few people that have the knowledge and distance from what led us to this point to diagnose the problem. Throw in all the noise and ideological wrangling and regular folks are left to stand there, angry, with few answers, wondering if anything is being done, not to mention if it has any hope of being successful. Over the past several months I’ve spent an inordinate amount of time trying to understand all, or even some of the factors that helped push us in this direction. I’ve read analysis and blogs and economists and damn near everything that I can read to get a handle on it, and all I find is an infinitely expanding universe of dysfunction. I’ve come to the conclusion that most people who even marginally understand the scope of the financial problems we face are tainted by their complicity, be it tacit or active, in creating the problem. We all are to blame for allowing this to happen, and we all are the victims of our own folly, in my view. In my experience, it is the act of taking responsibility that allows real solutions to emerge. This is true in every aspect of life. Accepting responsibility for maintaining conditions that are unsustainable is the path to a manageable solution.

We admitted we were powerless over our addiction - that our lives had become unmanageable.(Source)

It is a simple concept that is difficult for most people to accept, and harder to stick with. Few things ever get better without some help. It is the intervention of a medical staff that helps the patient heal faster, but ultimately, that patient has to want to heal, and do the things necessary to heal in order to ever really get better. Most of the time, that means making hard choices. Making hard choices is something the American public consistently resists. We’ve been trained to do this over decades of largesse, both in personal choices and in choices that affect our communities. We’ve taken the path of least personal resistance, and run aground. We’ve been asleep at the switch and allowed people, who hold their personal interests over the interests of the society at large to manage our economy into a ditch. It is incumbent upon us to do everything we can to educate ourselves in good faith and without preconceived notions to ensure that we regain control of that which we should have never ceded. It’s time to stop pointing fingers and start getting our house in order. This means thinking less about the “self” and more about the community at large. This means corporations need to stop thinking in terms of “quarters” and move to a decades long strategy that may not see the fast growth we’ve falsely experienced over the past 30 years, but will ultimately net us more real growth over the same time period. Of course, Corporations didn’t do this on their own, regular old people did to. We did it when we decided to carry $20k in credit card debt. We did it when we voted against our own self-interest for some stupid fear based platform about the “gays taking over” or some such dumb shit. We did it when we stopped reading the papers and watching the news. We stopped paying attention because we didn’t DEMAND better from our news sources and our elected officials. See, this is a republic, and we’re all responsible. It’s been a long, steady, 30-year slide kiddos, but we didn’t just do this to ourselves, we did it to EVERYONE. Every time you point a finger at someone else, there’s three pointing right back at yourself. I take responsibility for my part in the downturn. I didn’t run up stupid debt, or pull any derivatives shenanigans, but I also didn’t really try hard enough to talk other people out of doing these things. I didn’t yell and scream loud enough when they stopped regulating the markets, or the mortgage industry. To be honest, I didn’t know it was happening. As we’ve seen over the past months, not knowing is not an excuse, its part of the problem. If we want to keep our republic, we have to do more to become “a well-informed populace”. That means listening to the “experts”, but also being willing to do a little bit more to see the whole picture, instead of the little picture they’re selling on the boob toob. Being an active part of our republic means more than just voting whenever you remember, it means TAKING OWNERSHIP of your nation. But it’s more than that, we have to start taking ourselves seriously, and stop blaming the government we, ultimately elect. Government may not always be the solution, but if it’s the problem, then so are we, we put them there. Right now, I don’t see too many people doing that. So while I can honestly and forthrightly say that I don’t know what the hell to do about the financial mess that we’re in, I know one thing for sure. As hard as it is, as much sacrifice as it may be, we’ve all got to start contributing to our nation by being a part of the process if we want to both dig out of the mess, and make sure it doesn’t happen again. That’s the only solution.

Well, That Explains That!

Steve Ross — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 14:32:52 +0000

(h/t Polar Donkey) This lays out the credit crisis about as well as anything I've seen, but still doesn't show a solution, which is what I was looking for. Enjoy!
The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

Removing the Veil

Steve Ross — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 16:29:38 +0000

I’ve been running this little blog for just over 2 years now, first at blogspot, and now here. In those two years I’ve learned a lot, perhaps more about the act of blogging, politics and blogging politics than I ever hoped to know. To be sure, when I started on this little endeavor, I never thought that my voice would be heard over the ever-expanding universe that is the blogoshpere. Thanks to the help of several more connected bloggers in the world of politics and writers I’ve had the fortune to meet over this time, I feel I’ve cultivated something here that is outgrowing my old ideas of what role this space would serve. Don’t get me wrong; I don’t have a big head about anything. I’m painfully aware of my strengths and weaknesses. I’m reminded nearly every day. Still, the reach of this blog has far exceeded any expectations that I held two years ago. To that end, I’ve decided to make some minor changes here. First and foremost to me is my decision to use my real name on every post. You’ll notice just below the title that the author no longer says “vibinc”, but my actual name, Steve Ross. Even though I “outed” myself months ago, new readers may or may not have read that post, or the About page located on the right of the content area. Using my real name will hopefully dispel any of the “Anonymous” charges that have been tossed around over the past several months. In short, how can I expect anyone else to personally own their words when I am cloaked under the veil of a moniker, even if I have already introduced myself. Secondly, despite my heavy travel schedule (I’ll be crisscrossing the country to 5 cities over the next 4 weeks) I intend to sharpen my focus on Memphis politics. In the next month the SCDP will be selecting new leadership. I think it’s important that people be acquainted with the people who seek those leadership positions. So far I’ve been able to contact two of the five seeking the SCDP chair, and hope to reach the others soon. Hopefully, I’ll be able to get these profiles out before the Ward and Precinct meeting on March 7th. I’m also working on the look and feel of the site. Making things pretty is not necessarily a strength of mine. Making them work is. While I tend toward more utilitarian design, I know that this space can often look cluttered and difficult to read. Hopefully over the next few weeks I’ll be able to strike a balance between removing the clutter, but staying true to my utilitarian nature in a way that is more pleasing to the eye. Even though I’ve been resistant to “monetizing” anything in connection to this space, I have been urged to do so by, well, a lot of people. The inclusion of ads on the side is not something I take lightly. In many ways I see the “monetizing” of editorial space, which this blog largely is, a corrupting influence that can call into question the motives and motivation of the writer. Still, I put a lot of time and work into this site, and if I can just get the hosting and other expenses paid every year, even though that doesn’t amount to much, it will make it easier for me to dedicate myself even more to writing, which is something that would make me very happy. Luckily, I’m not big enough, or so inclined to go out soliciting ads, and there are plenty of services that will do that for you, so if you see something that interests you, go for it. Hopefully it will allow me to do more things with this space than rattle off a couple thousand words a day. Finally I want to thank the readers of this blog for valuing my perspective and hope that we can build a greater dialogue in the future. This space is not a meant to be a one-way street. I hope that all of you will take advantage of the medium and help foster a dialogue. Ultimately, that’s what this whole blogging thing is all about. Thanks, and have a great weekend.

Revelations

Steve Ross — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:17:14 +0000

I know there are a lot of happy trolls in Tennessee right about now. Yesterday’s revelation that the newly installed Treasurer of the TNDP had given money in past years to Republican Party organizations, as well as candidates illustrates, in their mind, just one more thing that is wrong with the new leadership at the TNDP. I’m not ready to make that declaration just yet, but I do want some questions answered. Newscoma got that off to a good start this morning. In the mean time, I used the super internet technology machine to ask for a response from the new chair. Here is his response:

Bill raised and gave over $250,000 to Barack Obama's presidential campaign (which should speak well enough for itself), served as Mayor Richard Fulton's treasurer and has contributed over 90% of all he has raised for Democrats in the over 20 years that he has been raising money. He is a prominent developer in the Southeast and part of doing business is making contributions to both sides of the equation. That is just a fact of business whether we like it or not. He is fully committed to the Tenn. Democratic Party and will be a huge asset to our efforts. I am confident & pleased that he is our Treasurer.

At this point, some 24 or so hours since I first read about it, I’m a lot less irritated, but still a little disappointed. Part of my disappointment has to do with the lack of respect the choice showed to supporters of the TNDP and state Democratic candidates. While Freeman’s bona fides may pass the letter of the law, just being bona fide doesn’t necessarily make it right to choose someone who has given money to the GOP in the recent past. At the very least, this should have been disclosed on the front end to get out in front of the “GOTCHA” moment that came Saturday afternoon. At the same time, I recognize that it’s unfair to penalize someone who, in working to build a business, found it necessary to not alienate himself from one side or the other. This is not something I could do without feeling like I needed to wash myself in tomato juice to get the taint off. However, raising a quarter million dollars for the Obama campaign is a step in the right direction. To be honest, I would like to hear from Freeman himself on his past giving. Ultimately, this whole scenario is a case of not “taking care of business”. This means that either someone doesn’t have a good understanding of “respecting your constituents”, or they lack the foresight to see the array of consequences, three steps into the future, never mind the obvious conflict of interest. I think this was a fumble, pure and simple. Happens with new running backs. The other side of my disappointment is the petty personal bullshit that is surrounding the whole process of transition at the TNDP. I’ve heard charge after charge about this or that, by people who claim, with no personal attribution, to be so close to Bredeson, or Davis, or Gordon, or Tanner, that they know how they feel about the situation, and have permission to talk about it. I’ve never been so far up a politician’s ass that I knew what they had for lunch, so maybe that’s part of the gig, but no matter how much someone hates the new Chair of the TNDP, it is disrespectful of the people who support the ideals and principles of the party to work so hard to tear it down further over some personal bullshit. This example is willful stupidity, which is far different from the previously mentioned inadvertent stupidity. I don’t think I need to go into much detail about which behavior I think is more destructive. In the final analysis I think all Tennessee Democrats have learned a lesson. So much of our past system has failed in ways that defy description. The TNDP has spent too long dependent on the national party to maintain the professional staff required in this day and age to keep a strong party organization thriving. We rely on the whims of the DNC, which has shown a good deal of whimsy since Howard Dean left, to pay for staff members that we should be able to pay for ourselves. This cripples our communication effort throughout the system and makes it harder for people to show the ultimate sign of support, giving. We have county parties that are either stale, inactive, or a clusterfuck. It only takes 5 minutes at an Executive Committee meeting in Shelby Co. to realize how big of a clusterfuck they can be(come enjoy the show on the 5th). We have thousands of people who are interested, untapped reservoirs of energy and activity, who have been turned off by the process of being marginalized by people whose entrenched power in the state and county organizations seeks only one goal, the maintenance of said power at the exclusion of all else. We have put petty differences over the principles that should bring us together, and built factions to maintain those divisions. The resulting system has accomplished all the things I’ve mentioned above, and yet, seeks to be maintained by those whose ego’s are so fragile that losing a simple election for chair would send them into a panicked diatribe intent on blowing the whole thing up, to perhaps, seem like the savior. FUCK THAT. Any reservations I have over the bona fides of the new Treasurer are overshadowed by the self-indulgent rat-fucking the party has received at the hands of people who have nothing better to do than prop themselves up on the backs of the faithful. I’m a Democrat. I’m not a Bredesen Democrat, or a Davis Democrat, or even a Cohen Democrat (though I do like him a lot, and am proud he represents me). I AM A DEMOCRAT, PERIOD. I’m not a Democrat for personalities, I’m a Democrat for ideals. People are easily swayed by the personalities, but it is the ideals that are the tie that binds us together. People and candidates come and go, but the principles of the party endures. Parties and the ideals they represent can’t exist without the support of individuals, but no political party is defined by one individual. Parties are defined by the strength of all of their parts; people, principles, ideals, and finally, politicians, in that order and not the other way around. In order to turn the TNDP around, we have to make this the rule rather than the exception. I don’t claim to know what specifically is going on at the TNDP. I’m 1600 miles away right now. What I do know is that what we’ve been doing over the past several years is stupid. The longer we neglect the party structure for candidates that don’t respect the party structure, the longer we will marginalize OURSELVES, and by extension, our party. If we have a strong party, we’ll have STRONGER candidates. That’s the moral of the story. And while this current kerfuffle is frustrating, remember November 5th as the day we realized how far we've fallen, and say it with me, “Never again”.

Purity, Outrage, and Lessons

Steve Ross — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 06:17:13 +0000

I wonder if Bill Freeman ever thought that such a shit storm would be stirred with his name in the headline? Probably not. Truth of the matter is, this thing has a lot of moving parts, and as I demonstrated last night, it’s easy to get caught up in all of them, with perhaps, not all the information you might like to have, and not be completely clear about how this situation lands in your particular worldview. So, I’m going to try again, from a different angle, and see where it takes me. Purity As LWC points out there are a lot of people who have worked against the Democratic Party, and Democratic ideals that have had an epiphany of sorts. It is this epiphany that helped us win the Presidency, and hefty majorities in the US Congress. While the progressive blogosphere has been focused on “more and better Democrats”, some have put the bulk of their efforts into “more”, and others have focused on “better”. Both are important to achieve Progressive goals. The truth of the matter is, in order to gain an immediate “more” you may have to temporarily sacrifice “better”. This doesn’t mean that you don’t call the “more” out when they stumble. I’ve been one of the loudest hollerer’s at these folks. However, I believe it is true that any Democrat, even old Gene Taylor of Mississippi, perhaps the MOST conservative Democrat in the House of Representatives, is better for the progressive cause than ANY Republican. This is largely borne out in Progressive Punch Scores. The difference is, these are not people who left the flock. These are people who stayed in. So how do we handle these “Reagan Democrat” types that are coming back? Do we institute a litmus test? What truly is the measure of a Democrat? We need to think about this going forward. Not just because of the Bill Freeman thing, but because we have to make a decision about how open or closed we are going to be as a party. How big are we willing to let our tent get? Outrage In the wake of the Freeman selection, the outrage has ranged from mild to snarky to extreme. My first reaction was, “you’ve got to be fucking kidding me”, but aside from that I’ve had a weird sense of detachment. Even while writing my email to Forrester I felt detached. I haven’t had time to really think about the whole thing. Part of me wonders if this was some misguided attempt at pragmatism, balancing a perceived liberal chair with a treasurer that is certainly to his right. The back-story about Freeman’s past dealings with Bredesen shed some light on his giving pattern, but if someone is so distasteful, would you support the Republican out of spite? I just don’t get it. Honestly, the whole scene is hard to process. I have a hard time with conservative Democrats, but supporting a Republican candidate is so far outside my values that I just can’t even fathom doing it. Maybe it’s easier for people to the right or me, or for people who are less partisan. But the question has to be asked, if a church wouldn’t make an agnostic a deacon, should a party make a recent convert with a checkered past treasurer? Lessons Finally, there’s the Bush tickets. I think this is the thing that gets people’s goats more than anything else. The sum total of all my giving to candidates over the past three cycles doesn’t amount to $10k! $10k for an hour or so with a President that most Democrats revile as the single most destructive “leader” of our time is just too hard for long time Democrats to stomach. $10k is more money than I paid last year on interest, on a house that I bought two and half years ago. That’s some serious bread to drop on meeting a President. I’ve had the honor of meeting 3 Presidents, and it never cost me a dime. Two of those Presidents I never would have ever voted for, much less given money to, but that doesn’t make it any less an honor. They’re ex-Presidents for Christ’s sake! So yeah, I don’t know how old Freeman’s kid is, but I get the idea of wanting a child to meet a President. I’m just wondering, what message did purchasing access send? How much public good could that money have done going to a charity? How could that money have been invested in the community to do something other than look like a big-shot? Yeah, I’m busting your balls, because you’re talking about a sum of money that is more than 15% of my yearly income. That’s a lot of money for an afternoon. You could have gone to Disney World for a week, come back and helped build a house for Habitat for Humanity or something. Do my feelings change if you replace “Bush” with “Obama”? Sure they do, I’m not gonna lie. But decisions have consequences, and that consequence may mean that you need to spend another cycle or two, reassuring the faithful that you’re one of us. That said, Mr. Freeman, I applaud you for what you did for the Obama campaign. And the prospect of doing something like that here in the TNDP is really intriguing. Fact of the matter is, that money came from big donors, who are really important to the fiscal security of the party, but we were told that a more balanced approach was in the cards, and that’s another part of the rub. How do you get small dollar donors, who are more likely to be motivated by far different things than large donors, to give to a party that has in it’s leadership, a guy that just re-found the straight and narrow? Small dollar donors give because they believe, not necessarily because they believe we can win. You see where I’m going with this. It’s a bigger problem than it looks. In the final analysis, I’m not ready or willing to make a call on this. I’m also not going to say I’m not irritated about it, because I am. What will be, will be. However, should Freeman choose to stay in the post, he should understand that the bar is going to be a little bit higher for him than someone with unblemished credentials. That’s just reality. As for the direction and administration of the party, Mr. Forrester, I’m not going to tell you what to do right now. I’m not going to call for anyone’s resignation or anything like that. I am going to be straight with you and say, this very well may be a defining decision. There are some fences to be mended here. I’m not particularly pissed, but other people are, and they have influence over a larger sphere of people and just like giving can go viral, so can “not giving”. I hope in the future the party will give more consideration to the rational and emotional sides of their decision-making. This means being a little bit more savvy and looking outside the Exec Com for input. No one said this would be easy, or that everyone would come willingly, but if we want to win, we have to do everything we can to keep our people happy and keep the invitation open for as many people as possible. The idea is white, clean, and neat. The execution is sausage making. The trick is to not expand your sphere to spite your base. Namasté.

Shall We Play a Game?

Steve Ross — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 22:41:33 +0000

The hits just keep on hittin’ don’t they? This afternoon we learn of a possible Coup Attempt against one Mr. Gary Odom. Seriously, this past week has seemed more like mid-September meltdown on the McCain campaign than an off year (remember, the fundamentals of our economy are strong?) Let’s run down what’s happened so far:

Governor’s pick for TNDP chair loses, trolls appear like a Gremlin thrown in a swimming pool. A relatively quiet month goes by, even though the trolls persist. The Executive Committee elects Bill Freeman Treasurer. Revelations about Freeman’s past giving and voting emerge. We learn of ”Trust Issues” between Bredesen and Odom. People talk openly about an Odom coup.

This is hardly a comprehensive list, but it is somewhat illustrative of the points of origin If you are a Democrat, and I don’t care what side you’re on, you have to be wondering why the hell is this going on? I can’t answer that question, but it seems that the battle royale between Bredesen and Odom has taken a far more “nuclear” tenor. This whole thing reminds me of a scene from the 1983 movie War Games. Hey politicians, hey hacks, hey bloggers, and donors and activists, and staffers: We’re the eventual casualties of this pissing match. If you think we can get out of this public pissing match smelling like something other than piss, you’re wrong. This is not supposed to be about personalities, it’s supposed to be about the party. Apparently, blowing the whole thing up for vanity is more important. There’s more than one finger to point in this thing, and who started it is not important. It just has to stop now.

Presidential Address Liveblog

Steve Ross — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 02:27:30 +0000

Yeah, I'm liveblogging it, but I'm not sure exactly why. Follow along here or read the real speech. Text of the Address The Republican Response Add in a Mr. Rogers-esque delivery. (h/t Busy Mom 10:10 PM CST - Back from the Rum store, the liveblog has ended. Go in peace. 9:37 PM CST - Jindal is the complete opposite of Obama. I hope he does these responses for the next 3 years. No matter what happens we'll win in 2012. Now that he's done, I'm off to smoke. CALL ME AN ASSHOLE! DO IT! 9:34 PM CST - At this point I'm hoping that this gets pre-empted by a Billy Mays commercial. 9:33 PM CST - Ok, this guy is making me tired, seriously. Jindal, you're out of your league! You should have entered down the bannister behind you. "Dangerous enemies are planning our destruction" - they are the Republican party folks. 9:31 PM CST - Jindal, you're a douche, and your delivery is bad, and you are the poor dumb sap that took the gig of following one ot the best orators of my life on national TV with newly lowered ears and did I mention a bad delivery? One thing for sure, I'm glad you talk slower than Obama. Gives me more time to mock you. 9:30 PM CST - Did he just invoke Katrina? Are you fucking kidding me? Awww, I get it, this is a GUBAMENT IS BAD, but people are good, and I'm talking like Jim Neighbors so you'll think I'm a nice guy even though I want to eat your children...type approach. It's worked for so long, why not, RIGHT BOBBY? 9:25 PM CST - LIVE FROM RED STICK, BOBBY JINDAL - Happy Mardi Gras? You want to be the first Indian-American president don't you? His "delivery" is like a 2nd grade teacher reading a story to the slow kids. Oh yeah, he's talking to REPUBLICANS! 9:23 PM CST - HEY JINDAL, COME ON DAMMIT. I'm in California, and the only place you can go to smoke is Mexico or Nevada. Help a brother out! 9:12 PM CST - GAWDAMMIT, I gotta stick around and make fun on Jindal now. Forgot about that. One good thing about not having the White House is that when you're guy is done speaking, you're done. I like having the WH, but can't they respond before the speech? I mean, we know what kind of dumb shit they're going to say anyway...right? 9:09 PM CST - And it's over. Back after a smoke. 9:08 PM CST - I'm interested to know why Obama voters are tracking lower than McCain voters on MSNBC. Can't wait for Chuck Todd to explain the math to me. Maybe it's a heartbeat monitor rather than an approval/disapproval thingy. 9:05 PM CST - If you're wondering why I'm putting CST, it's because I'm in California and it's just 7 here. That way when I read this in a couple of days, I'll be able to figure it out with my DVR. Ok, that's bullshit. The clock on my computer is still set to central and I like holding down the shift key. 9:02 PM CST - I think I may have missed something... Ok, sounds like he's winiding down. It's a good thing because I need a cigarette and my fingers are tired. I'm out of shape since the land of a thousand debates that was the primary season ended. Gotta get my typing fingers working. 9:00 PM CST - For as many standing o's as he's gotten, wouldn't it be easier to just stay standing? Or maybe you stand on one O and sit on the next. Seems more energy efficient and easier on the knees. 8:58 PM CST - I don't know if anyone's actually reading this because I'm having to type like my life depends on it. Seriously, there's this guy behind me yelling and telling me I'm typing too slow. Ok, if you're there, make some damn comments! 8:56 PM CST - Still on taxes. I'm glad that he hammered that home. I'm tired of Republicans lying about that shit and getting away with it. Time for JOURNALISTS to stop being conduits for misinformation. /soap box Don't they know that's a blogger's job? sheesh! /snark 8:55 PM CST - If you're going line by line through shit, how's about gutting all those stupid freebies for offshore money in the tax code? Uh oh. He just said DOD was going to lose something. Is he wearing a flag pin? Oh yeah, I see it now. 8:52 PM CST - Orrin Hatch, that sounds like something dirty. "Now we've moving past the orrin hatch..." Y'all stop standing up for fuck's sake. I'm running out of rum, and the liquor store is like a half a mile away and I gotta walk and the longer this takes, the less inspiration I can consume! 8:49 PM CST - I don't know why I keep looking shit up. I'm getting behind! Edumacation No offense Barack, but every President wants to be the Education President. However, you did just give more money to education in the StimPack than the total budget of the Dept. of Education. Education needs reform? Send them to the bankers. Or here. I like that line about dropouts. That was powerful stuff...sorry for the non snarky aside..sheesh! 8:43 PM CST - CarZ - The companies are stupid but since we invented them we need to keep them. see previous update Healthcare - He's using statistics from Here Healthcare is that thing that everybody agrees is fucked, but no one wants to actually deal with because like, going to the doctor means getting poked and prodded by a non-hot old dude that can't groom his eyebrows and has breath that's part Werther's Originals and part poop. 8:40 PM CST - I can't tell time either... Ok, Energy. I think he's saying we're lazy, or we just like inventing things, not actually MAKING them. This may be borne out by the massive destruction to our manufacturing sector since Reagan decided to wage war on unions and bust the Air Traffic Controllers in the 80's. Did he just ask for Cap and Trade? Joe Lieberman has a woody. 8:37 PM CST - I don't think the audience reaction thingy on MSNBC has moved below 70% since he started talking. I don't trust those things...people are generally stupid, myself included. 8:36 PM CST - I think he's getting annoyed by the clapping. Didn't we reform our regulatory system in like 1999 by ? 8:34 PM CST - Our job is to solve the problem? How about regulating the hell out of them? It's not about helping banks? Oh, there went another 100 points. 8:33 PM CST - Hold them accountable? MADNESS! I see the Dow dropping 500 points tomorrow. Doesn't he know that holding people accountable is bad for the current bonus compensation plans that Wall Streeters currently receive? 8:30 PM CST - Where is the money for these loans he's talking about coming from? Part of the problem is that people with money don't trust the system. Is the Federal Gov't just going to guarantee the loans, or are we coming up with the $$? 8:26 PM CST - Just got settled. Watching and reading along.

Corporate Events and the Bailout

Steve Ross — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 15:25:36 +0000

Today over at Huffington Post there’s an article about another bailed out bank spending scads of money on corporate junkets. I understand the outrage. As a Democrat, it’s hard to square the idea that a financial institution, who received financial help from taxpayers, would then turn around and use money, whether it came out of that pile or not, for something so seemingly frivolous. As with most things, there’s another side to the story that’s not getting told. As some of you may know, I do events like this. Not necessarily for banks or whatnot, but for corporations. Most of the time, these events are to reward top performers in their institutions for their work, or to bring in new business in promoting a specific product or service. This may not have been the case in this particular instance, but you get the idea. Hundreds of millions of dollars every year are spent producing these events. From flights and hotel rooms for attendees, to catering and event space rental, to the equipment, like lights, sound and video, and staff, like me, to support the actual meeting. This is an industry that flies under the radar. Few people ever really think what it takes to organize an event that may only support a few hundred people, but cost per person on a weeklong event can come to $1000 a head. The money spent goes to people like me, hotel staff and all the people who support the event throughout the chain. Because of the planning that it takes to produce an event like this, we haven’t seen a huge downturn yet, but it’s coming. Most events start planning a year or more out. For most companies, the initial out of pocket expenses to produce such an event, makes it unrealistic to cancel. A cancellation may save some money, but with no return on investment. It makes more sense for them to do the event than to cancel because even though it may mean a loss of cash flow, they reckon it’s not as bad as the perception that would follow a cancellation, or the potential loss of investment on a new product or service rollout. So while I understand the outrage, and the political impact of exploiting said outrage, as a capitalist, I also understand that the majority of these events are legitimate marketing expenses that organizations have used over the years to drive profit or brand loyalty in their customer base, or to increase a knowledge of standards or provide additional training to their employees. Obviously, there are exceptions. I can’t defend events I haven’t done, because I don’t know enough about them. For that matter, I can’t defend some of the events I HAVE DONE. But the whole scene is more complicated than some would have you believe, and while I certainly have a great deal of self-interest in writing this, I also think it’s important to not “throw the baby out with the bath water” when talking about corporate events. 99% of the events that happen out there are not junkets, populated by balding men chomping on cigars, sitting in steam rooms wrapped in towels or getting Swedish massages. Nearly every event I’ve ever worked served some higher purpose for the company. They wouldn’t spend the money if they didn’t believe they would see some ROI, particularly now. In closing, I would advise companies that have received any government money and intend to host an event to strive for more transparency. Bailout money may have been specifically for increasing fluidity in the credit markets, but the reality is that $700b cannot replace the $5t that was taken out of the market as the result of a loss in confidence. If your event’s purpose is to increase confidence to bring these people back into credit game, more power to you. You will need to disclose this to avoid public ire. On the flip side, be responsible. I know this is a foreign concept to many out there, but while events like this may be inherently stimulative to the economy, they should not be used as an opportunity to reward irresponsible behavior. You’re already in the spotlight, don’t make it any worse on yourself. Finally, while it may be politically expedient to key in on events as wasteful spending, don’t let this distract from the REAL problem; lack of meaningful and effective regulation on the financial markets. It’s hard for any politician to walk away from an easy smack down, but the truth of the matter is there is a lot of legislation that needs to happen to bring a positive resolution to the problem. Confidence cannot be restored until the financial markets have clear and effective rules designed to protect investors from the situations that led to the collapse. This may not be as sexy, or get you face time on cable TV, but ultimately, it’s the ONLY thing that is going to turn the credit market around.

SCDP – Ward and Precinct Meeting

Steve Ross — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:14:48 +0000

On Saturday, the SCDP will begin the process of reorganizing with its “Ward and Precinct” caucus at Airways Middle School, 2601 Ketchum. This is the first step in selecting a new Executive Committee and Chair for the SCDP. Since the 2006 County re-organization, the SCDP has devolved from somewhat relevant organization, to a state of willful irrelevance at the hands of a well meaning, but largely absent chair, and a rabid factionalism that has further split the party into fiefdoms that are to be protected, rather than seeking common ground when possible to move the party forward. This condition has led to the exit of individuals, both from the Executive Committee, and from any interest in rehabilitating the party. In the past 6 months I have heard, both personally, and through the grapevine, story after story of people who have given up on the SCDP, and any hope of ever turning it into a relevant part of the political structure in Shelby County, not to mention the state. I’m not ready to give up on it, yet. Tomorrow, we have the opportunity to have a say in the future of the county party. You don’t have to run to be a delegate for your voice to be heard, but you do have to show up if you want any say in the process. Registration runs from 9-10:45 AM. At 11, we break out into precincts and elect delegates. The whole thing should be done by 1pm, which is good because I have to be on a plane at 2:40. Come be a part of the solution, and help turn the SCDP into the party it SHOULD BE.

Still Suffering from the Bush Economy

Steve Ross — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:37:54 +0000

The Labor Department announced today that 651,000 new unemployment claims were filed in February, raising the national unemployment rate to 8.1%. Unemployment has been on a steady rise since December of 2006. The stock market has lost 53% of it’s value since peaking at over 14000 in October of 2007. The FDIC reports that 43 banks have failed since February of 2007. RealtyTrac reports that 1 in every 466 homes nationwide received a foreclosure filing in January of 2009. Despite this steady decline that has been going on for quite some time, though largely unnoticed until last September, fringe elements in the media are starting to organize themselves to lay blame for the crisis on the 45 day old Obama administration. Really, it’s ridiculous to even mention the Obama administration in the same breath as the financial crisis in any way other than to address the merits of the plans. A new administration is not like replacing a fuse. The problem didn’t get to this point in a day, and it won’t be fixed in a day. There are some legitimate points to debate in the current Obama plan. We can argue about the stimulus, or the housing plan, or if the healthcare plan would have any appreciable effect on the economy. We can talk about how TARP funds should be distributed and what rules should apply, or any number of other things, but ultimately we’re not going to see the effects of ANY of these things before September or October, and the truth of the matter is, even then the loss in confidence may not be restored, not to mention the nearly 6 million jobs that have been lost since the end of 2006. Further, there are some things that have yet to be publicly addressed that desperately need to if confidence is ever to be restored. Regulations regarding the markets, the agencies that provide credit ratings, and lending practices, perhaps the things most responsible for steep decline in September, must be addressed before anyone will feel comfortable investing their money. This problem is deep and wide, and the only solution is to treat the disease, not just the many symptoms. Of course, that takes time, and doesn’t fit into a 3 second sound bite. Systemic solutions will be picked apart, and a great deal of focus will be given to obscure specifics, with the intention of damning the entire program over the minutiae, rather than looking at the broader impact of the whole. This is the nature of the beast, but if we REALLY want to fix the problem, we have to be ready to swallow the bitter pill. As uncomfortable, and disturbing as this whole mess is, it’s only going to get more uncomfortable before it gets better. We, as a nation, have to “sweat out” the fever in order to get better. This means we’re also going to have to do some things that we’ve been told by pundits and conventional wisdom are “bad” for us. Of course, these are the same people who said everything was fine and the system was working until the pressure of reality became so great they could no longer feed us their line of bullshit. In the end, we will continue to suffer from Bush’s economy, until Obama’s plans have time to germinate. This won’t stop the TV talkers from trying to tie Obama to the problem, but until his plans have been proved a failure, they’re far better than the “nothing” being fed us by the right.

SCDP – Race for the Chair-Prelude UPDATED

Steve Ross — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:37:53 +0000

For those of you who haven’t been keeping score, we started with 5, Lee Harris, Cherry Davis and JW Gibson dropped out on, or around the Mid-South Community Organizers for Change, Straw Poll. The remaining candidates are Jay Bailey and Van Turner. Last night, I sent an email questionnaire to the two remaining candidates for SCDP chair. The questions follow.

1. Why are you running for SCDP chair, and what is your vision for the Party? 2. Describe the role you feel the SCDP should play in local politics. 3. Fundraising for the SCDP has been lagging. How will you turn this around to fund your vision for the party? 4. Talk about your plans to coordinate with other party entities (Other county parties, TNDP, House Caucus, Senate Caucus, etc.). 5. Finding out any information concerning the current work of the party is very difficult. What steps will you take to better inform Shelby County Democrats? 6. Last year we saw a huge influx of volunteers, particularly with the Obama organization. Talk about your plans to incorporate this new energy into the party. 7. Breaking with tradition, the party endorsed a “non-partisan” candidate in the past election. What is your opinion of such endorsements, and do you support endorsing non-partisan candidates in the future?

I’m posting this for two reasons; one to start a conversation, outside of the race for the chair, about issues surrounding the SCDP, but also to help make sure the candidates take the opportunity to address these and other issues in a public forum. Hopefully, in the coming days I’ll get some responses to post. Don’t forget to come to the Ward and Precinct Caucus tomorrow at Airways Middle School, 2601 Ketchum. Registration is from 9-10:45, voting begins at 11:30. UPDATE: The first candidate's answers are in. I won't say who was first, but if it wasn't you, get to sending.

van

Steve Ross — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:39:54 +0000

SCDP – Race for the Chair – Van Turner

Steve Ross — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 04:00:41 +0000

As promised, here is the first set of responses to the questions I posed both candidates running for SCDP chair. They are un-edited and posted in their entirety. Promotional materials follow. Thanks to Van for choosing to participate. 1. Why are you running for SCDP chair, and what is your vision for the Party? I am running to unite the party and to move it forward. I plan on accomplishing this by focusing on issues which everyone in the Party can unite around and by shifting the party to a more proactive as opposed to reactive posture. The Shelby County Democratic Party could and should be a credible and influential body in local and state Democratic politics. 2. Describe the role you feel the SCDP should play in local politics. The SCDP should fulfill its mission of attracting, endorsing, funding, and assisting strong, progressive candidates in their efforts to seek office. 3. Fundraising for the SCDP has been lagging. How will you turn this around to fund your vision for the party? We will turn it around by using proven methods such as the Kennedy Dinner and member donations. I also think that we can use other mechanisms such target emails, Facebook, Linked-In and other internet resources to attract new talent and resources to the party. 4. Talk about your plans to coordinate with other party entities (Other county parties, TNDP, House Caucus, Senate Caucus, etc.). Coordinating with other party entities is essential. I think we become stronger as we reach out to other organizations to organize over common issues and goals. I think we absolutely must take the state House of Representatives back, and we must coordinate with other party entities to accomplish this goal. 5. Finding out any information concerning the current work of the party is very difficult. What steps will you take to better inform Shelby County Democrats? I propose that we have town hall meetings to let all Shelby County Democrats know exactly what is happening with its executive leadership. We should also revive the Party newsletter to update and advise local Democrats of the Party's efforts, and we should make our website more interactive and an active site for news and views to be posted. 6. Last year we saw a huge influx of volunteers, particularly with the Obama organization. Talk about your plans to incorporate this new energy into the party. We need to capture this new movement. This is a young movement, a fresh movement which is not tied to any particular faction. The Party and politics needs this breath of fresh air. My thoughts are that we regularly meet with these groups and form coalitions around common interests and goals. 7. Breaking with tradition, the party endorsed a “non-partisan” candidate in the past election. What is your opinion of such endorsements, and do you support endorsing non-partisan candidates in the future? The Party's Bylaws do not prevent the Party from endorsing "non-partisan" candidates. This is a decision the Executive Committee must make. My personal preference is that we only endorse Democratic candidates in general elections; however, in some non-partisan elections, it would be wise for the Party to have a hand in choosing the leadership that will affect everyone in the city and county.

SCDP – Ward and Precinct – Today is the Day

Steve Ross — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 14:10:29 +0000

Get up! Get some breakfast in ya, and get down to Airways Middle School, 2601 Ketchum for the SCDP Ward and Precinct Caucus. Registration starts and 9:00AM and runs through 10:45. Voting on Delegates will start around 11:30 (I got the time wrong yesterday). After all that, you can come to the airport and see me off...or not. Remember, today we are just electing delegates to the Convention on March 28th. If you want to be a part of that process, you need to come be a part of this one. Hope to see you there! Update: As far as I know, the ward and prectnct meeting is over. My precinct had but 2 delegates. I'm an alternate delegate. Thanks to all who participated. I'll have more when I get settled in Orlando.

Doogie Howser Moment #75621

Steve Ross — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:09:06 +0000

It’s been a rough month or so. My travel schedule has been brutal, my future work prospects, dismal. I’m not crying or anything. I know I’m far better off than the vast majority of people. That said, looking into the near future, I find myself looking down the barrel of large swaths of unbooked time. This is an unfamiliar experience for me. Since I started freelancing, back in 2005, only once have I found myself without enough work that left me concerned with my future…the first 4 months. That quickly turned into the rat race that my life has been since. The majority of the companies that I contract for are experiencing the same thing I am, low bookings. The difference is, they have a much wider reach, and a deeper client base to draw on. They’re not busy, but they’re keeping their full timers working. That means less work for people like me. On the client end, no one wants to deal with the potential media fallout, or get called irresponsible in a time when so many are cutting back. This leaves people and companies, like myself, hounding the people and companies that ARE doing events. From there it turns to a bidding war that will ultimately devalue the work I do, and cause me to have to make less for the same, or more, work. I don’t know what to call this. Is it simple oversupply and underdemand, or is it deflation? Is a hole being dug that will take us years to dig out of? Is this same thing happening throughout the entire economy, or are the people with money holed up with their checkbooks clinched tightly in their hands, waiting for an “opportunity”? Saying “opportunity” like that makes me feel dirty. In this context, it’s a double-edged sword. Whose back is being broken to create this “opportunity”? What is the workforce as a whole losing at the hands of this supposedly forthcoming “opportunity”? In my world, a real “opportunity” doesn’t come at the expense of a large group of people. That’s called exploitation. It bothers me more because there are things that I want to do. Places (not necessarily physical) I want to go, outside of work. I’ve been fortunate enough over the past several years to be able to spend my time, what little I have had outside of my work life, doing things that contribute to the community. I want to do more of this. This is the place I want to eventually go. Up ‘til now, I’ve said that the time wasn’t right. That either I wasn’t ready or that something wasn’t in place to make this an option. Some of it has to do with money, some with really enjoying a lot of what I do most of the time. As hectic and chaotic as my life is, there’s a part of me that thrives in this environment. I’ve never been involved in anything quite like it. I feel I need the chaos to keep from stagnation, but while what’s happening right now with the economy, and with certain elements in the political arena may seem chaotic, it doesn’t read like chaos. It reads more like mass suicide, and that is more troubling than anything I’ve experienced since the era of seemingly imminent mutually assured destruction. In the end, I’m not necessarily pessimistic about my future, or the future of the country. I honestly feel that things will have to get better eventually. At the same time, I don’t see a realistic endgame being communicated to the public. I don’t feel much discipline being enforced. I hear a lot of emotional “red meat” rhetoric being put forth, but I’m not seeing how the variables of the equation are being reconciled to give us a real, workable solution. That’s the crux of my anxiety, and I think, the anxiety that many are currently feeling. Anxiety can be comforted for a time with emotions, but eventually, the root of the problem causing the anxiety has to be addressed, and until it is, nothing we do will make any of this any better.

SCDP – Looking Forward

Steve Ross — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:31:06 +0000

The past two years have been a difficult time for the SCDP. Despite all the new energy we heard about in the 2008 Presidential election, the SCDP remained relatively quiet and kept a low profile until the ”ballotgate” fiasco just weeks before election day. It would be easy enough to talk about all the problems at SCDP, but at this point, piling on may not be constructive. Perhaps now it’s best to look forward, not forgetting what has happened, but focusing on what the SCDP should seek to accomplish in the run up to election day 2010. First and foremost, the SCDP has a responsibility to get Democrats elected. They can do this by raising funds, helping support candidates through GOTV and other grassroots operations, and maintaining a recognizable brand throughout the county. Last year, Shelby County elected a Democrat in every contested race for State government. This is an accomplishment considering some of the losses that Democrats faced last year. In 2010, we have a distinct opportunity and challenge. First, we have to defend Senate districts 29 and 33, mount a challenge to 31, and at the very least, maintain the House seats we currently have. Secondly, we have County elections. Even though newly elected Commissioner Matt Kuhn has said he will not seek election in 2010, there are still 7 other Democratic seats to defend on the Commission, as well as the issue of County Mayor. Finally, we have the Governor’s race. While the Democratic side isn’t nearly as active with primary candidates as the Republican, Shelby County, as the largest and most solidly Democratic county in Tennessee, has a duty to lead the charge in West Tennessee, to get our candidate in front of people, and work with County Party organizations in West Tennessee to help get Democratic voters out in their areas. All of these goals are completely doable under the stewardship of a healthy party leadership. The reality is, we haven’t seen much healthy leadership in some time. So once the re-organization is complete, it may be a good idea for the newly installed leadership to do some soul searching. Not about what the party should “feel like” or anything metaphysical, but about how the various factions of the party can come to trust one another and better work together for a common goal; keeping Shelby County a deep, rich, royal blue and making it bluer. This means setting aside some of the long-held assumptions about each other. This means taking emotion out of the mix and working together rationally and logically. Most of all, this means looking at the past, with an eye toward the future, to ensure that the party doesn’t get mired in some of the factional fights, but can also get shit done. In addition to some of the factional issues, the party needs to do more and get better at reaching out to local Democrats. While I am in contact with several Execom members from time to time, many people don’t know how to contact the leadership of the party. The truth of the matter is, people will more likely bitch about something rather than going out of their way to do something about it. The party has to get better at involving and engaging people outside of the Execom. This means more transparency, and taking steps to actively engage interested individuals. Engaging people is the fastest way to raise money and an army of volunteers, but it takes time, a continued effort and discipline. The members of the next SCDP Execom should make a commitment to engage people outside of leadership, for the strength of the party Looking forward, the SCDP has much more potential than it is demonstrating. Realizing that potential, despite all the challenges, is the trick. It’s not particularly difficult, but for the party to grow it means working intentionally in that direction. I hope all the new Execom members take the challenge of building the party up and out as an opportunity, rather than a burden. That’s the only way we can see the SCDP take it’s rightful place at the table.

Cramer Gets Schooled

Steve Ross — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:24:54 +0000

If you didn't see the edited version of the interview on The Daily Show, you missed out. The unedited interview follows, and it's tough stuff, but a must see.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Interview Outtake Pt. 1

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Interview Outtake Pt. 2

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Interview Outtake Pt. 3

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

Social Media: Stepping Outside Your Comfort Zone

Steve Ross — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:12:26 +0000

Two days ago, newscoma penned a post to the TNDP. In it, she argued for a greater use of the “social media” tools at the party’s disposal. This post stirred up some thoughts about social media, transparency, and organizational messaging that I’ve been thinking about for a couple of weeks now. For people who haven’t been involved in the “social media” revolution that has been going on, the idea of putting your life out there, writ large, for all the world to see must seem foreign, perhaps even narcissistic. While narcissism may be a motivating factor in the use of “social media” for many, so is the catharsis that the medium provides. From my perspective, it is this cathartic experience that keeps me motivated to write about myself, politics, and the world around me. It may seem narcissistic to think that anyone would care what I have to say, but honestly, for me this is about process more than anything else…the process of thinking about, and better forming my opinion, perspective and positions. This is about my personal growth. When I started this blog, and previous writing exercises, I had little to no expectation that anyone would be interested in what I had to say. Over the past couple years, I feel my life has been enriched by the conversations and perspectives that I’ve been exposed to, thanks in large part to my participation in this medium. For organizations, the prospect of engaging in “social media” is a bit different. Many organizations fear “social media” because they look at it more as some “time waster” engaged in by people who have too little to do (the Cheeto’s eating blogger meme). Further, organizations that have found themselves on the crosshairs of bloggers, or participants in the “social media” revolution, may be resistant, seeing it as only a tool for the opposition. This represents a gross misunderstanding of the medium. Social media can serve the traditional goals of messaging for an organization. It can be a lens to focus the message, a megaphone to distribute the message, and a microscope to examine the foundations of the message, or pick apart the opposition, but relying solely on these traditional messaging techniques ignores the most powerful aspect of the medium. Social media is an avenue, a large two way street to engage in a conversation with constituents. It is an opportunity for growth. It is a way to connect with people on a personal level that has never been available before, and this is where organizations, far too often, fail to understand the positive power and impact the medium can have. This, of course, has its positives and negatives. On the positive side, better connecting with your core audience offers opportunity to better leverage your message and further the goals of the organization. On the flip side, opening yourself up to this also means that you will have to accept the good with the bad. Not everyone will share your goals, and some may work like hell to undermine you. But in truth, from an organizational standpoint, the only way you lose in this scenario is by allowing a “bunker mentality” to set in and withdraw from the potential positives. Dissent is an opportunity for conversion. For the most part, people will not take the time to present a thoughtful dissent if they aren’t already, in some way, invested in the organization. By addressing this dissenting view in a thoughtful way, the organization has opened up the opportunity to “convert” the dissenter from an oppositional to supportive plane. By the same token, there are plenty of bad actors out there whose intent is not constructive (trolls). Direct engagement may not be the best tactic in this scenario. The key here is to act in a transparent way that takes away their talking points. Most importantly, hunkering down is not an option. Proving them wrong through word and deed so as to discredit their authority is the only way to come out ahead. That won’t necessarily stop them from talking, but it will minimize their influence in the long run, which is the best you can hope for. Finally, a word about transparency and message. Organizations typically look at message as an unwieldy prehistoric beast, to be subdued and controlled, lest it roam freely and cause untold destruction. In a time, not too long ago, this may have been true. The game has radically changed now. As we have seen over the past several months, traditional notions of “top down messaging” can only go so far. The world, like it or not, is far more open than it ever has been. Perception becomes reality for organizations that are resistant to true transparency, or who are unsure of the potential impact. Organizations have operated for years, seeking to put only their “best foot forward”. While certainly, one would not want to engage in a message that is destructive to the organization, allowing for more organic communication that shows both the strengths and the weaknesses, can result in steep gains for the organization. The shorter version here is that if people don’t know there’s a problem, they will most certainly not act to address the problem. This is uncomfortable. No one wants to put their challenges out there for all to see. But challenges are opportunities for organizational growth if the organization is willing to grow organically. This means stepping outside of your organizational comfort zone, and allowing some of the warts to be exposed as an opportunity to find new ways to correct challenges. This is something that social media is perhaps most effective at harnessing. Tools like facebook and twitter can be utilized to motivate people into action. Blogs can take these one step further by providing more in depth analysis for the more engaged elements. In order for any of these things to work, they have to be used, and used in a straightforward way. This means putting aside some of the ego, and laying it out on the line for people. This means being ready to take criticism, constructive and otherwise, and using that criticism as a springboard for reform. Ultimately, this means that you may break the traditional rules of messaging. In doing so, you may also far surpass the returns of traditional messaging. It’s a big bet, that some have used better than others, and it requires a bit of savvy, but it’s not rocket science, and it doesn’t take a team of media specialists to accomplish, it takes organizational willingness and a mind frame of constant learning. In the end, a lot of this seems counterintuitive, particularly in a world where message has been so heavily managed for the past 30 odd years. The reality is that people are coming to understand that they can’t afford to be disengaged, and when organizations don’t seem to be making an effort to engage, people either get angry, or look to solutions outside of the organization. Sometimes this can work for the organization, sometimes against, but the only way to even have a chance at success is for the organization to plow forward, to beg forgiveness when they stumble, to ask for help when they need it, to show signs of humanity rather than fake omniscience, and to always be looking for solutions to internal challenges. That’s why they call it social media, because it is collaborative, and in many ways unrestrained. The best way to keep from being swept away or left behind is to ride the beast, and guide it to your success. It can’t work if you don’t use it, and pleading ignorance is not an excuse. The key is to jump in with an initial message with few objections to open up the lines of communication, and make a commitment to keep those lines open. It’s a wild ride, but if an organization is committed, it will reap rich rewards.

SCDP Purity Test

Steve Ross — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 17:00:33 +0000

I’ve been thinking about this post over at LWC a bit, and while I understand this wasn’t the intent, it kind of comes off as character assassination. For the record, I haven’t made a solid decision on which candidate I support either. In talking to both men, I feel that they have good intentions. How those intentions play out in reality is another story, but the inability of Jay Bailey to return an email with 7 piddlin’ questions is telling. Hell, even if he didn’t get the questions, which I cannot guarantee, I emailed Upton asking him to follow up and I haven’t received a response from him either. This is twice that I haven’t seen any follow through from Mr. Bailey. Jolly good show guys, that’s confidence inspiring. So, back to the character assassination…but first… I am 100% with labor. I personally support EFCA, and don’t much care for the right to work laws that hamper organizing efforts here in the south. So before anyone goes all “Dumb as a box of hammers” on me let’s get that out in the open. The idea that Mr. Brown puts forward on your blog is addition through subtraction. The notion that someone’s job excludes them from serving the Democratic Party is a purity test that goes too far. Are you guys fucking serious about this? Are you really going to hold someone’s job over their heads and “disqualify” them from working for the SCDP? Are you really going to exclude anyone from certain law firms from being Chair of the SCDP? Really? When did we become the party of exclusion? I thought that was the Republicans! Ok, fine. If someone’s job is the standard by which we are to select the next chair of the SCDP, let’s take a little looksee under the hood of Mr. Bailey’s gig…but first… Anyone remember the ’06 reorg? Anyone remember the multiple packets of papers we got describing Mr. Bailey’s run ins with the Tennessee Bar? Y’all remember that? Yeah, lots of trees wasted for some personal vendetta that probably lost him the Chair to Norman who has been more than a disaster or a clusterfuck. Norman’s leadership has been so bad it seems intentional, but that’s another story for another post. Here’s another question… Should the chair of the SCDP be calling the largely Democratic Memphis City Council racist? That’s essentially what he did just 4 short days ago. As a part of his representation of a lawsuit against the city for trying to hire more qualified cops of ANY COLOR Mr. Bailey alleged that the whole loosening of restrictions was a plot to hire more white people. Are you fucking kidding me? We’re going through a crime wave so hot that it makes a summer heat wave look like a cold spell and people are seriously using race as a wedge to keep qualified cops off the streets? That’s awesome. That’s good shit man. That’s some healing for a party that has been more divided than a Las Vegas call girl. Personally, I don’t hold Mr. Bailey’s past or present against him, because I believe in people’s ability to transform and reform themselves, but this lawsuit is the pinnacle of stupid shit. The point is, that by the standard put forth in your piece, we should be looking for another candidate, because neither of them are pure or good enough to run the terminally fucked up SCDP. In closing, all I’m asking for is a little intellectual honesty here. I understand Labor’s reluctance to endorse someone they feel may be working against their interests, but THEY SHOULD UNDERSTAND that someone’s job does not necessarily define the person. In short, I call bullshit.

Sound and Fury…

Steve Ross — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 02:21:57 +0000

Cracker, you’re literally dripping with outrage, an image I could do without. Yeah, I smacked you around a little, but my reasoning was sound, if snarky. Sound enough, in fact, for you to not even mention it in your “response”. Sucks to lose an argument doesn’t it? Allow me, if you will, the opportunity to actually address the four main points you brought up in YOUR post. First and foremost, I’m nobody’s spokesman but my own. Supporters of Mr. Turner haven’t contacted me other than commenting on the previous post. I, like you, have stated quite clearly that I’m not in the bag for anyone at this point either. Further, as an alternate delegate to the Convention on the 28th, I may or may not have any say in the matter, so don’t go distorting reality and handing me the job of Mr. Turner’s spokesman. I’m not looking for a job, and I doubt he would hire me anyway. As for the MPD situation, I understand why the African American community would be concerned, but is a lawsuit about the residency rules the answer? I don’t think so. The distrust of the MPD by African Americans goes far beyond the tenure of Mr. Godwin. The lack of transparency that has marred Mr. Godwin’s tenure at MPD only compounds the problem. Truth of the matter is there are far better things to sue over. Much of Memphis and Shelby Co. government is set up specifically to deflect any accountability. This is, perhaps, the biggest problem feeding distrust of local government throughout the system. At the very least, Memphians of all stripes, should organize and lobby the City Council to demand more accountability from the City and MPD in hiring and other issues. Suing over a residency rule is tangential. You’re right about the “nice guy” thing. As you well know, I wasn’t keyed in to the local political scene until several months before the 2007 re-org., so I can’t really speak to any SCDP chair outside of Mr. Norman, who has had some serious attendance problems. So while a “nice guy” may not be the answer, neither is a polarizing figure that would cause the various and sundry factions within the party to double down on their distrust of each other. I’m not saying that Mr. Bailey is that polarizing figure. In fact, what little contact I’ve had with him has left me with a relatively positive impression. Truth be told, I don’t think either Mr. Turner, nor Mr. Bailey are particularly polarizing figures. Both men have their plusses and minuses. People can make a determination based on how those plusses and minuses square with their personal values. The polarization seems to be coming more from who the candidate’s supporters are rather than the candidates themselves. Case in point, Thaddeus Matthews. ThaMatt has been busy stirring up racial derision as he is want to do. Just a few days ago he attacked the head of the local AFSCME for supporting Mr. Turner. So perhaps labor isn’t as united as you seem to think. All that said, I understand why some labor representatives would be reluctant to support Mr. Turner. In my last post, I didn’t address this reluctance or the potential challenges it may present. I was addressing this particular statement:

Ida Leachman, a longtime labor leader and organizer for the United Furniture Workers, said "We don't need anyone from Butler Snow or Baker Donaldson as Chair of the Democratic Party” (Baker Donaldson is the firm of former Republican Senator Howard Baker).

Finally, the suggestion that Mr. Bailey would somehow be more likely than Mr. Turner to stand up for labor is nothing more than a guess. To be honest, if Labor wants someone they are sure will be “out on the front lines” for them, I suggest they run their OWN candidate for Chair. Look, if you want to align yourself with ThaMatt and some the people that seek to divide for their own gain, go right ahead. That’ll do wonders for your credibility. If you want to accuse me of being in the bag for any particular candidate when I have clearly stated that I’m undecided at best, then crank up your reality distortion machine and go for it. Personally, I think you’re better than that.

A Joint Message from “The Steves”

Steve Ross — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:00:54 +0000

Over the past several days the two of us (Steve Steffens of LeftWingCracker and Steve Ross of Vibinc) have engaged in a public shouting match over the race for the chair of the SCDP. After some careful personal reflection, and an outpouring of concern from friends, we both recognize that we agree on more things than we disagree on, and those disagreements are grounded largely on perspective: one, as a long time political observer, activist and volunteer, who wants strong, effective leadership for the SCDP, but is suspicious of “unproven” leaders, the other, as a newer political observer, who also wants strong effective leadership at the SCDP, but who is suspicious of the “legacy factions” that have served to divide the party. These two perspectives are not necessarily contrary. The truth of the matter is that both Mr. Bailey and Mr. Turner are unproven leaders supported by “legacy factions”. Both men have achieved great things in their lives, but neither has necessarily distinguished themselves as a leader that can unite the party in any way other than within their core groups of supporters. As President Obama said in his Inaugural Address; “the time has come to set aside childish things.” This rings true in local politics as well. It means that both candidates are going to have to do more than print nice promo material, or pass out stickers to gain the trust of Democrats throughout Shelby County. It is the Democrats of Shelby County that will give the money and the time to the party and it’s candidates over the next 2 years, and it is the Democrats of Shelby County, regardless of whether they serve on the Committee or not, that these two candidates need to be reaching out to and communicating with to ensure that the County Party is more than a monthly exercise in Robert’s Rules of Order. At this point, neither candidate has been particularly impressive in their outreach. Neither candidate has done much to distinguish from the other. In fact, both candidates’ platforms are strikingly similar. This last point is interesting. If what needs to happen at the County Party level is not in dispute, as a general statement, then why can’t both candidates come together, address the issues jointly, and speak out against the elements of their support base who are more interested in division than unity? And that’s really where it ends up. Most of the people we’ve talked to, that have voiced objections to Mr. Turner or Mr. Bailey, have cited their supporters as the primary or secondary objection rather than the men or the platforms they are running on. That is madness. The truth of the matter is that the Democratic Party is at a crossroads in Tennessee. In two years the state legislature will begin the process of redistricting the state. How this plays out will in large part depend on how well the entire Democratic establishment organizes and unifies. As the minority party in both the State House and Senate, we stand at the precipice of losing as many as 3 seats in the US House, not to mention all the state House and Senate seats that can be gerrymandered to serve the interests of the Republicans. The SCDP, as the largest County Democratic organ in the state, has a huge opportunity and responsibility to ensure that we not only defend and expand the seats we have in Shelby County, but also provide support, by coordinating with the various county organizations and the state party, to help regain control of at least one body of the legislature. We cannot do this as a divided house. This is a time for unity. This is a time to set aside long held divisions and work together, as Democrats, to ensure victory and to reclaim our place as a leader, not only in Shelby County, but also throughout the state. In order to do this we have to establish trust in the SCDP, between the incoming 71 Executive Committee members and the factions that make up the body. For this to work, all sides have to abandon their roles as “spoiler” or “kingmaker” and work together for the best interest of the largest and most diverse collection of Democrats in the state. It’s time for leadership in the SCDP that represents and is committed to work with ALL SHELBY COUNTY DEMOCRATS. We have offered up our blogs to both candidates, and hope they take the opportunity to engage Democrats throughout the county. Turning back on this responsibility now will likely cripple any efforts in the future to unite and effectively lead the party forward, leaving us, once again, with a dysfunctional and divided local party. Democrats both in Shelby County, and throughout the state can’t afford to let that happen. Sincerely, Steve Steffens Steve Ross

Deep Thought - RE: AIG

Steve Ross — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:33:15 +0000

If we (IE the Government) really own 80% of AIG, why don't we stack the Board as well and just fire all these sleazy shitballs?

Sunshine In Memphis - Part 1

Steve Ross — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:21:59 +0000

As Newscoma noted earlier today, this week is Sunshine week. While I know we all get bombarded with “weeks” that are supposed to symbolize something, or highlight a cause, Sunshine week is really important to me. Sunshine week is about making government as accessible as possible, not only to journalists, but also to regular people. If you take any time to look at the four tiers of government we have in Memphis; Federal, State, County and City, you’ll see a range of “transparency” that goes from cloudy to murky to filthy to mud, depending on where you’re looking. The Sunlight Foundation, as well as other organizations are committed to making government as transparent, and by extension, accountable to the people, as possible. I wrote about this over two posts in late 2007 pertaining to the open meetings laws. Today, I’m going to just focus on the City web presence. Tomorrow, I’ll talk about the County web presence and the Election Commission, which will be an entire post to itself. Memphis Government The truth of the matter is, here in Memphis knowing what your government is doing in your name can be difficult to the point that it seems intentional. IT HAS GOTTEN A WHOLE LOT BETTER in the past two years. For instance, a quick shot over to the City Council page and you can view the minutes in a PDF, and see all the city’s business since the beginning of the year. Just one year ago, when I wrote about this, the site was so disjointed that it was impossible to navigate. Now it’s fairly organized, though I wish they would organize the archives in the same way they are organizing the 2009 meeting minutes/agendas/schedules/documents. The rss feeds are cool too, but somewhat inconsistent. Still improvement is improvement. Good job guys, but don’t get complacent. Memphis has 38 Comissions and Boards listed. Of those, 10 have websites listed. The rest, don’t even have phone numbers listed, just the same physical address as the Mayor’s office, and an email address that probably forwards to a secretary. What do these Boards and Commissions do? Go read the page yourself, but many of them hold sway on issues of importance, yet list no members. Remember that mud I was talking about? As for the rest of the Government offices in the Memphis City Government, they can be reached by going the the Government Home page in the upper left hand of the body. Click on the drop down menu and pick an office. From there, you’ll get a bio of the person in charge and perhaps some links on the right. As a general statement, I’ve never seen a web site laid out the way the City of Memphis site is. In my view, this site is way beyond “unintuitive”, it’s a mess. Apparently, the last time any significant changes to the site were made was 2005 so, so that may account for the problems. The world has changed Memphis, and it may be time for a refresh. Outside of keeping up with the City Council business, paying my Property Taxes, and maintaining my business license, I don’t have much contact with City government, so I can’t say how functionally transparent the actual city departments are. Maybe that’s a project for next month. But the simple fact that the various and sundry offices of City Government don’t have much “operational presence” online is cause for concern, and the Boards and Commissions thing is an error of omission beyond pale. Check in tomorrow for a look at the County Government, and specifically the Election Commission.

Transparency Builds a Working Relationship

Steve Ross — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:02:12 +0000

Of course, the inverse is also true… Today, there’s a story in the Commercial Appeal about a row at yesterday’s School Board Meeting. The chief issue of concern was a change in health insurance carriers for the Memphis City Schools that would leave many teachers looking for new doctors. I have zero direct contact with MCS, as I don’t have any kids. What little contact I do have with MCS is with its teachers. So, when it comes to how it operates as an organization, I don’t know. How it operates as a school, well, there’s data out there to detail that. This story, however, is more about how the MCS operates as an employer. For any organization to operate as an efficient entity, there has to be some level of trust between the various levels, management/non-management, etc. While certainly, in many businesses, there are issues that may not be wise to discuss openly, like courting a new client, or the rollout of a new product, issues of benefits, particularly when those benefits have been agreed upon through the negotiation process, need to be open to dispel rumors, and keep people from losing faith or damaging any good will that may exist between management and front line employees. It would seem that there was some trust violated in this issue. From the article:

Members of the Memphis Education Association, the teachers' union, said they were not told about the changes or invited to participate in the selection process, setting off a storm of e-mail. By late Monday, board member Dr. Jeff Warren said he had received more than 700 messages and calls from outraged and scared employees.

Luckily, for both the MCS and the teachers, the issue was tabled until the 13th of April. Now, this is most certainly a management issue, rather than anything to do with “Sunshine Laws”. However, building a culture of transparency often opens a dialogue, and avoids these management issues. Look, teachers know, perhaps better than anyone else, what happens when money is tight, and school budgets are operating on the edge of their funding. Both of my parents either are or were teachers, so I’ve seen this all my life. Further, teachers have seen their healthcare costs rise over the years, particularly if they add a spouse or children to their policy, so it’s not as if they don’t see the hit of rising healthcare costs. So why not openly discuss this with the MEA? See, the problem, is that this was treated like something to sneak by people rather than openly address the issue, and discuss options. Even if that wasn’t the intent, that’s the way it looks to people. So while this particular issue may be a management issue, it begs the question, what else is being snuck through the system? Further, the issue is not that, had the process been open some other conclusion may have been arrived. The issue is that the entity tried to operate without consulting the largest group of people who would be affected by the change, and by not including them, not only lost an opportunity to build trust, but damaged any trust that may have existed. And this is the very same mistake that Administrations, legislative bodies and all kinds of government organizations make thousands of times a year, that breeds distrust in the system. The point is, and this is kind of my “Sunshine Week” message, that transparency dispels the mythology and misperceptions about a government, or any other organization. Transparency is not just for “watchdogs” to play “gotcha” politics, it’s to reassure and build trust with a constituency. In this case, the constituency was the teachers of the MCS. Next time it may be standards that involve the students, or a safety issue, or a transportation contract, but if the process is open, and interested parties are involved, the chances of “shenanigans” are greatly diminished, and charges of “shenanigans” can be easily dismissed. You see, transparency not only builds a public trust, but it also creates a public record, and in doing so, protects a public entity from itself, which may be the most important benefit of all.

Sunshine in Memphis – Part 2

Steve Ross — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:45:09 +0000

Yesterday, I talked about the online transparency of the Memphis City government, today I want to touch on the online transparency efforts of the Shelby County government. First of all, the Shelby County Government’s site is a good deal more visually appealing than the Memphis site, but just as cluttered. The front page does, at least, contain a link to nearly every county department that you might need to interact with. In short, it may not be the best it could be, but it’s not the worst either. Elected officials are found through a pull-down menu at the left of the page. These are ordered in a way that makes a lot of sense, which is a refreshing change. Selecting “Mayor” takes you to a page that not only tells you about the mayor but also mayoral initiatives, projects, and services that fall under his administration. In fact, all the departments that fall under the administrative purview of the Mayor’s office can be reached in a manner that also follows the inverse chain of command (top to bottom, rather than finding the bottom and then working your way up). That’s good stuff. Selecting “County Comm” takes you to the front page of the Board of Commissioners. This page is far less organized than that of the members of the Administration. Board member’s pictures line the right side of the right column, the left side of that column lists text links to Online agendas and Committees. This isn’t attractive design, but it is easy enough to navigate. The Online Agendas link takes you then to a page that asks you to choose between a “search” page, that appears broken when you first look at it, even though it isn’t, and an “Agenda” page that lists the agendas for the past several meetings. The nice thing about this system is that for every meeting there is a list of supporting documents for each item on the agenda. All of these are PDF, so you can download and print easily if you need to. The problem I see with this is that there are not minutes. There is no recorded vote in this list. Hmmm. I went to the documents section and ran a cursory search. Nothing came up. I did this a couple of times and still got nothing. Frustrated, I decided to go analog, and give them a call. Turns out, the system is fairly new, which I knew already, and they haven’t exactly worked out how the minutes will either be included, or the manner in which they will be delivered, but the gentleman on the phone said in the coming weeks (4-8 weeks) that the minutes will be included and that they are looking at putting older minutes up also as an archive. This is really good news. Once the system is fully functional, not only will you be able to inspect the information surrounding an issue, but you should be able to search it, along with the minutes and by extension, the voting records of the commissioners. Until then, you’ll have to go downtown and ask for a physical copy of the minutes. I’m excited to see it work, quite honestly. Addressing the rest of the elected officials in the list, is really too deep and wide a topic for one post. Needless to say, each section follows the same pattern as the Administration officials, many with links to external county run sites. This makes it easier to go directly to the department you’re looking for, even if it does make your bookmarks a little unwieldy. All in all the Shelby County Government site is pretty good. It’s representative of a government that serves the interests of over a million people (which is a larger population than several states). Yes it’s deep and wide, but so is the government. Access to documents is pretty good, though you still have to go downtown for some things. Ultimately, it’s better than most, which is saying something. There’s still room for improvement. The site suffers from the same problem that the City site does in not listing members of boards and commissions, but for each one there is a contact name and phone number, which is a step up. Ultimately, most people in Shelby County have even less contact with the county government than I do with the city. Further, press reporting on the County government is virtually nonexistent unless something terribly wrong has happened. There’s a lot of ground to cover, and even more moving parts, but the county seems to be doing more than the city to make sure that people can easily access information. Hopefully the city will follow suit. This evening, or tomorrow I’ll talk about one of the County departments that I have, perhaps, the most contact with, the Election Commission.

It’s Time to Put in Some Work

Steve Ross — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:48:33 +0000

Update:Email address links fixed. Sorry for the syntax error. Steffens over at LWC has made his case for wine to be sold in Grocery stores. I couldn’t agree with him more. Today, Red, White, and Food, an organization supporting the effort, put out a list of Senators and Representatives, and their position on the matter. Memphis has an opportunity to make a big difference on this matter. With 21 Representatives and Senators out of 132, that’s 16% of the entire legislature. Below is a list of Shelby County legislators ordered by their support, or lack thereof. If your legislator supports the measure, send them an email thanking them. If your legislator is either opposed, or has not announced their position, head over to the Red, White and Food media center and get educated, then write your legislator. This is simple stuff. If beer is ok in grocery stores, why not wine? Note: If you use a web based email system (Yahoo, AOL, hotmail, Gmail, etc.) right click on the appropriate link below and copy the link, then paste it into a new email. If you use an email client like Outlook, Apple Mail, or something like that, just click the link and a new email will appear with the recipient's address in the "to" field. Supporters Sen. Paul Stanley, Memphis Rep. Karen Camper, Memphis Sen. Beverly Marrero, Memphis Rep. Larry Miller, Memphis Rep. Jeanne Richardson, Memphis Rep. Larry Turner, Memphis Undecided Rep. Brian Kelsey, Germantown Rep. Steve McManus, Cordova Sen. Mark Norris, Collierville Rep. Barbara Cooper, Memphis Rep. Lois DeBerry, Memphis Sen. Ophelia Ford, Memphis Rep. G. A. Hardaway, Memphis Sen. Jim Kyle, Memphis Rep. Joe Towns, Memphis Against Rep. Jim Coley, Bartlett Rep. Ron Lollar, Bartlett Rep. John Deberry, Memphis Rep. Ulysses Jones Jr., Memphis Rep. Mike Kernell, Memphis Sen. Reginald Tate, Memphis h/t LWC, and Braisted

Sunshine in Memphis – Part 3

Steve Ross — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:49:21 +0000

On Monday I talked about the online transparency efforts of the City of Memphis. Yesterday we touched on Shelby County Government. Today I want to focus on the Shelby County Election Commission. Before I begin, I have to say that nearly every interaction that I have had with the staff of the Election Commission has been positive. To be honest, I’ve made some pretty annoying requests of some of the people in the Election Commission office, often times with little knowledge of what all goes in to fulfilling the request, and the people at the downtown office have always delivered, though sometimes it did require some clarification. In short, you guys do a good job. The Shelby Co. Election Commission’s site serves two basic purposes. The first is to educate and inform voters on how to register, and where to vote. This information is readily available and easily accessible. In fact, the new design of the site actually works in ALL BROWSERS. This is a HUGE improvement over the site that existed just six months ago, and perhaps the most functional area of the site. The second thing the site is supposed to do is provide access to election results and reports. This is where it really starts to suffer. First of all the Java JRE 5.0 plugin doesn’t work in all browsers (Safari on the Mac), though it does seem functional in Firefox. This is something that they should note on the first page to ensure people don’t go chasing their tail trying to MAKE it work. Accessing the Election Reports is simple enough, though I notice that the Precinct Report for 2008 looks like it was scanned. Why not just download the copy from the State Site, or generate a PDF from the original document? While accessing the reports are easy enough, doing anything with the data is a painful experience. I don’t know if you’ve ever tried to copy and paste anything from a PDF to Excel or a Text document, but really, it’s borderline stupid. I don’t know what’s technically involved, but if a program can generate a PDF, one would think it could also generate a delimited text document, or CSV, or Excel spreadsheet. It would be nice if these things were made available on the site, for people like myself who are trying to learn the intricacies and trends of Shelby County voters, in some way, outside of the conventional wisdom. Further, it doesn’t seem like it would cost anything more to do something like this. (Please correct me if I’m wrong.) There’s a third purpose that the Election Commission serves, but offers absolutely no web support for whatsoever, and that’s collecting and maintaining financial disclosures for local candidates. This is something that I really want to be made available on the web, but I know will be a HUGE undertaking. Still, since the state passed a law allowing counties to set up electronic financial disclosure filings, one obstacle is out of the way. The other obstacle is getting the candidates to actually file electronically. I’ve looked at and had copies made of some local financial disclosures, and I’ve gotta say, the methods are all over the map. Some campaigns simply attach an Excel spreadsheet to the disclosure form, instead of using the actual 4 entries to a page form provided to detail the contributions and expenditures. Some actually hand write every single contribution and expenditure on the detail list (you know who you are). This presents a challenge for the Election Commission to make these records available electronically. Folks, this challenge isn’t lost on me, but that also doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t happen. Currently, if you want to view a financial disclosure you have to truck on down to the office, fill out a form, and then you can see the disclosures. If you want a copy, that’ll be 25 cents a page please. If you’re trying to assess a trend, or look at who’s giving money to whom, this can represent a HUGE expense. Making these documents available online would be a great boon to transparency in electoral politics in Shelby County. The long and the short of it is, the Shelby County Election Commission does a pretty good job of handling it’s core responsibility to voters, educating them about the voting process and making voting results available to the public. There’s room for improvement, in these areas, and even some simple fixes that could be done for easier access. The third area, financial disclosures, represents the biggest opportunity for the body online. Whether this happens or not is more an issue of funding and educating elected officials more than anything else. I hope, as the economy improves and local budget deficits are resolved, that monies will be set aside for this improvement. With County and City elections coming up in 2010 and 2011, it would be a great asset to Shelby County voters, and set us on the cutting edge of local financial disclosures in the south. Ed. Note: Posting over the next several days will be limited as I am traveling through the 25th. Enjoy the rest of Sunshine week!

Good Stewardship is Needed Badly

Steve Ross — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 07:59:05 +0000

The hot mess that has been the subject of many posts, and some of the outlying controversy surrounding the SCDP Convention to be held on Saturday has been stewing for weeks now. To better understand the issue, here is the timeline as it has been explained to me, by several sources, with documentation. An amendment to the SCDP bylaws was duly submitted to the body by Tara Maxwell and Eddie Jones, and distributed on February 9th, 2009 to members. The amendment sought to address the Executive Committee distributions by House District. The relevant section addressed is Chapter 1 Article V of the SCDP Bylaws. Because turnout was so high this year, and the current bylaws have no provision for distributions to districts with Democratic vote totals over 14,000, Mr. Jones and Ms. Maxwell sought to put those provisions into writing to ensure that House Districts turning out big for the Democratic Presidential nominee got an appropriate level of representation on the Executive Committee. The SCDP Executive Committee voted down this amendment to the bylaws at the March 5th meeting. On March 6th, an SCDP execom member told me about this situation. I sent an email to the TNDP. The response I got back, on March 8th, basically stated that the TNDP hoped that the SCDP would fix the problem, and that based on the information given up to that point, no grounds for overturning the convention or other intervention were apparent. On March 9, 2009, Mr. Jones filed a grievance with the TNDP. That grievance was met with this response some time after. In the intervening time there has been a good deal of scrambling, finger-pointing and phone calls. Just since Saturday, I have received a lot of phone calls, emails, and talked to more Democrats around the county than I ever have before. Sunday, the TNDP County Development committee, consisting of these members: Jay Bailey, Gale Jones Carson, Maryanna Clarke, David Harper, Beth Hickman, Fred Hobbs, Joyce Hopson, Patsy Johnson, Geeta McMillan, Sue O'Dell, Martha Brooke Perry, Michael Toomey, Barbara Wagner, John Wiseman, Elisa Parker, met and unanimously voted for the grievance claim. Jay Bailey reportedly recused himself from voting. The result is that there will now be 83 Executive Committee members if the SCDP follows the ruling of the TNDP. If they choose not to, well, I don’t know what will happen, but likely, a new convention will have to be scheduled and the 71 members elected on Saturday will have to run again. I have heard that the SCDP will be meeting Friday night to try and deal with the issue. Unfortunately, the only thing they can really do is vote to abide or not by the TNDP ruling, as any potential amendments that could solve the problem haven’t seen the necessary 10 days between submission and a vote. (Bylaws Chapter 2 Article X Section 2) We can debate the bylaws and the ruling. In the response, the argument that no provision of the SCDP bylaws was violated is fronted. Quoting from the document:

There has been no action by the Shelby County Democratic Executive Committee or the Shelby County Reorganization Process that violates the bylaws of the Shelby County Democratic Executive Committee, nor has Mr. Jones cited any such action. Instead, Mr. Jones' complaint cleverly blurs the distinction in the bylaws between one man, one vote representation at the ward, precinct and district caucuses and membership on the Shelby County Democratic Executive Committee. …

This assessment is technically correct. The current by-laws state in Chapter 1 Article V Section 8:

The number of persons chosen to participate in the Biennial Convention process on both the Ward and Precinct caucus level and the District caucus level shall be determined solely by applying the ONE-MAN, ONE VOTE concept to the number of votes cast for the Democratic candidate for Governor of the State of Tennessee or for President of the United States in the preceding general election, whichever is most immediate, for those positions at the time of the Biennial Convention.

Clearly, the language here speaks nothing about the number of Executive Committee members, it merely talks about how participation in Ward and Precinct, and the House Caucus is to happen. To the best of my knowledge, no qualified voter was denied participation in the Ward and Precinct process, and the number of delegates to the Convention on Saturday is representative of the voter turnout in November. At the same time, this provision is located in the Article that deals specifically with the Executive Committee. It can be argued that its placement there not only gives it governance over the distributions for Ward and Precinct, and House Caucuses, but also the Executive Committee. Further complicating the issue, the bylaws also say NOTHING about House districts that receive more than the 14,000 votes mentioned in Chapter 1 Article V Section 7. There is no remedy for an election with such high Democratic turnout in the bylaws. Nowhere does it state that the number of Executive Committee members per Tennessee House District is capped at 5, even though that may have been the practice in the past. There is no sliding scale provided in the bylaws to deal with an outlier election. This coupled with the “One man, one vote” provision leaves the organization at risk of such disputes being handled by a higher authority. In short, the people caught on the losing side of this issue seem like they’re screwed. There have been claims that this process was opaque, but any opacity is likely more the problem of the SCDP organization than anything else. SCDP Chair Keith Norman was notified on March 11th and sent a hard copy of the grievance. I don’t know if Mr. Norman shared this information with the interested parties, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he didn’t, further complicating the process. People have surmised that there was some back room dealing that follows supporters in recent TNDP chair race. This is unsubstantiated, and somewhat libelous. The long hard truth of the matter is that on February 9, 2009 the members of the SCDP Executive Committee were presented an amendment proposal that was one of an infinite possibility of solutions for dealing with the issue of an election with incredibly high turnout. Not only did they choose not fix the problem, no one, to my knowledge, even suggested an alternative that might have better suited the interests of enough people to pass. And that’s the problem. To the best of my knowledge, which is limited since I do not serve on the SCDP Executive Committee, no alternative proposal was explored to address the discrepancies of proportional representation on the body. To the best of my knowledge, no attempt to compromise with Mr. Jones was made. Compromise is the foundation of our Republic, and yet, the members of the Executive Committee made a choice to forgo one of the very traditions that made this nation great, in favor of name calling, accusations, and innuendo. It’s a classic example of what Zig Ziglar calls “a hardening of the attitudes” and that circumstance is the cornerstone of the house of dysfunction that is the SCDP. Did Mr. Jones’ proposed amendment seek the best possible situation for his House District? Absolutely, most compromise starts with what you want and ends with what you’ll take. Mr. Jones has a duty to represent the interests of his House District. In presenting this amendment, he served their interests, as well as the interests of other high performing House Districts. By not offering up an alternative, or even seeking compromise, those who would bedevil Mr. Jones do their very own House Districts a disservice by giving up the immediate win for the long-term solution that could be to their benefit. Now we’re less than 48 hours out from the convention. I’m not a delegate, so I have no vote. However, in looking at this and many other situations at the SCDP, from “ballotgate” to the mysterious missing Chair, to all the factionalism and bullshit that has crippled the institution, it doesn’t look good. In the final assessment, the absolute lack of intellectual curiosity, or willingness to solve, rather than maintain problems leaves me with no other choice. Trust is the foundation of all relationships, if people cannot trust, they also cannot be a part of the solution. Compromise is the lifeblood of a functioning organization. If the various and sundry factions within the party refuse to compromise, then they are killing the organization and have no business serving. Good stewardship and thoughtful leadership is needed badly, and right now. If the current members won’t or can’t provide it, then we need to elect ones that will. It’s time to do that very thing. -- I’m sure I’ve pissed a good deal of my friends off on the SCDP executive committee with this post. I’m sure I’ve “kneecapped” any chances of me getting elected to serve on the committee. Crazy as it sounds, I would really like to serve, but if it means having to become a part of one of the factions that have crippled the party, well, thanks but no thanks. I’ll just keep working to elect Democrats from the outside. I’ll be in attendance Saturday, and I hope that the choice is made to do the right thing rather than the right now thing. Right now it’s not looking good. Wish in one hand, shit in the other, see which one fills up first, ya know?

Feel Good Friday

Steve Ross — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:27:52 +0000

In honor of their upcoming world tour.

Spandau Ballet - True
by trashfan

The Lion that Meowed

Steve Ross — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 22:29:01 +0000

What was stacking up to be one of the most contentious Shelby County Democratic Party re-organizations in quite some time, turned out to be an orderly exercise in the Democratic process. At issue, the race for SCDP chair between Jay Bailey and Van Turner. While the race between the candidates had been civil, the behind the scenes maneuvering turned into a contentious battle over the number of Executive Committee members to be seated on the body. For more information on this, check out this previous post as well as this and this piece from LWC. In the end, the SCDP decided to follow the order of the TNDP and allow 83 members on the Executive Committee, an issue that was at question before the Convention started. The election of Executive Committee members occurred with few problems, though some former members did express displeasure at the way their districts were handled after the meeting. In the end, Van Turner won the Chair of the SCDP, 49 to 32, with one absent, and one abstention. After the Vote, Mr. Turner took the stand and recognized Jay Bailey, who asked the party as a whole to come together, put aside old differences, and get to the business of electing Democrats. No one knows if his supporters will heed his call for unity, but we’ll likely find out on April 6th, the first meeting of the newly re-organized SCDP. Congratulations to all the new members of the Execom, and Van Turner, and remember, the bloggers are watching! ;-)

SCDP – Moving Forward

Steve Ross — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:23:08 +0000

Now that county re-org is done, and the weekend has likely been spent recuperating from the hard work, and probably harder celebrations that followed, it’s time to start talking about the inevitable “what next” issues that come with winning. The past two years have been tumultuous, to say the least, for the SCDP. From the Richard Fields debacle that started the past committee, to “ballotgate” and eventually, the ruling from the state party that took the party from a proposed 71 to an eventual 83 members, there are some hurt feelings and a good deal of distrust between different groups that need to be tended to. There are also some structural issues that need to be looked at. While the bylaws that govern membership in the Executive Committee may not break after the 2010 election, like they did this year, there’s a possibility that they will. The SCDP would do well to either come up with a new plan to distribute these members, or set in stone the standard set by the TNDP. One of the biggest challenges facing the TNDP is the perception that it is a stagnant, dying body. The truth is, the SCDP does a lot of things, but for some reason does a poor job of getting that message out to rank and file Democrats. There are a lot of issues that would likely fix themselves if the SCDP made a conscious choice to reach out to local Democrats. I would be willing to bet that fundraising and volunteer participation would jump exponentially if the SCDP made a consistent effort to reach out. All it takes is dedication. Not all of the solutions take money. The simplest thing the SCDP can do is start, and promote a facebook group. Right now there is a Shelby Co. Democratic group, but it’s not for TN, it’s for Shelby Co. IN, population 44,000. Why can’t a party that serves nearly a million people do something that a party in a county of 44k can? This group would be a super easy way for both Execom Members and rank and file Democrats to communicate with each other and open up the process for interested individuals in the community. Another thing the SCDP needs to consider, is borrowing a proposal from Jay Bailey and start now organizing precincts. This doesn’t have to be some elaborate plan or anything, just a simple phone tree that starts with Executive Committee members and works it’s way down to voters. This also creates a communication structure to get info to more voters. Just because Jay was the opposition at the convention doesn’t mean he doesn’t have a good idea. Finally, the SCDP needs to consider is engaging elected officials and work with them to not only get the message about the party out, but also to help repair the image of the party, and provide assistance in identifying potential Democratic candidates. 2010 will see the County Commission up for election, as well as all the State House and the odd numbered State Senate seats, and the Governor. This is a HUGE election for Democrats throughout the state. If the Democratic party statewide cannot take back the House, we’ll likely lose at least two congressional districts to Republicans, not to mention the gerrymandering that will certainly occur here in Shelby Co. Building a bridge with elected officials now can help build trust for the election season, and help build an army to support our candidates. I have a lot more ideas, but these are the three that I see as most critical. Different people will have different ideas about what needs to get done. The key is to keep Democrats in the loop and involved. If the SCDP can accomplish theses two simple things, they will have achieved far more than in previous terms. Good luck, and Godspeed.

Building the Toolbox

Steve Ross — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 13:23:39 +0000

The TNDP launched a new site today. This is the second “refresh” of the party’s site since the election of Chip Forrester to the Chairmanship. The new site is built on a social networking platform that allows users to not only friend each other, but also other party organizations and groups throughout the state. Other improvements over the previous site is the ability to access just about anything and everything a user might want in relation to the state, or their county’s party organization. This represents a quantum leap over previous efforts, and puts in place one of the campaign promises of the new Chair. While a new site may or may not be “the” thing to turn the state blue, it represents a new tool for candidates and county parties to use in their efforts to better organize and inform their constituents, and that’s what grassroots organizing is about, making as many tools as possible available to as many people as possible. When you have more tools, you can get more things done more effectively. By furthering the reach and communicating with people using their preferred method, more people get involved, donate time and money, stay engaged, and eventually vote for candidate that is being represented by the effort. Honest observers of political trends will acknowledge that the new organizing tools being made available on the Internet aren’t meant to replace the old ways of doing things, but to enhance and expand them. Nothing will replace door-to-door canvassing, phone banking, house parties, or other tried and true methods of campaigning. It would be a mistake to dismiss these activities. But adding a screwdriver to the toolbox doesn’t make the hammer obsolete. If anything, it allows the hammer to stop trying to drive screws and focus on driving nails, the job it is best suited for. By building a more comprehensive set of tools for Tennessee Democrats to utilize, the TNDP is allowing Democrats throughout the state to focus more on their individual strengths, instead of trying to make the hammer drive a screw. Further, these new tools speed up the delivery of necessary “old school” organizing needs, distributing the information throughout the system and better focusing the efforts of volunteers and candidates in their effort to win their election. I’m looking forward to see how the site further evolves and is utilized as we work to regain the State House and Senate in 2010. This is a step in the right direction, and an opportunity for the state party, and by extension the county parties, to expand their reach and inform their constituents in ways that were unimaginable in years past. Congratulations TNDP, and keep up the good work.

Feel Good Friday - #1 Songs Edition

Steve Ross — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:37:08 +0000

The #1 hit song from this day in 1971, because the song from 1972 would have had all of you after my scalp. Just sayin'.

Where to Begin…

Steve Ross — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:29:29 +0000

There aren’t many things that I like doing less than calling bullshit on someone whose words and ideas I have come to respect over time. Unfortunately, this is one of those times when I have to call bullshit. Last night, knoxrebel @ Knoxviews penned a 4000 word screed calling on Chip Forrester to resign from the TNDP. It is one of the most disappointing things I’ve read in quite some time. Let’s start at the beginning… The piece starts out with the assertion that the past 9 weeks have been the worst time in TNDP history. I would argue the events leading up to the loss of both Houses of the legislature in last year’s election was THE WORST TIME for Tennessee Democrats. Political power is determined by how many people you can get elected, not by false drama stirred up by self-interested individuals on blogs or at cocktail parties. Obama’s performance in Tennessee had more to do with a Democratic infrastructure that has been gutted over years, not weeks or months. Had we maintained a majority of the House and stayed within one seat in the Senate and seen weakness from the Obama campaign, THEN one cold put that weakness in TN at Obama’s feet, not the other way around. From there, he talks about the election process. Truth of the matter is, many of us had the opportunity to visit with both Forrester and Bone. Both men had the same basic prescription for the TNDP (get more people involved, be more responsive, etc.). Honestly, I didn’t make a determination on who I preferred, just like I didn’t for the SCDP chair. Bone did indeed get the support of big name officials, but those guys don’t sit on the executive committee. We can discuss whether they should or not, but right now they don’t. Truth is, Forrester got a jump on the campaign, solidified a support base and Bone never made a case for why he was better other than his endorsers. End of discussion. In this argument, knoxrebel seems to imply that duly elected “executive committee” members should do the bidding of people elected to far less representative offices than the Executive Committee, rather than voting their districts, or their perceptions of their district’s best interest. I think I’ve given us both enough wiggle room on that statement. Ok, I have to put all these points out there… Pitting Old Against New When and where did this happen? In Forrester’s acceptance speech he says:

First and foremost, I want to renew my pledge to you that we are going to open up this party to everyone who believes in the ideals of the Democratic Party, the party of hope and change. We are going to make this the most inclusive political party in the state of Tennessee, which will enable us to build the grassroots organization necessary to elect a new Democratic governor and regain the majority in the House of Representatives and add Democratic seats to the state Senate in 2010.

The full text of his remarks can be found here. I don’t see anywhere in there that he pits the old against the new, unless including the new in the process somehow does that. FONCE Before March 5th, I bet there were a lot of people that follow TN politics that didn’t know what FONCE was. I admit my former ignorance. As a 5 year resident of Tennessee, I don’t remember it coming up before now. Maybe it did, and I missed it. But isn’t it interesting that it came up in the media almost exactly 2 weeks from the day that Freeman was announced Treasurer? I mean, knowing that Freeman had been against it in the past and all. This is not a conspiracy theory or anything, just an interesting coincidence. As TNDP chair, should Forrester have known more about FONCE? Probably. Why didn’t he? I don’t know. Truth of the matter is, it wasn’t introduced, via HB 2264 until 2/26/09 and referred to committee on 3/2/09, just 3 to 7 days before the question was brought up and just 6 days after Freeman’s appointment, there’s a possibility it may have slipped by. But I don’t, and you don’t, and no one REALLY knows. All we know is that on 3/5/09, Forrester flubbed a question about proposed legislation and the media took off with it. Forrester hasn’t taken on a lot of the legislative agenda. Part of this is because the House and Senate have caucus organizations set up to support and elect Democratic legislators here in Tennessee that are far closer to the sausage making that Forrester can ever hope to be. As head of the TNDP, the last thing Forrester wants to do is come out on the wrong side of the caucus organizations, so caution may be a good thing. Remember back at the beginning when I said things were broken. This probably still needs to be fixed. The question is, “Is it the top priority of a statewide organization that has almost no staff, a broken infrastructure, and a lot of rebuilding?” or do we leave much of the legislative wrangling to the caucus organizations that are more atuned to dealing with such things? Ideally, both Caucus organizations and the TNDP should be able to speak with one voice, but these things don't necessarily happen over night. Freeman Just thinking about the whole Freeman thing makes me tired. I bit my tongue through the whole thing, which is actually saying something. I’m not going to disparage anyone involved in that decision now that he has chosen to resign, but the net effect was that his appointment reinforced some of the “Gov. Vs. Chair” rhetoric. As much as people want to say this is true, the only people that REALLY know are Forrester and Bredesen. There are some “facts”, particularly in this section, that you site but do not back up. I would be interested in seeing some documentation on this. If all that documentation is opinion or hyperbole, or worse, buying in to internet trolls, well, don’t waste your time. I can’t stop you from buying into someone’s “authoritative opinion”, even when they’re too chickenshit to put their name on it, but I don’t have to agree with you. Where you see three, I see none Let’s do these in order so there’s no confusion: 1. Had Forrester not gone to the DNC Chair’s meeting, people would have derided him for not working hard enough for the TNDP. This was a no-win situation. 2. A scheduling problem, really? 3. The TNDP has not announced a decision to move, period. They have announced that they MIGHT move. They have announced they are considering the economic impact of moving. They have not said they ARE moving. I don’t know about anything regarding Cammack and Horne, but Horne has given a lot of money, like really, a lot, over the years to the TNDP and Democratic candidates, and as a Democrat I thank him for that, as we all should. As grateful as I am, giving money shouldn’t open the door to an uncontested primary. You don’t build a party by squashing competition; you build it by fostering healthy competition. Party Wars You’re just wrong about the Shelby County situation. As long as 14,000 votes ≠ 29,000 votes, you’re just plain wrong. End of discussion. I don’t know what happened in Knox Co., but my understanding was that the election for chair was uncontested, and that potential shenanigans were averted. How does this equal shenanigans? I won’t go on with my point-by-point analysis because at this point, I’m embarrassed for you, to be perfectly frank. To paraphrase Andy in the comments, you’ve chosen to co-opt the talking points of people who have nothing but ill intent for the TNDP. In doing so, you run afoul of your own ideals and principles, as I understand them from your previous writings. Conclusion I understand why people can feel threatened by new leadership and “fresh blood” coming into an organization. Truth of the matter is, this is not a zero sum game. You don’t lose anything by allowing new people in, you GAIN something; new ideas, new people to help, different perspectives. You don’t have to like all those things, but just like back when you were new in the party, they have an energy that you can choose to see as invigorating, or as a threat. You’ve chosen to feel threatened, and that’s unfortunate. The thing that everyone needs to realize is that WE’RE ALL DEMOCRATS, from Bredesen right down the line to little ole inconsequentional me. This whole thing is about an old guard trying to hold on to something they walked away from when they made a decision to demonize rather than work for the good of Democrats across the state. The new guard is stepping up, and doing the best they can, but the truth of the matter is that if we don’t all work together, we’ll miss a generation of Democrats in this state. Jellyfinger and Harrison may not care about that, but as a true believer, I do. Not all the old guard people have left the reservation, despite what these anonymous “experts” may say. There are many who are genuinely concerned for the future of the party, but have bought in to the line that these guys have been spouting for two months. To you folks I say, go up and visit the volunteers and the chair. Talk to them, see what they’re doing. That county re-org that just happened, largely without incident, they helped Vionne organize that. Those press releases and emails you’re getting now, they helped set up the new system and clean up the old mail list. That web page, that looks more like the DNC site than anything we’ve had in the past, and allows people to talk, and meet, and discuss issues with each other from across the state. They put that together, and in a way that is scalable, sustainable, and cost effective. They didn’t do this without direction. They did it at the direction of, and they continue to work on things, from the Summit on down. These may seem like small steps, but considering the cards that Forrester was dealt by the outgoing administration (70k in the bank and 80k of lawyer bills), what was he left to do but gather all he could together and make the best of a bad situation? Truth is, it’s easy to talk about the things Forrester has done “wrong”, especially when you make more things up. Forrester has made mistakes for certain, but none of them are nearly as critically costly as implied without the help of Harrison, TenRod, and Jellyfinger spinning them to make them sound worse than they really are. Forrester and his “Chipinistas” are doing all they can to make the TNDP as successful as they can. They could do more with help from the “old guard”, but they can’t just sit there and wait for the old guard to come around. At the end of the day we are left with a choice, keep doing what we’ve been doing and keep getting the diminishing returns we’ve been getting since I moved here in 2004, or start building something new on top of the foundation that was left behind. I think it’s time to build. We can have a discussion about whether the building that’s going on is good or bad, but no matter what, this is something we have to do, and in order to build on a foundation, that foundation has to make a decision to be a part of the solution rather than part of the problem. I’m sad and concerned for the state of Democrats in Tennessee. My concern is not grounded in anything that Forrester has done, but in the choices people on the periphery have made to demonize Forrester at the expense of the party as a whole. I’m sad that some in and around the party, including people whom I have come to respect, such as knoxrebel, have made a choice to buy in to the destructive line of these individuals. At the end of the day, we’re all Democrats. We argue, cuss and fight, but we are all working for the same thing, to get Democrats elected. It’s time to put the minor differences that some have capitalized on to foster dissent aside, and start working together on building a party that we can all be proud of together. PS Ok Jellyfinger, Harrison, and the rest. Come and beat me up. I'm ready and I've got my helmet on. I'm sure you can find one sentence to distort in some way, so do it while you can.

Underrepresented

Steve Ross — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 13:46:17 +0000

So, I've been looking at, and playing with and poking around the new TNDP website some more since I first wrote about it last week. It's growing organically, which is what these types of sites do once they're released into the wild. One of the things I'm noticing, as I scroll through the 350+ members that have signed up since last week, is that there are A LOT of people from Chattanooga and Knoxville, but not so many from Memphis or Shelby County. What gives? Are we BIG SHELBY or not people? Why haven't Shelby County Dems damn near overrun the site with membership requests? Come on! If this site is ever going to be put through it's paces it's gonna take all of us banging on the door to either break it, or to prove that it has a solid foundation. Get off your butts Shelby County Dems, and go join the new TNDP site. It's easy and best of all FREE! All you have to do is: 1.Go here, fill out the info, and click 'sign up'. 2. Once you're signed up, go here and invite other folks to sign up. We're trying to reach 1000 total members by the end of the week. Just 650 to go, and I'd like nothing more than the majority of that 650 to be from BIG SHELBY. Bring it people!

Where's the Love?

Steve Ross — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 12:39:15 +0000

Yesterday I sent out a call to Memphis Democrats to go join the new TNDP site. Several people signed up, but Memphis is still SORELY underrepresented. Here are the stats: TNDP Total - 382 members Nashville - 72 members (18.8%) Knoxville - 56 members (14.6%) Chattanooga - 14 members (3.6%) Memphis - 14 members (3.6%) Shelby Co. - 16 members (4.2%) Why isn't Memphis and Shelby County completely and totally dominating this thing? I know it's not a race, but come on! We have more active Democrats here in Shelby Co. than any other county in the state! We need to represent. Follow these simple instructions and help put Memphis where it should be, at the top of the heap in terms of membership at the new TNDP site! 1.Go here, fill out the info, and click 'sign up'. 2. Once you're signed up, go here and invite other folks to sign up. Come on people, we can't let this stand! Get to joining!

Happy Birthday to Me

Steve Ross — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 01:13:31 +0000

Glad to See This

Steve Ross — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:35:43 +0000

As LWC noted last week, the SCDP has started a newsletter on it's site. This is a step in the right direction for a body that has, in the past, been both secretive and disconnected from rank and file Democrats in the county. I hope they keep it up. Also, on the 6th, the new SCDP execom elected it's slate of officers. Give them all a round of applause. I'm looking forward to hearing more from the SCDP in the coming months. Information is the key to building a robust and strong party organization. If this is any indication of the future of the party, we've started down the right path.

More than a Little Disappointed...

Steve Ross — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:15:34 +0000

Ok folks. I know I've been harping on this, but seriously, we're WAY BEHIND now. Current TNDP Membership Stats Total - 464 Davidson Co. - 105 - 23% Knox Co. - 68 - 14.6% Shelby Co. - 32 - 6.9% Rutherford Co. - 24 - 5.1% Hamilton - 15 - 3% We're in danger of falling to fourth if we don't get some more people to sign up. This is not a race, per se, but we should at least be "representing". Also, all you elected officials out there in Big Shelby. Take 5 minutes and do what Senator Marrero did, and sign up. Alright, I'm done whining now.

Did the Gov’s Race Just Heat Up or Cool Down?

Steve Ross — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:37:20 +0000

So as has been widely reported Harold Ford Jr. is not running for Gov.. What does this mean for TN democratic politics and what does it mean for the race as a whole? Let’s take a look. 3 people have really totally “declared” on the Democratic side; Kim McMillan of Clarksville, Ward Cammack of Nashville, and State Senator Roy Herron of Dresden. Other folks who have been making moves signaling a possible run are; State Sen. Andy Berke of Chattanooga, Mike McWherter of Jackson/Dresden, State Sen. Jim Kyle of Memphis, and last but not least, Knoxville developer and former TNDP chair Doug Horne. HFJ’s decision not to run comes as little surprise. He has been largely absent from the Tennessee political scene since his loss in the 2006 Senate race to Bob Corker. Also, his work at the DLC, while a generally popular organization in Tennessee, has taken him out of the national spotlight in many ways. Finally, the allegation that he received a bonus from Merrill Lynch may have pushed the political calculus over the edge. There is no doubt that he would have been an instant frontrunner had he entered the race. Now it is exactly that, a race. The three declared candidates; McMillan, Cammack, and Herron, come from both the political and business worlds. McMillan, the former Majority Leader of the State House, and Senior Advisor to Governor Phil Bredesen, got out of the gate early, meeting Democrats across the state, including yours truly. McMillan is well spoken, if somewhat vague about her agenda, and will likely do well in rural TN. The income tax debacle is still being hung around her neck, and until she shakes off that label, she may have a hard time making inroads among some of the more moderate and conservative folks in the state. Ward Cammack was the second candidate to declare. A former investment banker, Cammack retired from the industry at the end of last year. In an interview with Kleinheider at Post Politics Cammack readily acknowledged that he had given to and voted for Republicans in the past. This may be difficult for some in and around the party to accept, but he reassures Democrats that, “Yes, I have given [money] to Republicans in the past and I have voted for Republicans in the past. I have never tried to hide that,” Cammack says. “But if you ask me if I believe in the Democratic Party, the answer is yes. Yes, I do.” Roy Herron has been a fixture in the Tennessee Legislature for over two decades. The only sitting Senator that has currently announced for Governor, Herron is also the Chair of the Tennesee Senatorial Democratic Caucus. With a long legislative career come plenty of things for people to pick at. Most recently the risky bond deals that have crippled local municipalities he supported in 1999. Herron is not up for re-election to his Senate seat until 2012, so his entry doesn’t leave an open hole in the Senate, but the crippling unemployment in SD24, and his perceived inability/unwillingness to bring home some bacon to his needy district may hurt his local base of support. Now for the undeclared folks. When I met Senator Berke, I didn’t really know what to expect. Being from the other side of the state I had no real contact with him. He turned out to be a charming person, keenly interested in the future of both Tennessee and the Party outreach. Since then, Berke has been largely concerned with legislative affairs, but rumors of his intent to run persist. We probably won’t know until the session is over, but if he runs, he will bring an East TN flavor to the mix the race. His twitter feed is awesome, and funny. I haven’t had the opportunity to meet Senator Jim Kyle, even though he represents a district here in Shelby Co., but his twitter feed is instructive. This is a guy interested in process and procedure, which is how government works. There is little doubt that Kyle would be an able administrator in state government. Should he choose to run, he has to work on his delivery of a message that resonates outside of West TN. It’s been quite some time since anyone’s been able to do that statewide, and with a surging population in the East, it’s even more of an uphill climb. You may or may not know the name Doug Horne, but one thing is certain, he’s a Democrat. The former chair of the TNDP has given probably hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years to Democratic candidates and institutions in the state and around the country. I didn’t live here during his tenure at TNDP, but just looking at his giving record makes him a contender. If he’s willing to put that much money into other people’s races, just imagine how much he will put into his own. The McWherter name strikes fear in the hearts of politicians all over Tennessee. Not because of anything nefarious, but because of the political powerhouse that it has been for decades. In last year’s Senate race Mike McWherter's late exit is credited, rightfully or not, with some of the weakness on the Democratic slate. In a post at Pith that fear may or may not be well placed. McWherter’s possible entry hasn’t deterred anyone from announcing so far. How much his possible entry will shut down fundraising is another question. Despite his name, McWherter has a tough row to hoe and the high expectations that may be out of his reach. Toastmasters anyone? As the legislative session winds down and political events become more frequent across the state, we can expect that the field will become clearer. Candidates aren’t required to disclose their fundraising until mid-July, which still gives candidates currently serving in the legislature an opportunity to do some fundraising, though expectations will be far lower for them. The next disclosure after July is February 2010. That’s a lot of time for people to get in, or out, or break away from the pack. We likely won’t know for some time, but just like the lottery, you can’t win if you don’t play. With only three candidates officially in the race on the Democratic side, there’s lots of money out there on the table, and while fundraising isn’t everything, it is an indicator of early support. The worst-case scenario for all of these candidates, and Democrats in Tennessee, is that NONE of them catch fire, much like the 2008 US Senate race, and we end up with a de facto concession candidate. Looking at the field now, it’s hard to know who will emerge as the fighters, and who will fade away. Both the McMillan and Cammack campaigns are in one stage or the other of building a campaign presence. McMillan has had a nicely designed web site for some time. Cammack is in the process of redesigning his, and has hired on campaign staff already. Herron, who just announced last week, has a reported $282k in the bank to kick start his campaign. It seems unlikely, given the people currently in the race, and the ones looking at the possibility, that we’ll end up with a placeholder. That said, it’s vitally important that these candidates start getting more face time with voters, both Democrats and Independents. The Republican slate, while a little larger, is full of people with name recognition in the state. Sitting back and hoping they implode is probably not going to happen. In order to be successful, candidates on the Democratic side are going to have to distinguish themselves not only from each other, but make a strong argument for Democratic principles to voters. This may be a tough sell considering the legislative losses that the Democratic Party suffered in the state last November, but it’s vital. The Governor is the most visible Democratic Party member in the state. Gubernatorial candidates, by extension, are the future standard bearers of the party. This is not just about “looking Gubernatorial”, it’s about BEING a Governor in the eyes of voters before they even get to the ballot box. We’ve got a good slate so far, and the possibility of a real shootout in 2010. This thing is going to heat up. Don’t expect much more than simmering for a while though. We’re still 19 months out and ANYTHING can happen.

picture-1

Steve Ross — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 04:37:42 +0000

Proof of Life

Steve Ross — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 04:43:25 +0000

I'd like to thank the orange academy..... the post here the post there h/t 55-40

Teabagging – The Awful Truth

Steve Ross — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:15:23 +0000

teabag - To dunk ones scrotum into the open mouth of another person. h/t - Urban Dictionary This is the face of “Movement Conservatism”. Classic

Teabagging - The Music Video

Steve Ross — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:04:03 +0000

The OFFICIAL WORLD RELEASE! vibincblog gives you, TEABAGGING the music video. Lyrics, vocals, video direction, editing, audio mixing and effects all by yours truly. Enjoy. This was my shot as a DIY 24 hour film. Haven't done one in years. Started at 7am on 4/15/09 finished at 5am 4/16/09. Remember, while this is a political song, it's meant in a lighthearted way. Please take it for what it is...a parody.

Losing COGIC, and Competing for Conventions

Steve Ross — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:48:44 +0000

The news that COGIC plans to move it’s annual convention to St. Louis in 2010 leaves a huge hole in the hospitality industry here in Memphis. Since the story broke, it’s been estimated that Shelby Co. will lose some $35m. While that may not be a huge percentage of the annual GDP for the county (.06% of $56b), it’s a huge loss for one industry to absorb. As I mentioned in this post about the proposed Convention Center last September, hotel beds in or near the downtown area is one of the biggest stumbling blocks to hosting large events here in Memphis. St. Louis’ 38,000 rooms, compared with Memphis’ 21,000 makes St. Louis an easy sell for a convention that brings in some 50,000 people annually. Further, St. Louis has 200,000 sf more convention space than Memphis, making it easier for them to keep everything in close quarters. I do 2-3 large (5000 to 20,000) events in St. Louis every year. These vary year to year because conventions rarely visit the same city every year, particularly in my small corner of the business. However, whether the event is just using the America’s Center, or spreading it all out between that convention space and the Edward Jones Dome, St. Louis has far better accommodations to compete for events of this size. In Memphis, if a convention wants to do something like this, transportation from the Cook to the Forum can be costly, or worse, you can lose eyeballs in the move (people not making it from site A to site B). Further, the ability to deal with just one organization between the venues makes addressing problems that arise in the normal flow of an event, less of a hassle. Since my September post, little has been said or done about the real problems that Memphis’ convention business faces. Further complicating the issue is the economic downturn that has made competition for events far more heated, both between cities and event companies (equipment, planning, etc.). In order for Memphis to better compete in this climate, and future business climates that emerge, we have to look at ways to make Memphis more convention friendly without giving away the store. The first step in this is actually making a long-term decision about where we want our conventioneers to be. The Cook is on the north end of Main, the Forum is further south near Beale St. Just under a mile from each other, these two sites don’t seem that far away but to an event planner, they might as well be half a world away. Event planners and hosts cannot ask their guests to take care of their own transportation from these venues. Do you want 15,000 people trying to find their way on foot, or the trolley, or by any other means from one place to the other with little knowledge of the area? That’s just not an option for an event of ANY size. Usually events end up having to provide busing from one place to the other which can be expensive, and narrows the amount of time that the event has with it’s guests. Further, coordinating between two sites in one building is hard enough, two sites a mile away is a HUGE pain in the butt. This is also true of hotels spread hither and fro in a Memphis. Guests are often bussed from hotels further south of the Convention Center. So, where do we want our guests to be, is a HUGE question that hasn’t been addressed here in Memphis. The next thing, and I think this is reasonable, is making a conscious decision on what size of events we want to compete for. What’s sustainable? How much space, how many beds, how many restaurants, and all the things that go into supporting an event experience, is the city willing to help maintain. Hotels aren’t just going to get built because we want them to. They will get built because there’s an economic opportunity far bigger than any PILOT we could offer. We could build 15,000 more rooms in Memphis, but if there’s not the business to support them, it doesn’t matter. So, first, where do we want people to be, secondly, how many people can we support. The third thing is managing our “brand experience”. This is the most complicated part because it deals with things that, at once, can and cannot be tightly managed, but must be met with a citywide intention to maintain certain standards. Is the convention space attractive? Is there easy access to entertainment? Is the environment generally safe feeling? Is there support staff, across all the Government and private entities involved, that is focused on assisting the guests? All these things are vital for maintaining business, and getting new business, but it’s not something that I have experienced in my 10+ years of doing events nationwide, here in Memphis, and it’s the biggest problem we face in attracting and maintaining “post-COGIC” levels of convention business. I won’t take the time right now to get into these things specifically. I touched on them back in September and all those items and more apply still today. Ultimately, the point is making Memphis a place for conventions has to be an intentional effort above just having a place to do it. We haven’t done a good job of this. If we want to build a convention presence beyond our current levels we have to start doing a better job. All the hotels, and space, and everything else in the world won’t help us if we don’t do what we need to do with a high degree of intention. As for COGIC, I think once they see how much more expensive St. Louis is they will be back. This gives us 2 years to start addressing some of their concerns, and working to correct problems, not only for their convention, but for other conventions of all sizes and shapes that may be interested in coming to Memphis. If we want the business, we have to act like we do, all the time, without exception. Anything less than that ensures what we’ve been getting, and that’s obviously not really working out for us, is it?

Whereupon I ask once again...

Steve Ross — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:59:30 +0000

Shelby Co. Democrats, what's the deal? Since my last post on this topic, we've added 3, count em, 3 members to the new TNDP site. By contrast, Davidson has added 20, and Knox has added 7. Shelby Co. is has a greater population than both these counties by a pretty large margin. Why are we lagging? Get on over to the TNDP site and show your support of the new tools at our disposal by signing up. It just takes a second, and if you don't want any more email from the party, you can easily turn that off in your settings. There are the stats so far: Total Members - 532 Davidson - 121 - 22.7% Knox - 75 - 14% Shelby - 35 - 6.6% Rutherford - 26 - 4.8% Hamilton - 19 - 3.6% Top 5 counties - 276 - 52% In last year's election, the top 10 counties constituted 55% of the total statewide electorate, so that's pretty close to reality. However, Shelby constituted 15% of the total electorate statewide. Right now we're lagging by more than 8%. We've got to do better. If you're already a member, send some invites to friends. If you're not, take 5 min. and give it a whirl. Further, the SCDP Executive Committee is sorely underrepresented on the state site, and our group currently has 2 members (Thanks to Nika Jackson for starting the group, if you're not a member, go sign up for that too!). Alright people, get to it. We gotta get past Knox Co. at the very least. Just takes a second, and I'll stop whining!

Walk to Stop the Violence - Updated

Steve Ross — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:36:00 +0000

Ed. Note: Annesdale-Snowden neighborhood and contact phone numbers added below. Thanks for participating! Neighborhoods are not islands. They do not exist on their own, unaffected by their surroundings. Neighborhoods are a part of the community at large, both independent, and connected to the city, county, and bordering municipalities that make up the greater community. This is particularly true in Memphis, where we are surrounded by both cities in Shelby Co., Tipton Co. and Fayette Co. in TN, as well as those in De Soto Co., MS, and across the river in AR. Like it or not, we are a community that makes up “Greater Memphis”, and what affects us here in the incorporated areas of Memphis, also affects those in the surrounding neighborhoods and communities. In the past month there have been several instances of gun violence in my neighborhood. Gun violence doesn’t have to involve actually shooting the firearm. More often than not, it involves merely wielding, threatening citizens with injury or worse. The MPD reports that gun violence is down 10.5% in Memphis. In my quiet neighborhood, it’s WAY up. In response to the rise of gun violence in my neighborhood, a group has emerged to bring circumstance this to light. On Wednesday, April 22, 2009 at 5:30, people will meet just two blocks from my house to address the instances of gun violence in my neighborhood. Below is an account of violent acts in and around my neighborhood in the past month as reported by the Commercial Appeal

--Reginald Epps, 20, Brandon Johnson, 18, and Gabrerial Perry, 20, are believed responsible for eight armed robberies in the area between March 18 and March 21. --Terrance Craft, 19, and Derwin Seals, 16, are believed responsible for another string of armed robberies between March 27 and April 9. --Michael Neil Krauss, 42, was shot to death near Cox and Harbert after he ran from a man during a robbery attempt April 4. The gunman is still at large.

The agenda for the event is as follows:

5:30pm-6pm: Congregate at Cooper & Harbert to paint signs. Walk to crime scene #1 at Harbert & Cox. 6:15pm-6:30pm: Talks and remembrances. Walk to crime scene #2 at Cowden & Tanglewood. 6:45pm-7pm: Talks and remembrances. Walk to Peabody Park for entertainment and refreshments. Representatives from the City Council, State Legislature, Police, Clergy, and friends & family have been invited to speak. This event is supported by your local neighborhood associations - Central Gardens, Cooper-Young, Annesdale-Snowden and Idlewild.

You can sign up to attend at a Facebook page here The problem of violent crime is not isolated to certain areas of the city. Violent crime in my neighborhood is JUST AS HORRIFIC as violent crime anywhere else in the City, County, or Metro area. We, as a community, need to come together to address all the issues that affect all of our neighborhoods in a comprehensive way. I hope this event will serve as one small step in that direction. Come join us. For more information please call Richard O'Brien at 292-357.

Keep the Living Wage - Updated

Steve Ross — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:50:06 +0000

Update: According to the Tennesseean's In Sesion blog the anti-living wage bill was defeated today by a vote of 3-3, effectively killing the measure for this session.

Original post follows... At 1:30 today, the House Subcommittee on Employee Affairs will take up HB 0311 the companion bill to SB 0083 which would end the living wage provisions here in Memphis or any other living wage provision maintained by city or county governments across the state. From the summary:

As introduced, prohibits local governments from requiring private employer to pay its employees any wage not required to be paid to such employee under state or federal law. - Amends TCA Title 50, Chapter 2, Part 1.

The bill passed the State Senate back on March 12 with a vote of 18-13. After passage of the bill in the Senate, County Commissioner, Steve Mulroy wrote an editorial defending the living wage in the Commercial Appeal. The arguments Commissioner Mulroy made last month ring true today. The most compelling of those, in my opinion is “home rule” . Why does the state believe that they know what is best for Memphis, or any other city/county? Why is the state legislature engaged in an attempt to drive down quality of life provisions that a local government, in considering it’s own economic realities, have put in place? What business is it of the state to make us set a wage in our community that is FAR BELOW what is necessary to LIVE in our community? Contact the members of the Subcommittee and ask them to kill this bill. Committee Officers Mike McDonald, Chair (D-Portland) (615) 741-1980 Stacey Campfield, Vice-Chair (R-Knoxville) (615) 741-2287 Members Mike Bell (R-Riceville) (615) 741-1946 Brian Kelsey (R-Germantown) (615) 741-4415 Sherry Jones (D-Nashville) (615) 741-2035 Gary Moore (D-Joelton) (615) 741-4317 I’ll do my best to keep up with the progress of this bill as the session continues.

Mayoral Budget Address - Liveblog

Steve Ross — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:35:24 +0000

The Mayor's Budget address has ended...Two quick after notes: Herenton says he may run against Cohen in 2010 Back at 4:15, I noted something that the Mayor said he deserved an apology for from Stephanie Fitzgerald, President of the Memphis Education Association. Here is the comment and a link to the original article:

The only place he could get the money," says Stephanie Fitzgerald of the Memphis Education Association, "would be from the money they're not paying to the schools that were taxed for the schools."

(Source) 4:30 PM - The liveblog has ended...go in peace. 4:29 PM - Herenton now seems very uncomfortable. This is really kind of funny to watch, honestly. He's got his book in his hand, and he's shifting his weight, and now he's looking at his shoes. This is some funny shit. Dude FINALLY quit talking. I don't think it was Lowery, but whoever it was sounded drunk of from the Bayou. 4:27 PM - Same guy still talking, about Convention Center and all other sorts of stuff. This guy is more long winded than the Mayor himself. I have no idea. Probably someone running for Mayor in 2011. Maybe it's Lowery. 4:22 PM - Somebody was talking but since I can't really hear the Council members, and the damn camera won't pan over, I have no idea who it is. Hard to do a liveblog when the camera guy is acting like it's all about Willie. 4:19 PM - Ware comments about County Trustee tax collection services vs. "in-house" vs. contractor. Couldn't hear because there's no audio from the Council. 4:17 PM - Flinn notes that depending on what happens, budget not over until courts rule on schools. Herenton says it's not on him. Flinn, beginning of process, not the end. There will be more scrutiny of the proposal. 4:15 PM - Strickland asks about funding for MCS. Herenton: Tax rate has not changed since last year...additional comments. Says head of MEA owes him an apology. Researching that whole thing...Strickland follow up: If State requires Memphis to fund at former levels, will a tax increase be involved. Herenton: Mayor is not responsible for schools. Says any increase is the City Council's problem. 4:10 PM - Collins asking about tax collection, and the transition from a contractor to the "in-house" arrangement that is proposed in the budget. Herenton: Believes the contractor was a good decision for delinquent tax collections. Net increase due to that arrangement. Says Council didn't understand arrangement with contractor, or the fee structure. Decided to let them see how it works in-house so they can make a more informed choice. 4:07 PM - Fullilove asking about last year's employee buy-out. Herenton: Buy-out is done, and don't need any more. 4:05 PM - Cannot hear questions because they didn't tie into the damn house PA! XLR cable is cheap folks, and takes just a minute to solder. Something about Property tax. 4:03 PM - Concludes remarks. Thanks members of Executive. About to be open for questions from the Council. 4:00 PM - Primary goal to ensure core services, even though some city amenities may be open less. Maintenance for roads and city buildings will continue despite Economic Downturn. NO PROPERTY TAX INCREASE. 3:57 PM - Parks and Golf Courses will be open fewer hours. No layoffs, but there will be no funding for 125 vacant City positions. Will stick with treasurer's office and collect property taxes. Will expand city attorney to help collect delinquent taxes. 3:55 PM - Talking about "Where the money comes from." - Property taxes =43% of city revenue. Sales tax & State income tax = 34%, fines and fees = 23%. Sales tax receipts have declined steeply since mid-last year. Sales tax collections declined by $6m in the past year. Anticipate sales tax continued weakness through FY 2010. Operating budget - $617m, 1% less than last year. Increase in public safety spending. Funding for Utility assistance, and 3% salary increase across board for City employees. 20% 3:50 PM - Saw slowdown "way ahead" and took steps to address before it became a problem. Federal funds will allow 300 additional police over next 3 years. Frees up $3.1m for other things. Reduced level of funding to non-core services such as non-profits. 3:46 PM - Says Memphis is on solid financial ground because of past hard choices. 3 years of operating surpluses. $89m of current surpluses. Something to be proud of, and is not an accident. 3:43 PM - Mayor steps up to the podium...Starts off with economic comments...and positive news about Memphis. Says Memphis is on solid financial ground. 3:38 PM - This is streaming LIVE on WMCTV.com 3:35 PM - Herenton just arrived, the invocation is going on now. I guess I should be bowing my head instead of typing.

Hate Crimes Legislation - UPDATED

Steve Ross — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 02:13:45 +0000

Update: Finally up for a vote, 2.5 hours later. Bill goes to full committee. In reality, HB0335, introduced by Memphis Rep. Jeanne Richardson (HD-89) is a pretty simple piece of legislation. It takes TCS 40-35-114 (17) and changes the word “gender” to “gender, or gender identity or expression”. That’s it. Something so seemingly innocuous, a couple of words changed in a law designed to protect people who are routinely targeted because they are “different” may seem like a waste of time for the state legislature, but this has been an error of omission for transgendered people in the state of Tennessee. The highly publicized beating and eventual murder of Duanna Johnson was not the first incidence of transgendered people being targeted in Tennessee. On July 1, 2008 Ebony Whitaker was shot and killed just outside a Memphis daycare. On January 7, 2007 Nakia Baker’s body was found in Nashville. Baker had been beaten to death. On February 16, 2006, Tiffany Berry was shot after she stepped out of her apartment in Memphis. At the time of this report there had been seven other instances of crime targeted at transgendered people in Nashville alone. (Source) This, of course, doesn't account for the crimes that are either not reported, or not recognized as hate crimes. Richardson’s bill will be before the House Subcommittee on Criminal Practice and Procedure tomorrow at noon in room HHR31. Please contact the members of the committee by following the links or using the phone numbers below and ask them to support this reasonable fix to Tennessee hate crimes law. Committee Officers Eric Watson, Chair, R-Cleveland (615) 741-7799 Janis Sontany, Vice-Chair, D- Nashville (615) 741-6861 Members Eddie Bass D-Prospect (615) 741-1864 Karen Camper D-Memphis (615) 741-1898 Chad Faulkner R-Campbell and Union County (615) 741-3335 Judd Matheny R-Tullahoma (615) 741-7448 Also check out this post from Grand Divisions.

Walk to Stop Violence - Reminder

Steve Ross — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 20:01:49 +0000

This is just a reminder that tonight is the Walk to Stop Violence in Midtown. Below is an agenda for the event. You don't have to live in Midtown to attend, everyone is welcome. The agenda for the event is as follows:

5:30pm-6pm: Congregate at Cooper & Harbert to paint signs. Walk to crime scene #1 at Harbert & Cox. 6:15pm-6:30pm: Talks and remembrances. Walk to crime scene #2 at Cowden & Tanglewood. 6:45pm-7pm: Talks and remembrances. Walk to Peabody Park for entertainment and refreshments. Representatives from the City Council, State Legislature, Police, Clergy, and friends & family have been invited to speak. This event is supported by your local neighborhood associations - Central Gardens, Cooper-Young, Annesdale-Snowden and Idlewild.

You can sign up to attend at a Facebook page here Come join us. For more information please call Richard O'Brien at 292-357.

Why I’m Against Consolidation

Steve Ross — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:01:58 +0000

In the past several years I’ve been an advocate for Consolidation. I’ve written several posts in support of the subject. Today I’m changing my tune. Today, I come out against consolidation and all it stands for. What does consolidation even mean? The definition of Consolidation is combine (a number of things) into a single more effective or coherent whole. That’s a nice idea, but for the past almost 50 years consolidation here in Shelby Co. has represented to many an exercise that takes a County government, and a City Government, and smushes them together like two cans of different colored Play-doh. Some have characterized consolidation as a marriage of the blind and the deaf, unable to communicate or respond to each other, or worse, as creating a man made Platypus. None of those things sound like something I’m interested in. Consolidation SOUNDS LIKE taking two under-representative bodies and making them one SUPER UNDER-REPRESENTATIVE body. That’s something that I just cannot support. Shelby Co. has is 724 sq. mi. and a population density of 1189/sq. mi. The County Commission has 5 Districts, 4 of which are served by 3 people, you still following me, for a total of 1 council member for every 69,000 people. That’s less representative than the average State House seat in Shelby Co. by 13,000 people. Memphis is even worse. We have 7 Districts, and 2 “At Large” half city districts. At 279 sq. mi. we’re just 37% of the total land mass of Shelby Co., but have a population density of 2327/sq. mi.. Representation on our council is worse than in the county. That’s 1 district member for every 93,000 people. The “At Large” is even worse than that, ranging somewhere around 1 member for every 112,000 people. In all, any one district may be represented by 4 people, but only has one person really “responsible” for the area, and 3 others that are really responsible for the interests of their half of the city. You can “math this out” to look better than it is, but even at 1 per 83,800, you would still find yourself with each City Council member representing 27,000 more people than our State House members. In pointing out the reality of our under-representation on both the County and City governments, I don’t mean to besmirch the intentions or credibility of any of the members, but to point out the representational reality that the two largest “municipal” governments in Tennessee are broken. The notion of marrying these two under-representative bodies into one SUPER UNDER-REPRESENTATIVE government is distasteful to just about everyone. I’m against that…I’m against Consolidation. I’m not against a completely revamped, and more representative Metro Government. I actually like the idea, as long as it’s not set up to solidify the power bases or any one group or political structure. I like the idea of a Metro Government that is SUPER representative. Davidson Metro is a good example of this. Davidson Metro is 502 sq. mi. with a population density of 1243/sq. mi.. It has 35 Council Districts, 5 “At Large” positions and a Vice-Mayor that oversees the body. Each district position serves approx. 18,000 people. The “At Large” positions are simple, vote for 5 and the top vote getters win. Vice-Mayor is a Metro wide race that everyone votes for, just like the Mayor. Everyone is voted into a 4-year term, and the election is held in an “off year” to allow for citizens to actually be able to focus on the election. That doesn’t sound bad to me. Achieving a representational ratio equal to that of Davidson Co. would mean 50 council districts. That doesn’t seem manageable. 35 seems more manageable, and would net just over 2 council seats for every State House District. I like the “At Large” positions as well, for several reasons; 1. It gives people who have served on the council an opportunity to continue to serve after they have been “Term Limited” out of their local districts. 2. It allows for institutional memory to survive huge turnovers of the council. 3. It is a good platform to build leaders that could someday serve in an executive position. “Leaders aren’t born, they’re raised”, in order for a community to get the kind of leadership they want, they have to “raise” those leaders and show them what leadership looks like in their community. Whether or not something like this emerges in the most recent push for a Metro government is yet to be seen. County Mayor Wharton is currently on a listening tour to hear resident’s concerns and questions. At the beginning of the month he visited a group in Cordova. More are planned over the coming months. In order for any real push for a Metro government to begin in earnest, the Memphis City Council and Shelby Co. Commission have to adopt a resolution to create a Charter Commission comprised of members appointed by both bodies. The Charter Commission would then craft a charter to be put before the voters of both governments. Both City and County residents must approve the measure for it to take effect. The makeup of the potential “Charter Commission” is really important. Appointing the usual suspects is going to be a non-starter. Both the City Council and County Commission need to look outside themselves, and the revolving door of people appointed to public boards and commissions to ensure that a wealth of ideas and experience is represented on the Commission. Further, both legislative bodies in Shelby Co. need to distance themselves from the process to ensure that no charges of “power consolidation” can be levied against them. Once the Charter Commission is empanelled there are a lot of issues to deal with, in addition to the more basic problem of actually writing the Charter. Here are a few ideas that I support: - Council districts that respect traditional neighborhoods/areas and are more representative than current or future State House Districts, along with a methodology to address population growth/contraction in the area. - Direct oversight and supervision of any county executive that would emerge from the charter process. - Sensible and comprehensive ethics rules that are easy for laymen to understand. - Recall authority and citizen driven ballot initiatives. - A straightforward line of succession for the executive, and the replacement of resigning council members. - Easy and clear transparency of all government agencies, including the council, for citizen oversight. Of course, there are all kinds of additional issues that will arise in the process. The key is that the process is open, transparent, and the result of a conversation with constituents, rather than trying to force a solution down the throats of voters, which is one of the greatest fears of most county residents. Having a direct say, and knowing what the eventual governing body will look like may go a long way to addressing those concerns and quelling those fears. This whole discussion needs to be focused on building something new. Even though past discussions of creating a Metro government have largely been focused on making something new, simply using the word, “consolidation” illicits feelings of losing our already tenuous grasp on local control. No one is going to support that. At the end of the day, there needs to be a good faith effort to address the concerns of County and City residents, and a well organized campaign to educate the public on the eventual proposal, both as it is being crafted, and once it emerges from the Charter Commission. Memphis Tomorrow, an organization whose mission is …to bring top business leaders together with government and civic leaders to foster economic prosperity for all who live in our community. has started a site dedicated to the discussion of building a Metro government in Shelby Co. called Reinvent Government. While this is a step in the right direction to foster engagement in the community, any effective effort will have to be supported by people who have a history of being arbiters of good faith, both in their neighborhoods, and the county at large. A “grass tops” push by politicians and business leaders alone will not do. The conversation has started. The landscape of any proposed charter change, and the comprehensiveness of the eventual proposal largely depends on how engaged and involved people throughout Shelby Co. choose to be. If the people don’t get involved, we’ll keep getting what we’ve been getting and fighting the same old fights that have hamstrung our community for decades. If we do get involved, we might just end up with something pretty special, a government that we helped create, that is directly responsible to us, and that holds power at the will of a diverse, but unified group of people. Yes, I’m against Consolidation. I’m against taking a duck and a beaver and putting them together to try and make a platypus, but I’m not against starting from scratch. Wiping away the power structures that have hamstrung our community, and building new systems from the ground up, to serve the will of the people. That sounds like a Revolution to me. A revolution is something sorely needed in Shelby Co.

What Happens When the Soldiers Still Want to Fight the War?

Steve Ross — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:56:16 +0000

This is the news report that broke yesterday regarding the “brokered” deal between several of the state’s elected officials and the TNDP Chair, Chip Forrester. Some have claimed that this makes Forrester a figurehead. In yesterday’s conference call, Forrester indicated that the arrangement is not substantially different from last year’s situation. The difference is that now the party is more focused than last year on grass roots organizing. I’m still waiting on a real live press release detailing the arrangement before I pass judgment. Really, it’s kind of interesting. I had a post ready that detailed the good things that have come, or are coming from the TNDP leadership in the past 3 months. This revelation (I had heard there was a “truce” coming, this was not what I was expecting, nor what I would call a “truce”) kind of threw a monkey wrench into that post. Now that I’ve had time to sleep on it, I think we should acknowledge the positive steps and the challenges going forward, so here goes. First with the pluses: 1. Communications – This is simple, in 3 months I’ve received more press releases, emails and information from the TNDP that I had in the previous 4 years. Aside from losing, that was one of the biggest complaints coming into the Chair’s election. I’m glad this is fixed. 2. Web Site – The new web site is more than I expected. The ability of people to organize themselves online, to form groups, to form alliances despite living on opposite sides of the state, is a pretty big damn deal. This thing is only going to evolve more as time goes on. 3. Training – The upcoming Summit at Monteagle shows a dedication to training future ground troops to support the party and candidates. This is a HUGE deal for Tennessee. We need more people that are trained volunteers. Further, programs like this allow people to take the knowledge back home with them, and train up even more people. There’s a viral element to it that, if harnessed correctly, can be awesome. 4. Access – Forrester is the first chair to recognize that progressive bloggers can be your best friend, your worst enemy, and sometimes both. The outreach to people all over the state, keeping us informed when he can, and treating us as stakeholders in the process, is potentially transformational. We’re an unwieldy group, to be sure, but God knows that we’re not going away any time soon. Working with us is far better than ignoring us. He’s taken more steps in that direction than any member of the Tennessee Democratic establishment, ever. Of course, not everything has been a bed of roses. There have been some mistakes, errors of omission, and a few outfight fuck ups. 1. Messaging - Newscoma has a good post up about this. The TNDP hasn’t managed the news cycle very well. Yesterday’s response to the AP report referenced above is a prime example. This particular instance may have more to do with the actual terms of the agreement, but the silence until 4:30 PM yesterday was deafening. Currently the TNDP is looking for a Communications Director. The addition of someone whose sole responsibility is dealing with the media/bloggers/messaging will make it more likely that these uncomfortable silences happen less. Hopefully, someone will be in place soon. 2. Fundraising – I think just about everyone, with the possible exception of Norm Coleman and Al Franken, who are still engaged in a court battle for the MN-Sen. race, has seen a great deal of weakness in fundraising this year. It’s hard to get people to give money when they’re worried about their economic future. That said, there haven’t been that many public requests for funds from the Chair. Sure, he’s making phone calls to donors, but one of the things that the DNC and the Obama campaign mastered was the ask. Every single communication involved an ask, and it worked. This may not bring in big lump sums of money, but if you don’t ask, you don’t get. Something is better than nothing. 3. Owning it – From achievements and enhancements to fuck ups and foibles, one of the most irritating things that the TNDP has been struggling with is publicly owning all of it. The mistakes need to be acknowledged publicly and promptly so that the news cycle moves beyond them more quickly. The achievements need to be included, in some way, in every official communication to the public. This reinforces the good and minimizes the bad, while not totally dismissing either. It’s putting your best foot forward, even when a mistake is made, to own everything you do. Lots of folks think that only talking about the good stuff is the way to improve your image. I believe that if you own all of everything you do out in public, you do a lot more to improve both the public perception, and the credibility of your reports. There are a lot of good things that can happen with all this. Building a grass roots network is an investment in Democratic candidates that will pay off not only tomorrow, but also 20 years from now. If successful, these people can be an invaluable resource in the run up to next year’s election. On the down side, the folks at the TNDP are sorely understaffed, due in large part to the financial position that the party was in after last year’s election and fundraising challenges that have been a reality for both parties over the past few months. Hopefully the plan that emerged yesterday will allow the TNDP to focus on the grass roots and have to worry less about raising scads of cash. In the end, I know there are a lot of people who feel put off after three months, but think about the volunteers who have been living it. They still get up every morning and bust their asses, regardless of what the detractors say. I understand that the pissing contest directed at the chair has been disheartening, but nobody said politics was pretty. I see why this feels like surrender to some, but are we going to win back the House with one faction working to undermine the other? Think of the alternative. I don’t want to live through 20 years of Republican rule of the legislature, that’s for sure. It may still happen, but we have to do everything in our power to prevent it. Ultimately, that’s all I can think about right now. So if the War of the Roses is over, let’s stop worrying about who won and get to work. 2010 is right around the corner. We don’t have any time to waste.

DFA Training Memphis and Beyond

Steve Ross — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:30:17 +0000

I just finished training with Democracy for America here in Memphis. It was an awesome experience. I encourage everyone, if you want to work or volunteer on a campaign, or even if you’re just a political junkie like me to go to the training. The insight itself is instructive. A lot of those things that you bitch about that politicians do, are explained in these trainings (through examples), even though that’s not the focus. In fact, there’s as much information to be learned about why people do what they do from this training than I can explain in my current mushy headed state. It was awesome. I want to remind readers that training in similar subjects will be offered at the TNDP Summit in Monteagle this coming weekend. Guys, this has been one of the most satisfying weekends in this political junkie’s recent memory. I thank Brad Watkins for bringing them back to the area. There were attendees from Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi, and even Texas at this training. It's worth the drive from Texas folks, you missed out! The next DFA trainings in the area are Shreveport, LA and Birmingham, AL in June. Go to Democracy for America for more information.

Newsgasm

Steve Ross — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:16:25 +0000

The past week has been a cornucopia of news stories, locally, statewide, and nationally. Here’s a short rundown… Last Tuesday, Memphis Mayor Willie Herenton announced he was exploring a run of the 9th District seat currently held by Steve Cohen. The poll released last night (full results here) has been derided by local blogger ThaMATT who, it seems, has no understanding of how polling works. We’re a long way off from the primary. With these two, anything could happen. Herenton could get indicted, Cohen could show his personal knowledge of movies from the 80’s. Anything’s possible. Yesterday also brought us the Snarlin’ Arlen Specter switch. I got 10 calls and 20 emails in a 5-minute period after this broke. I suppose I’m ought to be excited about this, but I’m not. Arlen is just trying to keep his seat, something politicians do no matter how long they’ve been in, and realizes the political calculus that’s in front of him…he can win a general, but not a primary. Specter’s Progressive Punch score may put him at the top of the heap among the Republicans, but when you’re to the right of Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson, I have to hold my nose to call you a Democrat. While it may be nice to have a possible filibuster proof majority in the Senate once Franken is seated, my lack of enthusiasm on this development is right up there with writing a check to the Treasury in the midst of a budget surpluss. Further, this stops the party from running a stronger Democratic voice in that race, which means we gave up a long term opportunity for a short term gain. Awesome. Today marks Obama’s 100th day in office. I find benchmarks like this tiresome, but apparently they’re going to play along. All day the gas bags will be talking about all that has, hasn’t and won’t materialize in his first term, as if the first 100 days are a coffin that somehow encompasses everything that is possible for the next 1361 days. Blech. Save it folks. You’re wasting air I might need later. Finally, I just want to know who wrote this headline. Whoever it is over there at the CA is entitled to a free drink at their leisure. Despite the unfortunate nature of the story, the headline made me giggle and holler. All right folks, Let’s be careful out there.

TNDP.org Membership Update

Steve Ross — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:58:07 +0000

Here are the TNDP.org membership stats for this week... Total Members - 617 Davidson - 136 - 22% Knox - 82 - 13% Shelby - 43 - 7% Rutherford - 30 - 5% Hamilton - 24 - 4% Shelby Co. people, you're really disappointing me. Since my last update TNDP.org has added 85 members, 8 of which are from Shelby Co. I know we have more people than that. Heck, the SCDP Executive Committee is some 83 members! Further, where are all our state Executive Committee members? So far, I only see two. Sign up and show your support! Just takes a second, and I promise it won't hurt a bit!

TNDP Summit Wrap-Up

Steve Ross — Mon, 04 May 2009 14:34:51 +0000

I just got home from the TNDP Summit in Monteagle, and I have to say, I’m completely blown away. I’ve been to my fair share of political events but this was something completely different. I don’t think I’ve ever left a state or local political function of any sort with the feeling hope in my heart and fire in my belly that I’m feeling right now. This wasn’t just some kumbaya moment, though there were some elements of that. This was more a tent revival, a call to action than anything else. What follows are some of my general impressions of the events of the weekend. If the TNDP releases video of the events, I’ll link it and discuss the events of the weekend in more detail. Saturday morning started off with comments from TNDP Chair, Chip Forrester, Representative Bill Harmon, whose district includes Monteagle, and Representative Mike Stewart. These three really helped set the tone for the weekend, focusing on unity and the task we have ahead of us, not only in the coming 2010 election, but for the years that follow in helping build a better Tennessee. From there, we had a panel discussion entitled “What Unites Us as Democrats”. This is where the rubber started meeting the road. Moderated by Representative Gary Odom, the panel included politicians and activists from across the state. It was interesting to hear all these people, from liberal to more conservative positions, talk about the ideas that unite us, and it was a good segue into the next panel, which was a bit more contentious. Rep. Mike Turner moderated the “Winning & Protecting Seats in Rural Tennessee” panel. Featuring Rep. Ty Cobb, Rep. Charles Curtis, and several political consultants, this panel sought to take what unifies us, and parlay that into a larger discussion about using those unifying themes, rather than some of the more contentious issues, to win in rural Tennessee. All the panel members made some interesting points, but the two who carried the day were Rep. Curtis and Rep. Turner. As questions came in, there was a great deal of concern from several in the audience about specific hot button issues. This could have turned into an ugly discussion, but Turner and Curtis deftly turned it around into a conversation that focused on unity rather than division. Democrats here in Tennessee are a diverse bunch. There are rural and urban, conservative and liberal members from all across the state, but when it comes right down to it, there is a unifying theme between all of us. It’s easy to point out divisions and forget what we have in common, but it’s often harder, in the face of some hot button issues, to recognize that which we agree on. More than anything else, this session helped highlight these commonalities, and helped me better understand the realities that many of us in more urban environments often forget. It was also a great set-up for the events of the day that would follow. Our lunch speaker was Blue Dixie author, political coorespondent for the Nation, and editor of the Texas Observer, Bob Moser. I read his book back in January on a whim. Published just a few months before the November election, Blue Dixie does some in-depth analysis about the events that led up to a localized Democratic resurgence in the rural south in 2006, and strategies that will help bring that to other areas. Perhaps the two best messages that I gathered from the book, and the discussion were 1. Thomas Schaller, author of Whistling Past Dixie, is full of shit and should be ignored, and 2. The only people who can turn the south blue, are southerners who come together under a common purpose and maintain a constant effort to build their communities and relationships. If you’re a Democrat, and you live in the south, you HAVE to read Blue Dixie. One of the main focuses of the TNDP Summit was training. Over the course of the weekend there were several opportunities to learn new strategies and tacics. I wasn’t able to make it to all the trainings, but as a recent participant in the DFA Campaign Academy I know this can be some eye opening information that is key to building a strong statewide organization. Saturday wrapped up with some bluegrass and BBQ with speeches by gubernatorial candidate Kim McMillan who had a prior commitment for the following day’s candidate panel, and Representative Lincoln Davis. I have to admit, I was skeptical. I’ve been hard on Rep. Davis here in this space over the past several years, and I have no doubt that he and I will disagree again on issues in the future. But if there was ever any doubt that Lincoln Davis is a Democrat, it was dispelled on Saturday night. Davis, who didn’t attend the events earlier in the day (to the best of my knowledge) delivered a barn burner of a speech that further highlighted the “85% of issues”, as Rep. Mike Turner later stated (I would put it closer to 90%) that unite us a Democrats. I really hope that the TNDP will put video of this speech up on their site because you have to hear it to believe it. Powerful, informative, Davis brought out the commonalities of Democrats and the differences between the Republican’s “Party of no” and the Democrats “Party of know”. I couldn’t possibly distill the entirety of the message here, but I came away both impressed and fired up. It was the perfect ending to a perfect day. Sunday started with a prayer breakfast led by State Senator Roy Herron and State Rep. Johnny Shaw. This led into a Gubernatorial forum with Sen. Herron and Ward Cammack (McMillan and McWherter had prior commitments). Despite the absence of two of the announced candidates, it was great to hear these two speak about their visions for the state. Truth be told, the differences between the two were very nuanced. A one hour forum is also a very short period of time to acquaint yourself with their positions, but it was good to hear from the candidates on the issues this early in the process. I hope that all the candidates can work together to do these kinds of forums across the state as the campaign heats up in the coming months. The last speaker for the even was Alex Lofton, Field Organizer for Organizing for America, a grassroots organization that sprung from the Obama campaign. Lofton freely admitted that Tennessee was not a focus of the Obama campaign, but also noted that Organizing for America is an effort to maintain the momentum gained, and spread that momentum throughout the areas that the campaign was unable to reach. In all honesty, this sounded like the next logical extension of former DNC Chair Howard Dean’s 50 state strategy, which has often been passed over as one of the key strategies that led to the legislative gains in 2006 and 2008, as well as the success of the Obama campaign. In all, I don’t think this event could have been timelier or more appropriate for Tennessee Democrats. Everyone I talked to left with a higher sense of purpose, and a feeling of hope and activation that I have not seen since I moved here in 2004. Over the course of the weekend over 300 Democrats came together to work for a better future for Tennessee. That’s ultimately what this was about, and I firmly believe that this will happen in the 2010 election. Kudos to TNDP Chair Chip Forrester, the TNDP volunteers who organized the event, the sponsors including SEIU local 205, Tennessee House Democratic Caucus, Ward Cammack, Roy Herron, Jim Kyle and LeQuire Gallery, and most importantly, the 300+ people from all over the state who took time out to learn, fellowship, and come together this weekend. Hopefully, we can do this again soon…and maybe a little closer to Memphis.

Shelby Co. Non-Discrimination Order

Steve Ross — Tue, 05 May 2009 14:36:14 +0000

Tomorrow is going to be a busy day for activists seeking equal protection for people in the GLBT community. In Nashville, HB 0335 sponsored by Jeanne Richardson of Memphisis before the House Judiciary Committee, but there’s also something going on right here in Shelby County. County Commissioner Steve Mulroy has introduced a non-discrimination ordinance. Tomorrow is the first reading of the ordinance. You can read the ordinance here, but essentially the measure provides protections against discrimination for people based on their sexual orientation/gender identity in the County government, by contractors for the county government, and by private employers in the unincorporated areas of Shelby Co. This ordinance is scheduled to be read for the first time tomorrow. It will have to be read 6 times, 3 in the General Government Committee and 3 in front of the entire County Commission. Contact your County Commissioners at (901) 545-4301 or via email below, and show your support for this ordinance. Commissioner Deidre Malone   Commissioner Joyce Avery Commissioner Mike Ritz Commissioner George S. Flinn, Jr. Commissioner Mike Carpenter Commissioner J. W. Gibson, II Commissioner Henri E. Brooks Commissioner James M. Harvey Commissioner Sidney Chism Commissioner Joe S. Ford Commissioner Wyatt Bunker Commissioner Matt Kuhn Commissioner Steve Mulroy Also check out this post at Grand Divisions for more details.

Big Shelby Leads Charge in a Declining Western Division

Steve Ross — Thu, 07 May 2009 17:50:20 +0000

Tennessee is growing. According to US Census estimates Tennessee has added some 525,614 people since the census in 2000. In that time, the Eastern and Middle Divisions, as defined by TN Code 4-1-202 through 204 have seen their population increase by nearly 500,000. The Western Division, by contrast, has only added 30,000 people. The Western Division suffers from some issues that have contributed to this poor population performance. First, the W. Division has fewer counties (21) that are far more rural than the other two divisions. The W. Division has only 1 of the 10 largest counties in Tennessee…Shelby. Only Shelby, Madison, Tipton and Gibson have populations over or near 50,000. By contrast, Middle TN has 8 Counties with populations greater than 50,000, and East TN has 15. According to these estimates, Shelby County has only grown by just over 9000 people since 2000. Davidson, Rutherford, and Williamson in Middle TN have grown by over 150,000 total in the same time period. Knox, Hamilton, Blount and Sevier in the East have grown by around 100,000. Where have all the West Tennessee people gone? 10 counties in West TN have seen population declines since 2000 for a total of 6500 fewer people. Tipton and Fayette, the two counties surrounding Shelby have seen a growth of almost 16000 people. Many of these new residents are likely from Shelby Co., creating a growth neutral situation. DeSoto Co., MS has seen growth of some 50,000 since 2000, the vast majority of these people have moved from Shelby Co. Under these circumstances, the growth that Shelby County “feels” in terms of infrastructure use is not realized in the tax base, or the population leading to a net negative growth as a percentage of the entire state’s population of 1.8% division wide. With redistricting coming up in 2010, the Western Division stands to lose as many as 3 Representative and 1 Senator, if these numbers hold true, to the quickly expanding Middle. This is bad news for as many as 4 elected officials as well as the people of the Western Division, but at this point, there’s not much that can be done by 2010. The closure of several manufacturing plants in NW TN, and the general absence of economic diversity in rural counties is partially to blame for this decline, but the majority of the cause is right here in Shelby Co. High crime, low graduation rates, rampant poverty, and a reliance on existing employers to “grow our way” out of the problem have hampered Shelby’s growth, sending more and more people to N. Mississippi, which has almost tripled in population since 1990. Mayor Herenton’s famous declaration calling on people to “leave” rather than addressing the problems of the City can’t have helped the situation. On the flip side, nearly all of the new employers to the state in the past several years have taken residence in the Eastern and Middle divisions. This helps explain their growth as much as our inability to maintain our percentage of the statewide population. In the end, while this is an ugly scenario, this is the reality that we’re facing in two years, assuming that the numbers hold true. For Democrats, it gives us one more motivating factor for taking back the House in 2010, to keep Republicans from exploiting these statewide demographic shifts in redistricting. For the Western Division, it further illustrates the need for us to demand better from our elected representatives in state, county, and city government. We have a lot to address, and it can’t all be done by 2010, but it’s important for the 21 counties here in the West not fall so far behind that we become an economically depressed area of Tennessee. We have a great deal to offer, but we also have to stop being our own worst enemies, and work together to raise the standard of living for all West Tennesseans. It’s a tough row to hoe, but inaction is not an option.

Un-posted Posts and Other Scraps From the Memory Hole

Steve Ross — Tue, 19 May 2009 03:03:25 +0000

Most of y’all don’t know much about me because I don’t like writing about myself. You may have some idea what I do, or that I travel or that I work in the event industry, but you don’t really know that much about me. I’ve gone to considerable lengths to stop myself from writing about myself because I find it somewhat masturbatory. Maybe that’s good, maybe it’s bad, maybe it doesn’t matter, but I’m breaking that rule right now. When life gets complicated, different people do different things. Some go outside themselves and deal with it/avoid it that way, others keep it close to their vest and hope it goes away, still others damn near disappear until the coast is clear. I’m not sure which, or which combination of categories I’m falling into right now, but my world has become increasingly more complicated over the past several months, and even though I knew some of it was coming and tried to prepare, I find myself in the uncomfortable position of being uniquely unprepared to deal with much of what’s been thrown at me. It probably all started long before last July, but that’s the closest thing to a beginning to all that’s going on that I can identify. Around that time I made a conscious choice to work myself as much as I could. It was relatively evident by then that things in the financial world were taking a turn for the worst, even though the worst had yet to come. Fortunately, partially because of the industry I work in and partially due to dumb luck, I was able to work pretty much straight through until the beginning of April. In that time I was able to bank a pretty good nest egg. The unfortunate consequence of doing what I do is that working that much pretty well keeps me out of town for the bulk of the time. This isn’t a big deal if you’re single, but as I have experienced time and time again in the decade I’ve been in this business, you can’t do that for too long and have much of anything to come home to. Folks in my business try to rationalize this with declarations about money or this or that, but the truth is, at some point you will make the choice between being with your friends and family, or being gone. That’s what it comes down to. You don’t have to take every gig, and up until the middle of last year, I didn’t, preferring to spend time at home to have a life. I wasn’t getting rich, but I was, by and large, happy and able to do just about everything I wanted to this side of buying a tropical island. The issue comes when you set up this “normal” of working a little more than enough to get by, and then flip everything around. Most of the time it’s not what people signed up for. Most of the time, even though you have common goals and wishes and hopes and dreams, those things are less important than the time you can spend with the people you care about. Nearly all of the time, when you make that conscious choice of far-away work over loved ones, you set yourself up for two things; 1. That you also unintentionally neglect them when you’re home even though you’re not trying to, and 2. That they’ll stop seeing the long-term benefit of the arrangement. The worst thing that happens more often than not is that path becomes the excuse to not deal with things that ought to be dealt with. So, back in March, after traveling for the majority of the previous 9 months, StacyMac and I broke up after over 5 years together. No one’s mad at anyone as far as I can tell. There was no major drama or cussing or fighting or any of that. We just parted ways. She’s still my friend, and I’m still hers. Sure things are weird. You can’t spend 5 years of your life with someone and then just turn off a switch like it never happened. You can’t always stop yourself from reverting to long held behavior sometimes, which can also sometimes be awkward since things are different, but you have to find a way to make things feel normal and make sure that you do everything you can to respect the friendship that was an integral part of the overall relationship. That doesn’t make it easy either. See breaking up with someone, middle finger held high and with a litany of expletives is actually pretty easy. Any jackass can do that. Breaking up, but making a conscious decision to respect the friendship is hard. It’s harder when you haven’t quite reconciled your feelings about the way things turned out. But I’ve been through enough of those explicative laden endings, and quite frankly, as “easy” as they are, they don’t solve much or make you any better, so as uncomfortable as it all is, I’m damn sure going to make sure the friendship works, even if the relationship didn’t. So now I’m here at home after the last show I have for almost 6 weeks, which means I’m functionally unemployed, thinking about just what the hell it is that I want to do with my life. I think when you lose a “constant” you HAVE to take time to reflect, to reconsider. I’ve spent the majority of my off time the past several weeks, when I wasn’t just sitting there being depressed, reconsidering myself, who I am, where and what I want to be, and it’s not all black and white and easy to figure out. I love what I do, but I want to either do it closer to home more often or think about doing something else to fill the gaps. Part of this is by necessity. The business is getting tighter now, a result of the 6-8 month lag that IS the industry. People are trying to negotiate on rate (for the first time in my 4 years freelancing which either means I am underpriced, or everything’s about to go to serious shit), which actually just degrades EVERYTHING and EVERYONE in the industry. But cash flow is cash flow. I can probably limp through the summer until things maybe get better and hope for the best, but it might end up like the 8 months after 9/11 where my income dropped by 60%, and that bugs the shit out of me. Some of my friends in the industry are taking on day jobs, and trying to work in theater at night. That works in larger or more robust markets, but I’ve been out of theater for 12 years now and I’m not in any hurry to go back. Doing sports production is an option, but until football and basketball season starts back up, there’s really not so much out there for a guy that’s not been working that segment of the industry. Sure, all the gear is close to the same as what I deal with now, and a “show” is a “show”, but this is a people business and if you don’t know the right people, and have their confidence, getting hired is harder than you think, and there’s always the “who am I replacing/displacing” factor that bugs the shit outta me. Then there’s other stuff. This is where it gets really limited. I didn’t finish college, and it’s been 16 years since I quit, and while I’ve batted the idea of going back to school around, I’d basically be starting from scratch, because I sure as hell ain’t majoring in Music, like I was 16 years ago. The biggest problem is, all the things I’m interested in aren’t big time demand/money makers either, and would likely have me in an office environment, which is kinda like caging a rabid possum on meth and poking it with a sharp stick. My “last hope” options are even worse. Now that you can’t say “hobo” anymore, and being a “hobo” isn’t nearly as appealing as it was made out to be in old school country music, one of my childhood fantasies is probably a no go. I’m no longer athletic unless there is a 12oz curl contest somewhere, and even then, I’ve lost my edge. I’m an all right cook, but cooking is one of those things I like to do when I want to do it. Cooking all the time would be dangerous to other people, knives and all. But I have this blog and I have 20 years of paying A LOT of attention to politics, process and policy. I don’t know how much this means because there are a million other people who have more hands on experience than I do that are in a similar position. And who the hell do I think I am anyway? I don’t think I get anything any more right or wrong than anyone else, and from looking at my traffic, it wouldn’t matter much if I did, but I’m passionate to a fault, and bang out these 2000 word screeds with some irregular regularity. Maybe they have some impact, maybe they don’t. I don’t know. I know I have the ability to piss everyone off all at once, a talent that has only served to allow all the factions that I deal with to both distrust me, use my name in vain, and at the same time, lobby me on their behalf. What a country! One thing I do know that this post has been keeping me from posting about anything else, and it’s been driving me crazy, so I better get it done so I can get past it. The point is that there’s a lot of transition going on here, and just like any transition, it can be hopeful and daunting at the same time. So bear with me while I get my bearings again. Hopefully, before too long I’ll be pissing everyone off at once with little effort again. Maybe I’m already hard at it…

It's Time for Action - Part 1

Steve Ross — Thu, 21 May 2009 01:11:22 +0000

(Ed. Note: This is part one of a three part post concerning recent developments in the legislature and potential actions that can be taken in the future to keep them from happening again. Guns, Guns everywhere or Are We Still Barbarians? Are we any more civilized than we ever were? I mean sure, we’re not living in an ancient age of Kings claiming to have their “God” on speed dial or anything (right?), and no one in the US is getting invaded by the village or city-state next door (except DeSoto Co.), but have we really changed all that much emotionally and intellectually since those times? The obvious answer is yes, we have modern democratic institutions, and live in well constructed houses that are the result of thousands of years of engineering knowledge, and work in offices and factories and farms and other businesses that are highly mechanized to make the jobs less unbearable, and have all kinds of technology that helps us live longer, more productive lives…but really, are we all that different? I mean, we have different stuff, and that stuff is, arguably, way cooler than the old stuff and helps us get more stuff done faster, but has the change in civilization only been about stuff or is there something deeper? The question probably sounds pretty stupid really, I mean, could anyone rationally say that we’re as barbaric as the fabled empires of yore? Just look at the differences of modern warfare. Wars that once cost hundreds of thousands of lives, perhaps millions, are now executed with pinpoint precision, and when targeted correctly, spare the lives of most of those in the general vicinity (right?). So perhaps we value human life more than we once did. Perhaps that is our crowning achievement. Or perhaps, we just have more stuff to do things in ways that we didn’t before, and the sparing of human life is more of political necessity thanks to the speed and impact of information dissemination than any great awakening of the human mind. Maybe I’m just being pessimistic, or maybe there’s something to what I’m saying. I’m not honestly suggesting that while civilization has grown, our ability to be civilized has become stagnant. It is, however, interesting to me that with each small step forward we take as a society there is pushback from those who wistfully yearn for the more barbaric days of yore, where the men were men, the women were women, only the bad guys died in gunfights at the end of the movie and the good guy rode off into the sunset with the girl. I mean, we all recognize that this is fantasy right? That world didn’t really exist. Just like Greek mythology is fables, and all, right? That said, I’m mystified by the misty eyed apologists for SJR127, the guns in everywhere bills, the possible dismantling of the Ethics Commission, and I’m sure I’ve missed something because I haven’t mentioned either of the Stuntbabies yet. All of these things are throwbacks to our fabled barbarian past. If someone pulls a gun on you, and starts shooting, how likely is it that you can duck for cover, draw your weapon, and return fire without endangering the lives of others in the vicinity? Seriously, how likely is it that the adrenaline will take over and you will not only miss your target, but also hit an innocent bystander? Think about the number of rounds found at many murder scenes involving firearms. For that matter, think about the number of rounds shot in a typical gunfight in a movie. What is the typical round to bullet wound ratio in either of these scenarios? How many rounds not only miss their targets, but carry on to inflict a wound on an innocent bystander? It’s not like they stop when they miss, right? I mean honestly, handguns, while convenient, are dreadfully inaccurate. Because of the short barrels, a fraction of a degree is likely the difference between hitting and missing your target at ranges of over 30 feet. While the average person may believe they have the intestinal fortitude, resolve, and accuracy of Dirty Harry, the truth of the matter is that rarely is anyone given the time to line up a shot that even remotely resembles his iconic, “do you feel lucky, punk”, moments. It just doesn’t happen, and if it does, and the trigger is pulled, it’s more likely that you just shot someone who was out of bullets…effectively disarmed. I’m not suggesting that people who own firearms are somehow uncivilized, or barbaric, quite the contrary. I’m a strong supporter of 2nd amendment rights and feel that gun ownership, while a huge responsibility, is a right provided by the Constitution. I don’t think people NEED AK-47’s or anything like that, and they sure as hell don’t NEED automatics, but who am I to tell someone what kind of gun they go hunting with, as long as they’re hunting for something other than people. Further, I’ve been to many shooting ranges in my time, and have enjoyed renting and shooting “assault style” rifles. It’s a thrill, no doubt about it. The problem for me comes not in the gun ownership, but the rationalization for unfettered carriage. But thinking about the scenario above, what likelihood of survival does carrying a firearm into a restaurant actually give you? Does it give you any, or does it give you a false sense of security wrapped in the fables of a thousand western movies? Truth is you are no safer with a firearm than without, anywhere, and in some cases, actually more likely to either be fired upon or killed with your own gun. Carrying a firearm, particularly a concealed one, is not any more a deterrent than allowing the death penalty in murder cases deters people intent on committing murder, or long jail sentences deters people from smoking marijuana. In fact, it’s probably less. Vigilante justice is no substitute for the justice system that we’ve spent the past 200+ years building, if anything it weakens it. We are not barbarians, in fact we’ve come a long way, and while there are people who commit barbaric acts in our society, we cannot act like returning the favor is justice. Justice is making them accountable to society through the justice system. Expanding the number of places that concealed weapons may be carried is not safety, it’s false security wrapped in mythology. All too soon, that mythology is going to backfire. Next up, SJR127 and the anti-choice crowd

It's Time for Action - Part 2

Steve Ross — Thu, 21 May 2009 03:17:17 +0000

Fighting What the Fight is Really About or The Barbarism of Subterfuge This is part 2 of a 3 part post. Part 1 can be found here What about SJR127? The truth is, SJR127 is a Trojan horse, being rolled into the state constitution that would allow the state to make a determination on your right to privacy. Despite the emotionally charged debate that’s been going on since long before Roe Vs. Wade, a right to privacy, not abortion, is the foundation upon which that case was decided. Supporters of SJR127 want to limit your right to privacy, whether they realize it or not. That’s right, one of the cornerstones of the conservative movement, a movement grounded in the idea of personal liberty and responsibility supports legislation that, once enacted, would limit your right to privacy, thus infringing on your liberty. Ironic isn’t it? Liberty is defined as …the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.While the purest ideas of liberty may not be possible in a world of societal norms, due process, …the principle that the government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law of the land… the idea that is the core of the Roe v. Wade decision, not just abortion, is the thing that will suffer under the implementation of this state constitutional amendment as well as availability of abortion, should it pass. For me, this whole thing is not about the emotional arguments fronted on the left or the right about “killing babies” or “choice”, it’s about whether or not “liberty” is truly endowed by our Creator, as set forth in the Declaration of Independence, the intellectual cornerstone of our Republic. The act of barbarism is the attack on one’s right to privacy in medical affairs, as determined by over 200 years of case law and the 14th Amendment. The act of barbarism is forcing someone to make a choice based one someone else’s perception of values, while clearly denying the right to privacy and due process based on a “feeling” of what should be done rather than reality. The truth is, most of the proponents of SJR127 are not as “Pro-Life” as they claim to be, they are anti-choice. They don’t want you to have any say in your life. They are less concerned about your liberty than their drive and desire to restrict it. They want to regulate your body, mind and spirit in a way that harkens back to “serfdom”, and SJR127 is a step in that direction. I can respect someone who is “Pro-Life” but also votes for legislation to help people through their struggles by supporting contraception, education, jobs and affordable healthcare, but the people that put SJR127 up aren’t those people. They don’t give a shit about you once your born, and if you have a problem, or are living in poverty, or don’t have access to education or employment opportunity, from their perspective, it’s probably something you did. We’ve got some time on this before it becomes law. If we want to defeat this, electing more Democrats may help, but the biggest thing we have to do is we have to get organized, which is the topic of the next post. Annoying aside…Finally, just a bit of reality on the emotional side of the issue. First, the notion that women use abortion as birth control is bullshit. I have several friends who, for one reason or another have had abortions. All of them carry the weight of the decision with them years beyond the actual procedure. These women didn’t have abortions because they didn’t want babies, but for a litany of reasons that are too numerous to name. Telling these women that their decision to terminate the pregnancy is a “second chance at birth control” or that they’re “baby killers” is vile disgusting horseshit, and the people who spout this filth should be ashamed. You can oppose abortion without engaging in this kind of over-the-top rhetoric, but I imagine that since you are left to rely solely on an emotionally explosive argument, then you have no logical argument to give. Further, if you want to reduce the number of abortions then support something other than tying off the tip and praying nothing slips through. Education, contraception, and readily available healthcare are all solutions to reducing abortion. Acting like sex shouldn’t happen except under certain circumstances is denial. Accept responsibility for your position and support programs to limit unwanted pregnancies instead of trying to apply some outmoded code on a group of people who do not share your views. You’ll win more people over that way, honest. Secondly, in February 2007 a child was born after just 22 weeks of gestation. This is almost exactly the mid point of the 2nd-trimester, or 8 weeks AFTER the first trimester (1st 14 weeks), which is the time frame in which an abortion, under normal circumstances may be performed. (Source) While it is a modern miracle that this child was able to live just barely halfway through the pregnancy, there is no indication that a younger fetus would be able to withstand the shock of such a procedure. Abortion is not murder because murder assumes that you are “alive”. Life is the the period between the birth and death of a living thing, esp. a human being. If you have not been born you cannot die, or be murdered, simple as that. The next post is the mother lode...time to organize folks.

It's Time for Action - Part 3

Steve Ross — Thu, 21 May 2009 11:25:31 +0000

This is part 3 of a three part post. Part 1 deals with gun issues, Part 2 deals with SJR127. This section is different. This section is about forcing accountability and ways to do that Accountability Defeats Barbarism or It's the Accountability, Stupid There is no accountability in barbarism, and if some had it their way, there would be little accountability in government. Accountability is where ideology falls apart. Both sides call for more “accountability” so long as it’s politically expedient for them, but neither REALLY deliver. Honestly, it’s the height of stupid how badly both sides sell but fail to deliver accountability. Maybe it’s because elected officials are just not gifted at coming up with ways to police things, or maybe, just maybe they’re relying on sleepy eyed constituents that are only really engaged in the process from the car to the ballot box, and “just can’t quit” their electeds no matter how bad they’re fucking it up. I’ll call it Brokeback politickin’. See, when the Democrats are in control of the legislature, the Republicans want things like Ethics Commissions and fundraising embargoes and accountability and all that because they know that if they can cast doubt, or if there’s something that gains attention (like Tennessee Waltz), their advocacy will score political points. When the tables get turned, they want to dismantle the very same thing they built because it costs too much or it’s too burdensome. Both sides try to avoid shit like this as a general rule because at some point, fate being what it is, they will be in power and thus subject to the rules as the party in power. There are, however, people on both sides that always support things like this. I love these people, regardless of party because they possess a dynamic moral compass (one that doesn’t exclusively point at “them” all the damn time). They understand democratic institutions need oversight in order to be effective, but most importantly, that they need that oversight for the people who are paying attention, and even those who aren’t, to have faith in them, which is vital for effective governance. So when Lt. Gov. Ramsey calls for the end of the fundraising embargo during the legislative session, or some drastic change to the Ethics Commission that he voted for, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand what’s at play in the political calculus. He can’t get elected Governor against a guy with as much money as oil in Saudi Arabia if he can’t raise money 24/7 and causing a dustup in the Ethics Commission or with TREF gives him some cover to do what he’s got to do to get the thing he wants to get. Of course, he could just as easily resign his seat in the Senate and raise all the damn money he could get his hands on, but then he would lose a powerful platform, and if he doesn't win, he's out of the game. It’ll be interesting to see if Democratic state legislators who are also running or considering a run for Governor get behind his effort. I love you guys, but don’t think I won’t call you out the same way. Now, I personally don’t see any real problem with legislators raising money when they’re in session, so long as there are strict guidelines and a well-funded agency with teeth that can enforce the guidelines. That’s not the issue. It becomes an issue when the self-interest is so BLATANT that it stinks to high heaven like a fish market on a hot summer afternoon. This is something you do RIGHT AFTER a campaign, not in the run up. But shitty accountability doesn’t just happen when pols are policing themselves. Does anyone believe that the mess we’re experiencing economically could have been averted had; 1. Rules not been taken out of play for regulators, & 2. Our former administration not yanked the teeth out of regulatory agencies praying that the tooth fairy (unregulated markets) would pay off? This is why legislators and Congress in general have shitty approval ratings, they just don’t get accountability. This is why people feel government is broken. In Monteagle, TN House caucus chair Mike Turner said , “Republicans get elected by claiming that government is broken then get elected and prove it!”. Now that’s a funny line, and was delivered with all the bravado that we’ve come to expect from Rep. Turner, but the truth is, Democrats break government too…like when they surrender their ideals to bullshit Republican ploys. But that’s just government accountability, not REAL accountability. After that stupid “Guns in Bars” bill passed, there was a lot of racket from restaurant owners who were PISSED OFF that their elected officials had not even bothered to consult them before voting (Newscoma touched on this last week). Now sure, you can’t get to every constituent, but word gets around, particularly in the restaurant industry (I mean, town crier anyone? sheesh), and had one of these fine fellows or fellettes (I think that means something else,) bothered to talk to a couple of people, word would have spread and letters and phone calls would have been made. Here’s a tip, if you’re waiting for your legislators to magically not be a douchebag, you’re going to be disappointed. I’m NOT SAYING THAT ALL LEGISLATORS ARE DOUCHEBAGS, many, even the ones that do stupid things from time to time aren’t. I’m saying that if you want to ensure that they don’t go down that dark path, you have to initiate contact. But one letter only goes so far. Truth is you’ll need to get a bunch of friends and colleagues to write also to make an impact. Once you’ve made that contact, expressed your opinion, if they still consistently do the wrong thing, vote their asses out of office, because crapping in a bag and leaving it on their front stoop is unseemly. But people, more often than not, are interested in playing the victim and not taking the bull by the horns, and politicians count on that which is why incumbents win like 95% of the time. Truth is, if you don’t think you can do anything then chances are you won’t. Politicians vote against their ideals from time to time because they aren’t provided the political cover, the vocal support they need to feel confident in their actions. Progressives, on a local and statewide level, consistently fail to gain the kind of change they want not necessarily because they elected the wrong person, but because they assumed that person would remember their agenda and failed to make that person do it after the election. Further, using our logic, "it’s the right thing to do, so why should there be any question?” we find ourselves mystified when our people vote in ways inconsistent with the values they espouse. Conservatives get this. They bang the hell out of their ideas EVERYWHERE, which partially explains all the whack job letters to the editor in the paper. Is it that they have too much time on their hands, or that they’re organized in a way that allows them to have more influence even though they might be fewer in number. (ie. more vocal). Elections aren’t the end of the process, they’re the beginning. In order to make the stuff happen that we want to happen we have to build and maintain an organization. We need to run a lobbying effort. I know that lobbyist is a dirty word and all, but not all lobbyists are fat cats making 7 figures, drinking brandy out of fancy glasses and chomping cigars. Some are workaday Joes that make money in politics advocating for one issue or another, and others are people like you and me. See, as constituents we have the right to “lobby” our elected officials for things, and we can do this in a variety of ways that don’t necessarily include hiring a former member of congress to go up to the hill and trade a vote based on the outcome of a game of racquetball. Unfortunately, you and I don’t have as much money as large corporations, so they get more expensive lobbyists. This just means we have to invest more sweat equity in our lobbying efforts or join organizations to pool our efforts. There are lots of organizations you can join that lobby on behalf of policy ideals, from more narrow issue groups (like ACLU and NOW) to broader ideological groups (like DFA or MoveOn), to even larger member organizations like unions or the Chamber of Commerce. This gets dicey though, because any jackass with $100 can sign up and join the US Chamber of Commerce, but if you want to join a union, one either has to exist, you have to start one, or you have to find a job at one that has one. This is why passing EFCA is so important, not only for the work benefits of joining a union (though those are important), but for the leveling of the playing field in the lobbying arena that comes with it (IMHO). Groups like the Chamber don’t want this to happen because it’s a threat to the entitlement system that they’ve created over the past 30 years. If anyone can join a union then anyone can get involved in the lobbying process working against their interests, and thus threaten their power. Lobbies like the US Chamber, who is singularly more responsible for the destruction of mom and pop businesses like mine as lead fluffer (NSFW) for companies like Wal-Mart have used their lobbying power to ensure everything from offshore loopholes for big business to anti-labor legislation that hinders the organizing process. If you ain’t a billion dollar company spread out all over the world, they ain’t your friends. But for $100 bucks you can join the USCOC if you like, and for a donation you can join DFA or MoveOn, but unless you work somewhere that has one, you can’t join a union. So why not just join MoveOn or DFA? You can, but understand that they are not focused on issues in the same way that the ACLU, NOW, USCOC and Labor are, and they’re practically nonexistent here in Tennessee. MoveOn and DFA are broadly ideologically based, ACLU and NOW are more ideologically focused on specific topics and have a greater presence and Labor is looking out for the interests of their members, even when it runs contrary to traditional ideological allies (think Labor v. Clinton on NAFTA). Let’s think about this locally and use SJR127 as an example. Did any group in the state start a statewide petition drive or a letter writing campaign around SJR127? Did they focus their efforts on contacting people in swing districts to write their legislators advocating a position (pro or con)? I can’t say for sure, but I’ll bet money that conservatives did, because they are passionate, focused and organized to do these things. Progressives here in Tennessee right now are just passionate. I saw NOTHING other than blog posts from the left that showed any focused or organized effort. If there was, I must have missed it. If we want to have an effect on the passage of legislation like SJR127, we have to be able to plop a sack of letters on Mike Turner’s (or any other legislator’s) desk from HIS constituents and say, “your voters want you to vote against this”. We have to have proof, and blog posts ain’t gonna cut it. In order to “Make them do it” have to focus and organize our passion. So, how do we do this? First, we identify allies. For the purposes of SJR127 that would be groups like NOW, Planned Parenthood, and probably several others. They have lists of supporters and donors, we have to help contact these groups to find out what actions (if any) they are engaged in to fight the legislation. From there, we as bloggers use our readership to promote the effort, and if we can clean the Cheetos off our shirts, get out there and do some boots on the ground work. Depending on the success of the effort, perhaps we can swing some votes our way. I don’t know what, if anything NOW in TN did in opposition to SJR127, but I DO KNOW that if we keep doing what we’ve always done, we’ll keep getting what we’ve always got. Writing blogs is cool, and definitely helps, but like the election, it’s the beginning of the process, not the end. The end is when we get what we want, and unless we start doing something different, it ain’t ever gonna happen. Several months ago someone told me to leave the politickin to the politicians and just write your blog and to donate money when you can. Well, maybe I haven't written enough, donated enough or wished upon a star enough, but being on the sidelines and just giving money to places ain't working for me. I'm ready for the next step. I've never been much of a volunteer, but now I think it's high time I started. I want to do all the shit that I’m scared of, phone banking, canvassing, you name it, I’m in. I want to see how this is done, and learn from the experience, and find ways to apply it on a broader scale. Most importantly, I want to have something to show for at the end of the day other than a bunch of words and angst. So that's where I'm at. I know where I'm volunteering, and in the next few days I'll write something about that effort once I become more familiar with the campaign, the strategy, and the tactics employed. In the end, if we want our elected officials to be accountable we have to make them BE accountable beyond the ballot box. Accountability is a full time job, but it's a job that voters have to take on. As we've seen over the course of this session, we can't sit on the sidelines and hope they'll do the right thing, we have to make it politically toxic for them to NOT do the right thing. Until that happens, nothing will change. Until that happens, all the emotion, words, and frustration we've seen is just wasted energy. If we want change we have to make it happen, and we have to start now.

One More Thing About SJR127

Steve Ross — Thu, 21 May 2009 13:50:06 +0000

I know I just posted about this yesterday as an issue, but as a matter of law SJR127 is not completely decided, it has merely jumped the first hurdle to being an amendment to the state constitution. According to the state constitution, in order for this to become an full fledged amendment, it must be voted on and passed two more times, once by a 2/3 vote of the House and Senate, then again by the majority of voters in the state.

and if in the general assembly then next chosen as aforesaid, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be agreed to by two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, then it shall be the duty of the general assembly to submit such proposed amendment or amendments to the people at the next general election in which a Governor is to be chosen. (Source)

So here is the challenge. Between now and 2011 we have to either flip, or put in place 3 Senators and 12 Representatives that will vote against this amendment, for it to fail which would prevent it from coming up for a popular vote in the 2014 general. That’s 18 months of organizing to flip electeds and 3 more years of organizing against final adoption or nearly 5 years of organizing against this thing. This IS NOT a call to start primary efforts against Democrats or any such nonsense. This is a call to communicate with these Democratic legislators and begin a lobbying effort to ensure they vote against this once it comes up again, and to look at Republican held districts that may be receptive to a strong Democratic challenger. We have to start somewhere, and this is the first step.

Feel Good Friday - February Stars

Steve Ross — Fri, 22 May 2009 11:24:52 +0000

Memorial Weekend Randomness

Steve Ross — Sat, 23 May 2009 00:51:14 +0000

I’ve had a lot of time to myself this week. After writing the epic trilogy that was both a labor of love, and a classic example of the OCD I suffer when writing and editing my political posts (4000 words took two whole days) I decided I needed to do some things around the house. I hate house chores. I just do, and even plugging in some music and just banging away at them is torture. But that’s just what I did, and it gave me some time to clear my head. For as long as I can remember, music has been a huge part of my life. I majored in it in college, even though I never finished, but since about 1989 I’ve had a pretty distinct soundtrack. Sure, I’ve picked up new music since then, but there are some constants that I’ve kept around and that remind me of different times and places. It’s been kinda cool. For me, long-term memories are usually associated with painful things. This week, while some of those came up, I found myself remembering the silly, funny, and interesting things that the music I’ve managed to keep around brings rushing back into the forefront of my mind. I’ve always been a sentimental fool. Not really sure why, I just am. Over the years I’ve tried to mask that sentimentality with a touch of gonzo unfiltered access to the very first thing that pops into my head, appropriate or not, to any willing, and some unwilling listeners. It’s a way to shield myself from the things in my head that often send me into a self-destructive, sad place, where nothing ever quite goes the way I want it to. I think everyone does this to a certain degree. We make these emotional walls to keep us safe from others, and more often, ourselves. We create these pre-programmed responses to situations that don’t require thought or reflection, and plow ahead with what has to be done by whenever or whatever. I don’t know if this is a good thing or a bad thing but I know that at a certain point, you start losing some of yourself to these programmed responses, and start turning into something you don’t even recognize. Sometimes, it’s good to just let the self-reflection wash over you and sweep you out wherever it takes you. I spend a lot of time thinking about stuff, though I don’t write about much of it. Most of the time it’s politics, but not always. Sometimes it’s just random things from my past, or loose plans for my future involving things I want to do, places I want to go, people I want to meet (usually not specific people, but something more like an archetype of people). I don’t know if my thoughts are evenly distributed between the past, the future and the now, but I would guess it’s more about now and tomorrow. The past is that past and it can’t be changed. Tomorrow can, and even though I get these pangs of past that wash over me, I keep looking for a better future, hoping that I can make some small impact before fate, or God, or whatever, takes me from this physical plane. But just because the past can’t be changed, doesn’t mean we can learn and grow from it. The past holds the culmination of all the spiritual and intellectual knowledge, we as a species have cobbled together. We wouldn’t be where we are if not for the past, and while the past holds a lot of pain, it also holds insights into the future for us as individuals, and as a species. Monday is Memorial Day, a holiday originally established here in the US to remember the Union soldiers who died in the Civil War. For as long as I can remember, the Memorial Day weekend has also been the unofficial beginning of summer. In Little Rock, where I spent my adolescence, Memorial Day weekend was celebrated at Riverfest, a 3 day festival that featured live music, and that I worked for several years before moving here to Memphis. Even though the closing concert had a patriotic medley by performed the ASO, and fireworks display, I never had much awareness of what Memorial Day was all about until sometime in my mid-twenties. It was at that time that people I knew from High School started coming home from their enlistments in the military to attend college. Some planned to go back after school and serve as an officer, some had other plans, but many of them had a different view of Memorial Day. Sure we had cookouts and parties and all that stuff over the weekend, but Memorial Day, Monday, was a time for them to give thanks to all that those who fought and died for our country. It was a time of celebration and reflection of the people who help us maintain this grand experiment we call a Republic. So as you celebrate Memorial Day this weekend, take a moment, after the coals have cooled on the grill, and the friends and neighbors have gone home, to reflect and give thanks for the unselfish sacrifice that so many have given over the years to help ensure that you have all the rights and liberties you have today. As General George S. Patton said, “It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived." Without them, America would be a very different place. Cheers, and have a great weekend.

Celebrating the Life of Martel Ross

Steve Ross — Thu, 28 May 2009 23:50:44 +0000

Yesterday, my family gathered to celebrate the life of my Grandmother, Martel Ross. She passed away on Saturday at age 88, after several years of declining health. This was the first time I remember seeing my brother, father, mother, aunts, uncles, cousins and their spouses in one place since 1989 when my parents divorced. My grandma was a very intelligent, opinionated, and vocal person, which explains a lot about me and the rest of my family. She was also one of the most loving and supportive people in my life, no matter how stupid or ill-advised the choices I made. Looking around the Fellowship Hall of the First United Methodist Church of Paragould, AR, yesterday afternoon, I saw my family together, being a family together, with all of the good and bad things that being a family entails. I saw the influence of my grandmother on the lives of these people who helped raise me, and who I grew up with, and it reminded me of what makes our family so special. We may be an odd collection of strong, mouthy, people, but when it comes right down to it, we love and support each other. That’s what family is all about. During the ceremony that followed, the pastor shared stories about my grandmother that had the entire family laughing. Grandma had an amazing command of the human condition, and all the things that go along with it. Most importantly, she wasn’t afraid to share her insights, and that is perhaps her greatest strength. After the ceremony, the remaining Rosses gathered to do what we always do when we’re together, eat and talk and laugh and love each other, even if we drive each other crazy sometimes. It reminded me of something I’ve forgotten over the years, something that can get lost in a tangled weave of the now, and all the things that seem to get in the way as we navigate our lives, and that is the importance of family. You can’t pick them and you only REALLY get one. I’ve forgotten this over the years and now have come to the realization of its importance, and impact in my life. Physical mortality may be a part of the human condition from which none of us can escape, but regardless of the foundations of faith upon which you are grounded, I think we can all agree that a part of immortality comes from the impact and influence you have in the lives of the people around you throughout your life that lives on long beyond your years. So while my grandmother may be gone physically, she lives on in the hearts and minds of both her family, and those who were lucky enough to have her in their lives. I love you Grandma. Thank you for all you gave, of your heart, mind, body and soul.

It’s About the Victims

Steve Ross — Fri, 29 May 2009 17:19:23 +0000

For weeks now we’ve been hearing about the city’s failure to maintain staffing and round the clock operations of the Memphis Sexual Assault Resource Center (MSARC). Wednesday, the Shelby County Commission moved a resolution out of committee that would allow the County Mayor to present a proposal to operate MSARC. The resolution was added on to the committee meeting Wednesday, and as of yet, has not been put on the online system. Hopefully the text will be available online in the coming days. While the possibility of the County assuming responsibility for MSARC has some promise, the reality for the victims of rape and other sexual assaults in the area is that they will not only have to suffer the consequences of a horrific crime committed against them, but they will also have to navigate a system that is broken. According to the 2008 preliminary FBI crime report Memphis had 210 reported rapes in 2007, and 201 in 2008. RAINN has some startling statistics about the reality of this crime. Only 60% of rapes are actually reported. If this statistic holds true here, the number of rapes in Memphis is somewhere near one a day. Considering that just 60% of rapes are actually reported, can you imagine how much the number of reported rapes could decline when victims, already suffering from severe emotional and physical trauma of the assault, are faced with the possibility of dealing with an agency that has been allowed to fall into disrepair? What are the long-term physical and emotional implications for the victims of this crime? What about the public safety element? If rapes aren’t reported the people who commit this crime cannot be held to account. This situation is devastating for a community that has, unfortunately, become accustomed to such failures from the City. In most instances, my first reaction to news of this nature would be to look to the responsible authority and demand accountability, but this is not about politics or politicians, it’s about taking care of the victims. If the City can’t or won’t fix the problem, then they need to cede control to a body that can and will. In the meantime, victims of sexual assault are left with a system that once was a model for care, but has become a victim of neglect. For more information also see this article from Sunday’s Commercial Appeal.

Either You Support Discrimination, or You Don’t

Steve Ross — Sat, 30 May 2009 17:39:28 +0000

Really, it’s that simple. Opponents of the proposed Shelby County Non-Discrimination Order, protecting members of the GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender) community may want to shift the debate from public policy to scripture, but scripture ain’t public policy, period. Either you support discrimination, or you don’t. End of story. Wendi Thomas had a great article about this Thursday. This puts Joe Ford, the only African American member of the County Commission to vote against the order in a strange position. He now has to reconcile his support for Civil Rights legislation, some of which helped him and many other African Americans rise up from oppression into positions of power, against his opposition to, what amounts to the very same thing for a group of people who have no protections, and can be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation or gender identity with impunity. I don’t think Joe Ford really supports discrimination. I think Commissioner Ford got caught up in the scriptural argument, and forgot that one of the things that makes America great is the separation of church and state, and that scripture ain’t public policy. As Thomas notes, Commissioners Chism and Harvey abstained from the vote last week. It is my hope that they will see just how simple this issue is and vote for civil rights protections for a group of people who are currently living at the whims of their supervisor’s potential prejudice. Finally, I just want to say one more thing about the whole argument against protections for members of the GLBT community. The video below was produced by the Commercial Appeal in their report of the demonstration held in opposition to the Non-Discrimination order last week. First, this order isn’t about giving and “special” protection, it’s about giving equal protection. Should people be fired or affected in some way that hampers their ability to make a living due to their sexual orientation? What ever happened to judging people based on the quality of their work? Also, this order doesn’t cover most of the incorporated areas of the County. It does cover County Government employees, and contractors that do work with the county. That’s it. Secondly, this proposition has NOTHING TO DO WITH GAY MARRIAGE, or relationships, or anything other than providing discrimination protections for a group of people who are currently without a safety net. People who tell you this is about protecting a group based on their life choices know NOTHING about the issue, but just for fun, let me ask all the straight folks out there who are against this ordinance this simple question, “Did you wake up this morning and DECIDE to be heterosexual?” I’m sure you made or are making a choice as to whom you will be heterosexual WITH, but I know I didn’t “choose” to be heterosexual, I just am. I’ve never once met a person in the GLBT community that made a conscious choice as to their sexual orientation or gender identity. Saying members of the GLBT community made a choice to be who they are is a sign of ignorance. In the end, it still comes down to this simple question, “Do you support discrimination or not?” If not, then you are duty bound to vote for this order. If you do, I would submit that you’re going to have a helluva time later on in life. Discrimination knows no bounds; eventually it will come to your door. If you support it now, you may find yourself the one without a safety net. Will that change your mind, or will you do what you’re asking members of the GLBT community to do and just deal with it? I think we know the answer to that question.

Healthcare: What is the “Public Option”?

Steve Ross — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:15:11 +0000

Way back in March, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi pledged to pass some kind of healthcare reform by July 31, people probably thought she was crazy. Now, two and a half months later, with little public information regarding the progress, it seems impossible. Up ‘til now, the only real public hearings about Healthcare Reform in the US Congress have been in the Senate Finance Committee, chaired by Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT). But the reality is, in addition to these hearings, behind the scenes, several legislators in both the House and the Senate have been working their butts off to get a healthcare proposal together that will both provide coverage and reduce costs for Americans. One of the things that has come out of this process is called the “public option”. What is the “Public Option”? In short, the “Public Option” would extend to individuals and employers a government sponsored healthcare plan. This plan would be similar in some ways to Medicare, which currently covers people over the age of 65. How this option plays out in reality is still up to legislators in DC, and the coming weeks will be critical in ensuring that all people, regardless of pre-existing conditions and ability to pay, have an opportunity to access the healthcare system. Gov. Howard Dean, former DNC Chair and founder of Democracy for America, who has been pushing for comprehensive Healthcare Reform since his run for President in the 2004 Democratic Primary, recently came out in favor of a plan put forth by the Senior Senator from New York, Chuck Schumer. The plan, which was introduced in early May, is an effort to assuage the fears of private insurers, who oppose ANY public option, by requiring that any “Public Option” be held to the same standards that private insurers are bound by. Despite this concession, private insurers are running scared from the “Public Option”. Why are private insurers scared of the “Public Option”…competition, pure and simple. Health insurance premiums have been rising at a rate of 5% a year for several years. Often, this increase in cost happens at the same time that services are CUT. If the US Government were to embark on a “Public Option” health insurance plan, these private insurers would have to compete with the government, potentially cutting into their profits. This may seem anti-competitive on the front end, but when you consider that we currently spend $480b/year more than any other country that currently has universal coverage on just the ADMINISTRATION of private healthcare, there’s a clear opportunity for exploiting efficiencies in the market that would make such private insurance quite competitive with any “Public Option” that might emerge. Unfortunately, over the next several months, you’re more likely to hear a FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, & Doubt) campaign from those whose interests are more grounded in a self-interested profit motive than the notion that affordable healthcare is a right. The point of establishing a “Public Option” is to make private insurers do the job they should have been doing for their shareholders all along, by promoting efficiency and innovation in a market that has become stagnant. This innovation and efficiency will help drive costs down, alleviating the burden on employers who provide healthcare to employees and minimizing the Faustian choice many employers are left with; to cut benefits, or lay off employees. Needless to say, this helps the economy at large in a variety of ways. First, it frees up capital in small businesses who have been struggling under the weight of their moral duty to provide healthcare to their employees by doing what we were told the market would do, create cost savings though efficiency. Secondly, it covers people who have been left behind in the Healthcare discussion, increasing their productivity in the long run by providing basic services to people in jobs that do not currently provide healthcare. Third, and most importantly it limits a cycle of graft and exploitation that has been present in the private system since the last major healthcare discussion in the early 1990’s, that will ultimately make healthcare more affordable not only for those who choose the “public option”, but also for those who, for what ever reason, feel a private insurer is the most sensible choice for them. Over the next two months this debate will come into the public eye. Lots of money has been set aside to fight for both sides of the argument, including some $2m from a guy who seriously gamed the system that aired this weekend. More will follow. The key for us here in the South, and for our Representatives and Senators, is that we not fall prey to the hype brought forth by those who would deny us affordable healthcare. We likely won’t have another chance for at least 8 years. The last opportunity was 15 years ago. We can't let this end up like it did in '94. The time is now. Let’s get it done. For more information check out the Change that Works campaign here in Tennessee. The National campaign can be found here.

Playing Politics with MSARC

Steve Ross — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 01:39:17 +0000

Today, in Executive Session, the Memphis City Council met with Mayor Herenton concerning the problems facing the Memphis Sexual Assault Resource Center, MSARC. MSARC has been in the news quite a bit over the past several weeks, after 2 area victims were turned away due to staffing issues. I wrote about this late last week, but the events of today’s Executive Session warrant another post. The meeting began with some comments by the Mayor, but really heated up once the questions started flying. There were two moments when the hair on my arms and legs literally stood up. I livetweeted the meeting. What follows is a distillation of one of these two exchanges. Strickland: You agree the health dept. should be funded by the Co. gov't. MSARC fits hand in glove with Health Dept. model. What is different with MSARC? Herenton: Hidden agendas on Council and County gov't. Most people didn't give a damn about victims. More interested in politics. Activists and media convoluted situation in a way that I resent. Now, I understand that this is not a transcript, but audio will be on the Council site tomorrow or Thursday for confirmation. I’ve confirmed that this is essentially what was said by 3 different sources on the scene. This sounds like the Mayor is playing politics with MSARC. At the very least, he’s being inconsistent. The Health Department and Domestic Violence services are currently handled by the County, why not MSARC? Because politicians, activists and the media “convoluted the situation”? Are you serious? After the Executive Session Council member Jim Strickland proposed moving MSARC to the County and also said he will propose to cut funding for MSARC, essentially leaving it for the County to administer. Yesterday, the County Commission rolled a proposal by Commissioner Mike Carpenter (@mikecarpenter1)to take responsibility for MSARC (Resolution (.pdf) Should Strickland’s actions pass, the road would be paved for the county to take over MSARC without Herenton’s approval. Tonight, WMCTV will have more coverage of the meeting. I’ll update the post once that piece airs, and include a more comprehensive transcript once the audio is available on the City Council site. Below is the report from the 5pm broadcast. -- You can read the live tweet of the meeting here. Special thanks to WMCTV and their twitter feed @actionnews5 for informing me about and streaming the event.

MSARC Resources

Steve Ross — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 16:06:41 +0000

Below is all the Government actions, and media clippings I have been able to collect concerning MSARC. If you have a blog post that you would like to include, please email me at: sross1972 at gmail dot com.

Government Actions

We hope to have earlier City Council and County Commission audio up soon. Memphis City Council Executive Session Audio 6/2/09 Roll Call :42 | Mayor Herenton’s Opening Comments 24:16 | Councilman Boyd 7:50 Councilman Flinn 5:44 | Councilman Strickland 6:45 | Councilman Conrad 6:09 Councilwoman Halbert 8:30 | Councilwoman Ware 6:05 | Councilman Collins 2:34 Councilwoman Fullilove 2:08 | Councilman Conrad’s additional comments 1:13 Councilman Flinn’s additional comments 1:29 | Mayor Herenton’s Closing Comments 5:09 Norma Lester 4:05 | Deborah Clubb 2:36 | Brad Watkins 3:11 Terre Fratesi 4:21 | Nancy Williams 2:17 | Dr. Winter 2:23 | Closing Business 16:14 -- County Resolution to Adopt MSARC

Community Action

Mid-South Peace and Justice Center Canvass and Phone Bank Flyer

Newspaper and TV Coverage

(All rticles listed are in the order they were published)

Independent Blogs About MSARC

(Ed. Note - vibincblog.com does not necessarily endorse or support the positions of other writers included in this list. The list is provided to give a diverse perspective on the issue. All opinions are those of the writers. The opinion of vibincblog is ONLY represented in the posts from vibincblog.
MSARC Needs Y/Our Help - The Privy Syndicate, May 13, 2009 My Island of Idiots - RANDOM BITS OF AUDREY-NESS, May 20, 2009 It's about the Victims - vibincblog, May 29, 2009 Playing Politics with MSARC - vibincblog, June 2, 2009 herenton -- he never ceases to amaze... - Random Thoughts, June 3, 2009 Friends of MSARC Canvass THIS WEEKEND! - Confessions of a West Tennessee Liberal, June 4, 2009 On Messages in a Rape Kit (MSARC) - Mediaverse, June 4, 2009 (this post will update with new developments) More on MSARC - vibincblog, June 4, 2009 Herenton Should Be Recalled, But.... Annoyed in Memphis, June 5, 2009

More on MSARC

Steve Ross — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 16:34:31 +0000

This morning’s Commercial Appeal has two articles dealing with MSARC. The first, addresses the reality behind one of the victims from Bartlett who was left to wait 3 hours with a frustrated Bartlett Detective only to find out help was not on the way. The second article deals with the actions of the City and County governments working to determine which entity, City or County government, MSARC fits best with. Yesterday, Mediaverse-Memphis wrote a post that seems on the face of it to allege any and all discussion of moving MSARC from the City to County government is about politics.

This move isn't about tax equity. It isn't about getting other municipalities to pay their fair share for a service that they allegedly use for free. It is simply about sending a message to Mayor Herenton, who sent a message of his own to the Council Tuesday.

I couldn’t disagree more. Strickland’s proposal is about putting an organization that serves a regional constituency where it belongs, with the County, just like the Health Dept. and other victim’s services. The difference between the Health Dept., and MSARC is that the Health Dept. is mandated by the state, MSARC is not. So, defunding the Health Dept. means that the County is legally bound to take up funding, which they have done. With MSARC, defunding this program means the County could, if it so desires, pick up the program. Several members of the County Commission have expressed interest in doing so. Listen to the exchange between Strickland and Herenton (6:45). His intentions are both well stated and reasoned. It is Herenton who is politicizing this issue by “resenting” the “public outcry” at the failures of service under his watch. Listen to Herenton’s response starting at 3:10 in the above referenced clip. At 4:45 into the clip Herenton admits that he looked at a County solution for the problem, but turned away from it in the face of public outcry and activism. Are you serious? In this statement the Mayor has CLEARLY stated that he would rather do what is politically expedient for his administration RATHER than do what is, by his own admission, right for MSARC. This is, quite simply, an unbelievable admission. In his opening comments (starting at 5:50), the Mayor expressed that he did not know much if anything about MSARC before the failures of last April. This too is a stunning admission, coming from an administrator, the “CEO of the city”, who has held office for some 18 years. MSARC began as the result of a push from victim’s advocates well before the Mayor took office (1975 according to the city site). It should come as no surprise to the Mayor that any failures of the system would be met with a great deal of public outcry after working to create this service. While the Mayor may feel that he has adequately addressed the issue, the lack of transparency coming out of his office, and his propensity to install former bodyguards in positions garnering six figures, as well as the failures at MSARC, make it difficult for those who have spent their lives advocating for victims, to take the Mayor at his word that the problem has been fixed. Councilwoman Halbert’s call for transparency is a clear sign of that lack of confidence. Perhaps the only thing good that came out of the meeting on Tuesday from the Mayor was his call for all of us to be outraged by crime in our community, regardless of whom it effects. I agree Mr. Mayor, but in the process, we must also do what is right for the victims of crime, not react politically to a situation that may look bad in the public eye. Herenton stated in the meeting that MSARC was back up to full operational capacity. The words of Dr. Winters the newly installed head of MSARC, are somewhat reassuring, but the Mayor’s unwillingness to address all the concerns of the council with his “you’ll know it when I make it” response is unnerving. In the end, this whole issue is not about outrage, race, activists, the media, or anything else the Mayor would point at to distract us…it’s about the victims. Herenton’s actions and general posture towards the activists whose primary interest is the victims only strengthens Strickland’s view that MSARC should fall under the purview of County Government. By looking at their actions though a political lens, rather than that of victim’s advocates, the Mayor has further damaged his credibility and acted in bad faith. Mayor Herenton, taking responsibility is little comfort when, on the other hand, you’re also trying to save face politically. -- I’m working on putting together an MSARC resource page that lists all the news stories, blog posts, resolutions, and audio from City and County meetings. This page can be found here. Please submit links to relevant articles by going to the contact page and emailing them to me. I’ll be updating this page as relevant news and information emerges.

MSARC – The Timeline

Steve Ross — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 17:46:19 +0000

I’ve been doing a lot of organizing and digging on the MSARC issue over the past several days. In addition to the audio of the last Executive Session of the Memphis City Council, I’ve been working to create a comprehensive directory of government actions, community activism, news reports, and blog posts dealing with the MSARC crisis. That directory can be found here. There’s still a lot of work to be done on this resource, including editing and posting the audio from the Memphis City Council meeting that really started up the firestorm. This meeting took place back on May 19th, and was, perhaps, the point at which members of the Memphis City Council, as well as members of the community really lost faith in the Herenton administration’s handling of the problem. You will remember, May 19th was about 21 days after the first reports of service failures hit the media, and one day after the Mayor announced the partnership with Le Bonheur. While the partnership with Le Bonheur was seen by some as a step in the right direction, it failed to deal with the adult victims of rape in our community. Child victims of rape make up 50% of the caseload at MSARC. This arrangement left the other 50% and advocates for their care wondering if they would be treated in the event they were victimized. Further complicating the issue is the de-centralization of victim’s services. Rape is one of the most under-reported crimes in our society. 60% of sexual assault victims never report the crime (Source, RAINN). Victim’s advocates assert that de-centralizing the care of victims of sexual assault further complicates the issue, making the reporting of an already emotionally traumatic crime, even more daunting for the victim. There were over 200 reported rapes in Memphis each of the last two years. Using the statistics from RAINN this means some 300 victims of sexual assault in Memphis alone never reported the crime (Ed. Note: This is a correction from a previous post where I made a math error in calculating the percentage of under-reports). Following the announcement by Mayor Herenton, The Memphis City Council, in Executive Session, met with the administrators charged with overseeing MSARC. It was in this meeting that several members of the City Council walked out, due to the lack of response by these administrators. One could argue that this action, leaving the meeting, was exactly the kind of “political posturing” that the Mayor complained about in June 2nd Executive Session of the City Council. What few have mentioned is that it is the role of the legislative body to oversee the effectiveness of divisions of the executive. The failure to report the actions being taken to rectify the issues at MSARC to the City Council is exactly the same kind of “disrespect” that the Mayor complained he was suffering from at the hands of the media, activists, and politicians. What is even more remarkable about this reality is that while Mayor Herenton complained about the lack of respect he’d received by these same media, activist, and political figures in his June 2nd appearance before the Executive Session of the City Council, he made no bones about his direction to the directors responsible for MSARC to not answer questions brought by the council. The Mayor wants to have it both ways. He wants to be “respected” but, through this action, does not feel he needs to return this respect to elected officials charged with serving the very same voters that ultimately elected the Mayor. This brings up an interesting question for the Mayor. Just what would he have the members of the City Council do in the face of an informational blackout from his administration, a service failure that adversely effects the victims of a heinous crime, not to mention complicating prosecutions of those crimes, and a great deal of pressure from the media and advocacy groups whose interest isn’t political, despite the Mayor’s protestations, but aligned with the needs of the victims? Does the Mayor expect the City Council to ignore its charge of oversight and simply trust him? Why, some 3 weeks after the first media report of the service failures at MSARC would ANY member of the City Council give the Mayor this kind of “blind faith” when his administration had done little to publicly or privately address the concerns of these three groups outside of the, at that time, recently announced partnership with Le Bonheur? Several commentators have opined that the Council failed to follow protocol, and sought to “go over the Mayor’s head” in their proposals for MSARC. While the talks with County officials on May 22nd by City Council Chairman Lowery may have been viewed as an “overstep”, the reality is that this service failure, and the unwillingness by the administration to address it to those concerned was a three-ring circus in need of a tent, which the Mayor provided. The truth of the matter is that the Mayor’s “modus operandi” is the VERY THING that helped stoke the flames of outrage in the community, and the VERY THING that continues to sustain it. Internalizing the paths taken, freezing out those who have a vested interest in the eventual solution, and railing against “well connected constituencies” may score the Mayor political points on other issues, but on an issue such as victims services, these protestations largely fall on deaf ears, particularly when the most affected communities exist in the heart of the Mayor’s electoral base. Herenton completely misses the point when he complains about these “special interest groups” and their “agenda”. Their agenda, despite the Mayor’s perspective, is to ensure that no victim of rape or any other sexual assault goes without the physical and emotional treatment needed for them to heal, not to mention the legal aspect of carrying out prosecutions on a crime that is one of the most difficult crimes on which to gain a conviction. The Mayor, through his rhetoric, has chosen to personalize the dissent in the community to be about him rather than about serving the victims in the most effective and comprehensive way possible. While most dissent may not have been focused on the Mayor before, his condescending and adversarial posture toward these groups has forced their hand, and helped turn a discussion that should have been about victims to a battle of personalities that never should have entered the conversation. This is a devastating turn of events for the victims. So here we are now, some 5 and a half weeks since the initial report of problems at MSARC. On Tuesday, the Mayor asserted that the problems have been solved and that MSARC is back up to full operational staffing levels. Unfortunately, the just yesterday ANOTHER instance of a recent failure at MSARC was reported. Mayor Herenton may assert that MSARC is fixed, but unfortunately, the facts don’t support this assertion. Yesterday, I laid out my argument for moving MSARC to the County. I would ask people who support the movement of MSARC from City to County government to measure their rhetoric carefully. Focusing words around the Mayor’s consistent strategy to make EVERY ISSUE surrounding the City about race or some personal issue only plays into his hands politically. This has been, for some time, an effective strategy for the Mayor, upon which he has won countless elections and political battles. Unfortunately, in this case it leaves out the most important people in the equation, the victims. Ultimately, that’s ALL this should be about, serving the victims of a crime that is one of the most brutal violations of both their body and a threat to their emotional stability. We can debate whether these victims would be better served by the City or County, but in the end, it is serving the victims that is most important, not the politics, or the personalization that the Mayor, or anyone else, would seek to use to galvanize their base for any particular agenda, regardless of what side they might find themselves. Government’s first duty is to protect the people. By making this issue about personalities, not only are the people not protected, but the debate is diverted from the real issue, to side issues that don’t serve the public good in the long run.

If Someone Did, Would it Help the Movement?

Steve Ross — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:23:23 +0000

I’ve been thinking, and reading a lot about the assassination or Dr. Tiller in Kansas last week and activities of Operation Rescue and other anti-choice groups. As a collective, their rhetoric, strategy and tactics are nothing new. They’ve been doing this for a long time. The tenor of their rhetoric is, perhaps, the only real change, and when it changes is not only interesting, but telling. This weekend, anti-choice groups made a tactical choice that, probably inadvertently, exposed what is, at least a side motivator, if not, the true call behind their movement. The Pill Kills protests that were planned across the nation, sought to motivate people to lash out against a universally accepted medical treatment. The protesters claim that the pill “kills unborn babies”. The pill may provide birth control, but it also normalizes women’s monthly cycles, among other things beyond just limiting the possibility of a fertilized egg becoming a fetus. It’s as if these people believe that any egg that gets by, fertilized or not, is a life that has been lost. By this standard, nearly every male in the WORLD is guilty of genocide on a scale that is unimaginable. In taking this protest forward, on the day Dr. Tiller was laid to rest, the anti-choice crowd has exposed what their real agenda is. They’re not only against abortion, but just about any kind of access to reproductive healthcare for women, period. Abortion is just the hot button issue to get the foot soldiers activated. Abortion is the motivating factor, to pull on the faith and emotions of people who may genuinely disagree with abortion, but have not been fully radicalized. The reality of the situation is that there is no such thing as an “abortion clinic”. There are doctors who perform abortions as one in a long list of procedures that include normal OB/GYN exams and family planning and counseling. The notion that everyone who walked into Dr. Tiller’s clinic was there to get an abortion is a flight of fancy that even the anti-choice crowd should scoff at. But still, members of anti-choice groups protest these clinics, in the hope that they can deter someone, anyone, from patronizing a doctor that performs a perfectly legal procedure, just because they don’t like it. Ultimately, this action results in women being denied access to critical healthcare services. And that’s where this whole strategy gets turned upside down. If groups like “Operation Rescue” really gave a damn about unborn babies, they would be driving poor expectant mothers to clinics for pre-natal care, rather than standing in front of clinics trying to dissuade patients from taking care of their reproductive health, and ultimately, their unborn children. For that matter, they would continue to provide support to these mothers and their children after the child is born. Nope, the anti-choice movement doesn’t really give a damn about the expectant mothers, their unborn children, or the children after they’re born. The movement’s only interest is building a religio-political organization wrapped in an opposition to abortion, but grounded in the idea that faith, specifically THEIR faith, should be the law of the land, Constitution be damned. Perhaps this is why the organization formerly known as “Operation Rescue West”, which is now in control of the national organization based in Kansas, lost it’s non-profit status as a ministry in 2006 for organizing politically against the Kerry campaign in 2004. Despite this political activity, Operation Rescue is not found in the FEC Disclosure database, nor is their former organization “Youth Ministries Inc.”. Their funding sources are, to my knowledge, undisclosed anywhere despite their overt political activities. After the 1993 assassination of Dr. David Gunn by Michael Griffin (whose family was shielded from the media pro bono by Joe Scarborough), the Clinton Administration passed and signed the “”FACE Law”. The “Freedom of access to clinic entrances” law was designed to protect clinics and their patients from the kind of intimidation, vandalism, and violence that had become the more frequent in the early 90’s. In July of 1994, Operation Rescue and other organizations came to Little Rock, the home of President Clinton, to protest the new law. Only 60 anti-choice protesters showed up, despite former Operation Rescue head Randall Terry’s prediction of 300, and thirty were arrested in one day for violating the FACE law. Since Clinton left office, violent actions against abortion providers seemed to decline. Christina Page at Huffington Post has an interesting theory that I tend to subscribe to about why this may have been the case. Still, as mentioned in the article, in the last year of the Bush Administration there were just 396 reported harassing calls to clinics. Since the inauguration there have been some 1400. This is not because of increased interest, but as Ms. Page suggests,

…like terrorist sleeper cells, these extremists have now been set in motion. Indeed the evidence is already there. The chatter, the threats, the hate-filled rhetoric are abundant.

Back in 1994, at the Little Rock action of Operation Rescue, I was among a large group of pro-choice Arkansans who stood to "defend the clinics" against the actions of Operation Rescue. I saw and heard the more radical elements of the movement first hand, and can attest that, at least at the time, the radicalization of rhetoric used by anti-choice protesters was not only not discouraged, it was encouraged with great fervor by the leaders of the action at the time. Individuals in the anti-Choice movement has been committing acts of vandalism and violence for decades. As detailed on Rachel Maddow’s show Monday, there has been much open discussion over the years regarding what is, or is not, fair game in the tactics of the anti-choice movement. With that in mind, the following clip is a must see.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

As they mention in the interview above, accused killer Scott Roeder says there is more violence to come. Roeder’s statement is chilling, but what’s stunning is the admission in the interview above that the anti-choice movement has actually discussed the potential impact of violence in such a detached manner as if violence were some kind of political maneuver, rather than the taking of a life….something they claim to oppose. But the real key is what Mr. Shaeffer eluded to at the end of the interview. The anti-choice movement is duty bound to report those who cross the line between protest and aggressive acts if they are serious about their claims that They Abhor Vigilantism. Until this happens, they can claim that they hold life in the highest regard, but their inaction on these acts of violence and vandalism serve as tacit approval that not only makes them complicit, but accomplices. So the question remains, "If Someone Did, Would it Help the Movement?". Well, someone HAS DONE IT, and more than once. The anti-choice movement can disavow and disown the actions of individuals all they want, but until they do SOMETHING to prove that they are not only against such violence in spirit and word, but also in action, either by counseling these known individuals, or reporting them to the police, the blood of these victims is on their hands.

This Trigger’s Already Been Pulled

Steve Ross — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:38:01 +0000

About two weeks ago I wrote about the public option. Around the time I was writing that, I started seeing some discussion of putting a “trigger” into any legislation that included a “public option”. I could go off and spend a lot of time trying to explain what a “trigger”, but I’ll let Igor Volsky from Think Progress’ The Wonk Room handle that:

Democrats on the Finance Committee said Mr. Baucus was exploring a possible compromise. Under this proposal, the public plan would be created only if private insurance companies had not made meaningful, affordable coverage available to all Americans within several years.

In essence, if Senator Baucus and some Blue Dogs get their way, private insurers will have a couple of years to do what the market was supposed to do way back in the 1990’s, make their coverage affordable and competitive for consumers. Senator Baucus, this trigger’s already been pulled. Let me lay it out to you like this. If I, a self-employed single male who makes more than average for my education level (Source I fall under “Some College”) can’t afford to insure myself, partially because of pre-existing conditions, and partially because I just can’t afford it, then how can any individual who makes less than me? The reality is, allowing individuals and companies to “buy in” to a healthcare plan that is administered like Medicare, or something similar, will greatly reduce the cost to the consumer and help provide access to people, like myself, who currently pay for regular checkups, etc. out of pocket, which works until you either get REALLY sick, or REALLY hurt. This is where a lot of the cost to insured individuals comes in. When the uninsured get REALLY sick, or REALLY hurt, they often end up REALLY bankrupt. Over 60% of bankruptcies in the US are related to, or involve a great deal of debt due to medical expenses. 78% of those same people had some form of private health insurance. When these bills don’t get paid, the doctors and hospitals have to make the money back somewhere. Eventually, that comes out of your pocket. Further, healthcare costs are bankrupting our companies. Take GM for example

In dollars-and-cents terms, there was another reason the American car companies fell behind the rest of the world in their investments in technology and quality control: health care costs. All through the period of its decline, the U.S. auto industry was forced to spend sums on worker health insurance that were unmatched anywhere else in the industrialized world, because the United States was the only one without a government-sponsored health care system. (Source)

We don’t have time to wait for some arbitrary “trigger”, which could possibly be nothing more than a free pass to current insurers, to bring more affordable, portable, and transparent health insurance to our citizens. We need a solution now. At the same time, there’s plenty of room for a discussion on what a “public option” plan should look like. It’s telling that Rep. Jim Cooper, a member of the Blue Dog Caucus, supports a plan without any trigger. Clearly, Rep. Cooper, whom I have been critical of in the past, sees the benefit of public insurance for those who can either not afford private insurance, or those who wish to “opt in” to a federally sponsored plan with competitive rates. In the end, there’s plenty of room for discussion, but people on all sides of the debate need to remember that the ultimate goal is to insure everyone. Over the coming weeks we’ll hear objections from insurers and providers. Many of these objections will focus on the minutae rather than the larger issue of providing affordable healthcare to everyone. In the end, that’s the only real argument they have any more. Americans are tired of suffering a death of 1000 cuts from the insurance industry. The tide has turned. As Nicholas Kristof writes in yesterday’s New York Times, This Time, We Won’t Scare. Hopefully, our legislators in DC won’t either.

God, I Hope They’re Not Catching On…

Steve Ross — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:33:31 +0000

…But I Think They Might…

Tuesday night, as I was preparing to board my red eye flight from Anchorage, AK, I checked my twitter feed, as I am want to do when I’m bored shitless in an airport, and ran across this post by a conservative consultant for Bob McDonnell, the Republican candidate for Governor in Virginia. The post addresses the stunning realities in the loss of former DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe in the Virginia Democratic Primary, but principally asks the question, “Does Money Even Matter in Elections Anymore?”. Really, you should read the whole post. It’s a very insightful, on the ground account of the race from someone who has a vested interest in the outcome. I think it’s really important that anyone thinking about running for anything read the post. It highlights that, while money is important in political campaigns, shoe leather and an irrepressible desire to reach out to voters wins elections. With that in mind, I want to remind readers about a current initiative of the TNDP, SOS trainings Save our State from the GOP are scheduled around the state in the coming months. Whether you want to be a candidate, a super-volunteer, or are simply interested in reclaiming the State House in 2010 you should consider attending one of these events. In the end, we all need to recognize that the old way of running elections isn’t the only way. Big money certainly helps, and connections to established party leaders may not hurt, but it ain’t the only way to get elected. Sometimes sweat equity pays the highest dividends.

MSARC Resolution

Steve Ross — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 02:39:43 +0000

Today the Shelby County Commission unanimously approved a resolution by Commissioner Ritz to assume control of MSARC. The resolution includes the creation of a Victim’s Services Board, but was soft on funding and other details. Ritz’s resolution was an alternative to the one brought by Commissioner Mike Carpenter, but it is currently not available on the County Commission’s site. This is a victory for victim’s advocates and the community at large for several reasons. First, it places all victims services under the purview of one governmental agency rather than splitting the duties across two. Hopefully this will not only create efficiencies, but also ensure better continuity of service. Secondly, by creating a “Victim’s Services Board” it ensures that the community is providing direct community oversight to avoid the problems that ultimately lead us to this circumstance. Finally, but perhaps least importantly, it takes a regional service and places it with every other regional service in the area, the County. There are a lot of people that need to be thanked for their hard work, advocacy, and continued push for a solution to the failures that led to this change including; Mid-South Peace and Justice, Memphis Area Women’s Council, elected officials on the City Council and County Commission who advocated for the shift, and finally, Mayor Herenton and Mayor Wharton. Without their leadership in coming together to find a solution, MSARC may have been caught between a rock and a hard place for some time. There are still a lot of issues to be resolved. The audit initiated by the city, currently scheduled to be completed in the next 60 to 90 days will, perhaps, shed some light on what led to the initial failure, and hopefully provide some learning on how to avoid this in the future. How MSARC will be integrated into the County is also an issue that is a bit murky, despite the actions of the County Commission tonight. Finally, how the Victim’s Services Board will operate, and who gets appointed to it is, perhaps the biggest unresolved non-operational issues going forward. The community is watching, and we expect transparency and accountability. As new developments come to light, I’ll report them here. Until then, here’s to hoping that MSARC can regain and maintain its place as a national model, not only in the way it’s organized, but also in the care and quality of services it provides.

TN State Sen. Staffer's Racist Email On CNN

Steve Ross — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:51:20 +0000

Sen. Diane Black, whose staffer Sherri Goforth sent an email containing a racist image was on CNN today. Yesterday Newscoma broke the story, and with the help of just about every Tennessee blogger, it went national. Below is the video from CNN.

Lone Wolf or Terrorist?

Steve Ross — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:36:30 +0000

Since the assassination of Dr. George Tiller at the beginning of June, and the attack on the Holocaust Museum, many on the left have characterized these actions as “Terrorism” and warned that they are likely to continue as long as the “Hate Speech” that motivates these actions go unchallenged. Just yesterday, Solon at Open Pen wrote a great piece about the rise of hate groups in the US, as well as here in Tennessee. In today’s USA Today, writer Jonathan Turley challenges the assertion that this amounts to “Domestic Terrorism”. From the article:

The fact is that Roeder and von Brunn appear to be murderers, not terrorists. Many people kill strangers out of hate for their race or religion or some other association. Colin Ferguson killed six people and injured 19 in 1993 on the Long Island Rail Road in a race-based rage. Last July, Jim Adkisson shot and killed two people at a church in Knoxville, Tenn., because he hated liberals. These are acts of loners or rogue operators who seek to satisfy a blood lust against different groups.

Perhaps Mr. Turley is unfamiliar with the definition of “Terrorism”

terrorism |ˈterəˌrizəm| noun the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. lone wolf noun a person who prefers to act or be alone.

Mr. Turley and I may be arguing two definitions of “terrorism” (ie, the difference between how the word is defined, and how the law defines it) but to say that these actions are not in pursuit of a “political aim” is to say these actions are purely random, despite evidence to the contrary. I won't go so far as to say that these individuals are part of a coordinated campaign of violence about to be unleashed on the American public, but calling it anything other than “terrorism” is to ignore the facts. By Mr. Turley’s standard, a lone wolf is just a criminal, even if he/she is politically motivated. That's just ignoring the definition of "Terrorism". For terrorism to occur, you don’t have to have people firing rockets into another country, or strapping a bomb to their body. Terrorism occurs when violence is committed for political gain. There is no question that this is the case. Let’s not try to “make this better” or candy coat reality. There are potential terrorists on all sides of the spectrum. The difference is the action. Once the action is committed, it becomes terrorism. It doesn't have to be coordinated...it just has to be political.

We All Live in the Same Glass House

Steve Ross — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:32:39 +0000

prejudice |ˈprejədəs| noun 1 preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience :

I was kinda sorta trying to avoid this whole topic completely, but since I’m defining words today, I guess I don’t have any choice. Maybe I should go back to school and major in linguistics. I’m going to tell you a secret, that you may or may not know, but that is a truth, whether you like it or not. You ready? Ok, here goes: we are all prejudiced.

We are.

There’s nothing you can say that can defend against that statement. We are fallible. We do things for reasons we don’t understand. We are all prejudiced…end of story. I’m not saying we’re all racist, or sexist, or homophobes, or age-ists. We each carry our own strain of the disease. At the end of the day, we’re all prejudiced, and none of us can hide from that reality. What brings this up is the story that was broke Monday by my sister by another mister. This thing made the national news, in a day and age where this kind of stuff is becoming more prevalent, or at least more noted every day. There’s been much discussion about the story, but at the end of the day, the story is a symptom of the disease. We, as humans, encounter racist, sexist, PREJUDICED shit every day, regardless of who or what we are. Shelby County Commissioner Sidney Chism provided some just yesterday, and, in a stretch of irony, he's the guy that proposed the far reaching Shelby County non-discrimination order. Prejudice is a reality of our world, and our task is to defeat it, not try to make political points off of it. Prejudice is wrong, and I’ll admit that I’m as guilty of it as anyone. The key question we have to ask ourselves is, “Are we trying to get better?”, or “Are we using it to promote a political agenda?” In the end, we all live in the same glass house. As long as this is a political issue instead of a social issue, we’re throwing stones at ourselves, and ultimately bringing the glass house down around us.

The Ghost of Nominees Past

Steve Ross — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:16:09 +0000

Affordable, portable healthcare has been an issue in American politics since long before the 1990’s. Unfortunately, little, if anything has been done in that time to ensure that Americans have access to insurance coverage, despite a great deal of support for reform. Today NBC News and The Wall Street Journal published a poll stating that 76% of Americans polled support a “Public Option”. In this space we’ve covered The Public Option and a Trigger mechanism for the Public Option proposed by conservative Democrats as a hedge against real reform favored my the majority of Americans. While the debate continues in Congress, and on the airwaves, a bipartisan group of former Senators have come together to promote a plan of their own. As part of the plan, former HHS nominee Tom Daschle argues against the Public Option saying

"We've come too far and gained too much momentum for our efforts to fail over disagreement on one single issue,"

WTF?

The plan endorsed by Daschle would give states the duty of establishing “public options”. This may be favored by Republicans, but it creates a serious problem in establishing nationwide portability. Further, as we have seen here in Tennessee, as budgets get tighter, state funds for such programs dwindle and the working poor suffer. Finally, the plan also makes any savings that would come from establishing a nationwide risk pool and throws them out the window. In short, this is a stupid idea that will likely result in no real savings, or expanded coverage for the 47+ million uninsured, who, like myself, who cannot afford insurance due to sheer cost or pre-existing conditions. I’ve always liked Senator Daschle. I feel he brings a lot of knowledge and experience to this debate, and I was hopeful about the possibility of true healthcare reform when President Obama nominated him to HHS. In light of his current position, I find myself questioning his motives. You may remember that in the two years before he was nominated he banked some $200,000 from the healthcare industry. I don’t want to sully the man’s reputation, but it raises serious questions about his motivation and intentions. In the end, there is overwhelming public support for a “Public Option”. If our elected officials in DC are too scared to pass something that has the support of 76% of Americans, they need to get their butts spanked by their constituents. We have the political will to get this passed, the question is, “Will they do what’s right or what’s easy?”. Right now they’re leaning toward the easy. Most importantly, we can’t let the ghost of a past nominee derail the reform that we, the people are in favor of. Do what’s right, pass the “Public Option” or suffer the ire of your constituents. This reform is way overdue.

SCDP Meet and Greet This Evening

Steve Ross — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:02:30 +0000

The Shelby County Democratic Party announces it’s first “Meet and Greet” since the April Re-organization. Friday, June 19, 2009 (that’s today people) 5:30pm to 7:30pm Hattiloo Theatre 656 Marshall Ave. Memphis, TN Appetizers and Cash Bar $25 Suggested minimum contribution benefits S.C.D.P. 829-3377 or 830-3283 Host Committee: Van Turner Dave & Diane Cambron Ron & Barbara Williams Carla Stotts-Hills Desi Franklin Jonathan Cole Carlos Bibbs William Gillon Adrienne Pakis-Gillon Chris Taylor Nancy Greenwalt Cathy Hailey Kent Will Kent Willie Boddie Nancy Kuhn Mitzi Gatewood Norma Lester Jim & Jeannie Johnson Come out and support your local Democratic Party! Also join the new Facebook Group.

How much is the security of your vote worth?

Steve Ross — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 17:56:54 +0000

It's not the voting that's democracy, it's the counting. Tom Stoppard, Jumpers (1972) act 1 British dramatist & screenwriter (1937 - )

Since the beginning of this legislative session, the efficacy of your vote has been under attack. HB0614/SB0872 sought to delay the implementation of the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act. The Act, passed in 2008, mandates a “Paper Ballot” rather than the unverifiable “Electronic Ballots” that are currently in use in 93 of 95 Counties here in Tennessee. Mary Mancini at Liberadio! has been all over this issue, both through her posts and the Facebook Group she and several others created and maintained. Thankfully yesterday, the last day of the legislative session, HB0614/SB0872 failed to get a majority in the State Senate by 1 vote, and was sent back to the Calendar Committee. Since the session is now over, the legislature can no longer try to delay the implementation of TVCA. Unfortunately, that’s not the end of the story. Newly appointed State Elections Coordinator Mark Goins has stated that his office will go to court to stop paper ballots if necessary. Citing a dubious at best fiscal note which has been thoroughly debunked, Goins’ intentions seem less about stifling your right to vote, but more about hindering the verification process mandated in the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act. Goins says he’s an advocate for paper ballots, but also says

“I’m a friend of paper ballots,” he said again, “But when you push your friends too far, sometime they bite back.” And, he added, “I’m this close to biting back.” (source)

Nice, so statewide confidence and verifiability of the whole voting system hinges on whether or not an appointed administrator feels pressure to do the job he was appointed to do. Be still, my beating heart. (/snark) It seems certain that the State will go to court to delay or otherwise challenge the implementation of a verifiable paper ballot in Tennessee, and in doing so, call into question the voting systems here in Tennessee, the motives of the Republican appointed State Administrators. The question facing Election Commissions in 97.8% of the counties in Tennessee is a much more practical, “What next?” Are they going to hang back and wait to see what happens in court…should any case appear, or are they going to start making plans to comply with the law? What about all the training that will be necessary for their employees? This stuff doesn’t just happen overnight. It seems to me that in order to be in compliance with the law, as it stands now, Election Commissions have to get going on this, no matter what happens or could potentially happen. So I decided to ask around and find out some answers. Turns out, it’s not only been on their radar, they’ve been looking at solutions since the beginning of the delay debate. Shelby Co. budgeted money to deal with any shortfall that may from HAVA funding not that there should be any. Obviously, it sucks for the taxpayers that Shelby and some 92 other counties have spent scads of money on touch screen voting machines, but there are lots of lingering questions out there about these machines, and Diebold the company that makes the machines we have here in Shelby Co., hasn’t done ANYTHING to answer these questions.

These allegations would be less unsettling if there were some other mechanism than just the “word of the computer and its programmer”. Unfortunately, the idea of using a receipt printer or some such other device isn’t within the letter of the law, and to my knowledge, no such device is certified under the necessary standards. So, it looks like some unfortunate state is going to be buying a whole bunch of used touch screen voting machines from Tennessee Election Commissions...or not Turns out nobody wants these so the market may be saturated with these unwanted beasts. In short, we may just have to let them rot in some warehouse somewhere. Of course, until Mr. Goins makes a decision on whether to take this case to court, all of this is just speculation. It is good to know that, at least here in Shelby Co. someone's thinking about the consequences and ready to deal with it when they become reality. I just hope, for the safety of our votes that we don't have a long and costly legal fight on our hands. Like the quote at the beginning of this post says, "It's not the voting that's democracy, it's the counting.

An Open Letter to Mark Sanford

Steve Ross — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:45:59 +0000

Ed Note: Yes I know I’m way behind on this stuff, but hopefully I’ll get caught up just in time to get behind again Governor Sanford: You don’t know me. I’m not a resident of your state or a member of your political party. In fact, politically we are polar opposites. This letter isn’t about politics, it’s about something far more important. I was pleased to hear yesterday that you won’t be making any more public statements about the affair that you engaged in, and was disclosed publicly last week. This is the best decision you’ve made since the affair started. The public has no inherent right, or need, to know anything about the character of the emotional relationship between you, your wife, and your mistress. You opened that door through your bizarro press conference of last week, and since then have continued to not only tear off the scab, but pour truckloads of salt in the wound. I’ve been fighting the urge to come out and slam you over this time for being a hypocrite, among other things, but have resisted. Now I think it’s important that you someone tell you to stop thinking about yourself, for once since this thing started, and start thinking about your family. You may have thought that putting the details of this personal issue on the table would clear the air. Perhaps you thought you would receive some kind of absolution. Perhaps you believed that by airing all your dirty laundry publicly you could somehow find the strength to move past your transgressions. In the end, all you’ve done is further expose yourself as a self-centered, thoughtless prick. Did the world need to know that you consider your mistress your “soul mate”? Seriously, what outcome did you expect from making such a screwed up statement? What was your aim? Were you trying to further humiliate your wife, a woman who has faithfully stood by you for some 20 years? Were you trying to bring more shame on your children, who are the most innocent victims of your transgressions? Whether that was your aim or not, that is what you have done. Some have said that you need to stop embarrassing yourself. Frankly, I don’t give a damn about what you do to yourself, but what you’re doing to your family is a far greater sin than just the affair. In order for there to be any resolution to this you have to do the one thing you haven’t done since the affair started…stop putting yourself before your family. All these confessions, all these weird ill-advised statements aren’t about reconciliation with your wife, they’re about reconciling with yourself. You obviously feel that by making these public statements some level of guilt will be lifted from your soul, in the process, you’re further damaging your relationship with your wife, and making any reconciliation that much harder. Stop it. Sir, you brought this on yourself. The guilt is your cross to bear. You were more than willing to enjoy the spoils of the affair, now, for any real reconciliation to occur, you MUST be willing to carry the consequences of your actions on your own. Putting them out in public only makes matters worse, and is one of the most selfish things you could possibly do. Stop it. I truly, and with all my heart hope that you can man up enough to put yourself aside and do what’s right, both for your wife and your children. I truly hope that both of you can find a way to trust, love and honor each other and rebuild the relationship that you obviously once had. For this to happen, you have to take the first step, and that means reaching out to your wife and your children, focusing solely on them instead of focusing on yourself. Reconciliation is a long and difficult road, but you must find the strength within yourself to make the first step. I pray you find that strength and do what’s right by your family, who have stood by you and sacrificed so much to make you successful in your public life. It’s time for you to return the favor and become the husband and father that you never should have stopped being. Good luck and Godspeed. Sincerely, Stephen Ross

Not a Deal Maker

Steve Ross — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 05:42:54 +0000

In his ”Exit Interview” Mayor Herenton says he’s “not a deal maker”. Of course, he also said a lot of other things, and you can read them here. I wonder if Mayor Herenton understands the office he is seeking? Surely the Mayor knows that as 1 of 435 in the US House, he will have to seek alliances, and that means making deals, if he is to get any amendments or legislation he sponsors to make it to the President’s desk. Should the Mayor become a Congressman, he will have to make deals. That he is not practiced in this art, is a huge strike against him. I haven’t written about Herenton’s primary challenge, or any of the on goings here in Memphis pertaining to the Mayor, because I don’t believe any of it until Council Chairman Lowery assumes the Mayor’s office on an interim basis. Once that happens, I’ll start believin’. Still, the Mayor’s antics today, including the possibility of running in the Special Election if he doesn’t like the field cast some serious doubts on how serious he really is about anything. What this is starting to look like now, is a man who more than anything else, just wants to be in the public eye, stirring up shit, for his personal enjoyment. By resigning, or at least threatening to, he took himself out of power to seek a new office. He’s losing the bully pulpit he alone has as City Mayor. Now he’s starting to realize this, and he’s making moves to maintain his relevance at it’s current level. It must be a very lonely place for the Mayor. I don’t think anyone believes that after Herenton leaves the Mayor’s office that he’ll be irrelevant. Quite the contrary, Herenton will have time to carefully craft his verbal grenades to lob into the race for Congress. He will have lost the bully pulpit, but he will not have lost the thing that elevated him to the Mayor’s office in the first place, his tenacity. What will be interesting is how much media play he’s given after his departure from City Hall in comparison to his current media value, and the media play Cohen receives. Broadcast and Print media have had a pass on covering the Mayor while he held that position because as mayor everything he said was potentially newsworthy. Once he is no longer Mayor, everything he says is a part of a political campaign, which still holds some newsworthiness, but also creates the potential for the appearance of favoritism one way or the other should the media not cover them both equally. In the end, Herenton may not be a deal maker in his political life, but he’s definitely made a deal with the media. Herenton has made a conscious decision to put publicity over policy, his personality over effective management and governance. Memphis deserves better, but we, as a city, have to step up and stop this madness. If we don’t, we can expect nothing more than more of the same, which has been devastating to the city in the long run.

Profit Over Wellness

Steve Ross — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:06:24 +0000

A little birdy dropped this fine piece of testimony in my lap overnight. In it, former CIGNA executive Wendell Potter describes just how important profit is over care in the current healthcare system in the US. From the testimony:

The average family doesn’t understand how Wall Street’s dictates determine whether they will be offered coverage, whether they can keep it, and how much they’ll be charged for it. But, in fact, Wall Street plays a powerful role. The top priority of for-profit companies is to drive up the value of their stock. Stocks fluctuate based on companies’ quarterly reports, which are discussed every three months in conference calls with investors and analysts. On these calls, Wall Street looks investors and analysts look for two key figures: earnings per share and the medical-loss ratio, or medical “benefit” ratio, as the industry now terms it. That is the ratio between what the company actually pays out in claims and what it has left over to cover sales, marketing, underwriting and other administrative expenses and, of course, profits. To win the favor of powerful analysts, for-profit insurers must prove that they made more money during the previous quarter than a year earlier and that the portion of the premium going to medical costs is falling. Even very profitable companies can see sharp declines in stock prices moments after admitting they’ve failed to trim medical costs. I have seen an insurer’s stock price fall 20 percent or more in a single day after executives disclosed that the company had to spend a slightly higher percentage of premiums on medical claims during the quarter than it did during a previous period. The smoking gun was the company’s first-quarter medical loss ratio, which had increased from 77.9% to 79.4% a year later.

All “for profit” companies have a duty to return value or profits to their investors. When the company sells some other commodity, service or product we expect that cost cutting will be a tactic in a larger strategy to ensure that shareholders are rewarded for their investment. This, however, takes an odd turn when the health of a nation is sold as a commodity in such a way that neglects the supposed aim of the company, to provide health insurance. It becomes even more alarming when profit becomes the ONLY motive, leaving insurers few options to positively impact their bottom line.

To help meet Wall Street’s relentless profit expectations, insurers routinely dump policyholders who are less profitable or who get sick. Insurers have several ways to cull the sick from their rolls. One is policy rescission. They look carefully to see if a sick policyholder may have omitted a minor illness, a pre-existing condition, when applying for coverage, and then they use that as justification to cancel the policy, even if the enrollee has never missed a premium payment. Asked directly about this practice just last week in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, executives of three of the nation’s largest health insurers refused to end the practice of cancelling policies for sick enrollees. Why? Because dumping a small number of enrollees can have a big effect on the bottom line. Ten percent of the population accounts for two-thirds of all health care spending. The Energy and Commerce Committee’s investigation into three insurers found that they canceled the coverage of roughly 20,000 people in a five-year period, allowing the companies to avoid paying $300 million in claims.

Maintianing profit levels by purging high risk customers may be a good way to keep investors happy, but it exacerbates the risks to the economy as a whole by increasing the possibility of health related bankruptcies (50% of all personal bankruptcies are at least partially related to debt brought on by medical bills). Further, it is estimated that health insurance costs either have or will overtake profits for most employers, further damaging the economy as a whole. The rise in health insurance costs has not been met with additional coverage. In fact, many Americans are underinsured and don’t even know it.

There are many ways insurers keep their customers in the dark and purposely mislead them – especially now that insurers have started to aggressively market health plans that charge relatively low premiums for a new brand of policies that often offer only the illusion of comprehensive coverage. An estimated 25 million Americans are now underinsured for two principle reasons. First, the high deductible plans many of them have been forced to accept – like I was forced to accept at CIGNA – require them to pay more out of their own pockets for medical care, whether they can afford it or not. The trend toward these high-deductible plans alarms many health care experts and state insurance commissioners. As California Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi told the Associated Press in 2005 when he was serving as the state’s insurance commissioner, the movement toward consumer-driven coverage will eventually result in a “death spiral” for managed care plans. This will happen, he said, as consumer-driven plans “cherry-pick” the youngest, healthiest and richest customers while forcing managed care plans to charge more to cover the sickest patients. The result, he predicted, will be more uninsured people. In selling consumer-driven plans, insurers often try to persuade employers to go “full replacement”, which means forcing all of their employees out of their current plans and into a consumer-driven plan. At least two of the biggest insurers have done just that, to the dismay of many employees who would have preferred to stay in their HMOs and PPOs. Those options were abruptly taken away from them.

Less choice, less care, more cost…sounds like a winning combination for everyone except the people who are buying the coverage. It would be one thing if the consumers knew what was up, but the insurance providers are going out of their way to deceive their customers.

Secondly, the number of uninsured people has increased as more have fallen victim to deceptive marketing practices and bought what essentially is fake insurance. The industry is insistent on being able to retain so-called “benefit design flexibility” so they can continue to market these kinds of often worthless policies. The big insurers have spent millions acquiring companies that specialize in what they call “limited-benefit” plans. An example of such a plan is marketed by one of the big insurers under the name of Starbridge Select. Not only are the benefits extremely limited but the underwriting criteria established by the insurer essentially guarantee big profits. Pre-existing conditions are not covered during the first six months, and the employer must have an annual employee turnover rate of 70 percent or more, so most of the workers don’t even stay on the payroll long enough to use their benefits. The average age of employees must not be higher than 40, and no more than 65 percent of the workforce can be female. Employers don’t pay any of the premiums—the employees pay for everything. As Consumer Reports noted in May, many people who buy limited-benefit policies, which often provide little or no hospitalization, are misled by marketing materials and think they are buying more comprehensive care. In many cases it is not until they actually try to use the policies that they find out they will get little help from the insurer in paying the bills.

With all this in mind it’s baffling that anyone with the best interests of the health of Americans would put up any roadblocks to a public plan. In reality, the primary opponents of this plan are insurance companies already committing a fraud against their customers and the shareholders that benefit financially from this fraud. Unfortunately, some legislators are buying into this fraud. Health insurers are scared to death that they may have to meet or exceed the standards put forth by a plan that actually puts the health of the consumer before profits. But isn’t that what healthcare should be? As the debate moves forward, it’s incumbent on the American people that we stand up against the deceptive rhetoric and scare tactics of health insurers. Further, it’s important that we make sure our legislators know we don’t just want insurance, but an entire healthcare system overhaul that puts the needs of the sick above the profit motives of shareholders. If this be socialism, then so be it. Quality affordable healthcare is a right not a privilege. It’s time we get our priorities straight and stop putting the profits of the few over the health of a nation.

Memphis Needs a Boring Mayor

Steve Ross — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 18:13:01 +0000

After 18 years of intrigue at City Hall the time is right for someone boring to take the reigns. Who that person is, is still to be decided, but whomever it is must be willing to take a back seat personally, to the issues surrounding the city in an effort to bring economic opportunity, enhanced city services, and social justice to a community that has been fraught with discord since before I arrived here in 2004. Brad Watkins’ post at Confessions of a West Tennessee Liberal, is spot on...ISSUES FIRST, personalities and relationships should be a distant second…if not third. So far, there are at least a dozen candidates kicking around the idea of running for Mayor. Already, people are picking sides based on previous relationships. I understand this on one level. A candidate’s past actions are often the best barometer of their future performance, but it shouldn’t be the only test. What is their vision for the future? What are their key goals? How will they govern? These are all the boring, non-tabloidy questions that voters need to be asking in this shortened election cycle. The reality is that Memphians have been voting for style over substance in the City Mayor’s office for a very long time. The return on this investment has been the total stagflation of progress at City Hall. No new ideas, no new growth, and a higher costs for citizens (in terms of declines in quality of life, taxation v. ROI, and political strife v. smooth governance). Continuing this trend is a recipe for not just continued disaster, but escalating decline in a city that has seen little or no growth in quite some time. Despite Mayor Herenton’s concerns that the “right” people may not be running or may not win, his decision to resign the office of Mayor means that, short of filing to run in the special election, he either has to get behind his favored candidate, or deal with the consequences of his actions. Remember, it was the Mayor that created this scenario. If he doesn’t like the outcome, he has no one to blame but himself. The truth of the matter is that Memphis and Shelby Co. have done a poor job of grooming future leaders in a way that creates viable alternatives outside the established powers. Sure there are programs and groups dedicated to building new leaders, but the political establishment of the city and county hamstrings this effort through rigid coalitions of the consiglieri. If you’re not in, you’re out of luck around here. It’s one of the things that has been a persistent problem in this city for far longer than Herenton’s tenure at City Hall, or anywhere else in public life. These coalitions are designed to maintain established powers and ensure that nothing happens, no matter how beneficial to the community, without their approval. Sure, some have tried to buck this system, but they have received no future support from their efforts. The “personality campaigns” merely feed this effort to stifle positive change. Voters are distracted by personality, something that is far easier for a compliant public to wrap their collective heads around than policy or ideas that are sold to the public by these “personality merchants” as eggheaded. Rather than debate the proposals on their merits we are fed a steady diet of name-calling and innuendo, designed specifically to distract us from the lack of vision from which many of these “leaders” suffer. So yeah, I’m ready for a boring Mayor, because a boring Mayor may just be the prescription this city needs to get out of the rut we’ve dug over decades of ineffective leadership brought on by a system that has been hijacked and shackled to a very small, self-interested population. Bring on the boring, but make sure your ideas are exciting. Boring for boring’s sake isn’t going to get my motor going. Come to the table with some serious and well thought out ideas and I’ll work my ass off to get you elected.

Healthcare Debate to Heat Up in July

Steve Ross — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 11:13:20 +0000

There are a lot of things going on with the effort to reform the nation’s healthcare. Probably more than I’ll be able to distill here. Here are some of the highlights. Some of you may remember that Democratic House leaders pledged to address healthcare by July 31st. For those of you without the benefit of a calendar, that’s just 25 days from now. Seems like a pretty tall order. Still, several of the efforts are starting to take shape. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation has been following the efforts in Congress to craft a new system. A side-by-side comparison of both the three Congressional Committees and all the proposed plans are now available. These are pretty up to date. As you will see in the side by side, some of the committee’s haven’t dealt with every aspect of the issue. This is a great resource that I hope they continue to update. Firedoglake has been running a whip operation of the Progressive Caucus in the House. You’ll note, Tennessee’s only member of the Progressive Caucus, Steve Cohen is currently in the undecided column. A little gentile encouragement may be in order. Steve, take the pledge! This morning on Liberadio! hosts Mary Mancini and Freddie O’Connell will speak to former Insurance executive turned advocate, Wendell Potter. You may remember I discussed Potter’s Testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation last week. I can’t wait for the interview. If you miss the live broadcast this morning, audio is usually available the next day on the blog. Liberadio! can be heard in Nashville on WRVU 91.1, online at WRVU.ORG, or viewed on their UStream video feed. Finally, the Washington Post reports that insurance companies are spending $1.4m A DAY to defeat the public option. That’s a lot of scratch to make sure they don’t have to compete against an affordable option that they won’t provide on their own. Hmmm, I wonder if there’s a way that money could be spent better…. Alright, more info as things develop. Have a great Monday!

picture-5

Steve Ross — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:39:31 +0000

picture-4

Steve Ross — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:39:34 +0000

picture-6

Steve Ross — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:41:54 +0000

Drawing the Lines – Succession in Memphis

Steve Ross — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:37:35 +0000

If you’re not tired you’re not paying attention. Yesterday, Mayor Herenton issued a statement announcing his intention to delay his retirement until July 30th Source). I was playing golf at the time and totally missed it, only to be sideswiped by a flurry of text messages, emails and missed phone calls. As the CA reports, and the letter notes, there are, in Mayor Herenton’s mind “important city business matters”, “contractual matters” and, get this, a “friendly lawsuit”. Funny, these things didn’t seem to be an issue when Herenton issued his original resignation. What could have gone wrong? What could have happened? Yeah, yeah, yeah…It really doesn’t matter because this is where we are now, and while the City Council may have some card up it’s sleeve that I don’t know (like maybe telling the Mayor that they still accept his original resignation and any alterations just aren’t gonna happen) we’re in for an ugly time until after the Mayor vacates the office…if and when he actually does. While many may call the Mayor’s rejiggering of his resignation the height of political posturing, there is one issue raised by the Mayor that is kind of important. Succession and what happens to what when and where. Last year when the Mayor put in his resignation which coincidentally was to occur on July 31, 2008, Scott McCormick was the Chair of the City Council and set to take on the duties of Mayor. However, this was under the OLD Charter rules, meaning McCormick would have only served for 20 days, and then been replaced by a person of the City Council’s choosing, or the City CAO, Keith McGee if they could not decide. Ahh, but that was before the adoption of Charter Amendment 6 last November. I supported this amendment, because I felt that it was more important for someone that had been elected to SOMETHING to serve as Mayor for the 3-6 months until the next election, than the possibility of having someone who had NEVER BEEN ELECTED TO ANYTHING, serve in the post for as many as 3½ years, depending on the circumstances. Something I admittedly didn’t think about was the potential conflict of interest for the Council Chairman serving, potentially, in both an executive and legislative role in the event of a Mayoral vacancy. Herenton is right to bring up this question in his letter. In times like this I turn to history. Since I haven’t lived here all that long, I’m short on history, so I turn to friends who were. Thankfully, my good friend LWC answered my question in an email:

Oh boy. OK, as I remember, when Wyeth Chandler resigned to take a judgeship in 1982, the Old Charter applied, with Chair JO Patterson serving for 20 days, and then followed by CAO Wallace Madewell. However, local attorney (and then-campaign manager for 7th District Democratic Congressional candidate Bob Clement) Dan Norwood filed a lawsuit saying that the citizenry would not be served by allowing Madewell to serve until the 1983 City elections. The court agreed, and forced a special election that coincided with the 1982 November general elections. However, at that time, the 7th District came into the city all the way to freaking MENDENHALL, so the prospect of a black mayor (Patterson, playing the role of Myron Lowery, was up against Dick Hackett and Mike Cody) scared all the East Memphis voters into turning out in record numbers, which in turn sunk the campaign of Clement, and elected Don Sundquist to the 7th District seat. There would be a runoff between Patterson and County Clerk Dick Hackett (this was pre-decree), and Hackett would win, and serve until losing by 137 votes to WWH in 1991.

It would seem, assuming that this account is correct, that the current Charter deals with the problem of “unelected successors” quite well, giving people time to campaign (90-180 days depending). Further, Patterson didn’t have to vacate the seat. Ahh, but that’s the NEW problem. Before it was just 20 days. Not that big of a deal compared to 90-180. It seems that City Council Attorney Allan Wade shed some light on this subject today. In the 6 page opinion Wade deals with a variety of issues, but of most pressing interest, the executive/legislative issue for the “Mayor Pro-Tem” who is the current Council Chair and whether the Council seat held by Mayor Pro-Tem Lowery would be considered vacant. First the vacancy issue: Ed Note: This document was scanned into a PDF format. I am using screen captures because the text is not selectable. The argument presented is pretty compelling. Because the Charter dictates that Lowery is to be the “temporary Mayor” for 90-180 days, his seat is not vacant under the rules set forth to define a vacancy. It is clearly an “excused absence”. This goes back to the original “Home Rule” and the more recent 6th amendment to the charter that was adopted last November. The second issue is a bit more dicey. Even though it is somewhat covered in the prior section, this section gives us even more details as to whether the “Mayor Pro-Tem” can serve in both a legislative and executive capacity. So, if we take these two opinions at face value, the “Mayor Pro-Tem” is not required to vacate, the conditions of service do not create a vacancy, BUT in serving as the head of the executive, the “Mayor Pro-Tem” would not be able to also serve as a member of the Council. Now admittedly, this is but one opinion, but it seems reasonable…at least until someone gives me good reason to find otherwise. The arguments are laid out well, and address nearly all of the concerns in Mayor Herenton’s letter. I’m satisfied with this as an explination, but I’ll be happy to read and comment on any dissenting opinions that may be put forth by a legal professional. This still creates the reality that for at least 90 days the voters of the 8th district will be without one member on the Council. There is no remedy that I’m aware of to deal with this in the Charter. There may need to be a remedy, but as we are seeing with the last amendment, the law of unintended consequences is at play here, and would likely be in play in any future effort to clarify the charter that doesn’t include a “vice-Mayor” or some other elected member of the executive that maintains succession through the executive branch of government. Ultimately, it’s only Tuesday. The Council meets tonight, and there will likely be a great deal of discussion and hand wringing. I’ll be listening on the web. You can too by clicking here. The Executive Session is scheduled at 2pm, the regular meeting is scheduled at 3:30. The agenda looks light, but I bet it’ll be a hot one!

Getting Played…UPDATEDx2

Steve Ross — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:32:54 +0000

UPDATE 2: The Memphis Daily News is reporting that Mayor Herenton is already packing boxes to vacate the Office of Mayor. UPDATE: As luck would have it, something more popped up while I was writing the post. Apparently an Election Commissioner, Brian J. Stephens, feels that scheduling a special election based on "hearsay, rumor and conjecture" is premature (Councilwoman Swearengen Ware's word of the day yesterday). Here's the article at the Commercial Appeal. As has been reported by every media outlet in the area, the Memphis City Council approved a resolution (pdf) to accept the resignation of Mayor Herenton last night. The problem? He rescinded his resignation BEFORE the Council action. There will, no doubt, be litigation to follow. I live tweeted the Executive Session (audio), and the Council Meeting (audio starts about 7 min into meeting) yesterday. Folks, it was a barnburner. The four-hour marathon meeting was punctuated by misunderstandings, snarky comments, legal opinions and probably, a lot of hurt feelings. I’m going to try to distill the arguments presented, without getting into the normal personalities that dominate city business. I have some opinions, but I’ll wait until after the analysis before I get into those. What caused the firestorm was a series of letters that; initiated the original resignation process, delayed the official date of resignation, then a third that came just hours after the second rescinding all resignations (pdf). The basis of the debate hinged on whether or not the Mayor could rescind his resignation and whether a verbally expressed intent to resign/retire was legally binding. According to the testimony from attorneys Wade and Jefferson, it is within the prerogative of an individual to alter or rescind a resignation before that resignation is accepted. What clouds this issue is that the Mayor has expressed verbally that he intends to retire/resign on July 30. This verbally expressed intent was the crux of the arguments presented by many of those who voted for the resolution to accept the resignation. Many on the minority side of the resolution vote felt that the Mayor should have the right to change that date regardless of any verbally expressed intent or a letter of resignation. Their argument hinged on the reality that the Mayor was elected for a four-year term, and that he had the right to delay his resignation until the end of that term if he so desired. Their argument also seemed to state that until the Mayor actually vacated the office, there was no vacancy. This is, to my understanding, only partially correct. It is the opinion of both Jefferson and Wade that any resignation is not binding until the Council as a whole approves it. Because the Council had not accepted either the original resignation, or the delay before both were rescinded, there is some question as to whether any resolution to accept the resignation would be binding. Further, there is a great deal of question as to whether a verbally expressed intent would hold up in court should it be litigated. In any case, 7 members of the 13 member body voted to approve the resolution (pdf). After the resolution was approved it was requested that the minutes of this resolution be approved immediately. This would effectively make the resolution binding even though there is no written resignation. This failed after Boyd changed his vote from yea to nay. In the end, this was probably the best thing the council could have done under the circumstances. By not approving the minutes, the council left themselves some wiggle room, should the Mayor provide in writing, another letter of resignation with a date other than July 30 between now and their July 21 meeting. At that time the council could amend the minutes of their meeting last night to reflect the new date and the resolution would be legally binding officially noting a vacancy in the Mayor’s office by the date of any written resignation notice that may appear. The biggest question is, if the Mayor provides no written resignation with a date certain, will the resolution that passed last night be legally enforceable? Hopefully we won’t have to find that out. Hopefully, the Mayor will deliver another letter of resignation, listing July 30th as his “date certain” and the minutes can be approved and all the pain and suffering and bickering will be settled. I feel confident that this will not happen. This is where the opinion comes into the post. It is my strong belief that the Mayor will not send any letter of resignation to the Council until AFTER the minutes are approved. This letter of resignation will have ANY DATE other than July 30th on it, just to press the issue. What’s happening here, and I think some on the council may see it, is that the Mayor is playing with the emotions on the council like a cat plays with, and eventually kills a mouse. Every provocative move the council, or its members make elicits another swat from the Mayor. From Lowery’s over eagerness to Strickland’s exploratory committee, it all prompts another action from the Mayor. Think about the Mayor’s most recent statements about how he expects to be respected. Any slight, anything that would diminish the Mayor’s perception of his power as Mayor is seen as a sign of disrespect, from the reaction to the problems at MSARC to AC Wharton’s potential bid for City Mayor back in 2007. All of it, every single bit is designed to reassert that power to maintain that perception. With all this in mind, the Council, as the mouse in my analogy, would do well to get back into their mouse hole and sit this out until the cat leaves. I’m not saying the Council should not act if the opportunity presents itself. I’m saying the Council should be more measured in it’s actions, working to diminish any perceived provocation, until such time as the Mayor deems he is being respected, tenders his resignation in writing, and the Council has the opportunity to then vote, and approve the minutes of that vote in one fell swoop. I’m not saying it’s rational, I’m just saying it’s reality as I see it. I think everyone on the Council, even the ones who don’t seem to have a freakin’ clue as to what’s going on other than a purely emotional response, are trying to do what’s right for the city. I don’t think the Mayor is. As Councilman Collins said last night in regard to another issue, there is such a thing as “too much help”, and right now the Council is trying to help the Mayor out the door too much. If 7 members of the Council want the Mayor gone, they would do well to allow him to leave. Pressing the issue has always resulted in more pain than necessary. Stop allowing yourselves, as a body to get played by the Mayor. Let him get out the door, then you can kick him if you want. At that point there’ll be nothing he can do about it.

Chickens and Eggs and Calls to Murder

Steve Ross — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:16:46 +0000

“Which came first, the chicken or the egg?”, as the old question goes. If you’re a radical anti-choice/anti-contraception advocate, the egg is the same thing as a chicken. It’s being called the ”personhood strategy”, and the language is pretty broad. From the proposed ballot language: “the term 'person' shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being”. This ballot initiative is actually focused on contraception and probably loosely connected to the pill kills people that protested a while back. I just don’t think they’ve though it all the way through. By trying to tie life to the egg, or anything that constitutes the “beginning of biological development” they create a serious problem not just for women, but for EVERYONE. Since sperm is also part of the “beginning” of the biological development of a human being, it stands to reason that they too would be covered, setting up a situation that would make any sexual action that didn’t result in a self-sustaining entity abortion. What’s crazy is that even if a self-sustaining entity did come of a sexual act, there are millions of other sperm that do not end up becoming “self-sustaining”. Would those be considered aborted? Will wet dreams be considered abortion too? I recognize that I’m going a tad farther than even the “personhood movement” people are, but it stands to reason that they’re trying to make sure that men in their state suffer from the most widespread mass case of blue balls ever. In all seriousness, I understand that men don’t have abortions, but sperm, like eggs, are one of the building blocks that make the “beginning of the biological development of” a human being. It stands to reason that sperm could fall under the same definition as the eggs. Despite that, blinded by their aim, they plow forward, pushing one of the dumbest ideas in the US since new Coke. On the flip side, while the anti-choice/anti-contraception advocates may believe that an egg is a chicken, a chicken is not an egg, and killing a chicken is just fine with them! On Saturday I saw an article that noted Scott Roeder, the man suspected of the murder of Dr. Tiller in Kansas has been advocating for MORE KILLINGS. You may remember that back in early June Roeder made a statement to the AP that, "many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal.” Since then he has been communicating with other radical anti-choice advocates who advocate violence including Rev. Donald Spitz of “Army of God” and Linda Wolfe, who has been jailed some 50 times for interfering with clinics and is a friend of the person who shot Dr. Tiller in 1993. Y’all are makin’ my head hurt more than the shenanigans at Memphis City Hall. This has to stop people. Murder is not winning an argument; it’s killing a person. You want to win the argument, get a better argument, not a gun. People who try to win arguments with guns are either thugs or terrorists. People who use guns to further their argument have conceded that they have lost the argument. End of discussion.

The Law of Unintended Consequences

Steve Ross — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 04:08:00 +0000

Yesterday, flying high on a series of events that have turned the possibility of a change in leadership at the City Mayor’s office for the first time since I left college into a possible reality, there was more political coverage, opinion, and conjecture floating around since I moved here over 5 years ago. Honestly, it was a welcome change. In the wake of all this, I made a list of things I wanted to write about today. Instead, I spent the majority of the day suffering from the effects of a sugar binge that seemed like a good idea at 2am. Haagen-Daaz and Carmel Corn at 2am is a bad idea, no matter how much sugar you think you can consume. Anyway, in light of the events of the past couple of days, I thought I would go through some of the coverage of City Government, starting with the City Council meeting on Tuesday that fanned the media firestorm. First I’ll start with my coverage of the Council meeting Tuesday. Several TV stations have played the more explosive parts of the meeting, but in order to really get a sense of the climate, you have to listen to the whole thing. It all started with Councilman Strickland’s motion to suspend the rules. Now I understand that not everyone is familiar with parliamentary procedure. Thankfully, Wikipedia has a good definition:

A motion to suspend the rules, in parliamentary procedure, is used to allow a deliberative assembly to do something that it could not normally do without violating special rules of order, rules contained in the parliamentary authority, the standing rules of the assembly,[1] or rules of order contained in the bylaws.[2] (Source)

Basically, this was a successful attempt to add Strickland’s resolution accepting the resignation to the agenda. What happened from there was 45 minutes of impassioned debate (large audio file) not about suspending the rules, but the merits of the issue that would be brought if the rules were suspended. From that point, only 30 minutes were required to pass the resolution and vote on same night minutes. Again, for those not familiar with parliamentary procedure, had the Council approved the minutes that same night, the resolution would have a binding effect in its current form. Because they did not, there is an opportunity to amend the resolution should there be any need. Ultimately, this is a good thing, as I noted yesterday. After I published my post about the proceedings, a flurry of interviews with the Mayor started coming online. It started with Memphis Daily News reporter Andy Meek’s report that the Mayor was packing boxes in his office. Then there was this interview by Fox 13 (direct link). Since this interview hit the internet, there’s been more and more and more, heating up the speculation and causing one commentator to say I told ya so. I think it’s all, as Councilwoman Swearengen-Ware said multiple times yesterday, “premature”. There’s this one nagging thing that’s been banging around in my head that goes back to this whole parliamentary procedure thing that I’ve been talking about throughout this post. As the CA reported on the same day he announced his retirement, the Mayor’s pension was approved by the Pension Board. Something that wasn’t reported is the process. Just like the City Council, the Pension Board must approve the minutes of their last meeting for those actions to have any impact. Since the Pension board did not approve the minutes on the same night that the pension was set, any pension arrangement is still up in the air. When is the Pension Board set to approve the minutes? July 30, the same day that Mayor Herenton says he will vacate the office. Coincidence? Maybe, but I’d be willing to bet that the Mayor saw a potential point of weakness in vacating before the minutes were approved, and wanted to shore up that position. So maybe he will retire on July 30. We won’t really know until July 30. Between now and then we still have another City Council meeting. At that meeting, assuming the majority holds for another 12 days, they will approve the minutes of the meeting, making the Strickland resolution binding. If the Mayor doesn’t present the Council with another letter of retirement/resignation we’ll have a resolution that is, at best, on shaky legal grounds as noted by Atty. Wade at the Council meeting. Not that I think that will be an issue, but it could…especially if the Pension Board does something that puts Mayor Herenton’s pension in limbo. There are some other things that, admittedly, are less critical, but still interesting about the whole series of events. I personally find it interesting that the Mayor changed his date of resignation/retirement on July 6th. Also I find it interesting that the language used since the 6th seems more closely tied to “retirement” rather that “resignation”. Could it be that the bizarre resignation of Gov. Sarah Palin on July 3rd, combined with the issue of the Pension Board, gave the Mayor pause, and led him to make this clarification in language as well as the change of date? After all the pundits in America called her resignation a “political disaster”, perhaps the Mayor chose to do something that seemed less like a non-quitting quitter, ala retirement as he begins his run for the 9th Congressional seat. Ok, I’ll take off my tinfoil hat now. What’s most interesting, aside for all the “will he/won’t he” back and forth, is that underlying all this is a campaign for an office that is still yet to be announced as vacant, that is fully underway. Here is the “candidate’s forum” from earlier today as reported by the CA. For those of you just following the Cliff’s Notes, the Election Commission declined a bid to start the process for a Special election today. Why? From the article:

…there will be no preparations for a special election until there is a clear mandate from the City Council, adding that he doesn't want to spend any taxpayer money on the process until then.

The Election Commission, rightly, recognizes the shaky legal ground the Memphis City Council is on, and doesn’t want to play. I can’t say as I blame them. But there’s more! A group has filed a lawsuit challenging the separation of powers that the Mayoral Succession charter amendment that passed last November with some 85% of the vote. I wrote about this after Atty. Wade’s opinion was released. Unfortunately, this is just an opinion, in order for it to be anything more there has to be some case law to back it up, which there isn’t. The Charter Amendment we voted in last November hasn’t been around long enough to be litigated, so this will be it’s maiden voyage in the courts, should the lawsuit actually be brought. If this seems chaotic to you, take a moment; walk around the block a couple of times, play fetch with the dog, maybe enjoy a good cigar and a fine single malt scotch. In any case, chill. This is all part of the process. Process is the thing that brings order to chaos. The Courts are there to decide if the pending litigation has any merit. Since this is a new Charter Amendment, and the circumstances surrounding the situation are heatedly emotional and have little or no legal framework to stand upon, there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with getting a decision to settle it. In fact, it’s a better outcome because in the future, we won’t have these problems. That doesn’t mean I agree with the legal position put forward by, really anyone in the process, that just means that by litigating it we can find out what reality is, and move forward from there. Yes it’s gonna cost us money, and money is tight. There isn’t anything about a succession battle that isn’t going to cost money. In the end, I think the courts will side with Atty. Wade’s opinion on the resignation and succession issues, and we’ll move on. Admittedly, I’m not a lawyer. I’m a guy with an opinion and we know what else everyone with one of those has. But from my time of being a goob reading all the stuff that no one wants to read and listening to all the stuff no one wants to listen to, I think this will turn out just fine. We’ll get it decision and we’ll go from there. Remember, the law is your friend, and process is the thing that got us out of the caves. You can get emotional if you want to…God knows I have, but in the end what will you have? Let the system work through our unintended consequences and let’s move on from there. At least, in the end, we’ll know where we stand so we can come up with an action from a position of understanding, rather than a position of emotion.

Defining Anti-Choice

Steve Ross — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:40:19 +0000

I don’t get emails from people challenging the words I use, well, ever, but just the other day I did receive the following email from someone who apparently didn’t want to comment on the post.

Upon reading your article “Chickens and Eggs and Calls to Murder,” I wanted to bring a particular point to your attention. Your use of the term “anti-choice” is very misleading, and shows a significant misunderstanding of the term. The term anti-choice by definition means “one who opposes ALL choices”, no matter what the topic of choice be. The opposition to abortion does not stem from the opposition of choices in general (as the term anti-choice would lead one to believe). Those who oppose abortion are against feticide and embryocide, thus making them anti-feticide, anti-embryocide, or anti-abortion. Just as someone who opposes the choice of a man to hit his wife is not anti-choice, but anti-domestic-violence, the correct label for a person who opposes abortion would be anti-abortion (or anti-feticide, anti-embryocide, etc.) I would invite you to visit the website www.notantichoice.com to review and read more information on this subject and on the use of the term anti-choice.

The email was in reference to this post. The emailer can say what he/she wants concerning the language I use to describe positions, but, as people who have been reading for a while will know, I’ve defined “anti-choice” once before. So for those of you just joining us in class, here’s the definition:

The truth is, most of the proponents of SJR127 are not as “Pro-Life” as they claim to be, they are anti-choice. They don’t want you to have any say in your life. They are less concerned about your liberty than their drive and desire to restrict it. They want to regulate your body, mind and spirit in a way that harkens back to “serfdom”, and SJR127 is a step in that direction. I can respect someone who is “Pro-Life” but also votes for legislation to help people through their struggles by supporting contraception, education, jobs and affordable healthcare, but the people that put SJR127 up aren’t those people. They don’t give a shit about you once your born, and if you have a problem, or are living in poverty, or don’t have access to education or employment opportunity, from their perspective, it’s probably something you did.

I’m not saying the person who sent the email is one of these people, I’m not saying they aren’t. I am saying, from an operational standpoint, this is the definition of “anti-choice”. If this seems to lead one to believe that there is an implied opposition to choices in general, that is EXACTLY the message I’m relaying. Further, the analogy the emailer used is just pure bullshit. Trying to equate abortion and domestic violence as “choices” is not just a stretch, but a Stretch Armstrong. Try again. In the post that prompted the email, I kept to this definition, targeting the fringiest of the fringe elements that wish to criminalize abortion, contraception, the rhythm method, and even possibly ovulation through their ridiculous “egg as human” ideas. These people are “anti-choice” because they would exclude everything short of tying off the tip, and possibly even that as well as access to reproductive healthcare and legal medications that both regulate the monthly cycle as well as prevent pregnancy. In short, these people are anti-choice, and if that includes the emailer, then I am confident we have nothing further to discuss. From a semantic standpoint, since that’s how this whole thing got started, I will say that people who hold “pro-choice” views are not “pro-death” as the radical anti-choice crowd who likes to call themselves “pro-life” would lead one to believe. I can’t think of ANYONE who espouses a “pro-death” or “make abortion mandatory” position. The debate is not about “life” per se, but about when “birth” is. The Choice side holds with thousands of years of precedent that something isn’t born until it’s born. The “other” side believes that something is alive from the point of fertilization. Finally, no matter what you call them, if people who oppose abortion would spend as much time publicly working to improve reproductive healthcare options for poor expectant mothers, as well as all the other healthcare, educational, economic needs and opportunities for the child throughout it’s life, anti-abortion advocates could make the point moot, by ensuring the situation only came up in extreme circumstances. Instead, they choose a path of vocal prohibition, which is a path that restricts choices, which makes them “anti-choice”. Any questions? Ed Note: This is a form letter. I'm told Feministe got the exact same letter just days ago. So, you're either not a person, or not very creative. Kisses!

City Council Meeting Tuesday, 7/21/2009 at 3:30

Steve Ross — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 02:36:29 +0000

Yes kids, that’s right, it’s time for another City Council Meeting. Even though I’m not in Memphis, I’ll be able to follow along with the fun via the intertubes (assuming the connection at this hotel in Jersey isn’t a piece of crap). I’ll be live tweeting the meeting on my twitter acct. Vibinc under the hashtag #memcc0721. There are a lot of things on the agenda, but the thing that may be the most contentious is at the very top of the list, the approval of the minutes from July 7th. For those of you not following along, that meeting, which I covered here featured an exchange between the majority of the Council, who sought to declare a vacancy in the Mayor’s office without a letter of resignation or retirement, and a very vocal minority of the Council, led in emotion, if nothing else by Janis Fullilove, who sought to let the Mayor leave before taking any action. Both courses are sketchy. I’ll delve further into that “sketchiness” in my next post. (I’m such a tease).;

Dissecting Mayoral Resignation

Steve Ross — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 10:51:51 +0000

Today the Memphis City Council will vote to approve the minutes of the meeting from earlier in the month. This will officially declare a vacancy in the office of Mayor, if the minutes are approved, without an official letter of resignation. This legally tenuous footing is possibly made more tenuous by the way the charter ignores “resignation” as an official act vacating the Mayor’s office. Section 38 of the Charter defines a Mayoral vacancy.

Sec. 38. Acts vacating mayor’s office. In the event the mayor, after his election, shall become interested in any contract with the city, or accept any office or agency of the United States, or of the State of Tennessee, or of the County of Shelby, or of quasi-public corporation, his office shall be thereby vacated. (Acts 1909, ch. 298, § 18; Priv. Acts 1937, ch. 122, § 4; Priv. Acts 1939, ch. 173, § 4)

I have stated, on several occasions that I am not a lawyer. However, do you notice the glaring omission in this text? I’ll make it easy for you, the word resignation or retirement. Neither of these are listed as “acts vacating the mayor’s office”. Death isn't mentioned either, though I doubt anyone would argue that death doesn't constitute a vacancy. Still it's interesting. What about Section 27? I mean, I know that’s what most people will point to as a refutation, and I would generally agree, however, section 27 says NOTHING about the office of Mayor. Section 27 resides in Article 5, which establishes the City Council.

Sec. 27. Vacancy in office generally. Removal of residence by a council member from the City of Memphis shall constitute a vacancy on the Council, but removal from one council district to another shall not constitute such vacancy. Upon any vacancy occurring in the Council, including a vacancy in the office of Chairman, by reason of death, resignation, removal or otherwise, the remaining members of the Council shall have the power by a majority vote to elect a person to fill such vacancy and to serve until his successor is elected and qualified. Said vacancy shall be filled as soon as possible and within a period not to exceed thirty (30) days thereafter. Such elected member shall possess the requisite qualifications for membership for that particular position on the Council, including the requirement that he or she be a resident of said district from which he or she is elected in the event of a vacancy and shall take office immediately upon election and hold said office until his or her successor is elected and qualified. A successor shall be elected to fill out the remainder of the term of the Councilman whose seat was vacated in the same manner as provided in Sec.28, except that such special municipal election shall be held on the date of the next regular August or November election. In the event a person elected as council member shall be absent from duty without proper and reasonable explanation therefor being made for a period of ninety (90) days, his or her said office shall be declared vacated and said vacancy shall be filled as herein provided. (Acts 1905, ch. 54, § 6; Ord. No. 1852, 8-16-66)

What does this mean? Maybe nothing, but to my layman’s eye this is interesting. Resignation, as a cause for vacancy, applies to the City Council but not specifically the Mayor. In searching the Charter, the word “resignation” appears 14 times. The only time it is mentioned in Article 6 is in Section 38.2

Sec. 38.2. Recall of Mayor Upon petition signed by a number of qualified voters equal to ten per centum of the total number of votes cast in the last municipal election for the office of Mayor and filed with the Election Commission (provided that no such petition shall be filed during the first two years of his term), the Election Commission shall call an election at the time of the next General Election after the filing of such petition at which said election the question shall be: “Shall the Mayor be Recalled?” If a number of voters equal to a majority of those voting on the question shall vote to recall the Mayor, the office shall be vacated when the Election Commission shall declare the results, and shall immediately be occupied by the person so designated to succeed the Mayor in case of his death, inability for any reason to serve, or resignation. (Ord. No. 1852, 8-16-66)

This really intrigues me, because since 38.2 falls after 38, it refers to things that should already be mentioned. Remember, 38.2 is not about resignation, but recall. The section assumes that “resignation” is a grounds for vacancy, but because it is not spelled out in Section 38, or anywhere else in the charter where it addresses the office of Mayor there could be some question as to it’s relevance. In my experience, Charters and other documents establishing a government, organization or business define things before they refer to them. By not defining the popular understanding of the term “resignation” as a “vacancy” the city charter leaves a grey area that simply shouldn’t exist. What’s even MORE interesting is that in the old charter there was a section that further defined vacancy to include “resignation”. This section (Section 38.2) is not included in the current charter that I downloaded from the City site. Here’s the section from the OLD charter:

Sec. 38.2 Vacancy in office. In the case of the death, resignation, inability for any reason to serve, or recall of the Mayor or his removal from the City, his office shall be occupied by the Chairman of the Council for a period not exceeding twenty (20) calendar days, during which period the Council shall elect a successor to the Mayor from among qualified persons not members of the Council at the time of such elections. Such elected person shall take office as Mayor immediately on election and shall hold office until his successor is elected or qualified, which office shall thereupon be filled in the same manner as heretofore provided for vacancies on the Council. In the event the Council shall fail to act within the twenty (20) day period, the Director of Administration shall fill said office until such time as the members of the Council shall have elected a successor or until the next general or municipal election.

Now admittedly, this section falls after Section 38, which is the exact same verbiage in the old and new charters. Still, it clarifies what constitutes a “vacancy”, which the current charter does not. So the question becomes, why does the old charter deal with resignation, but not the new charter? Because I’m not a lawyer, there may be some overriding state or federal definitions that supersede. I don’t know, but in any case, resignation is NOT a listed cause for vacancy under the current city charter as I read it. However, the definition of resignation in Section 27 may carry over to all city offices even though it is not specifically stated. Again, I’m not a lawyer, so I have to rely on a literal reading of the charter. From that literal reading, I have to ask myself if not stating something means that it isn’t recognized, even though it defies common sense. Certainly, from a “common sense” perspective “resignation” or “retirement” vacates the office. I don’t think ANYONE would argue that. The fact that it’s not spelled out in a way that makes it plain calls into question the entire issue of Mayoral succession, something we thought we were correcting with the charter amendments that passed back in November. This may be the “friendly lawsuit” Herenton mentioned in his letter of July 6. I haven’t had time, or the opportunity to read Atty. Jefferson’s opinion, and don’t even know if he’s released it. Perhaps there’s something in there that I don’t know about. Also there’s the possibility that my layman’s eyes have missed something vital in the charter. It is, however, interesting that the section that would deal with vacancy doesn’t specifically talk about resignation as a cause. Does it mean anything? Probably not. According to the charter, the Mayor’s reported business dealings with the city would have meant that he vacated the office years ago. That didn’t happen either. Ahh, the reasons I love process… References: Current Charter Old Charter Really Confusing "3rd" charter that includes markups

Healthcare and The Land of the Disintegrating Talking Point

Steve Ross — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:19:36 +0000

Is it just me, or are conservative TV talking heads and Blue Dogs the only people who are sticking to the talking points set up to kill Healthcare reform? It seems like it. Hell, even Republicans are having a hard time staying on point. Case in point, tin foil hatter and Minnesota Representative, Michelle Bachman

Approximately 114 million Americans are expected to leave private health insurance. Why? Their employers will drop the insurance because the taxpayer-subsidized plan will be 30 to 40 percent cheaper. This action will collapse the private health insurance market, and then the Federal Government will own the health provider game. (Source)

Cheaper, more efficient healthcare is worse? Who knew? Michelle, the mothership sent out talking points just yesterday. That wasn’t one of them. Still, the media is faithfully spewing RNC talking points like they’re all that’s been programmed into the pull string in their backs. Do any of these sound familiar?

* President Obama and Democrats are conducting a grand experiment with our economy, our country, and now our health care.  * President Obama's massive spending experiments have created more debt than at any other time in our nation's history. * The President experimented with a $780 billion dollar budget-busting stimulus plan and unemployment is still rising. The President experimented with banks and auto companies, and now we're on the hook for tens of billions of dollars with no exit plan. * Now the President is proposing more debt and more risk through a trillion dollar experiment with our health care. * Democrats are proposing a government controlled health insurance system, which will control care, treatments, medicines and even what doctors a patient may see. * This health care experiment will have consequences for generations, but President Obama and Democrats want to ram this legislation through Congress in two months. * President Obama's health care experiment is too much, too fast, too soon. Our country cannot afford to fix health care through a rushed experiment. * Americans want health care reform that addresses, not increases, cost or debt. * Government takeover is the wrong way to go -- health care decisions should remain between the doctor and the patient.

Apparently the RNC is “experimenting” with writing talking points. (/snark) The media blitz, and the lobbying effort, which is spending like there’s no tomorrow, and cherry-picking their facts, does seem to be having some effect…on Blue Dogs. Apparently, they’ve been getting the RNC talking points, and have come out to block the bill in the House Energy and Commerce Committee (Source). You’ll notice that one of the listed Blue Dogs is our very own Bart Gordon. Lincoln Davis and John Tanner probably aren’t far behind. Republicans are using this dissention to try and push a “centrist” plan of their own. Read down in the comments and notice the FUD spouted by commenter TNvolunteer73. Yesterday, The Hill published an article about support for a “public option”. In the article, the author sites the Rasmussen poll as more than an outlier, but an outright liar. The poll asks if people support “a government health insurance company to compete with private insurance companies.” From the article:

In fact, only one poll asking a straight favor/oppose question has recorded majority opposition — but generating that opposition required Rasmussen to misstate the facts. They asked about creating “a government health insurance company to compete with private insurance companies.” The only surprise is that just 50 percent thought a government-run health corporation was a bad idea. Of course, no legislation under consideration in the House or the Senate even contemplates creation of a “government health insurance company.” So if some day someone were to actually propose such an animal, Rasmussen can responsibly say the public is opposed — until then their poll is meaningless.

Math is hard, honesty is harder! So yesterday, President Obama (yes, he’s the President and I call him President, not Mr. or any of the other things that people on TV call him other than President) met with some of the malcontented Blue Dogs. Whether or not this meeting will net any real movement on the issue or not is still up in the air, but $24b/year in deficits to insure nearly 100% of Americans seems cheap. Hell, it’s only 4.5% of the Defense Budget! Further, that number is BEFORE any additional cost savings, and they’re still working on that. This morning’s USAToday notes in an interview with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, that Dems are working to squeeze bill’s costs. Focusing on areas of agreement rather than dissention, the House Speaker believes that ”…We are closer than ever before to the reform that the American people need, and we're going to get the job done." So maybe all’s not as bad as it sounds. Still, that’s not a reason to let your guard down, or get comfortable. We still have to demand a real health care solution from our Representatives and Senators. To that end, HCAN released this ad last week. Seriously, calling and emailing is the way to get in touch with these folks. Writing a letter is nice, but it can be more easily ignored than a constantly ringing phone. If you live in the 6th, and you want a public option, you best get to dialing. That’s the only thing that’s going to turn Gordon’s vote to our side. Give Rep. Gordon a ring, here are his digits 877-264-4226. Finally, I think every morning post needs some humor, and while I work hard at being snarky, I’m hardly a professional. So here’s Lewis Black destroying Republican talking points on Health Care.

( h/t Bruinkid) Have a Healthy Day!

Process and Precedent – Completing the Term(oil)

Steve Ross — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:32:54 +0000

All the talk and media coverage surrounding what the Mayor will or won’t do, and why he’s doing it is designed to sell papers more than inform. This thing has turned into something that more resembles a TMZ report than anything else, which is unfortunate because there is a real substantive story here, if only the media would allow it to emerge. Since we first learned of the Mayor’s retirement/resignation I’ve written about 4 posts. Almost all of these have dealt with process, or procedural flaws in one argument or another. Surely the members in the majority understand that their decision to declare the office of Mayor vacant as of July 30th based on a verbal commitment made to the media is a shaky legal proposition at best. Surely the members in the majority knew that as soon as the minutes were approved the Mayor would make a move to challenge their authority, and more importantly, their shaky legal position. It was evident that this would happen from the beginning, and regardless of whether members in the majority of the Council “believe” the Mayor will retire/resign or not, they have been told, over and over again by legal council that they “can” do this, but that the consequences are unknown. We can talk about a lot of supposed “reasons” the Mayor is doing what he’s doing. Lord knows I’ve played armchair psychologist for this thing for several weeks. But I don’t really think that’s necessary. You can call the Mayor’s methods what you want, I’ll go with unconventional, but in the face of a new “process” for Mayoral succession that was voted in last November, there is no legal “precedent” to fill the holes in the Charter, or support the position of the City Council. Herenton, as Mayor of the city, is duty bound to make sure executive authority is not usurped by the City Council. The Mayor has to make sure what’s happening now doesn’t become a legal precedent that will haunt future Mayors. For those of you non-lawyerly types out there (and some of you who are lawyers but didn’t see this coming)

Precedent: noun |ˈpresid(ə)nt| - a previous case or legal decision that may be or ( binding precedent) must be followed in subsequent similar cases :

The “precedent” that the Mayor must fight is that a vacancy can be declared by the Council without the benefit of a formal and valid resignation/retirement letter. I would suggest that the opposing parties (the Mayor and the majority of the Council) are at an impasse. The Mayor has publicly announced his intention to retire, but has not formally informed the Council (he rescinded all resignation/retirement letters before they were approved making them null and void), nor has that formal announcement been approved by the Council (because they were rescinded). What the Council approved is the legal equivalent of hearsay. Perhaps the Mayor has communicated individually to Council members his intention to retire on date certain X, but until that communication is made directly, in writing to the body, and not rescinded before the body can act, the council is building a case on a shakier foundation than the Pyramid. So, by voting to declare the office vacant, with little guidance from the charter on what constitutes vacancy, or the process for declaring such a vacancy, the Council has started down the path of creating a legal precedent that, if unchallenged, could weaken the office of Mayor for decades. We can argue whether a weaker Mayor is a good thing or not, that’s not the point. The charter establishes the office of Mayor, just like it does the City Council, assigning duties and responsibilities to both. Because Mayoral resignations/retirements happen so infrequently, and any past precedent in the wake of the Charter Amendments are tenuous at best, the entire process is untested and past precedents are questionable. Further, there is NO precedent ANYWHERE that I’m aware of, that allows the City Council to vacate the Mayor’s office without notice or benefit of a document expressing executive intent to vacate (the only exception here would be death). If the City Council’s majority position stands, the office of Mayor could be vacated based on what amounts to rumor and innuendo. Folks, this isn’t the Italian Parliament! We don’t just dissolve the government at the drop of a hat because we’re bored. There has to be just cause backed up by documentation. At this point I would submit that the Council has neither. In case it’s not clear, I find myself siding with the minority of the Council on this question, though not for the reasons that many in the minority have arrived at their position. Like LWC I believe that the Collins resolution, which would have held the approval of the minutes on the Strickland resolution to declare a vacancy until 5pm on July 30th, would have, at least, given the Mayor the opportunity to leave office in a manner consistent with his position and prerogative. Once the Mayor was officially off City payroll, as Atty. Wade said at the last City Council meeting, there would be no question as to whether he was still Mayor or not, the Council could act in a way that wouldn’t potentially establish any precedent that might be harmful in the long-term, or be up to a legal challenge in the future. Further, had the Collins resolution passed, the approval of the minutes on July 30th, despite the likely absence of Councilman Hedgepeth (who said he could not attend) may have been unanimous, uniting the Council and perhaps healing some fissures that have arisen through this process. Apparently, the majority wasn’t willing to take that chance. So, here we are. The Council has approved the minutes of the Strickland resolution and in doing so, declared a vacancy, potentially establishing a precedent in city process that is well outside of the intent of the Charter. At this point, I want this question to go to court so it can be cleared up and settled in a rational way, rather than what’s going on right now. So far, all we’ve seen are opinions (which are like a certain body part that everyone has), I think it may be time for a decision, and that can ONLY come from a court. It’s unfortunate that a lot of money will be spent on this, but it is what it is. There’s no turning back now. At the end of the day we have to look to the former members of the Charter Commission, two of whom are current City Council members, and ask why they removed provisions from the old Charter that defined resignation/retirement and death as a vacancy, but did not maintain these, or further define a process to follow. Hindsight is 20/20, but these individuals were tasked with foresight. In that task, they seem to have failed, and the city will suffer the consequences of that failure.

One Billion Dollars

Steve Ross — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:40:52 +0000

As H.R. 3200 plods it’s way through Congress, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce has emerged as a stumbling block. The opposition, led by Democratic Representative Mike Ross (AR-04), centers around Medicare payments to rural communities and the assurance that the measure will be deficit neutral. Ross is a member of the Blue Dogs, who as a group have come out against the “public option”, a program that would help individuals and businesses afford healthcare, and provide competition for companies that are currently the single most responsible parties in the massive increase in the cost of healthcare. I wrote briefly about this several weeks ago. One of the tools that has emerged in the course of the debate is a district by district analysis of the impact the legislation would have to their constituents. Unfortunately, the link for TN-03 is dead, so a complete analysis on this legislation’s impact in Tennessee cannot be done at this time, but just with the numbers from the other 8 districts the results are pretty startling.

Under the bill in it’s current state 100,000+ businesses in Tennessee, large and small would be eligible for a tax credit for providing their employees with healthcare. Healthcare would be less expensive, allowing for either better coverage, or additional employees. 68,000+ seniors in Tennessee would avoid the donut hole in Medicare, eliminating the choice between medicine and food. 678,000+ individuals in Tennessee would gain access to affordable healthcare, increasing productivity and quality of life. Here’s the kicker, nearly $1,000,000,000 a year in uncompensated care, that’s services that are rendered, but not paid for, would be covered throughout the state.

ONE BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR

How many new clinics will that open? How many doctors and nurses will that employ? How much additional access will that create?

ONE BILLION DOLLARS IN ANNUAL LOSSES WIPED OFF THE BOOKS.

By any measure, that’s a lot of money. Think about all the construction workers, and electricians, and plumber that will get put to work building the infrastructure to support these new doctors and nurses. Think about the additional access in rural communities, where the nearest clinic can be up to 30 minutes away. Think about it! What about all the income that money will generate? Those doctors and nurses will be making and spending money in the state. If half of that money is spent in Tennessee every year by new doctors and nurses buying regular goods and services, that’s another $46,000,000 in sales tax collections alone. You can’t tell me that this isn’t a financial positive. You just can’t. What about employers and individuals? By implementing this bill the annual cost of healthcare will drop. By how much is still not known, but the single largest driver of healthcare inflation is not lawsuits, but the insurance industry’s need to create ever-increasing profit margins and the current state of the uncompensated care that this bill would cover. For all you folks out there in rural Tennessee, take a look at this analysis of what HR 3200 will do for healthcare in rural America. Think of how this will benefit your community. Think of how it levels the playing field between rural America and the urban centers that so many are forced to travel to for healthcare delivery. Folks, this needs to happen. Call your Representative and Senators today and ask them to support HR 3200. Tennessee Representatives Representative Phil Roe (R - 01) – Ph. 202-225-6356 Fax. 202-225-5714email Representative John J. Duncan, Jr. (R - 02) – Ph. 202-225-5435 Fax. 202-225-6440 email Representative Zach Wamp (R - 03) – Ph. 202-225-3271 Fax. 202-225-3494email Representative Lincoln Davis (D - 04) – Ph. 202-225-6831 Fax. 202-226-5172 email Representative Jim Cooper (D - 05) – Ph. 202-225-4311 Fax. 202-226-1035 email Representative Bart Gordon (D - 06) - Ph. 202-225-4231 Fax. 202-225-6887email Representative Marsha Blackburn (R - 07) - Ph. 202-225-2811 Fax. 202-225-3004 email Representative John Tanner (D - 08) - Ph. 202-225-4714 Fax. 202-225-1765 email Representative Steve Cohen (D - 09) - Ph. 202-225-3265 Fax. 202-225-5663 email Tennessee Senators Senator Lamar Alexander (R- TN) – Ph. 202-224-4944 Fax. 202-228-3398 email Senator Bob Corker (R- TN) – Ph. 202-224-3344 Fax. 202-228-0566 email

Define Objections, Offer Alternatives

Steve Ross — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:52:53 +0000

Sean’s already touched on this but in light of both the op-ed in the Tennessean where Jim Cooper announced his “reluctant no" to HR 3200 (summary), and the appearance on Face the Nation Sunday morning I have to say something. Cooper's segment starts 9 min into the video below.
Watch CBS Videos Online Cooper offered two key points in the interview above. The first was the tax benefit to the super rich for “Cadillac” policies (12:00). He’s right about this being a handout on the backs of the working poor and middle class. That needs to be corrected. Also, he pointed out that there is currently $700b in waste EVERY YEAR. That alone would pay for healthcare for everyone. Looking at these two things, one has to wonder why he would come out against HR 3200? The bill seeks to do these things, and if it doesn’t to his or the Blue Dog’s satisfaction, there’s time to debate and amend on the House floor. Why is Cooper, who Bob Schieffer called “a Real Expert” on healthcare just giving up? That’s what it sounds like he’s doing! I ask you, Congressman Cooper, what specific areas does the bill “Fail”? Is it that it may not be budget neutral? If you remember, the Iraq war was billed by Paul Wolfowitz as “budget neutral” yet the Congress, as well as your Blue Dogs haven’t sought to apply PAYGO to the DoD. If healthcare requires some initial investment that may not pay off for 15 years, isn’t that a better investment than a war that will likely NEVER provide any ROI? Why do you damn your own party with statements like ”The president is put in a terrible spot by his own Congress.” Aren’t you a member of that same Congress and a member of the majority? Aren’t you hurting the President’s agenda by coming out against something before markup is even completed? What’s the rationale at work here Congressman? Is this really about healthcare or more of a slap at the current House leadership? It’s well known that you and Speaker Pelosi have a contentious relationship, particularly after his statement concerning the stimulus vote back in February. Maybe Cooper wanted a spot on Energy Commerce after whipping for Henry Waxman back in November. Maybe he REALLY DOES have objections, but not listing those objections out in his damning of HR 3200 does NO ONE ANY GOOD. If you are truly committed to healthcare reform, as you have repeatedly said, then why not just define YOUR objections and offer alternatives? Why not lead instead of lending your voice to the echo chamber of nay-sayers on the Republican side of the aisle? I just don’t get it Congressman Cooper. I don’t understand what you have to gain by coming out against something and claiming it doesn’t have the votes to pass before it’s even gone through a key committee, especially after a deal was reached late Friday between Waxman and Ross. It’s weird, on the very same day you came out against HR 3200, a fellow Blue Dog Gabrielle Giffords (AZ) came out in support of it. Maybe you don’t have all the votes you thought you did. I know I’ve been critical of you over the years. Late last year I made a commitment to focus on the idiocy brought forth by Republicans rather than criticizing members of my own party so much. So far, I think I’ve done a pretty good job of maintaining that commitment, but damn you’re making it hard for me. So without being overly critical, without being as brusque or as rude as I could be, give us some REAL details about your objections to HR 3200, because so far all you’ve done is said it isn’t good enough, which isn’t a good enough reason for me to believe you.

Just Another Day in Paradise...

Steve Ross — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:50:05 +0000

Yesterday, in the Commercial Appeal’s Eye on Memphis blog former City Council member and possible Mayoral candidate Edmund Ford Sr. was quoted saying,"People are very tired in this city."…"You know why?" he said. "Everything that's happening, people think that people are asleep right now but they're watching. Hey, they're sitting and watching everything." I think Ford’s right, people are tired, but they’re watching with a weary eye toward both the Mayor Pro Tem’s office and the City Council. It’s not because either has necessarily done anything specific to warrant this feeling, but the cumulative effect of a contentious few months, including a transition at the executive level for the first time in 18 years. People here aren’t practiced in accepting new leadership, particularly when that leadership may only last 90 days. Now Memphians are being asked to accept as many as three possible transitions over the next 3 years…one now, another one is likely in 90 days, and the possibility of third in 2011. That’s a lot of potential change for a city that hasn’t had much of any in nearly a generation. Early Missteps Myron Lowery’s tenure in the 7th story office of the Mayor may only be in its infancy, but already people are questioning his judgment. This should come as no surprise, since Herenton basically set up these questions himself with his July 6th letter changing his date of retirement, and his public statements charging that Lowery was putting the cart before the horse. In all honesty, Lowery hasn’t been very politically astute in some of his early actions. From his calls early last month for a shake-up at City Hall, to his fumbling of the removal of City Attorney Elbert Jefferson, Lowery has put himself in an unnecessarily adversarial position to at least six members of the council. This is exacerbated partially because of his role as the swing vote in the vacancy resolution, and through his moves that some argue, are designed to subvert Council action on the issue of the City Attorney. The truth of the matter is that there are only 11 votes in play for the City Attorney issue. Strickland must recuse himself due to pending litigation. That means that it takes 6 votes on the Council to remove Jefferson. Only 5 are a sure thing. Lowery’s decision to roll the vote until August 18th, gives him time to either let the court decide, or build a case against Jefferson. That case, if strong enough, could shift that sixth vote to his side. Residency Questions Lowery didn’t help his cause ANY by announcing Jefferson’s replacement would be a person that doesn’t live in Memphis. Because of the City’s residency requirement, all city employees are required to live within the city limits. New hires, that are not temporary employees, have six months to establish residency. This is a problem because Lowery’s tenure may only last 3 months. By appointing someone that lives outside the City limits, Lowery has opened the door to be treated, and have his appointments treated as temporary. Division Directors, like the City Attorney, are not temporary employees, whose offices are authorized through the charter as that serve at the pleasure of the Mayor with approval from the Council.

The Chief Executive Officer of the City of Memphis shall be the mayor, who shall be vested with and exercise the executive and administrative power of the City, shall be authorized to administer, supervise and control all divisions, boards, agencies, offices and employees of the City and shall see that the ordinances and provisions of the Charter are observed, except as otherwise specifically provided. Such administration shall be conducted by and through divisional directors under the supervision and control of the mayor, as provided herein. He shall devote his entire time and attention to the duties of his office. (Section 35 of Memphis Charter)

Despite the potential temporary nature of Lowery’s tenure as Mayor, he is, by all accounts, still the Mayor, and has all the rights and responsibilities of the Mayor at his disposal. The argument, fronted by Council members Halbert and Ware, that the 6 month provision somehow doesn’t apply to Mayor Lowery because his tenure won’t last that long, is a stretch. The residency requirement says nothing about the length of the appointment having any bearing on the hire.

Failure of any officer or employee to comply with the provisions of this section shall be cause for removal or discharge from city employment. New employees shall be allowed six (6) months after the date they are hired or appointed to comply with this section. (Section 190 Memphis Charter)

The residency requirement doesn’t stop members like Ware and Halbert from voting against an appointee. That’s well within their prerogative, but it also doesn’t stop the Mayor, regardless of the amount of time left in his term, from putting forth whomever he wishes for the City Council to approve, residency or not. Council Connundrum I’ve already touched on this, but now that the City Council is set in a six/six split, the appointment of Division Directors and the movement of city business is likely to be stuck in a deadlock for the entire tenure of Mayor Lowery. This scenario is difficult for the city going forward. Even though there were only two no votes for the appointment of former Council member Jack Sammons as CAO, any other appointments, or potential replacements of Division Directors will likely be held up by the Council unless a consensus choice, like Sammons, is brought before the Council. From a political perspective, this can be a plus or a minus for the Lowery Administration. Clearly the city is ready to move forward. Those who would oppose that forward movement can be looked upon as obstructionists. But that assumes that Lowery can muster the same kind of media attention and perception of authority that Herenton demanded. There is no question that, under a Herenton Administration, a move like the one Lowery made in regard to Jefferson, would have been accompanied with a full menu of the powers of the executive, and dire warnings to the Council if they were to somehow undermine or question his authority. Lowery is hamstrung by the potential temporary nature of his tenure, and the general belief that he will not win the Mayor’s office. Under this circumstance, Lowery has two options, try to build consensus, or play the role of a reformer being held hostage by Herenton loyalists on the Council. I don’t know which role Lowery is most suited for, but certainly he needs to make that choice soon and follow through COMPLETELY with whichever strategy he believes he can accomplish, lest he lose the confidence of his supporters and the city at large. Election Set Yesterday, the Shelby Co. Election Commission set the date for the special election. This election will be for the City Mayor, and State Sen. Dist. 31, which was left vacant after the resignation of Paul Stanley (R-KISS), following his intern debacle. The election will be held October 15th with a qualifying deadline on September 3rd and withdrawals by the 10th. This makes the election two weeks sooner than originally scheduled. Moving the election up doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me, but I haven’t had the opportunity to talk to anyone at the Election Commission yet, so, until then I’ll withhold judgment. What hasn’t been reported on is if this will be a primary election for this seat. I assume it will be a primary, since there’s no time for one between now and then, which means that ANOTHER election will have to be held for Sen. Dist. 31, which covers Bartlett, Cordova, Germantown, and 20 precincts in Memphis. Assuming that this is a primary election for State Sen. 31, then that could shift who participates in the 20 precincts here in Memphis. There are already three Republicans vying for the Senate seat; Rep. Brian Kelsey (R-83), Rep. Steve McManus (R-96), and Shelby Co. School Board Chair, David Pickler. This contest, particularly with the entrance of the controversial Kelsey into the race, could activate a large number of Republican primary voters. How this will play out in the 20 Memphis precincts that are represented by Dist. 31 is somewhat unknown. In the 2006 general, the Democratic candidate carried those 20 precincts by 1100 votes out of 15,000 cast. However, assuming there is no contest in the Democratic Primary, or possibly no candidate, this could elevate Republican participation, effectively deciding the seat without a general, which could tip the balance in the Mayor’s race. It’s a stretch, I know, but should someone like Conrad enter the race, particularly with the presence of a dozen candidates on the Mayor’s ballot, inflated Republican turnout in these 20 districts could turn the tide. In the end, it will probably just help County Mayor AC Wharton. Which is where I’m going to end this post, because, barring a sex scandal, or credible allegations of something hugely untoward, AC Wharton will be the next Mayor of Memphis. He has all of the elements of a successful campaign in place; money, people and time. He’s been running since the day after the 2007 election, he’s got a huge war chest, and he’s had people out working for him since Chism’s picnic, just days before Herenton announced his original resignation date. No one else is that prepared, no one else was even in the starting blocks. So while I generally agree with LWC’s analysis of the race, reality is reality, and until someone steps up, it’s his to lose.

picture-3

Steve Ross — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:43:27 +0000

Jefferson investigating Lowery?

Steve Ross — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 00:11:34 +0000

(Source) This is interesting. Why would City Councilwoman Wanda Halbert ask the City Attorney to investigate Myron Lowery? The only reason I can think of is something Halbert said during the "vacancy resolution" debate. Both she and City Councilman Brown alleged that Lowery, Strickland, and Conrad were acting in an "unethical" manner by voting on the measure because they were either running or considering a run in the special election. This, of course, is a silly assertion. It's not as if the "vacancy resolution" was a coup attempt, or anything meant to compel Former Mayor Herenton to leave against his will. The Mayor had repeatedly stated that he intended to leave, and had made assurances that it would happen on or around the 30th of July. This is, essentially, how it played out, and despite some, including myself, who were afraid of a charter crisis, the transfer of power went down without any real incident. In short, the "vacancy resolution" was an attempt to get ahead of the game to ensure a smooth transfer of power...nothing else. Lowery, Strickland and Conrad were all well within their rights to vote on this measure. Lowery may have stood to gain financially, from the temporary ascension to the office of Mayor, but he was and is doing so in the execution of his duty as the former Chair of the City Council. This in no way would prohibit his participation in the vote. If this is Halbert's argument, she would also be asserting that Senators in the US Senate cannot vote on budgets if they are running against the sitting President, and a whole host of other things that really just defy logic. What's most interesting is that now Halbert has declared herself a candidate for Mayor. If she was waiting until the actual retirement date of Herenton, at least she's being consistent, but all the arguments that came from her, Fullilove, Swearengen-Ware, and Brown were off base and just plain wrong, otherwise someone would have filed an injunction already and stopped the transfer of power, which did not happen. The next question is, did Halbert know she was going to run when she asked Jefferson to investigate Lowery? If so, this stinks to high heaven as some serious political shenanigans, which would be unethical, if they were provable, which they may not be. All of this is dependent on the timeline. I don't think the City Attorney can investigate the Mayor, as he is a subordinate of the Mayor, so the investigation probably began back on near the July 21 Council meeting when Halbert spoke of her ethical questions concerning Lowery. Now, of course, that Lowery is the CEO of the city (charter's language not mine), regardless of the temporary nature or not, Jefferson cannot investigate Lowery because, for now, he is a part of Lowery's administration. So, the question is, did Halbert decide to run for Mayor before or after her decision to ask Jefferson to investigate Lowery, and after she decided to run, did she ask Jefferson to suspend his investigation so as to not cause any questions about her own ethics? I don't have the answers, but the questions need them.

Menu Please…

Steve Ross — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:09:38 +0000

The political season is heating up here in Shelby County and I’m getting hungry. With a couple of special elections in the near future, and the pending announcement of a Gubernatorial candidate next week from the area, I’m tired of thinking about eating…I want a menu so I can pick out my food. Brad Watkins at West Tennessee Liberal has alluded to this in his “Issues First” posts (1, 2, 3, 4) but I’m gonna make it plain for those that don’t seem to understand;

What are your positions? What are you running on? Why the hell should I vote for you?

This is stuff I need to know and the voters need to know, not only in the upcoming Mayoral and Senate special election, but also going forward in the Governor’s race. I’m tired of waiting Mayoral Candidates. It's been 41 days since the first indication of a vacancy and some of y’all have been running SINCE THE LAST MAYORAL ELECTION. What you've done in the past isn't good enough. The past is the past, I'm interested in the future. Tell me why you deserve my vote. Tell me about your vision for the city. Tell me how you're going to make things better. Tell me, tell me, tell me...or get out of the way. Email using the Contact link or post a link in the comments for all to see. Like LWC I will publish just about anything you send me unedited, but don't waste my time with platitudes or empty campaign rhetoric. We deserve solutions, not BS. Gubernatorial candidates - You have a little more leeway than the Mayoral folks, but don't dawdle.

townmeeting

Steve Ross — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:42:17 +0000

Memphis Political Blogs

Steve Ross — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:29:20 +0000

A new blog started here in Memphis, right around the time that Herenton put his first letter of resignation called Eye on City Hall. A project of the Commercial Appeal, Eye on City Hall has been an indispensable new resource for me over the past several weeks. I follow a lot of local and state blogs, including Jackson Baker’s blog at Memphis Flyer and The Daily News blog run by Bill Dries and Andy Meek over at Memphis Daily News. These three blogs provide the inside baseball that you just can’t get as an average political junkie here in Memphis. In addition, I think I follow just about every media person based here in Memphis on Twitter. The reality is, Memphis has needed these things (focused blogs and twitter) since before I moved here 5 years ago. Local political coverage, up ‘til recently has been scarce, or driven by the availability of column inches. I don’t know if the media just didn’t think people were interested, or what, but now all the major newspapers in the state have some kind of blogging operation, and all of them also have more comprehensive political coverage in a blog form. The point is, more traditional media coverage, even if it doesn’t make the print edition, is ultimately good. You can look at blogs around the state, including Post Politics, Pith in the Wind and In Session in Nashville, not to mention Humphrey on the Hill and No Silence Here (which covers politics and other topics), and see that people are interested in knowing more about their local and state governments. My hope is that these enterprises end up becoming self-sufficient. My fear is that they won’t, and the public’s need to know will fall victim to the budgetary knife as large media operations continue to cut staff to save “shareholder value” the same way they did with the print editions. From my perspective, the “community value” far outreaches the pennies a share that cutting staff or local coverage might provide. Still, checking out these and other blogs sponsored by media outlets once in a while, even if you’re not a political junkie like me, might be a good idea. They don’t have the luxury people like myself, or LeftWingCracker, West TN Liberal, Tom Guelff, 55-40, and a whole bunch of other people (who are on my blogroll to the right) that write about politics here in Memphis have…we don’t rely on the income, they do.

Memphis Town Hall Meeting

Steve Ross — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:40:46 +0000

There are several Town Hall Meetings going on in the area as the week comes to a close. Tonight is a meeting with Marsha Blackburn TN-07. Date:Thursday, August 6, 2009 Time:7:00pm - 8:00pm Location:Macaroni Grill Street:6705 Poplar Ave City/Town:Memphis, TN Tomorrow, Mayor Myron Lowery will host a town hall meeting at City Hall Congressman Steve Cohen (TN-09) will host a Town Hall Saturday, August 8 from 10 a.m. to Noon at BRIDGES, 477 North Fifth Street, Memphis, TN 38105

Dirty Deeds

Steve Ross — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:42:16 +0000

I probably shouldn’t gloat, but apparently I was right about at least one thing. From the Memphis Daily News:

But Halbert told reporters Thursday that it was an inquiry on whether or not Lowery could vote to set a special election date in July since Lowery stood to become acting mayor. She and several other council members said it might be a conflict of interest. “While I personally may not have classified my inquiry as an investigation, I noted, it very well may have been just that to the legal department,” Halbert wrote in an email the day after Jefferson made his claim in court. Jefferson refused to say what his investigation is about on the advice of his attorney, Ricky E. Wilkins.

Halbert may have a “bugaboo about ethical conduct” as Bob suggests in the comments of yesterday’s post, but she wouldn’t know an ethical dilemma if it stood beside her and offered to buy her lunch. Lowery’s right in the MDN article, it was his “responsibility” to vote on the matter. That Lowery and Halbert were on opposing sides of the issue has NOTHING to do with the ethical nature of his vote, or ability to vote. That we're still debating his prior ability to vote on a Council matter says a lot about the people who are working to undermine him. In the meantime, City Attorney Elbert Jefferson, as the “chief ethical officer” of the city, is asserting his “privilege” over the very Executive he serves. That’s an interesting proposition. Of course, there’s a lot about this whole business with Jefferson that’s interesting. First of all, in the lawsuit against Lowery, Jefferson sued Lowery personally, not in his capacity as Mayor. Why? Because Ricky Wilkins, Jefferson’s Attorney, works for the city too, and could not sue the executive he serves. That’s a conflict of interest. Also, Jefferson probably wanted to delegitimize Lowery, the Mayor, in the process. Personally, I think the judge should have thrown the damn thing out saying that Lowery, the man, hadn’t done ANYTHING to Jefferson, and that if Jefferson had a gripe, he needed to sue the City. That’s not what happened. The judge ruled that the Mayor could not dismiss a Director without Council approval, which he conceded at the City Council meeting on Tuesday. We knew this. Why didn’t Lowery just concede defeat and move on? Because Jefferson is also seeking monetary damages against Lowery, the man, not the office of Mayor. Then there’s the whole ethics thing. The article talks about the Ethics Commission, which DOES NOT EXIST in any tangible way. From the article

But the city’s ethics commission has never been established. Its members have yet to be selected because city council members have had difficulty finding one member who is a retired jurist, one of the requirements for the commission.

So in the absence of an “Ethics Commission”, how does the “Chief Ethical Officer” address ethical concerns independently? Does he even address them independently, or can he use his position as a personal political witch-hunt for whatever purpose he deems necessary? One would think an independent council that required City Council approval would be the least biased way to address concerns, in the absence of a Commision. Who knows? Nobody does. Not one single freakin’ person I’ve talked to knows shit about anything. The Ethics rules adopted are a start, but without the Commission, what does it matter? If the City Attorney is the “Chief Ethical Officer”, who does he report to? A mythical commission? Leprechauns? Unicorns? Ed. Note: This Morning's CA reports that Jefferson is sending the ethics matters to outside legal Counsel. The charter is vague on a lot of things, but one thing that is crystal clear is that the Mayor, whomever that is, appoints division heads with the consent of the City Council as affirmed by Judge Evans’ decision.

Sec. 35. Chief executive officer; appointment and supervision of all divisions, boards, employees and city officers; to devote entire time to office. The Chief Executive Officer of the City of Memphis shall be the mayor, who shall be vested with and exercise the executive and administrative power of the City, shall be authorized to administer, supervise and control all divisions, boards, agencies, offices and employees of the City and shall see that the ordinances and provisions of the Charter are observed, except as otherwise specifically provided. Such administration shall be conducted by and through divisional directors under the supervision and control of the mayor, as provided herein. He shall devote his entire time and attention to the duties of his office. Subject to provisions of the Charter including civil service regulations thereof, and ordinances, the Mayor shall appoint and when he deems it necessary for the good of the people, may suspend or remove any employees of the City of Memphis, including any appointive officers or department heads provided for by or under the Charter. The Mayor may delegate to any appointive administrative officer the power to appoint, suspend or remove subordinates in that officer’s division, department, office or agency subject to such conditions and limitations as he may prescribe. The Mayor shall appoint the members of all boards and commissions, said appointments to be made with the approval of a majority of the Council; the removal of all members of boards and commissions shall be effected in the same manner and subject to the same procedures provided for directors. Members of Boards and Commissions shall continue in office until their successors have been appointed and approved.

That said, some reports have noted that Evans instructed the Lowery, the man (because remember, neither the Mayor NOR the City was being sued) that Jefferson couldn’t be suspended without “a serious infraction or incident.”, which is clearly contrary to the section listed above (though the CA report says state law has supremacy here). So what’s the solution? Lowery has to get enough votes on the Council to get rid of Jefferson, which is about as likely as me winning the lottery and moving to a tropical island with a bunch of hot models or something. Or he can drop it, and let the next Mayor deal with it. If he does that, he needs to be ready to do nothing more than cut ribbons, because there’s no way in hell he’ll bridge the gap to win the election. So what’s this all about? Money probably, power likely, but I can’t prove either. Money starts wars and fights and lawsuits, so it stands to reason that it would be, at the very least, part of the reason. Power is one of those things that everyone wants, or thinks they have until they find out they don’t. In short, this shit is dirty, one way or the other, and Myron Lowery isn't the one suffering (though he might disagree on that point), but the citizens of Memphis and the office of Mayor, who Jefferson is SUPPOSED to serve. What is his agenda? How many more agendas will emerge? We’ve got 70 days before the election to find out.

Meet The Candidates – Memphis Mayor Special Election

Steve Ross — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:54:49 +0000

The date’s been set, and even though the filing deadline is over a month away, some 10 candidates have declared their interest to run. Due to the abbreviated nature of the campaign, learning about the candidates for Mayor of Memphis is probably going to be a cram fest. In an effort to help people find information on the candidates I’ll be posting fairly regularly about ways candidates are reaching out to voters. Most of this will deal with the ways they are using the internet to attract support, but as time goes on other things may be covered also. Because it’s so early in the campaign, not everyone is up to speed. The inclusion of candidates who aren’t “up to speed” on this list is not an attempt to besmirch them, but to keep the list as comprehensive as possible. As always, candidates are welcome to contact me with new information and resources as their campaigns ramp up. Without further ado, here are your candidates so far: Candidates are listed in the order of their internet presence strength first, then by electoral strength when there’s a tie County Mayor AC Wharton - Wharton’s decision to jump in the race should come as no surprise. Since his early consideration back in the 2007 election, his name has consistently come up as the heir apparent. That his campaign also mobilized far more quickly than anyone else should also come as no surprise as he has been raising money for this run since just after the 2007 election. His website is clean and professional looking, with shades of the Obama campaign website apparent. My only complaint about the website is the manner in which issues are discussed. Currently, this page is just a list of editorials and news clippings. Still, this is far and away more comprehensive than most announced candidates. The priorities page is less comprehensive, but gives a good overview of his positions. Wharton has also been using social media very effectively. His twitter feed is by far the best use of the medium I’ve seen in a local election, and he also has a Facebook fan page is impressive. It’s interesting that his site currently doesn’t mention either. Oversight perhaps? Charles Carpenter - Carpenter, the former campaign manager for several Herenton campaigns, jumped out of the gate fast with his site. The design is relatively simple, but has plenty of meat to it. The issues page is hardly comprehensive, but gives the reader a good idea of his positions. I find it interesting that he worked with Herenton all those years, but opposes a metro government, for instance. Carpenter also has a twitter feed, which I coincidentally found on his front page, as well as a link to facebook that actually takes you to his personal friend page. Jerry Lawler - Lawler’s site is sparse, though it has some potential. His Letter to the People of Memphis is the closest thing I’ve found to an issues page. I’m sure some of this will change over time. He also is using twitter and facebook though I hate the way the facebook link works on the page. Mayor Pro Tem Myron Lowery - Lowery’s internet presence is far less impressive. He lacks a campaign website, though you can find him both at his city page and on twitter. Lowery’s use of twitter, so far, has been sparse but instructive. He consistently posts interesting things about what’s going on in the city. That’s great and all, but if he expects to win the election he’s going to have to mobilize to a far greater extent. Former City Councilwoman Carol Chumney - Chumney, who placed second in the 2007 Mayoral election, currently has no internet presence aside from a twitter page that has but one entry. I have it on good authority that a web page is in the works, though it will not appear at her former site due to a cyber squatter. Once the page is live I’ll be sure to link it either here, or in a future post. School Board Member Rev. Kenneth Whalum Jr. - Whalum, a member of the Memphis City School Board and pastor at The New Olivet Baptist Church is perhaps one of the most colorful characters in the race, besides Prince Mongo. Outspoken and often controversial (his church once had a sign out front that used the word ass), he has his own ideas, as evidenced by this video. Whalum also has a twitter feed that’s just getting started. City Councilwoman Wanda Halbert - Halber, who just announced her intention to run on Monday is also a little behind the curve. This is to be expected considering how recently she announced. She does have a twitter account though this may be a personal one, and is currently protected. Perhaps in the future she will have something more campaign oriented. Commisioner James Harvey - To the best of my knowledge, Harvey has no real internet presence, with the exception of his page on the Shelby Co. Government site. You may remember this nifty sign I saw at the Chism Picnic. Other than that, not much else has been seen or heard from Commissioner Harvey. Sharon Webb - A former member of the Memphis Charter Commision, Webb has also been pretty quiet in the mix. We’ll see. Prince Mongo - Newscoma’s favorite candidate. He hasn’t been able to ride the space beanie to victory yet, and aside from news articles and a very old website, there’s not much out there…but him.

picture-4

Steve Ross — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:33:28 +0000

Cha-Ching?

Steve Ross — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:38:38 +0000

(Source) Apparently, things are going pretty well over there at Jim Kyle HQ. Check out the new site, and don't forget about the campaign launch. From the Announcement - Everyone is invited and encouraged to attend! TUESDAY, AUGUST 11th, NOON UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS in front of the NED R. MCWHERTER LIBRARY www.jimkyle2010.com 901-543-VOTE (8684) FOR MORE INFORMATION: regina@jimkyle2010.com

cth01

Steve Ross — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 18:49:47 +0000

cth10

Steve Ross — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 18:50:26 +0000

cth13

Steve Ross — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 18:51:03 +0000

cth21

Steve Ross — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 18:51:34 +0000

Cohen Town Hall

Steve Ross — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 18:55:59 +0000

I just got back from the Town Hall meeting held by Tennessee’s 9th Congressional District Rep. Steve Cohen. I have to tell you, the turnout was pretty impressive. I livetweeted the event under the hashtag #cohen, as did some others at the meeting. Right now twitter search isn’t working too well, probably because of the DOS attack earlier this week, but you can follow me or just read my tweets from the event. Thankfully, the event didn’t have as much of the hostility that’s been reported at other events, though there were some very vocal dissenters. While they were a bit disruptive, and their outbursts occasionally made it difficult to hear, the meeting went down without any real incident. I arrived about 20 min. before the event was scheduled to start. At that point, the line was making it’s way around the corner. As we stood, waiting to enter, the line continued to grow. I’m not good at estimating numbers, but I would guess about 400+ people were in attendance. Luckily I was near the front half of the line and was able to pick a spot upon entering. There were a lot of Seniors in the line and both the Congressional staff, and many of the attendees on both sides of the healthcare issue were cool about making sure those people had seats. The meeting began about 15 min late, due in large part to the over-capacity crowd. The venue was pretty crowded, as the pictures that follow will show. After the pledge, which was punctuated by a shouted “under God”, and some general instructions by employees at his local office, Cohen began introducing members of his staff to groans from the people there to protest healthcare reform. Cohen brought his DC staff down for a retreat to meet with the local staff, and said he felt it was important that people know who’s working for them in DC as well as here in Memphis. At one point the crowd started getting restless, but was shouted down by a man who stood up and said, “I’m want to hear my Congressman!”, which elicited both applause and groans. After the introductions, a line of about 8 Doctors formed to talk about healthcare reform. Many expressed concern about the “public option”. Cohen made no attempts to disagree with them or anything, but allowed them each to talk for a few minutes about both the problems and their concerns. This was not scripted or pre-planned. I really think, in the end, it was an effective strategy to keep the opposition off their game, and some good points were raised, though they were difficult to hear and impossible to record due to all the mumbling and grumbling that was a constant at the event. There were some interesting moments in the Doctor comments section, though they were hard to make out due to the noise in the room, but as I tweeted Cohen held his own for the most part. The anti-reformers interrupted just about anyone who spoke, even people who supported their position. At one point Cohen asked people to “chill”, and later challenged a guy with a ”No Government Healthcare” sign, to which he answered, “I guess you’re against the VA, Medicare and Medicaid”, which brought down the house. Also, one of the doctors noted to the anti-reformers that “yelling lies over and over doesn’t make it true”, and another said, “anger and fear was trumping truth and facts”, which brought an expected response from the anti’s. Once questions started, it became even more difficult to hear. The questions came from cards, rather than calling on people in the audience, another effective strategy at keeping the meeting orderly. Most of the questions centered around Healthcare, but some touched on Cap and Trade and other issues. Over time, the anti folks started checking out of the meeting. Many left 30+ min early because they weren’t getting the play they wanted. Of course, the hardcore folks stayed at it, shouting all kinds of things that I can’t even remember at this point. I wish I could remember because it was some of the stupidest crap I’ve ever heard in my life, and I listen to right wing talk radio from time to time to get a laugh or get motivated against their messaging. In the back of the room, where I was standing, the hyperbole was thick, and there was a lot of passing around right-wing chain emails and such. From that vantage point, I can say that there were more signs in support of reform, or the public option specifically than there were from the anti-reform folks, though theirs were more, shall I say, creative...if that’s what you want to call it. Cohen did his best to dispel the myths about killing grandma and the “Palin Death Panel”. I don’t think he convinced anyone on the other side, though by the end they were not feeling victorious. After the meeting most of them just took their signs and grumbled their way out of the hall. Most of the supporters went up to say hi to the Congressman. I wish I had been able to take better notes, though the livetweet from the phone made my juggling act pretty difficult. All in all it was a successful meeting, despite the attempts to disrupt. Thanks to all the residents of the 9th District who gave up part of their Saturday to participate, and even those from Arkansas and the surrounding districts, whose intentions may not have been as constructive. It takes all kinds, and I hope that, perhaps some of the misgivings about healthcare reform were quieted...though I doubt it.

meandtrumpet

Steve Ross — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 01:23:37 +0000

unknown

Steve Ross — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:48:32 +0000

What Are You Doing for Lunch Tomorrow?

Steve Ross — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:46:08 +0000

Everyone is invited and encouraged to attend! TUESDAY, AUGUST 11th, NOON

UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS in front of the NED R. MCWHERTER LIBRARY

This event will start promptly at noon so please arrive early. There will be a shuttle from Central at Innovation, to the Library.

www.jimkyle2010.com 901-543-VOTE (8684)

FOR MORE INFORMATION: regina@jimkyle2010.com

See also: Commercial Appeal, Post Politics

Maybe It’s a Cry for Attention…

Steve Ross — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:26:03 +0000

As much as I enjoy covering local government, as rewarding and annoying as it can be, I’ve been remiss in my coverage of the County. I freely admit this. There are several reasons; 1. There hasn’t been a hot button issue that caught my interest (other than the NDO, which I did cover), and 2. The County Commission while representing a far greater constituency just isn’t as sexy, from a political standpoint. Sorry folks, nothing personal, that’s just been my perspective. That perspective may have changed after yesterday’s discussion at the County. County Commissioners Sidney Chism and Joe Ford are pushing a plan to raise the pay of County Commissioners by $10,000. The reason, to attract more talent. That’s funny, I guess they don’t see themselves as talented enough to serve on the Commission. Seriously though, as the article in the Commercial Appeal notes, County employees have gone without raises, yet these two Commissioners think it’s a good idea to raise their salary by nearly 25%. Classic. This in the wake of budgetary shortfalls at all levels of government, not to mention the impact on the Memphis City Council, which ties their salaries to the County Commission. Remember, just weeks ago during the budget battle, Jim Strickland on the City government side were calling for a DECREASE in pay for City Council members (ht @laceycrisp) I don’t know what these guys are thinking. In their district, which covers South Memphis, features zip codes whose HOUSEHOLD income is between $15,000 and $30,000 LESS than the 2007 US median household income. Further, they want to pay themselves nearly $20,000/yr. more as individuals than the household income for 38114, which they represent (Source). Good luck in 2010 kids. The second issue that came up yesterday is the ABSOLUTELY ASININE idea that a replacement needs to be seated for disgraced State Sen. Paul Stanley. As of right now, the first special election to replace Stanley (primary) will be held in about 65 days. The general election will likely be held just a few weeks after. There’s little danger of a special session, since the cost would likely break the bank in House and Senate per diem requests alone. I understand where some of the Commissioners are going with this. The idea that they could put in a Democrat to represent a heavily Republican district is appealing to some, even if that person never served a day in the Legislature, but the rancor that would result is just not worth it for a couple of weeks in office. Unless you have a REAL GOOD REASON to do this, leave it alone folks, or send me your real good reason via my Contact page. So, County Commission, despite the valiant efforts of @mikecarpenter1 to inform the public of the County Commission’s goings on, from a seat on the platform no less, I guess I’ll have to start bugging the shit out of them too, just like I do the City Council. Clearly the County Commission is thirsting for the same kind of attention that the City Council gets, and my mom always said you have to try and treat all the kids fairly and equally. Now I just have to schedule an extra therapy session or two every month to wipe all the additional stupid I will inevitably hear, out of my brain…

Maybe He Was Lonely

Steve Ross — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:45:44 +0000

Several outlets have reported the Herenton has pulled a petition to run for Mayor, just weeks after retiring. Maybe he was lonely…(NSFW)

Team America - I'm So Ronery
Uploaded by Videogeezer - Watch more comedy videos and sitcoms.

Here’s his statement as reported in the CA

"My primary political goal is to represent the ninth congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives. I have every intention of being a congressional candidate during the August 2010 election. "However, during the interim, recent events have compelled me to step forth to provide leadership and express my sincere feelings on how our city can continue to move forward, despite our current dilemma. "My recent retirement from the office of Mayor has created this situation and I feel obligated to seek alternatives to Myron Lowery and an 'anyone can win' mayoral race. "The city I love deserves better." "Therefore, I am also preparing a referendum resolution that would allow the citizens of Memphis to rescind the current charter amendment that elevated Myron Lowery to the office of Mayor Pro Tem. This resolution would prescribe limitations on the powers of a non-elected mayor. "It is clear to many citizens that my retirement from office created opportunities for Mayor Pro Tem Lowery and a puzzling list of mayoral candidates to turn our city backward. I am disappointed in Myron’s reckless style of leadership. He must be stopped. "We cannot allow Mayor Pro Tem Lowery to be elected mayor during the upcoming special election. Unfortunately, it is difficult to predict a clear winner with a complicated array of mayoral candidates in the race. "Therefore, I have pulled a petition to run in the upcoming mayoral special election."

Maybe, that letter Jackson Baker reported on has a little more meat to it than he reported. Or maybe it just is what it is. No matter, this is Memphis, and anything is possible. Still, I wonder what that letter says...

Lawler

Steve Ross — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:26:14 +0000

Lowery

Steve Ross — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:26:16 +0000

Whalum

Steve Ross — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:26:17 +0000

AC

Steve Ross — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:26:18 +0000

Twitter and the Race for Memphis Mayor

Steve Ross — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:33:39 +0000

By now just about everyone has head about twitter, even if you don’t know what it is. The best evidence of this widespread knowledge is the fact that at least 5 of the potential candidates for Mayor (County Mayor AC Wharton, Mayor Pro Tem Myron Lowery, Charles Carpenter, Jerry Lawler, and Rev. Kenneth Whalum Jr) are not only using twitter, but using it fairly effectively, to get message out and build campaign funds/volunteers. Yesterday, after the revelation that a certain former Mayor had pulled a petition to run for his old job broke on twitter nearly all of these candidates sprung into action on the social networking service. (Not Necessarily in chronological order) And the tweet that is my personal favorite... These were followed by event announcements and ways to get involved with the campaigns. As weird of a day as it was, I think it’s of the good, regardless of what the former Mayor does. The evolution of media and message is FINALLY starting to filter down to local races here in Memphis. It’s a huge opportunity, and an even bigger responsibility for the people of the city. They’re talking to us. They’re talking DIRECTLY TO US and listening to us as well. You would do well to listen, learn, and make your voice heard. It won’t stay like this forever if we don’t take advantage of it now.

YoungDems

Steve Ross — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:24:02 +0000

Crazy is as Crazy Does

Steve Ross — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 13:06:07 +0000

Well, you can’t say the past week has been boring! Thinking about yesterday’s events (video and comments from other blogs follow) I am reminded of something I said in passing several years ago about “retirement”. Until recently, I could never imagine myself retiring. I always just assumed that I would work until I died. Until recently, the notion of having “free time” was so foreign to me that I reckoned any “retirement” forced or voluntary would pretty much kill me with boredom. Now with 5 months of “singledom” and 4 months of spotty work under my belt I think I’ll be fine in retirement, and hope I can figure out a way to do it soon (if I can just win the lottery). That said, very few “type A personalities” ever successfully retire. If they do, they either drive everyone around them crazy or away, or they die of boredom. It’s easy to understand. They’ve been the movers and shakers all their lives. They’ve busted their humps to the point that they have little else but that hump busting, and after retiring they look around at the “all” they have and realize that aside from the material, it ain’t really all that much. I don’t know if this is what our former Mayor is going through or not, but it stands to reason that for most type A personalities, 2 weeks with nothing to do is about all the time they can stand themselves. So he pulled a petition and stirred up the media attention, and got just about every person in the city riled up to some extent. That’s what our former Mayor thrives on. But without the trappings of an office of import, eventually the media is going to figure out what the Memphis Flyer has figured out…that he’s just another wannabe. The comments, particularly on Twitter have ranged from angry to pricelessly funny 140 character screeds. I won’t quote them here, because really picking just a few is unfair to the teeming throngs, but let’s just say it has been HIGHLY entertaining. On the blogs, it’s been quite something else. I think many of us are still dumbfounded by the whole thing. Certainly, adanovi at Knoxviews is not only dumbfounded, but outraged:

Yes, that's right. Willie Herenton who retired from Mayor of Memphis, has picked up a petition to run in the special election to replace himself…. …This guy needs to be out of politics. He should have to pay the more than 1 million dollars required to hold the upcoming special election. He DOES NOT need to be representing any constituency of Tennessee in Congress and Memphis CERTAINLY needs new leadership. (Source)

Our new friend The Memphis Liberal has some link love to several articles that are quite revealing. But all pale in comparison to this post by Voice of Andromeda. Here’s a little sample

TO DR. HERENTON: We don't need your help. You are not the 'be all' and 'end all' of Memphis politics. There are views and issues which deserve the air. There are problems you have ignored, including, most egregiously, your own African-American community which has not prospered under your reign. You poison race relations in Memphis and we need you gone in order to move forward. We love our city too and your continued involvement in our local affairs moves us backward, not forward. Of course you have the legal right to resign and of course you have the legal right to re-file for the same office. People have all kinds of legal rights to do crazy things - doesn't mean they ought to do them or that, in doing them, everyone else doesn't have the right to question their sanity. In 2007, you wasted a lot of taxpayers' time, money and efforts in running for an office you didn't want. Less than two years later, you resigned, causing we the taxpayers (you remember, the people you supposedly want to represent again) to foot the bill for a special election to the tune of $1 million-plus. Now you want taxpayers to foot the bill for this special election for no reason since you want your job back....THEN IF YOU WIN, YOU WANT US TO PAY FOR ANOTHER SPECIAL ELECTION WHEN YOU QUIT AGAIN NEXT YEAR TO RUN FOR CONGRESS. ENOUGH!!(Source)

I don’t think I have much more to say on the matter, other than “actions speak louder than words, but words have a pretty strong voice”. By repeatedly defending himself against charges of insanity, the former Mayor certainly raises the question of his sanity. Crazy is as Crazy does sir. What follows are three of the interviews done by our former Mayor yesterday. WDIA Interview

Pity Party

Steve Ross — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:52:11 +0000

I loathe writing about myself. Mostly because when I do, it’s something bad or depressing, and I’m not really sure why I would go out of my way to share my gloom and doom with anyone, or why anyone would really care about it. However, writing gives me the time and the space to really think about things. It forces me to focus on what’s inside my head so I can really consider what’s going on in there, and what kinds of things I need to be doing to address/rectify the issue. To be blunt, the past 12 months are sucked a pile of elephant droppings. It all started on the 14th of August when I rolled my car. Thankfully, no one was hurt, but the whole thing ended up costing a cool couple of grand, even with full coverage, and my rate has gone up A LOT since, so the cost of that wreck, that wasn’t my fault, is still being calculated. Then, needing cash, and watching the global economic situation meltdown, I decided I would try and kill myself with work. Between August 15th and the end of March I was on the road 150 out of 225 days. That doesn’t count days traveling, of which there are an average of 1.6 for every 5 days on the road. That means that over the course of 7.5 months I was effectively “gone” for all but about 25 days. By the time March rolled around I was crabby, but flush with cash and seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, I was hopeful that the damage caused to nearly all the relationships in my life due to being gone so much, could be reversed thanks to some much needed, but ultimately forced, downtime due to the lack of any real events to work. Unfortunately, I was too late. So April and May came, and I spent a lot of time alone, and writing. I had just 16 days of work out of the 60 that those two months comprise. This was, on one hand, a good thing because I had wanted to spend more time here on the blog, and writing all the stuff that never quite makes it to the blog. I read and learned about all kinds of things that I never knew before, which is really one of my favorite things to do this side of eating and breathing (in that order). But, by the end of May, I was running out of money (thanks to a depression that had me spending like a lottery winner and taxes that I should have pre-paid earlier, but didn’t), I was emotionally fragile, and I was giving up hope. At the end of May my grandmother passed. It wasn’t really a surprise. For the past few years, just about every time the phone rang from a family member, I was sure that’s what the call was about. Still, with unresolved feelings about that side of the family, I was forced, at one of the most depressed times in my life, to confront those feelings and find a way to re-engage on the part of the family that I had largely left behind. Thankfully, June and July picked up a bit, and I was able to get my finances together a little better. I also got some help from my dad, which is really the only reason I’ve been able to keep my money together. Now we’re nearing the end of August, and I’m looking ahead. Business is about to pick up some, and hopefully I’ll be able to tread water for a little while longer, but the reality is, everything I’ve built over the past 5 years here in Memphis is in jeopardy. The home I bought nearly 3 years ago is really too big and expensive for one person. I’ve considered taking on a roommate, but the house is laid out poorly for two people that aren’t sleeping together, and I’m really not in the market for that situation either. What’s more, I don’t think I could damn someone that wasn’t emotionally entangled with the burden of having to live with me. So, I’m thinking of selling sometime soon, probably closer to the end of the year or the beginning of next. I’m not upside-down on my loan, and the appraised value of my home is a lot more than I paid for it, but the house needs some work to ensure that I get what I have in it, plus enough to pay any of the selling expenses. From there, I don’t know. I’d like to buy a duplex or something that I could rent out the other side of. I’d like to be able to go back to school and get a degree (probably poly-sci), but I don’t know if I can really do that and do what I do for a living. I’d like to eventually work in politics or doing some kind of community development/activism thing that spends as much time thinking about and doing what ought to be done, as it does out in neighborhoods helping empower people, but I don’t see a lot of opportunity on that front that doesn’t involve me starting ANOTHER business (which would be number 5 for me), which is not something I’m real jazzed about doing right now. So yeah, I’m feeling pretty pitiful and pathetic right now. It’s not that I don’t see a path forward, but that I don’t feel like I’m in control of that path, and that’s something I’m really not comfortable with. I feel like I’m being forced to consider things that just 12 months ago were unfathomable to me. In short, it sucks. I know it’ll get better if I take charge of my own situation, but to be honest, I’m neither in the right state emotionally or mentally to really do much of that right now. I just feel beat up. I’ve got to get over it if I’m gonna keep my head above water, and I know this. Anyway, thanks for taking the time to read my self-absorbed whiny assed pity party. This is not the post I wanted to publish today, but it’s the post that came out. Hopefully I’ll be able to finish the other sometime before you decide I’m a hopeless loser that doesn’t deserve your attention. /pityparty

What is a “Vibinc”?

Steve Ross — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 20:59:24 +0000

Back in the mid to late 90’s I was looking for a name for a music project. The project was to be something in the same genre as NIN but with a more experimental and less structured musical foundation. One day I was driving down Chester St. in Little Rock to my girlfriend’s house and I noticed a business that I had never seen before. The business seemed to be no more, but the name on the side of the building was still there in a Copperplate Gothic like font, which was a font I was playing with for potential names. The name on the side of the building was VIBRATORS INC. INDUSTRIAL VIBRATORS. Vibrators Inc., what an awesome name for a music project that was to be both experimental and somewhat industrial! I was sold. I played about 10 shows alone, and one show with another person in the band. Because of the nature of the technology available to me at the time, the music climate in Little Rock, and the fact that I never really figured out how to be “experimental” with a one man band, it never really got off the ground. But I was proud of the things I HAD done, and started using the shortened version of the name to identify myself in USENET groups and other online entities. Since that time, some 15 odd years ago, I’ve used Vibinc to identify myself. You will find that entity on just about every liberal political blog in the universe, and I still own the domains vibroatorsinc.com and vibratorsincorporated.com which will point to this domain soon. Vibinc.com got poached by an outfit in New York that I just don’t want the spend the time or money to fuck with, so I’ve let it go. So what was Vibrators Inc.? It was a company that sold equipment for paving roads. Their vibrators packed asphalt and concrete and all other sorts of things. In short, it wasn’t what your dirty mind thought, though my dirty mind thought the same thing. Update: In a very weird twist, a friend alerted me that vibinc.com was now available, so I snatched it up. YAY!

What is a “Vibinc”?

Steve Ross — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 20:59:42 +0000

Back in the mid to late 90’s I was looking for a name for a music project. The project was to be something in the same genre as NIN but with a more experimental and less structured musical foundation. One day I was driving down Chester St. in Little Rock to my girlfriend’s house and I noticed a business that I had never seen before. The business seemed to be no more, but the name on the side of the building was still there in a Copperplate Gothic like font, which was a font I was playing with for potential names. The name on the side of the building was VIBRATORS INC. INDUSTRIAL VIBRATORS. Vibrators Inc., what an awesome name for a music project that was to be both experimental and somewhat industrial! I was sold. I played about 10 shows alone, and one show with another person in the band. Because of the nature of the technology available to me at the time, the music climate in Little Rock, and the fact that I never really figured out how to be “experimental” with a one man band, it never really got off the ground. But I was proud of the things I HAD done, and started using the shortened version of the name to identify myself in USENET groups and other online entities. Since that time, some 15 odd years ago, I’ve used Vibinc to identify myself. You will find that entity on just about every liberal political blog in the universe, and still own the domains vibroatorsinc.com and vibratorsincorporated.com which will point to this domain soon. Vibinc.com got poached by an outfit in New York that I just don’t want the spend the time or money to fuck with, so I’ve let it go. So what was Vibrators Inc.? It was a company that sold equipment for paving roads. Their vibrators packed asphalt and concrete and all other sorts of things. In short, it wasn’t what your dirty mind thought, though my dirty mind thought the same thing. Update: In a very weird twist, a friend alerted me that vibinc.com was now available, so I snatched it up. YAY!

Feeling a Little Better

Steve Ross — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:57:23 +0000

Thanks to everyone who offered their kind words after my meltdown yesterday. Obviously, none of the circumstances have changed in less than 24 hours, and aside from winning the lottery, reality is what it is. Sometimes, I guess, it's better to put it out there and get the suckage behind you so you can move on. Thanks again, you guys are great.

Mid-Southerners for Choice Luncheon

Steve Ross — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:59:30 +0000

Planned Parenthood of Greater Memphis is hosting a luncheon featuring State Representative Jeanne Richardson (HD-89) on Thursday, August 20th 11:30 am, at the Holiday Inn University of Memphis. Tickets are $25 and can be purchased at the door, or ahead of time here. Come out and show your support for Planned Parenthood, and comprehensive reproductive healthcare.

Death Paneling

Steve Ross — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:16:44 +0000

I know this whole “death panel” thing has been going on for weeks now, but I’ve gotten to the point where I want to slap someone every time I hear them talk about Government pulling the plug on granny because she’s too expensive. What bullshit. We already have death panels you douchenozzle, they’re called INSURANCE COMPANIES. As The Memphis Liberal points out the Supreme Court has ruled that

Inducement to ration care is the very point of any HMO scheme.

The argument on the right is that you can sue an insurance company. Perhaps, but you’re still dead if you don’t get the treatment you need because some corporation hedged their bets. It's not like it's ever happened before or anything. Oh, and how does a lawsuit play with conservative notions that tort reform will magically fix what’s driving up the cost of healthcare. Come on people be consistent. Nope, the reality is we’re talking about two different cultures. One that believes corporations are going to do what’s right for people and that the government can’t do ANYTHING right, and one that believes government’s role is to provide an equitable foundation for all Americans and that corporations are more interested in protecting shareholders than doing right by regular folks. Which one sounds more realistic? Seriously, conservatives have been working for 30 years to protect shareholders and corporations far more than help regular Americans. Their perspective is that if the corporation benefits, somehow so does everyone else. From the union busting that the Reagan Admin. engaged in, to trade deals that have sent American jobs hither and fro, with the help of conservative and largely southern Democrats that have served as compliant enablers, the conservative ideology has destroyed America’s manufacturing base and left us in a position where good jobs for regular people are going the way of the dodo. All the while this same “Conservative ideology” is largely responsible for a tenfold increase in the national debt over the past 28 years. Somehow, this is supposed to provide a better quality of life for all us little people. But aside from making really affordable “cheap plastic crap” made in places most people couldn't find on a map, the only real benefit has been the availability of second rate goods to people who used to make a first rate version of the same damn thing. So when we apply this ideological difference to the healthcare “debate”, if that’s what you want to call it, you have some people talking about healthcare, and others talking about something else entirely. Sobeale hit on this back in June when talking about the difference between the left and the right on the healthcare debate.

Progressives want to give everyone healthcare. The other side wants to give everyone health insurance.

Healthcare. That’s what I’m talking about, not insurance. Insurance is the ONLY thing in the world you buy and pray you don’t have to use. Healthcare is something EVERYONE NEEDS, but that a growing minority of working Americans DON’T HAVE ACCESS TO. Sure, they can go to the doctor or the hospital, but if it’s something serious, they’ll likely go bankrupt. That’s the reality, and 50% of the people who go bankrupt every year are in that situation. So now that the Healthcare industry has dumped some $130m since April into putting the kibosh on any plan that includes a “public option” by stirring irrational fears and mobilizing a vocal but largely uninformed group of people to disrupt anything and everything that might further the “public option”. The debate has shifted from providing healthcare to all Americans to providing Americans with insurance, something they don’t want to have to use. This is just plain madness. The right wing reactionaries that show up in force at Town Hall meetings across this nation are grounded in the same ideology that has helped bankrupt this county and millions of it’s citizens. They are not there to debate, they are there to debase the process, to incite fear, and ultimately, deny you a right to affordable treatment when you need it most. This is not the huge movement that the media would play it up to be. They are not taking to the streets demanding that things stay the same. They are a couple of hundred people per district, out of some 600,000+ constituents, mobilized to make a good show of strength for a very short period of time. It’s media manipulation at it’s worst, and the media is playing the role of compliant enabler, just like those conservative Democrats who are paralyzed with fear anytime someone proposes a change that they might have to defend. It’s time for US to take to the streets and demand REAL healthcare reform that includes a “public option”. It’s time for us to show our strength. We’re running out of time, and the media “death panel” has written the obituary on meaningful reform, and is just waiting for that last gasp before they run with it. It's time to move this forward lest we have to wait another 16 years, or until we reach critical mass. It's time.

What’s the DANG Message?

Steve Ross — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:03:10 +0000

John Stewart nails it…as usual

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Heal or No Heal - Medicine Brawl

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Spinal Tap Performance

Shelby Co. Young Democrats Mixer

Steve Ross — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:16:03 +0000

Come One Come All!

Legitimate Concerns

Steve Ross — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:52:16 +0000

Earlier this morning, I read with interest the concerns expressed by Brad over at WTL. As I told him in my email to him, I have many of the same concerns. But before we go forward, we should read the resolution. The resolution operates under the Metro Government section of the TCA 7-2-101 through 108. That link takes you to the first relevant section of the law. Navigation is provided at the top and bottom of each page. As you read through the resolution, you’ll note that almost everything is handled in this section of state law. Brad is ABSOLUTELY RIGHT about IRV, Ethics, Term Limits and all sorts of things. WE WILL BE STARTING OVER. Truth be told, I won’t vote for anything that doesn’t include IRV and a strong independent Ethics Commission. That’s just reality. On the issues of partisan races, I think I have the answer and it’s located at TCA 2-13-208 Sec b

(b) In any county having a metropolitan form of government, the election of the county mayor and the members of the legislative body of such metropolitan government shall be considered to be municipal elections within the meaning of this section; however, the provisions of this section shall not be construed to require a partisan election for any other officers of the metropolitan government if the charter of such metropolitan government provides that elections for such officers shall be nonpartisan.

I read this to mean that unless the charter SPECIFICALLY sets up partisan elections that they are non-partisan. There are still more issues to be addressed with any Charter Commission, particularly one tasked with such a huge undertaking as unifying two of the largest municipal governments in Tennessee. The first issue is will it pass the County Commission? Right now that’s not clear, but they’ll be discussing it in committee on the 26th in the General Government Committee. As this progresses through the County Commission, I’ll have more.

Metro Government Resolution – Timeline

Steve Ross — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:14:33 +0000

In yesterday’s post I addressed some concerns that were presented about the Metro Charter Commission Resolution currently before the County Commission. Since then, I’ve received comments, text messages, emails and phone calls about this, so I thought it might be a good idea to take a look at the timeline for this thing. TCA 7-2-105 and 7-2-106 govern the timing from the appointment of the commission, to the election. But for the purposes of this discussion, it may be best to actually work backwards from the election. November 2, 2010 is Election Day. The resolution specifies that this is the date that the vote on the proposed charter would occur. 7-2-106 specifies that an election on the proposed charter is to occur 80 to 100 days after filing. That range puts the filing of the proposed charter between July 23rd and August 13th. 7-2-105 holds that, unless otherwise noted in the resolution authorizing the Charter Commission by both the County and primary City, the Commission has 9 months from it’s first meeting to complete the proposed charter. This would make the first meeting between October 23rd and November 13th. All members of the Charter Commission will have to be approved by the respective Council of their nominating executive. These individuals can be nominated by the executive at any time after the adoption of the resolution. It should be noted that the timing is is specified in the resolution on page 2, 7th WHEREAS

WHEREAS, It is also the desire of the County Commission that the proposed charter be filed not less than 80 days nor more than 100 days before the November 2, 2010 statewide election and, to ensure that the proposed charter is filed during that time period, when a resolution appointing the County Mayor’s nominees is submitted for approval that said resolution set the effective date of the appointments as November 5, 2009 which will require the metropolitan government charter commission to hold its organizational meeting on November 10, 2009 and perform its work between November 11, 2009 and August 12, 2010 in accordance with state law; and WHEREAS, It is further the desire of the County Commission that the resolution appointing members to the metropolitan government charter commission direct said members to file the proposed charter on August 10, 2010; and

If we take this timing into account, the effective date of the appointment would be November 5th, 2009. That’s some 20 days after the Special Election to elect a new City Mayor. The first City Council Meeting after the election is on October 27th. That would give the new City Mayor just 12 days to lobby the City Council, and have the appointments pass. Considering the timing, I think it is unlikely, despite fears expressed by several people, that any one person would have the power to nominate all 15 members of the Commission AND have them approved by the respective legislative bodies by the appointed time. Remember, I said unlikely, not impossible. Important distinction. Further, that kind of power would be met with fierce opposition on both the County Commission, and the City Council, and the citizens of both the City and the County. Such a move would likely put the kibosh on the process as a whole. Ultimately, it depends on when the legislative bodies, the Shelby County Commission and Memphis City Council, actually pass their resolutions. Once the resolutions are passed the process begins. Regardless of whether you support the idea of a Metro Government or not, we should be working to keep the discussion as honest and free of as much tin foil hattery as possible. There are some real concerns, for certain, but let’s arm ourselves with as much information rather than unfounded fears. If you’re really concerned, talk to your Commissioner or City Council member, that’s what they are there for. In the mean time, I’ll be monitoring the situation and report as this develops. Also see this article at the Commercial Appeal.

Don't Forget Tomorrow's Luncheon

Steve Ross — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:06:33 +0000

Mid-Southerners for Choice Luncheon

Two Events, One Perspective

Steve Ross — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:09:00 +0000

I spent the day today getting ready to go see my brother and niece, and attending events around Memphis. The first event was the Mid-Southerners for Choice Luncheon hosted by Planned Parenthood of Greater Memphis featuring Jeanne Richardson (HD-89). It was an inspiring event, attended by people who firmly believe in protecting a women's right to reproductive healthcare. Jeanne gave a great presentation and even brought up Rep. Karen Camper whose alias I will not reveal. Jeanne talked about SJR127 and the urgency of organization and action in the coming years. Later in the day I went to the Shelby Co. Young Democrats Mixer at SOLE in the new Westin Hotel near the Forum. This was a well organized, well attended meet and greet. Lots of people I didn’t know and unfortunately, didn’t get to meet, that’s how thick it was. Good on the organizers and the SCDP for organizing it. What was missing? YOU WERE. I don’t know all my readers, but I know a bunch of them, and I didn’t see all of you. I know you’re out there, and I love you for reading, but I’d love you more for being out there. Come join me at these events. I'm taking a break for the weekend to see my family. The next few weeks are going to be pretty crazy around here with the special election looming and maybe as many as 40 candidates running for Mayor, a possible Metro Charter Commission, and the Senate 31 race, which will no doubt be interesting. Rest up, we're all gonna need it.

RIP Ted Kennedy

Steve Ross — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 05:54:40 +0000

It's a sad day for America.

Vacation, All I Ever Wanted…

Steve Ross — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 12:20:22 +0000

Friday, I left to go to San Francisco, one of my favorite cities in the US, to hang out with my bother, niece and the gaggle of people that currently reside in their house. In all reality, there’s not a gaggle there, unless you count my mom and I as making up the slack end of a gaggle. For the size of the house, 6 people tripping over each other is a lot. I don’t think I could get 6 people in my house without someone feeling like their space was being violated. Despite the space challenges, it was EXACTLY what the doctor ordered. Mike and I hit the town and had a great time. I went out with him yesterday on his dog walking, which was a little more than I bargained for, but pretty cool. My niece, who just started school yesterday, is really starting to come into her personality, which is cool. I haven’t been out there for anything but work in over 5 years, and that’s been WAY TOO LONG. It’s not as if I didn’t want to, but that I felt like I, for some reason, couldn’t. Work anxiety and the fear of imposing on people stopped me more often than not. But this wasn’t a real “planned” vacation. My brother called me and asked me to come out, and I booked the flights and it was done, all in a phone conversation that included lots of sports analysis and some drinking and all the other things that brothers do and talk about. It’s really weird, because for the first time in nearly a decade I feel like I’m part of a family again. Between the outreach from some of the people I walked away from almost 6 years ago, and the ones that walked away from me even longer ago, I feel like I’m more than just this guy trying to make it day to day alone. It’s pretty nice. So, I feel rejuvenated but not exhausted, like so many people do when they come home from vacation. In all honesty, the only thing that’s exhausting is the thought of trying to catch up with my rss feed that went unattended over the weekend leaving me with the internet equivalent of War and Peace to read. Lots of catching up to do. Still, it was the best thing I could have done right now and I’m glad I did it. Now it’s time to get back to the grind. Looks like I’ve missed quite a bit over the weekend, particularly with the Herenton announcement and the allegations of homophobia at Kenneth Whalum’s New Olivet Baptist Church. I’ll get caught up and get back in the swing of things. In the mean time, spend some time on yourself. You deserve it.

It’s Really a Simple Question

Steve Ross — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:06:04 +0000

Today, the Shelby County Commission voted the Metro Charter Commission Resolution out of committee. The final vote on the resolution will be this coming Monday. Tuesday will likely see a spirited debate in the Memphis City Council on the same issue. There have been a lot of things said about this resolution, and a lot more worry and conjecture, but to my mind the question is simple:

Do you want to have a frank discussion with actionable results about local government or not?

That’s all the resolution does. It sets up a legal framework under Tennessee state law for a frank discussion of what our government in Shelby Co. should look like and makes it actionable by the constituents in Shelby Co.’s jurisdiction. What are those actions? This resolution would give us the opportunity to engage in a conversation with people who have the authority to help us craft a government that is more responsive to us in a way that we want to be responded to. I won’t cast aspersions on either of the primary governing bodies here in Shelby Co. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. I don’t think ANYBODY, including many of the members, believes they are as effective as they could be. This gives us the opportunity to have some say, other than who we vote for, in the way our government operates. Once a draft charter is crafted, we can vote it up or down. It’s that simple. Isn’t that what most of us have been asking for for years? The resolution passed Committee in the County Commission today, meaning it's very likely that it will pass again on Monday. The outlook on the Memphis City Council is not so clear. Contact your City Council members, tell them you support a frank discussion of local government and ask them to support the Metro Government resolution. If you don't know who your Council Members are, use the precinct locator to find them. REMEMBER you have as many as 4, one single district and 3 super district members. Contact all of them at the email addresses below.

Memphis City Council

Bill Morrison, District 1
Bill Boyd, District 2
Harold Collins, District 3
Wanda Halbert, District 4
Jim Strickland, District 5
Edmund Ford Jr., District 6
Barbara Swearengen Ware, District 7
Joe Brown, District 8 Pos. 1
Janis Fullilove, District 8 Pos. 2
Kemp Conrad, District 9 Pos.1
Shea Flinn, District 9 Pos. 2
Reid Hedgepeth, District 9 Pos. 3 Update: Fixed the link to Kemp Conrad's email address.

Jim Kyle at Drinking Liberally

Steve Ross — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 21:01:54 +0000

Over the past 8 months, I’ve been fortunate enough to meet and talk to nearly every Democratic candidate for Governor. This weekend, I hope that I will be able to complete that list. So far, I like all of them, though some more than others. Each brings something different to the table. Kim McMillan’s experience and can do attitude is a huge asset to her campaign. Ward Cammack’s out of the box thinking is refreshing and something that all the candidates should look at. With Roy Herron’s charisma he could probably be successful selling ice cubes to Eskimos. But what about Jim Kyle? Last night he dropped in on the Memphis Drinking Liberally crowd to talk about his campaign and his plans for the state as Governor. Without getting into specifics, the thing that struck me more than anything else was not any particular strategy or tactic that he hopes to employ as Governor, but a “whole patient” philosophy in approaching the challenges facing Tennessee. Education, Jobs, Taxes/Government Reform, and Crime are common, if not cliché themes for campaigns. Most candidates for any office focus on addressing the symptoms of an issue. They do this for several reasons, but mostly because the root of the problem is either too big for them to wrap their heads around, or too hard to distill into a simple sound byte for the media. Kyle has managed to both make the message simple by focusing on a familiar theme, but also take it to a level that is more comprehensive than most candidates can muster. Because he’s the most recent candidate to enter the fray, his site is a little thin on details, but he promises to announce an education plan in the coming weeks. I’m sure more initiatives will follow over time, but my first impression is really positive. I’m not making any endorsements until I get the chance to meet everyone and more of their positions are fleshed out, but I’m feeling really good about the field, and Jim Kyle made a big impression on me.

Memphis Mayoral Debate Round 1 – Reflections

Steve Ross — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 04:01:19 +0000

Tonight marked the first debate for the office of Mayor of Memphis. This was, quite simply 90 minutes of some of the most bizarre TV ever. The candidates present were required to have filed their petitions, which cut the field to nine. The candidates present were; Charles Carpenter, Carol Chumney, Wanda Halbert, Robert “Mongo” Hodges, Jerry Lawler, Myron Lowery, Kenneth Whalum, AC Wharton, and Sharon Webb. Like I said, this was highly entertaining, if you take some time to suspend the reality that there is a possibility of a very strange outcome in the Mayoral race. There were some winners, and losers, and people that really had no business being there, or in public life for that matter. Here’s my rundown.

Winners

Myron Lowery - Myron totally exceeded my expectations earning him the top spot in my “Winners” column. There was nothing flashy about Myron’s presentation. His answers, for the most part, were concise and to the point. He tooted his own horn, but more to show that even as a “Mayor Pro Tem” he was taking the job seriously. Myron’s answers served to dispel some of the criticism levied on him by former Mayor Willie Herenton. He was sharp, that’s all there is to it. AC Wharton - AC was polished and had it totally together, but that just earns him a second place finish in my mind. I’m being a little unfair because as the frontrunner expectations are higher than they probably should be. Still, expectations are part of the game and as the front-runner, AC is in a position of defending his frontrunner status. I think he defended his position tonight, but I don’t feel that he gained any ground. This is AC’s challenge as the frontrunner, gaining ground to reach a mandate, and that didn’t happen tonight. Charles Carpenter - Carpenter comes in a distant third. He’s a winner because he did something to distinguish himself both from the field and from the shadow of his former candidate. I don’t agree with some of his positions, but his ability to articulate them coherently, puts him in the top three.

Losers

Jerry Lawler - The candidate with the most name recognition in the race, Lawler’s answers were short on substance. He started out clumsily, as if he was not comfortable with the format, and then relied on right wing talking points to further his cause. I respect Lawler’s commitment to Memphis, and his desire to make things better, but it might behoove him to spend some time working IN the city, through non-profits, etc. before he tries this again. Carol Chumney - As the second place finisher in the 2007 Mayoral election, Chumney’s expectations were high. Unfortunately, she came off as cold and combative early on, and continued that trend throughout the debate, including an exchange with County Mayor AC Wharton involving the performance of City and County employees after the last big storm. Chumney had the opportunity to shine in this thing, with a polite, but firm, “I told ya so” message, that she never got to. Between that, her virtual absence from the campaign in the past month, and her lightly populated, but nicely designed site that she pimped in the debate, she’s got a big hill to climb to win this thing. Kenneth Whalum Jr. - The best of the losers, Whalum also started off combative, and then relied on initiatives that he’s led to prop up his platform. Really, his message wasn’t horrible, but the way he delivered it was reminiscent of our most recent former Mayor, which was a turn-off. Also, his unwillingness to clear the air about the incident at his church this weekend raises questions that CANNOT be answered until he addresses them.

Not Worth Mentioning

Halbert, Hodges and Webb were the sideshow. Halbert came closest to being a real candidate, but just about every time she spoke, I found myself wondering what the hell she just said. Hodges (Mongo) had several lines of the night, including arming people with Uzi’s, flushing the political class down the toilet like turds, and putting comic books and video games in Libraries. Webb was disjointed and confused, and at one point, couldn’t answer a question because she couldn’t stop laughing, which I can understand considering the dumb shit that was probably said right before her answer. Still, that’s no excuse, and she never really said much anyway.

Conclusion

The debate wasn’t a success or a failure, it was a sideshow. The inclusion of people that weren’t serious casts serious doubts on this part of the process. Still, it happened, and we have to live with it. You can watch the debate here.

You Don't Mind Socialized Fire Protection, Do You?

Steve Ross — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:45:17 +0000

Memphis Mayoral Debate - Coverage

Steve Ross — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:30:58 +0000

Last night I gave my immediate impressions. You can watch the entire debate here and you should, because I've started selling Brain Bleach, which is coincidentally the word of the day today. Below is the report from WMCTV who aired the debate. Commercial Appeal writer and debate questioner Wendi C. Thomas was truly perplexed by the whole Mongo scene. The Memphis Flyer's Jackson Baker has ten observations that he reserves the right to revise and extend in the future. Good call. Bruce VanWyngarden also had some immediate observations. Bob at 55-40 brought us three posts dealing with the debate. And Lindsey at the Commercial Appeal, did a fine job of stitching several perspectives together, including yours truly. I still have mixed feelings about the whole scene, and despite the comic relief brought by Mongo and the embarrassment I felt for a few others, it was a good introduction. That said, I think we know who the viable candidates are and next time we can separate the wheat from the chaff. There's no need to make this process any more of a sideshow than if already is.

Bill Clinton at TNDP Jackson Day

Steve Ross — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 23:54:20 +0000

I’m sure several others have written about Jackson Day in Nashville already. To be perfectly honest, when I got home I started capturing video of the event and haven’t stopped since. I’ve never been to a state level political event this large. There were some 3000 people in attendance to see keynote speakers Vice-President Gore and President Clinton. The whole thing was inspiring. Even though I spent the majority of my formative years living in Arkansas, where Bill Clinton was first my Governor, then my President, in the past eight years, I had forgotten a lot of the “why” Bill Clinton is the intellectual and political force to be reckoned with that he is. Here is Bill Clinton’s entire speech to the TNDP Jackson Day crowd. It’s a must see, not only for Tennessee Democrats, but Democrats nationwide.

More Speeches from Jackson Day

Steve Ross — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:07:35 +0000

I apologize for not getting these up yesterday, but my recovery from the post event activities has not been swift, to say the least. Here are the rest of the speeches, in event order. You can see Bill Clinton's entire speech here.

AC Wharton TV Ad

Steve Ross — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:13:56 +0000

This morning, the Wharton campaign released its first TV spot on YouTube that will be played locally. Sets a pretty high bar for the other candidates. Take a look:

Transparency Doesn’t Follow You Around Waiting for You to Notice

Steve Ross — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 00:03:13 +0000

In yesterday’s Executive Session of the Memphis City Council (audio link) the resolution establishing a Charter Commission was discussed. For those of you following along, the Shelby Co. Commission approved the resolution on Monday by a vote of 9-2 with one abstention. The City Council decided to hold the resolution until their meeting on September 15th so that some of the concerns of the members could be addressed. I’ll have more on what those concerns were specifically, but the issue that seemed to get the most play was the charge that too many decisions had been predetermined and that this means the process hasn’t been transparent. To be fair, I didn’t go to any of the listening tour meetings, and apparently, neither did many of our City Council members. I wasn’t involved in the drafting of the resolution, though I have read it and researched the law it references. For that matter, I haven’t paid much attention to the website that Mayor Wharton has had up since March (possibly earlier) on the subject. But just because I either wasn’t or haven’t been involved in many of the structural steps to bring this resolution forward, doesn’t mean that the process hasn’t been transparent. It means that up until recently, I haven’t been paying attention. There seems to be a persistent belief in this community that if even one person feels they are excluded from the process, that the process has been somehow opaque. This is simply not the case. So far, there are three, AND ONLY THREE THINGS that have happened with the concept of a Metro Government in Shelby Co. 1. There has been a listening tour attended by, including 15 Town Hall meetings across the County. 2. A resolution to establish a Metro Charter Commission has been drafted for the County Commission and adopted. 3. A nearly identical resolution has been drafted and introduced to the Memphis City Council. That’s all. The provisions used in the resolution are consistent with the Metropolitan Government section of the Tennessee Code. This section sets the groundwork for such an endeavor. The decisions on how, within the limits of Tennessee Law, the Charter Commission will be set up is up to the drafter of the resolution, but since this resolution had to pass BOTH the City and County government, of course there had to be a decision made on many things including appointed versus elected charter members. That’s not opacity, that’s part of the process of drafting a resolution binding two governments into a Metro Charter Commission and being mindful of all the circumstances surrounding the process, including the date upon which to hold the election. At the end of the day, this process has been as transparent up to now as possible. Charges that it hasn’t are simply not true. Knowing that something is happening but making a choice to either not participate, or educate yourself on the issues is not a lack of transparency, it's a lack of intellectual curiosity. The process shouldn’t be blamed for that, but it certainly is good cover for those who chose not to participate.

Happy to Oblige

Steve Ross — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 18:08:17 +0000

On Facebook Tuesday, Councilwoman Wanda Halbert reposted a note that she originally posted on August 18th. The note, entitled “The Truth Hurts” dealt with several things including the Metro Charter Resolution. At the end of the note, Councilwoman Halbert states:

I may simply be interpreting the information I've read incorrectly (that's usually not a problem for me).

In the interest of furthering the discussion, I’m happy to try and clear up some of the things that Councilwoman Halbert may have misinterpreted. This is not intended to be a beat down, or anything like that. This is an honest attempt to address the concerns expressed. First, Councilwoman Halbert raises some questions about the how and why of the Metropolitan Government provisions in Tennessee Law:

a) While Memphis would give up its existence and government, smaller cities (Germantown, Millington, Bartlett, Collierville, Millington) their services and elected officials are not affected. While serving as part of the metro population they will maintain their cities and independant governments. (Slide 1 page 10)

State Law is fairly clear on this. TCA 7-2-101 states that

The commission may be created by the adoption of a consolidation resolution by the governing body of a county and by the adoption of a substantially similar resolution by the governing body of the principal city in the county;

Memphis, as the principal city in Shelby County, has to agree with the County to explore the option. Smaller cities in Shelby County CAN be involved in the process in accordance with TCA 7-2-107

After a charter commission has been created, any smaller city within the county may by action of its legislative body appoint a representative to consult with the charter commission concerning the terms upon which the functions of such smaller city may be included in the proposed consolidation. Any terms proposed by the charter commission with respect to the smaller city shall be filed and published separately as an appendix to the metropolitan charter proposed with respect to the principal city, and shall be submitted independently in a special referendum election for ratification or rejection by the voters of the smaller city and by the voters of the county outside the smaller city in a manner similar to that provided in §§ 7-2-105 and 7-2-106 with respect to the proposed metropolitan charter for the principal city.

Memphis is not giving up its existence. Just like the Nashville Metro/Davidson Co. government didn’t make Nashville go away, this won’t make Memphis go away. Government as we currently know it WILL be fundamentally changed, both in the City and the County. However, we don’t know what shape that government will take until a Charter Commission is empanelled and a determination is made on the roles and size of legislative bodies, executives, etc. At that point, if people don’t like it, they don’t have to vote for it.

b) While Memphis will not have a voice in government at the table in the small cities, they will have a seat at the table and a voice in decisions about new (our) government. (Slide 1 page 10)

I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. Are you saying that Memphis should have a seat on Germantown’s legislative body, or Bartlett’s legislative body? Everyone in Memphis, Bartlett, Millington, Collierville, and Germantown is a resident of Shelby County. Currently, there are members of the Shelby County Commission that represent these areas, even though all of these municipalities have their own legislative bodies. I have 4 City Council members that represent me in city government (my district, and 3 Super-district members), and 3 County Commission members that represent me in the County. Memphis will have a seat (in fact, probably a majority of the seats) at the table of the resulting government, just as we do in the County Commission now (citizens of Memphis currently serve on the body). But the resulting County government can no more demand a seat in Germantown’s government, any more than Bartlett could demand a seat on Memphis City Council. I would invite you to clarify this in the comments or via email using the form here

c) Because there is clearly a desire by some to keep schools separated, in an effort to move forward with consolidation, they (school boards) are elected by the people, they will remain in place and decide if districts merge, i.e. the schools will stay separated.

Merging the schools is a poison pill that would likely kill the draft charter. Because this is such a fundamental change for all the citizens of Shelby County, it is reasonable to expect that individuals who live in the “General Services District” may wish to maintain control of their schools. This doesn’t mean it won’t happen eventually. Most importantly, while lots of folks have said that the schools are off the table, until the Charter Commission is empanelled, NOTHING is off the table. I think the phrase “Off the table” functionally means “a bad idea politically”, or at least, that’s my interpretation of the use of the phrase. Finally, the last section of the note:

For some reason, it appears a decision may have already been made to support the first - county mayor "appointing" 10 members to the charter commission and the city mayor (possibly pro-tem) will appoint 5 members. The county representatives must live outside Memphis territory, city representatives "who are county residents" cannot live outside its territory. So - - - - the county residents with a little more than 200,000 residents will have 10 votes and the city residents with a little more than 600,000 residents will have 5 votes. Gulp! .

Umm, no. As I said before, citizens of Memphis, Bartlett, Collierville, Millington and Germantown, as well as people that live in unincorporated areas of the County are all County residents. The County Mayor has the power to appoint people from ANYWHERE within his jurisdiction, which includes all of the areas I mentioned above. Thinking this through to its final conclusion, it is reasonable to expect that between the County and City Mayor’s appointments there will be more people from Memphis on the panel. That said, some on the County Commission, particularly Commissioner Bunker, have argued that the County’s appointments should include MORE people from outlying areas. Commissioner Bunker is within his rights to hold that opinion, and can vote against people at will in the confirmation process, but ultimately, it’s up to the County Mayor to nominate individuals to fill the 10 seats, and as a result, up to him, with the advice and consent of the County Commission, to determine the appropriate mix of individuals in those 10 seats between the urban, sub-urban, and rural areas of the county. In conclusion, I hope this is, at the very least, some food for thought in the upcoming discussion of the Metro Charter Resolution. Additionally, I hope you take this post in the spirit of which it is written, as an honest attempt to address the concerns raised. Thank you for your service to the people of the 4th Council district. I look forward to a spirited debate going forward.

Election Vs. Appointment and the Metro Charter Resolution

Steve Ross — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:17:33 +0000

One of the biggest concerns voiced in the current discussion of the Metro Charter Resolution that has passed the County Commission, and will be addressed in the Memphis City Council on September 15th, is the “decision” to go with appointed Charter Commissioners rather than elected Charter Commissioners. Much of this has to do with Tennessee Law as stated in TCA 7-2-101 and 7-2-102. First, TCA 7-2-101 sets forth that:

(B) The resolution shall either: (i) Authorize the county mayor to appoint ten (10) commissioners, subject to confirmation by the county governing body, and authorize the mayor of the principal city to appoint five (5) commissioners, subject to confirmation by the city governing body; or (ii) Provide that an election shall be held to select members of the metropolitan government charter commission;

Both options are clearly available. Later in the same area the law notes:

(F) When the resolutions provide for an election to select members of the metropolitan government charter commission, copies of the resolution shall be certified by the clerks of the governing bodies to the county election commission, together with certificates as to the fact and date of adoption, and then an election shall be held as provided in § 7-2-102;

So what does 7-2-102 call for?

(a) No less than forty-six (46) days nor more than sixty (60) days after the adoption of a consolidation resolution by the governing bodies of a county and of its principal city, which resolution providing for an election of the members of a metropolitan government charter commission, it shall be the duty of the county election commission to hold a special election to elect members of the charter commission. ( (b) The cost of the election shall be paid out of county funds. ( (c) The ten (10) candidates receiving the highest total vote in the election shall be elected as members of the metropolitan government charter commission. ( (d) Any qualified voter of the county shall be eligible for election as a member of the charter commission. ( (e) ( The deadline for filing nominating petitions for candidates for the charter commission is twelve o'clock (12:00) noon of the fortieth day before the election.

Based on this information, the question becomes, which do you prefer? While an election for Commissioners still SOUNDS better, the all call nature of the election, as provided by state law, means that people could be clustered in certain areas. There is NO PROVISION in the election section of the law for districts to be drawn, and no requirement that people be from a diverse cross-section of the community. However, for appointed Commissions, the circumstance is quite different.

(C) It is the legislative intent that the persons appointed to the charter commission shall be broadly representative of all areas of the county and principal city and that every effort shall be made to include representatives from various political, social, and economic groups within the county and principal municipality; (TCA 7-2-101)

So, there are two things at play here. Under the appointment provisions there are to be 15 Commissioners, 10 from the entirety of the County and 5 from the principal city, and they are to be from a diverse cross-section of the community. Under the election provision there are to be 10 people selected from an all-call special election with no districts, and no guarantee that the Commissioners are in any way representative of the community at large. Again I ask, “Which do you prefer?” No process is perfect, but in my opinion, the drafters of the resolution did right by the people of the City and County by choosing the appointment process rather than the election process. Less is left to chance. There is a greater likelihood of geographic, racial and socio-economic diversity, all things that are of critical importance for our community. I understand people’s reservations, but looking at the entirety of the law, there are no shenanigans, this was simply the better choice.

Why Now – Metro Government Resolution

Steve Ross — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 19:24:31 +0000

One of the biggest questions asked about the Metro Charter Resolution is Why Now? To be honest with you, I don’t have an answer, but there do seem to be a set of circumstances and realities that make the possibility of creating Metro Government more likely. Public Opinion Just days before the 2007 City election, a poll was released that showed 55% of City residents favored some form of “Consolidation”. The poll, sponsored by Fox 13 and carried out by Rasmussen had a MOE of 4.5% and was the most accurate poll of the election (actual election results were nearly within the MOE). So, taking the MOE into account, back in late 2007 somewhere between 50% and 59% of Memphians were in favor of “Consolidation”. That’s not a huge margin of victory, but only 35% were against, and 15% were not sure, making the “swing vote” very favorable for passage in the City. The Listening tour There have been conflicting reports on the results of the listening tour, but that’s to be expected. 15 events, all over the County are going to net at least 2 opinions of success or failure per event, if not more. Obviously, someone thought, taking all 15 events into consideration, that there was enough support to make a go of it. A Shift in leadership The departure of former Mayor Herenton may have been a signal to many that the time was now. Herenton was a long-time supporter of “consolidation”, though many of his ideas about how it could, should, or would be done were unsaid. However, Hereton was also a galvanizing figure against “consolidation” to many, particularly in the County. His heavy handed style just exacerbated that situation. His exit from the Memphis Mayor's office likely played a role, though was most certainly not the deciding factor. Timing I wrote about this three weeks ago. The provisions in Tennessee law concerning the formation of a Metro government provide for a special election. This, of course, assumes that there is no actual election scheduled. Based on the timeline provided in the resolution, we would be voting on this measure in the November 2010 election. This is a good thing. Thanks to the Gubernatorial race turnout will likely be high. This creates an opportunity to accurately hear the citizens of Memphis and Shelby Co. I’m not sure if the 1962 and 1971 referenda were part of a special or general election, but after some 38 years, it’s about time we hear the voice of the people on this issue. Stop the Bleeding As I noted in this post from May, the Western Division is contracting as a percentage of the entire population of Tennessee. Based on 2008 Census estimates, Shelby County has gained just 8000 people since 2000. Davidson, on the other hand, has seen an increase of 55,000 in the same time frame. In fact, Middle Tennessee and East Tennessee are responsible for 95% of the population growth in Tennessee. There are more reasons than I can list that contribute to this condition. Slow income growth, widespread economic stagnation, and societal problems that ultimately affect the entirety of the population are just a few. It can be argued that a single government solution in Shelby Co. may not be able to address these issues any better than our two government solution currently does. While this may be true, that argument acknowledges that the current arrangement also isn’t working. By uniting the two largest governments in Shelby Co., we eliminate an excuse for inaction and create an opportunity to deal with these issues as a community and a single government with one voice. Achieving our Potential In a piece from 2007 that I somehow managed to both forget, and never posted, I found that Shelby Co.

…has a GDP larger than 12 states in the US and 123 countries in the world. With an estimated 911,438 people living in Shelby County, we have a larger population than 6 states and D.C.(Source). With numbers like that, it’s time we started governing Shelby county the right way, like a state within a state instead of a city trapped in a 1960’s era arrangement.

Since then, the numbers have likely shifted a bit, but the message is the same. The totality of Shelby Co. is, both in population and economic activity, greater than, or equal to several states. Unifying the two largest governments in Shelby Co. gives us the opportunity to speak with one voice to ensure that our metropolitan area not only maintains, but builds upon these numbers. Conclusion So the question remains, “Why now?” As Memphis Mayor Pro Tem Myron Lowery said in Executive Session on Tuesday, “Why NOT now?”. The stars will never be aligned perfectly, there will always be an excuse to put this off, but looking at the conditions surrounding a broad range of issues, now is as good a time as ever. Like I said before, regardless of whether this is ultimately successful or not, we DO need to have a frank and actionable discussion about local government. We’d just as well start that discussion now.

That Other Election – State Senate 31

Steve Ross — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:01:48 +0000

I know everyone in Memphis is focused on the Mayoral race, and for good reason. There is another race going on, the race to replace disgraced former State Senator Paul Stanley. You may remember, Fmr. Sen. Stanley resigned after it was discovered that he had engaged in an affair with an intern. Now that the withdrawal deadline has passed, the race is on. Both parties have cleared the decks for their preferred nominees. On the Democratic side is Adrienne Pakis-Gillon . The Republicans have rallied around current HD-83 Rep. Brian Kelsey. Pakis-Gillon has some impressive Democratic bona fides, and widespread support from Democrats in Shelby County. However, name recognition will be a bit of an issue for the first time candidate. The hill is steep, but it’s possible that in a special election, she could win this thing. Kelsey, on the other hand, has no problem with name recognition. Dubbed “the Stuntbaby of Germantown", Kelsey has made a name for himself through shameless self-promotion and wild stunts that would make PT Barnum blush. I’m sure it goes back further than this, but let’s just deal with the past 9 months or so: After the election of Rep. Kent Williams to be Speaker of the House, Kelsey filed an ethics complaint against the new Speaker alleging he had sexually harassed a female member of the Republican caucus. At almost exactly the same time, though it took a week for reports to surface, Kelsey apparently tried to barter with the new Speaker through a text message for a Committee Chairmanship. Ultimately, Kelsey admitted he did it and was not prosecuted because the Nashville DA didn’t see the message as coercion, but rather as a “request”. Kelsey’s legislative agenda is a cornucopia of right wing pet projects disguised as “good policy”. Late in the session a poorly timed and self-aggrandizing press release nearly scuttled the widely supported Charter School bill, for which he tried to take credit, but had nothing to do with. For more detailed information check out this Post Politics search. I could probably go on, but what would I write about later? This is going to be a race to watch, as will the upcoming special election for HD-83 if Kelsey follows through with his promise to resign. Stay Tuned!

Up All Night

Steve Ross — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:19:48 +0000

My watch just beeped 5am. I arrived back home at 3:30, after another work excursion that has become more rare over the past several months, but was both welcomed and dreaded. In the past 90 minutes I have spent my time listening to the pulsating symphony of noises made by tree bugs and other night creatures along with the sirens and slamming car doors of the city. It’s a calming thing for me, even though it probably shouldn’t be. The past month has been one interesting turn of events after another. After my self-described pity party of last month, I have emerged from my funk focused on a big goal. That goal is finishing my education, damn the consequences. I recognize that I’m starting over…again, and I’m ok with that. As I sit here in the dark, listening to the noises of the night, I feel at peace with the permanence of transition.

When you stop learning, stop listening, stop looking and asking questions, always new questions, then it is time to die. – Lillith Smith

This may sound extreme, but it is the thing that drives me…always collecting, learning, experiencing new things. Ignoring this allowed me to get into my funk, embracing my desire to constantly grow is the thing to get me out of it. Fuck it. It’s 5am and I’m in a damn good mood, so here’s a little ditty that I can’t get out of my head. Enjoy.

Boomtown Rats - Up All Night
by epb21

Picture 2

Steve Ross — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 07:28:44 +0000

Blocked

Steve Ross — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:27:45 +0000

Frequent readers of this blog know that I am a political junkie. I want to know everything that’s going on, even if I don’t ultimately write about it. That’s just how I am. It’s a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, despite my short time living in Memphis, I have a decent amount of institutional knowledge about who and what and where. On the flip side, I don’t often write about all of that for reasons that run the gambit from the insignificant to not really having ALL or enough of the story to run with it. That’s the reality of where I’m coming from on the whole political scene. I like to know, but if there’s not a story there, or I don’t have a good enough grasp on the situation, I won’t write about it until the pieces fall into place. Being a political junkie, that’s often in places scattered hither and fro across this country, I have found that there are tools, like twitter and Facebook, as well as the traditional means that are helpful in keeping up with the politicians. There are few things that REALLY PISS ME OFF in this world, that aren’t somehow policy related, but one of them, more than anything else, is denying me information, particularly if you are currently campaigning for office. From my perspective, part of your gig as a politician is to inform EVERYONE, regardless of whether I’m a supporter or not. The truth of the matter is, whether I vote for you or not, you will likely serve in an office that represents me. You may not like what I say, or how I say it, but denying me my right to both know what your plans are, and an opportunity to respond to your positions, whether you choose to respond or not, is the height or bullshit. So it was with a great deal of both disappointment and irritation that I discovered I had been blocked on twitter by Mayoral candidate Kenneth Whalum Jr. Apparently, Kenneth Whalum Jr. either doesn't give a damn about working to win my vote, or he's just naive enough to believe that he can win on the strength of whatever support he currently has. Not only is this a bad strategy, it’s just plain dumb. I may not be a supporter of WHALUM!, but that doesn’t mean that I won’t write something that turns another voter. It raises the question: “If this is how Kenneth Whalum chooses to run a campaign, how will he govern as Mayor?” Will he squash dissent? Will he have me removed from government meetings the way he had a gay couple removed from his church, but won’t talk about? This wouldn’t be a story except that the right reverend has done this to other people that have disagreed with him. It seems that candidate Whalum just can’t deal with differing views. Well, so be it. If you are currently following Kenneth Whalum, login to Twitter and do a friend search. If you are currently blocked, take a screen capture and let me know about it on my contact page. Include your twitter name and I’ll contact you about where to email the image. If I get enough people doing this, I’ll publish another post that lists all of us.

Weekly Round-up: Working for a Living Edition

Steve Ross — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 20:50:49 +0000

This week has had me so busy I haven’t even been able to follow ANYTHING. My rss reader is filled to the brink. My email inbox is overflowing. I missed both the County Commission meeting and the City Council meeting due to my return to work. I’m just now catching up on crap from Wednesday! Why am I writing now? My brain is tired from all the catching up, and it doesn’t look like I’ll have a break for some time. Oh well, a guy’s gotta eat, and while I would have liked to slack off a little while longer, I don’t think I could have paid the bills, so this is, as Newscoma says, “of the good”. The Poll On Thursday, a poll was released showing County Mayor AC Wharton leading in the Memphis Mayor’s race. No shit. Sorry if I’m underwhelmed, but AC has been running for this thing since the last city-wide election in October 2007. Anyone that’s surprised by this has been living under a rock. Of course, there have been charges that a sample of 400 people isn’t representative of yada, yada, yada… Polling outfits regularly poll statewide sentiment with 1000 person or less samples. There’s noting wrong with the poll except that it didn’t show “your person” winning. So, if you don’t like the outcome of the poll, get off your hiney and start volunteering for the candidate of your choice. And those 27% of you out there that either don’t know, or won’t say who you support, put on your reading glasses, it’s time for you to shit or get off the pot. Election day is just around the corner. Kelsey Pulls a Herenton As reported by Jackson Baker, Representative Brian Kelsey is suffering from acute premature press release syndrome. Apparently, hitting the send button for the young Representative from Germantown is an automatic response that he just can’t stop himself from, even when he knows he needs to wait. Unfortunately, in the time that elapsed, from initial report to retraction, it appeared to resemble some of the shenanigans of a certain former Mayor. I wonder how that’ll go over with the base. I know, everyone makes mistakes, but this isn’t the first time Representative Kelsey has suffered from this problem. I hope he seeks medical attention, or at least becomes more familiar with the “schedule”, “draft”, or “delete” buttons in the future. Playing with my emotions like that just isn’t funny, and it makes you look dumber than you look on TV. Chartering a Course On Tuesday, the Memphis City Council voted unanimously to approve the Metro Charter Resolution. I don’t have anything snarky to say about that, but out of the same meeting came the revelation that the new official handshake of the Council is the terrorist fist bump. Coincidentally, the Memphis Chamber of Commerce has instituted a no hand shaking policy. I’m sure that’ll go over well while they try to attract business to the city. Twitter Twatter Eye on City Hall blog picked up on the whole WHALUM!!!! Twitter blocking deal thanks to the help of @shaneofmemphis. I got lots of emails, @replies, and DM’s from people who had suffered the same fate, but publishing all those names is really more trouble than it’s worth. As was noted in the comments, this kind of resembles the activities of another local politician. I’ll let you figure that one out for yourself. -- Have a good weekend!

Re-evaluating Through the Transition

Steve Ross — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:52:04 +0000

Two months ago I wrote about the changes that have been going on in my life this year. Needless to say, it’s been interesting so far, and signs point to more interesting developments over the coming months. My recent absence from this blog and the twitter are partially the result of a wacky work schedule and a concerted effort to start down the path of many of the changes I talked about in that August post. Aside from working my ass off, I’ve also been preparing to sell my house. This is by necessity more than anything else. While my original plan was to continue working and traveling through my first part-time semester back in college, the outlook on the work front isn’t that promising, so I’ve been looking at other avenues. This is how life goes, and while it’s frustrating and challenging, I feel very hopeful and positive about what has happened so far, and what will inevitably be coming down the pike. Through all of this, I’ve had little time to devote to the reading necessary to write. Longtime readers of this blog know that while I write a lot of opinion pieces, I usually make a concerted effort to source my material with as many supporting links as possible. I feel this is necessary because opinions ARE like assholes, everyone has one, but opinions pieces backed up by sources don’t necessarily suffer the problems that plague the typical opinionated blog post. This may sound a little arrogant, but I like to back up my opinions because I feel it not only makes them stronger to you the reader, but it also allows me the time to better formulate and hopefully strengthen my argument. The downside of this is that it takes a REALLY LONG TIME to write…well, anything. Between work and work on my house, I really haven’t had the time. To be honest, even though the work I’ve been doing on the house has largely been of the manual labor sort, there’s a lot of thought that goes into the process, as well as a lot of Advil. I hope that I can get back to writing at the beginning of November, but I’m not making any promises. In the course of all of this, I’ve also been re-evaluating just what I want this blog to be. For me Vibinc has been about advocacy, policy and politics from a decidedly liberal perspective. I don’t see that changing anytime soon, though I am looking at ways to better focus my attentions and perspectives to things that effect not only the way we live here in Memphis and Tennessee, but also the way we perceive the political environment in our community. I’m not really sure how this will manifest itself, or where it will take me, but I think it’s an interesting path to pursue. Even though I’m re-evaluating the blog, that doesn’t mean I don’t have some things to say about the election Thursday. I know I promised some people, including @ MphsBlckPolitcs to write about it in the run-up to the election, but for the reasons listed above I never quite made it past the incubation stage. So, consider this a Post-Mortem of the election if you will… _ If you didn’t see the complete and total landslide that was Thursday’s election coming, then you aren’t really paying that much attention to local politics. Back at the beginning of the campaign I said that someone (presumably Wharton) could win with only 30% of the vote considering the large field. Under normal circumstances this could have been the case, but the abbreviated nature of the campaign and the strength exhibited by the Wharton camp made that circumstance highly unlikely. As Mayor Pro Tem Myron Lowery said election night, AC Wharton has been running since the 2007 Mayoral election, had more money than anyone, and a better organization. This is neither “interesting” nor “odd” nor any other descriptor that would cast doubt on the election results. AC’s campaign organization was ready, and no one else’s was. As a result, EVERYONE that got into the race after the retirement announcement of Mayor Herenton was stuck in a situation that made winning a virtually impossible task. There were some surprises… Myron Lowery’s strong showing, despite a late start and a small war chest showed that, given more time, he could have made a run at Wharton. I like much of what Lowery has done so far and hope that Wharton will take note of some of the changes that have taken place at City Hall over the past two months and maintain them through his administration. On the flip side, I’m glad that Lowery will be returning to the City Council. For all his faults, Lowery can be a calming voice on a body that can be quite contentious from time to time. Carol Chumney’s third place finish should be a wake-up call for the former City Council member and State Legislator. Any rumors of her exit from future runs are not only premature, but also ignore her resolve. Carol wants to be a part of making Memphis better. Through her work in the state legislature and City Council this should be more than evident. However, Chumney suffers from a multi-faceted public perception problem. Part of this comes from what I called her ”cold and combative” posture at the first Mayoral debate. While Chumney did herself no favors in this first performance, media accounts, including my analysis of the first debate, perpetuated many of the long-held stereotypes of women seeking positions of power in the political realm. As Mary Cashiola reported in the Memphis Flyer, “Women are twice as likely to be described emotionally in the media,” according to Erika Falk, author of Women for President: Media Bias in Eight Campaigns. Folks, this has to stop. We need women and men of all races and socio-economic backgrounds to engage in the political process. The manner in which women, particularly strong, passionate women, are covered in the media is shameful, dismissive and downright ugly. As consumers of media, we deserve better. As candidates, women deserve to be treated with the same level of respect as their male counterparts. Snippets like this are simply dismissive and disrespectful. Not only is the quote used in the piece not bitter, it is a relevant critique of her political opponent that should have been researched rather than used as a blunt object to further a stereotype. All that said, Chumney did commit some serious tactical errors that likely led to her weak showing at the polls. First and foremost, the early lack of any clear messaging from her campaign, despite a run less than two years before, allowed her opponents to get a jump on her in an area where she could have shown early strength. Considering her strong showing in the 2007 race, the meme of the campaign should have been “Chumney vs. Wharton”. By allowing so much time to pass before any clear message emerged, Chumney ceded a great deal of ground to Wharton early, and Lowery late. Campaigns are about momentum, and unfortunately for the Chumney campaign, this early lack of momentum made the difficult task of overcoming a well-funded candidate even more difficult. Charles Carpenter was the fourth place finisher, and while he only received 5% of the vote, there is little doubt that he will use this as a springboard for a future run. Carpenter brought some interesting ideas to the campaign, and even though I disagree with him on many of his campaign positions, I hope he continues to engage in local politics. We need all kinds of voices in the mix, even ones I disagree with. While the rest of the field accounted for less than 7.5% of the total vote, their impact on the race shouldn’t be ignored, particularly from Lawler and Whalum. Both had potent messaging operations, though Whalum seemed to show more late momentum than Lawler. In the end, all the messaging in the world can’t overcome a strong, well run, and well-funded campaign. Running for any office requires a level of intentional preparation that cannot be thrown together in three months. With the next Mayoral election just two years away, anyone considering a run should start making preparations now. Memphis is best served by a strong and diverse field of candidates competing to lead us forward, not the dominant dynasties of the far and recent past. It is through this competition of ideas that we can grow as a community. Without competition, comes stagnation like what we saw in the final years of the Herenton Administration. Regardless of the intentions of any elected official, it is critical that we foster this kind of competition going forward, lest we fall back into the patterns of the past, and allow the future to slip by us.

No Sour Grapes

Steve Ross — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:38:41 +0000

Well, today has been pretty wacky. First of all, I want to thank City Councilman Shea Flinn, Mayor Pro Tem Myron Lowery, and County Mayor/ City Mayor Elect AC Wharton for having the courage and outside the box thinking to nominate me. Even though I didn’t get seated on the Charter Commission, I’m honored and humbled by the consideration they gave me. Kudos to all of you. I would also like to thank Mike Carpenter on the County side, who also put my name up for consideration. On a certain level, I’m not really that surprised by the result. I’m not particularly politically connected, and I don’t have a great resume. I’m a guy that works a “blue collar” job for a living that just happens to be really interested in politics. Am I disappointed? Sure, but in all honesty, just being nominated is an honor that I didn’t really think I would get. I am surprised at some of the rhetoric used by City Councilman Joe Brown in reference to me. Invoking the word “blogger” as if it were a slur or a swear is something that I have heard more than once, but never in a public meeting. Councilman Brown has every right to voice his opinions, but in the end, I’m a concerned citizen that uses my blog to talk about areas of concern in my community, as well as in state and national politics. How that constitutes something negative is lost on me. In the end, I still intend to cover the goings on of the Charter Commission, just as I would have had I been confirmed. Uniting our community is the only way to move the Memphis area forward. Uniting our governments is one of the steps to accomplish this goal. Finally, I would like to congratulate the 15 members of the Charter Commission on their confirmation. You’ve all signed up for a huge undertaking. Good luck and Godspeed.

After the Storm

Steve Ross — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:11:25 +0000

Things seem to have quieted down a bit since the Tuesday’s kerfuffle. This is a good thing. There’s a lot to do, and while all the attention was nice, it couldn’t have come at a more difficult time. I ready to settle back into my routine of working and writing. And even though I haven’t been doing the latter that much as of late, I promise that I’ll get back on task. There are a lot of people to thank right now, more than I can really do justice, but I’ll give it a try. To all the commenters, well wishers, and random people that have shown support I want to say thank you. Your support over the past few days has been awesome. To LWC, Newscoma, Mike, Tom, Christian, and Betsy I say thank you for the support, and for shining a light on the core issue…that in America, speech may be free, but in often there’s a heavy price to pay for that freedom. As Bill Dries reported for the Memphis Daily News, I’m the second blogger in recent weeks to be denied an appointment to a board or commission because of blogging. I doubt I’ll be the last. Here in Memphis, there’s so much to be done and so many things in flux that it just about boggles the mind. The Charter Commission is just one of many things, and while I’ll not be serving, I will be covering it, just like I promised the other night. There’s also The MED, the schools, the crime, the poverty and infant mortality, and a whole host of other issues that really just boggle the mind. We’ve got a lot of work to do here, and I intend to be a part of finding a solution for Memphis. It’s going to be a heavy lift, but we have to do it. Over the coming weeks I’ll be talking about these things and more. They’re not sexy topics necessarily, but they need to be addressed if Memphis and the surrounding area is to recover from not only the short term problems we face, but the generational issues that have gone largely untouched for far too long.

Defining “Greatness”

Steve Ross — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:43:50 +0000

Yesterday in the Eye on City Hall blog Zack McMillan poses the question ”Has Memphis Ever Had a ‘Great’ Mayor? Can AC Become One?”. It’s an interesting read that lists many of the challenges facing our newly elected Mayor as well as the failures of past Mayors. From the post:

Generations of Memphians have taken history from University of Memphis historian Charles Crawford, and he often makes the point that the problems that plague Memphis, with roots dating back to the 19th Century, are so vast and complicated that even the best and boldest civic administration would have difficulty solving them. Each subsequent generation of Memphians -- and by Memphians we include all those who live in the eight-county Memphis metroplitan area -- wants to believe that problems just shot up out of the soil, but in fact things like deep-seated poverty, violent crime, lackluster universal public education and a low-wage low-skill job base have been here for a long time. "He will run into the traditional Memphis problems that previous mayors have run into and that I won't say are impossible but are intractable," Crawford said in a story we have running today. "Some of these things are outside the capacity of anyone as mayor to solve."

You know, on several levels, he’s right. First of all the …” deep-seated poverty, violent crime, lackluster universal public education and a low-wage low-skill job base”… is a problem that has faced Memphis for generations. Even our own city history page lists many of these problems. Further, Crawford’s assertion that many in the metro area want to believe that these issues “just shot up out of the soil” couldn’t be more right. Many of these issues have been going on since the inception of Memphis, which is not to say that solving them is hopeless, but that it presents challenges that are far greater than even we may recognize. Which gets me back to the point of the post I referenced at the beginning. In order for us to determine whether a Mayor or community leader has been “great”, we have to define what “greatness” is. If greatness is fixing everything, then no, we have had no great Mayors. But as the post rightly points out:

"Some of these things are outside the capacity of anyone as mayor to solve."

So, if these things are outside the capacity of any mayor to solve, then what really defines greatness in the position of Mayor of Memphis? The truth of the matter is, under this standard no leader of any stripe could be considered truly great. No matter how many problems any leader might solve, there are a hundred more lurking around the corner waiting to be discovered. Taking this reality into account, how does a leader achieve "greatness" in the face of generational challenges that are, to a large degree, outside of his or her power to fully address? Think back to the beginning of our nation. While the Declaration of Independence may spell out the foundation of American philosophy, and the Constitution may spell out the rights of citizens and the responsibility of government, the truth of the matter is that what we think of as “freedom” today, wasn’t the freedom of the late 18th Century. Just look at the right to vote. Early on many states had restrictive rules about voting. Unless you were white, male, and a land owner, you didn’t necessarily have the right to vote (Source). Over time, as the nation matured, these rules changed, and became less restrictive, removing property restrictions and other hurdles, then allowing women to vote, and eventually guaranteeing the right to “All Americans of voting age” (though for some, particularly those who have served their time in jail, having their right to vote restored is still a huge hurdle). Of course, none of these changes came thanks to any one individual. It took the voices and actions of thousands of people working for a common goal to extend these rights to the disenfranchised. And while each of these accomplishments are “great”, with every victory came the recognition of another form of disenfranchisement. A good example of this is protecting the choices of the voters through legislation like the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act which is a long way away from early attempts to bring voting rights to the disenfranchised and is still being fought out. That said, I don’t think anyone would say that those who fought for voting rights for the disenfranchised weren’t working toward something “great” regardless of whether it was for women, minorities, or the poor. While achieving these goals certainly is great, it isn’t the achieving that defines greatness to me, it’s the willingness to stand up and fight for the betterment of those around you. Inspiring that action in yourself and your fellow man is the definition of greatness. Recognizing that the fight is continually ongoing and continuing work on the big goal, long after the little goal is achieved is the definition of greatness. So, under that definition what would a great Memphis Mayor be? A great Memphis Mayor would be someone who inspired the public at large into positive action…a Mayor who, through their advocacy, action, and attention worked for the betterment of the city and those who have been wanting for generations. A great Mayor would connect the sick with the healthy, the poor with the wealthy, and the undereducated with the scholarly for the benefit of both sides of the equation in every instance. True lasting solutions cannot be dictated, they have to be discovered. Connecting people of all stripes and backgrounds is the way to discover our individual and societal solutions. Removing the barriers of class, race and God knows what else, and encouraging people to discover the humanity of their neighbors is the way to transformational change that raises tides and lifts all boats. So I’ll ask again, what would a great Memphis Mayor be? Well, solving all our problems certainly would qualify, but we all know that’s highly unlikely. How about we start with the small goal? Using the office to bring people together, opening up the lines of communication and helping nurture a community wide conversation that lead to community wide action would start a Mayor down the path of greatness. Will this be AC's legacy? Only time will tell.

New Hate Crimes Legislation and Discussion Panel

Steve Ross — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:52:03 +0000

Yesterday, the Obama Administration signed into law new hate crimes legislation that extends federal protections to victims of hate crimes on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. The law was attached to a military spending measure. When I read the list of groups covered, I found it remarkable that gender and disability were not currently covered in federal hate crimes law. Better late than never, I suppose. While federal protections for victims of hate crimes is important, having those same protections on the state level is of equal or greater importance. Last session State Rep. Jeanne Richardson and State Sen. Beverly Marrero introduced a measure that would extend hate crimes protections to people on the grounds of “gender, or gender identity or expression”. The bill made it out of sub-committee in the House, but was taken off the calendar in committee. Tonight at the Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law at the University of Memphis there will be a discussion panel (Facebook link) featuring Rep. Richardson and Sen. Marrero, as well as Memphis attorney Murray Wells, hate crime survivor Jack Robinson, and Tennessee Equality Project Board Member Darlene Fike. The discussion panel starts at 5:30 this evening in rooms 250 &252 at the University. Parking will be available in the Central Parking Lot across from the law school. Assurances have been made by University Parking Services that no tickets will be issued for off-campus visitors who lack a parking hang tag the evening of the event. Please be considerate of the University Holiday Inn's parking lot, which is reserved for its paying guests. Come out and be a part of the discussion.

Happy Halloween

Steve Ross — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:16:26 +0000

It's Halloween y'all, and what better way to celebrate it, before the inevitable parties and whatnot tonight, than with a scary story. I know I'm stealing Aunt B's schtick. She's been telling scary stories all month and almost got one read on this weekend's All Things Considered. When I was a kid I was all about some Edgar Allen Poe. Here's one of his stories that has stuck with me since Junior High...

The Masque of the Red Death
The "Red Death" had long devastated the country. No pestilence had ever been so fatal, or so hideous. Blood was its Avatar and its seal -- the redness and the horror of blood. There were sharp pains, and sudden dizziness, and then profuse bleeding at the pores, with dissolution. The scarlet stains upon the body and especially upon the face of the victim, were the pest ban which shut him out from the aid and from the sympathy of his fellow-men. And the whole seizure, progress and termination of the disease, were the incidents of half an hour. But the Prince Prospero was happy and dauntless and sagacious. When his dominions were half depopulated, he summoned to his presence a thousand hale and light-hearted friends from among the knights and dames of his court, and with these retired to the deep seclusion of one of his castellated abbeys. This was an extensive and magnificent structure, the creation of the prince's own eccentric yet august taste. A strong and lofty wall girdled it in. This wall had gates of iron. The courtiers, having entered, brought furnaces and massy hammers and welded the bolts. They resolved to leave means neither of ingress or egress to the sudden impulses of despair or of frenzy from within. The abbey was amply provisioned. With such precautions the courtiers might bid defiance to contagion. The external world could take care of itself. In the meantime it was folly to grieve, or to think. The prince had provided all the appliances of pleasure. There were buffoons, there were improvisatori, there were ballet-dancers, there were musicians, there was Beauty, there was wine. All these and security were within. Without was the "Red Death." It was toward the close of the fifth or sixth month of his seclusion, and while the pestilence raged most furiously abroad, that the Prince Prospero entertained his thousand friends at a masked ball of the most unusual magnificence. It was a voluptuous scene, that masquerade. But first let me tell of the rooms in which it was held. There were seven -- an imperial suite. In many palaces, however, such suites form a long and straight vista, while the folding doors slide back nearly to the walls on either hand, so that the view of the whole extent is scarcely impeded. Here the case was very different; as might have been expected from the duke's love of the bizarre. The apartments were so irregularly disposed that the vision embraced but little more than one at a time. There was a sharp turn at every twenty or thirty yards, and at each turn a novel effect. To the right and left, in the middle of each wall, a tall and narrow Gothic window looked out upon a closed corridor which pursued the windings of the suite. These windows were of stained glass whose color varied in accordance with the prevailing hue of the decorations of the chamber into which it opened. That at the eastern extremity was hung, for example, in blue -- and vividly blue were its windows. The second chamber was purple in its ornaments and tapestries, and here the panes were purple. The third was green throughout, and so were the casements. The fourth was furnished and lighted with orange -- the fifth with white -- the sixth with violet. The seventh apartment was closely shrouded in black velvet tapestries that hung all over the ceiling and down the walls, falling in heavy folds upon a carpet of the same material and hue. But in this chamber only, the color of the windows failed to correspond with the decorations. The panes here were scarlet -- a deep blood color. Now in no one of the seven apartments was there any lamp or candelabrum, amid the profusion of golden ornaments that lay scattered to and fro or depended from the roof. There was no light of any kind emanating from lamp or candle within the suite of chambers. But in the corridors that followed the suite, there stood, opposite to each window, a heavy tripod, bearing a brazier of fire that protected its rays through the tinted glass and so glaringly illumined the room. And thus were produced a multitude of gaudy and fantastic appearances. But in the western or black chamber the effect of the fire-light that streamed upon the dark hangings through the blood-tinted panes, was ghastly in the extreme, and produced so wild a look upon the countenances of those who entered, that there were few of the company bold enough to set foot within its precincts at all. It was in this apartment, also, that there stood against the western wall, a gigantic clock of ebony. Its pendulum swung to and fro with a dull, heavy, monotonous clang; and when the minute-hand made the circuit of the face, and the hour was to be stricken, there came from the brazen lungs of the clock a sound which was clear and loud and deep and exceedingly musical, but of so peculiar a note and emphasis that, at each lapse of an hour, the musicians of the orchestra were constrained to pause, momentarily, in their performance, to hearken to the sound; and thus the waltzers perforce ceased their evolutions; and there was a brief disconcert of the whole gay company; and, while the chimes of the clock yet rang, it was observed that the giddiest grew pale, and the more aged and sedate passed their hands over their brows as if in confused reverie or meditation. But when the echoes had fully ceased, a light laughter at once pervaded the assembly; the musicians looked at each other and smiled as if at their own nervousness and folly, and made whispering vows, each to the other, that the next chiming of the clock should produce in them no similar emotion; and then, after the lapse of sixty minutes, (which embrace three thousand and six hundred seconds of the Time that flies,) there came yet another chiming of the clock, and then were the same disconcert and tremulousness and meditation as before. But, in spite of these things, it was a gay and magnificent revel. The tastes of the duke were peculiar. He had a fine eye for colors and effects. He disregarded the decora of mere fashion. His plans were bold and fiery, and his conceptions glowed with barbaric lustre. There are some who would have thought him mad. His followers felt that he was not. It was necessary to hear and see and touch him to be sure that he was not. He had directed, in great part, the moveable embellishments of the seven chambers, upon occasion of this great fete; and it was his own guiding taste which had given character to the masqueraders. Be sure they were grotesque. There were much glare and glitter and piquancy and phantasm -- much of what has been since seen in "Hernani." There were arabesque figures with unsuited limbs and appointments. There were delirious fancies such as the madman fashions. There was much of the beautiful, much of the wanton, much of the bizarre, something of the terrible, and not a little of that which might have excited disgust. To and fro in the seven chambers there stalked, in fact, a multitude of dreams. And these -- the dreams -- writhed in and about, taking hue from the rooms, and causing the wild music of the orchestra to seem as the echo of their steps. And, anon, there strikes the ebony clock which stands in the hall of the velvet. And then, for a moment, all is still, and all is silent save the voice of the clock. The dreams are stiff-frozen as they stand. But the echoes of the chime die away -- they have endured but an instant -- and a light, half-subdued laughter floats after them as they depart. And now again the music swells, and the dreams live, and writhe to and fro more merrily than ever, taking hue from the many-tinted windows through which stream the rays from the tripods. But to the chamber which lies most westwardly of the seven, there are now none of the maskers who venture; for the night is waning away; and there flows a ruddier light through the blood-colored panes; and the blackness of the sable drapery appals; and to him whose foot falls upon the sable carpet, there comes from the near clock of ebony a muffled peal more solemnly emphatic than any which reaches their ears who indulge in the more remote gaieties of the other apartments. But these other apartments were densely crowded, and in them beat feverishly the heart of life. And the revel went whirlingly on, until at length there commenced the sounding of midnight upon the clock. And then the music ceased, as I have told; and the evolutions of the waltzers were quieted; and there was an uneasy cessation of all things as before. But now there were twelve strokes to be sounded by the bell of the clock; and thus it happened, perhaps, that more of thought crept, with more of time, into the meditations of the thoughtful among those who revelled. And thus, too, it happened, perhaps, that before the last echoes of the last chime had utterly sunk into silence, there were many individuals in the crowd who had found leisure to become aware of the presence of a masked figure which had arrested the attention of no single individual before. And the rumor of this new presence having spread itself whisperingly around, there arose at length from the whole company a buzz, or murmur, expressive of disapprobation and surprise -- then, finally, of terror, of horror, and of disgust. In an assembly of phantasms such as I have painted, it may well be supposed that no ordinary appearance could have excited such sensation. In truth the masquerade license of the night was nearly unlimited; but the figure in question had out-Heroded Herod, and gone beyond the bounds of even the prince's indefinite decorum. There are chords in the hearts of the most reckless which cannot be touched without emotion. Even with the utterly lost, to whom life and death are equally jests, there are matters of which no jest can be made. The whole company, indeed, seemed now deeply to feel that in the costume and bearing of the stranger neither wit nor propriety existed. The figure was tall and gaunt, and shrouded from head to foot in the habiliments of the grave. The mask which concealed the visage was made so nearly to resemble the countenance of a stiffened corpse that the closest scrutiny must have had difficulty in detecting the cheat. And yet all this might have been endured, if not approved, by the mad revellers around. But the mummer had gone so far as to assume the type of the Red Death. His vesture was dabbled in blood -- and his broad brow, with all the features of the face, was besprinkled with the scarlet horror. When the eyes of Prince Prospero fell upon this spectral image (which with a slow and solemn movement, as if more fully to sustain its role, stalked to and fro among the waltzers) he was seen to be convulsed, in the first moment with a strong shudder either of terror or distaste; but, in the next, his brow reddened with rage. "Who dares?" he demanded hoarsely of the courtiers who stood near him -- "who dares insult us with this blasphemous mockery? Seize him and unmask him -- that we may know whom we have to hang at sunrise, from the battlements!" It was in the eastern or blue chamber in which stood the Prince Prospero as he uttered these words. They rang throughout the seven rooms loudly and clearly -- for the prince was a bold and robust man, and the music had become hushed at the waving of his hand. It was in the blue room where stood the prince, with a group of pale courtiers by his side. At first, as he spoke, there was a slight rushing movement of this group in the direction of the intruder, who at the moment was also near at hand, and now, with deliberate and stately step, made closer approach to the speaker. But from a certain nameless awe with which the mad assumptions of the mummer had inspired the whole party, there were found none who put forth hand to seize him; so that, unimpeded, he passed within a yard of the prince's person; and, while the vast assembly, as if with one impulse, shrank from the centres of the rooms to the walls, he made his way uninterruptedly, but with the same solemn and measured step which had distinguished him from the first, through the blue chamber to the purple -- through the purple to the green -- through the green to the orange -- through this again to the white -- and even thence to the violet, ere a decided movement had been made to arrest him. It was then, however, that the Prince Prospero, maddening with rage and the shame of his own momentary cowardice, rushed hurriedly through the six chambers, while none followed him on account of a deadly terror that had seized upon all. He bore aloft a drawn dagger, and had approached, in rapid impetuosity, to within three or four feet of the retreating figure, when the latter, having attained the extremity of the velvet apartment, turned suddenly and confronted his pursuer. There was a sharp cry -- and the dagger dropped gleaming upon the sable carpet, upon which, instantly afterwards, fell prostrate in death the Prince Prospero. Then, summoning the wild courage of despair, a throng of the revellers at once threw themselves into the black apartment, and, seizing the mummer, whose tall figure stood erect and motionless within the shadow of the ebony clock, gasped in unutterable horror at finding the grave-cerements and corpse-like mask which they handled with so violent a rudeness, untenanted by any tangible form. And now was acknowledged the presence of the Red Death. He had come like a thief in the night. And one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall. And the life of the ebony clock went out with that of the last of the gay. And the flames of the tripods expired. And Darkness and Decay and the Red Death held illimitable dominion over all.Source)

Hope you enjoyed the story. You may also want to check out some of the analysis of the story. Interesting and timely.

Happy Halloween!

Kelsey Dodges Opportunity to Grandstand

Steve Ross — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 14:22:35 +0000

Strange, and very out of character for the "stunt-baby of Germantown". Makes me wonder what he's afraid of? The people of SD 31 deserve better. A vote for Adrienne Pakis-Gillon is a vote for responsive representation. Early voting is underway. If you live in SD 31, get out & give her your support. Vote Adrienne Pakis-Gillon for SD 31. Edited to add: I should have included this post from Jackson Baker to the mix, because it's spot on. One of the problems of writing on an iPhone is all the steps it takes to bang out a post. From the article:

Peg Watkins, president of the MSCLWV, professed to find Kelsey’s characterization of her organization “amazing,” maintaining that the League was formally non-partisan and studiedly neutral concerning elections. “I’d be happy to send him a copy of our mission statement,” she said. And, indeed, when Kelsey was reminded that the immediate past president of the League, Dee Nollner, was a Republican, he grudgingly acknowledged the fact. “Okay, there are a few, but mainly they’re the League of Liberal Women Voters, and I don’t have time for them.”

Can you believe this guy? Go read it if you haven't already.

Senate31

Steve Ross — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:46:59 +0000

endorsements

Steve Ross — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:49:28 +0000

Adrienne

Steve Ross — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:50:02 +0000

Election Day in SD31

Steve Ross — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:51:49 +0000

If you live in SD31, today is Election Day. You have before you, the choice between Brian Kelsey (R ) and Adrienne Pakis-Gillon (D). Kelsey has made a name for himself in his five years in the State House as a serial self-promoter. This self-promotion has manifested itself in him taking credit for things where no credit is due. The Commercial Appeal detailed some of Kelsey’s more blatant truth stretching exercises in a November 22nd article, prompting City Councilman Bill Morrison to say, "You don't take credit for somebody's stuff. That's not cool." Kelsey has also declined to appear in ANY forum with his opponent, as I detailed here, calling the League of Women Voters the League of Liberal Women Voters and skipping a forum sponsored by the Memphis Area Women's Council for a birthday party. Obviously, he’s more invested in his social calendar than representing the people of SD31. Today the voters of SD31 have an opportunity to rid our state government of Brian Kelsey. While armchair pundits and some members of the political class have written off this campaign as a gimmie for Kelsey, Adrienne Pakis-Gillon has been working tirelessly to earn the right to represent the people of SD 31. Along the way she has gained an impressive list of endorsements. It’s time. Just over 4900 people voted early. For Adrienne to win she’ll need as many supporters as she can get to show up to the polls and cast a vote for sensible, honest representation. If you’re not sure that you live in SD31, or where to vote, check out the precinct locator. Most importantly, go vote.

Memphis/Shelby Co. Metro Charter Commission

Steve Ross — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:53:15 +0000

This is a work in progress. If you have suggestions to be added, please submit them at my Contact page.

Resolutions

County Metro Charter Resolution City Metro Charter Resolution

Websites

Memphis & Shelby County Metro Charter Commission Official Site

Reinvent Government - The site for the listening tour that began in early 2009.
Rebuild Government - A conduit for information from the people of Shelby Co. to the Charter Commission.

Charter Commission Agendas

Ed Note: These are published as soon as they are received
December 17th, 2009
December 3rd, 2009
November 17th, 2009
November 10th, 2009

Charter Commission Minutes

Ed Note: These are published as soon as they are approved
December 17th, 2009 December 10th, 2009

Charter Commission Meeting Documents

December 17th, 2009 County Atty. Opinion on Schools Attorney General Opinion on Schools County Atty. On Constitutional Officers Annexation Reserve Areas December 4th, 2009 Comparative Studies - Indianapolis | Lousiville | Nashville | Jacksonville (1,2,3) Organizational Chart - City of Memphis Organizational Chart - Shelby Co. Timeline (As suggested by staff) Draft Commission Timeline - As prepared by Lou Etta Burkins Presentation by Scott Sigman

In the Media

Charter Commission Elects Ellis Chair Charter Commission Prepares for Nine-Month Mission New Shelby County charter panel slow to gear up

Blog Posts

Vibinc Metro Government Posts Smart City Memphis Posts

Metro Charter Commission Meeting Thursday

Steve Ross — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:18:59 +0000

At 4pm in Suite 850 of the Shelby County Administration building at 160 N. Main (Source), the Memphis and Shelby County Metropolitan Government Charter Commission will meet for the third time (as far as I can tell). You probably haven’t read much about this, because there hasn’t been much to tell. The first meeting was strictly an organizational meeting to help get the ball rolling. The second meeting established the leadership of the Commission by electing Julie Ellis Chair, Andre Fowlkes vice-Chair, and Lou Etta Burkins Secretary. This meeting will get the ball rolling on the stuff of actually crafting a charter from scratch. The agenda for the meeting is heavier than it looks. In reality, everything about this is heavier than it looks, and likely, not particularly interesting to the casual observer. Studying current governmental structures, and the structures of other governments is the kind of mundane task that goobs like myself revel in, but not most people. The reality is that everyone on the Commission has to have a good understanding of where we are now, in order to come up with a plan to get where we’re going. There will likely be some dissent on the way. In any case, I intend to be there, toothpicks in eyelids after my 26-hour day that starts around 7pm tonight and doesn't really end until I get off the plane Thursday afternoon. I’ve started a page that will eventually have more information about the goings on of the Metro Charter Commission. I'll add more as more information becomes available.

Sure, I’ll Jump In…

Steve Ross — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:03:30 +0000

So last night was both disappointing and eventful. First, I would like to echo the sentiments of Tennessee Senate Democratic Caucus Chairman Lowe Finney, about the Adrienne Pakis-Gillon campaign. She worked her butt off without much visible support from the establishment powers outside of Shelby Co. and deserves kudos for running a clean campaign against an opponent whose actions and legislative record literally begs for mudslinging. Speaking of State Senator Finney, there was some interesting news in his neck of the woods last night that has taken the state by storm. As if you didn’t already know, Rep. John Tanner (D-TN08), a founder of the Blue Dog Coalition announced his retirement after several media outlets reported his impending retirement based on an anonymous source. This led to a weird series of events that started out with a whole lot of speculation on who would run for the seat and ended up with Democratic Gubernatorial candidate, Roy Herron, dropping out of the Governor’s race to run for TN-08. Herron’s decision to run isn’t all that surprising. While he has been successful at winning straw polls all over the state, and is to be commended for out organizing his primary opponents at said straw polls, REAL polls suggest that his candidacy wasn’t really getting the reach required to overcome the presumed front runner in the race, Mike McWherter, who hails from the same area. For Herron, the political math made sense, and he did his math quickly dropping out of the race less than four hours after the first report hit Tennessee media. Despite Herron’s early jump into the TN-08 race, several other elected and former officials have expressed interest in the seat or at least been mentioned, including; Phillip Pinion of Union City (burnout?), Mark Maddox (He’s more likely to run for Roy’s State Senate seat), and Lowe Finney (who is up for re-election in the State Senate in 2010). In the mean time, Republicans have wasted no time in attacking Herron as an Obama lovin’ gay sympathizing socialist, which is funny on several levels. Herron has a pretty solid moderate to conservative voting record. Painting him as a wide eyed liberal is not just a stretch, but pure bullshit. As I said on twitter earlier today

If the GOP thinks Roy Herron is a "libural", then I guess those (R) state legislators that voted for an unconstitutional gun law are too!

We’ll see how this pans out in the coming weeks, but unless Herron really screws up, he’s in pretty good shape to win the primary in August despite not being able to use the funds he’s already collected for his Gubernatorial bid, as noted by Goldni and Braisted. So, what was I doing while all this was going on? Loading in a show in San Antonio that is featuring W. as a speaker. Yeah, it’s that one. #FML There are lots of other good posts about this out there, but I have a show to load out. Back in Memphis tomorrow. Thank God!

Metro Charter Commission Meeting – 12/03/09 - Updated (12/8/09)

Steve Ross — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:08:15 +0000

Edited To Add: Added some links to the post and to the Resource Page Last night the Memphis/Shelby County Metropolitan Charter Commission met for the third time. As with any new board tasked with such a huge mandate, there are still some structural and organizational issues to be decided, as well as a lot of information gathering. Foremost among these was deciding when and how often to meet. Chairman Ellis proposed that beginning in January, the Commission would meet every other Thursday starting with January 7th. Four dates were approved in addition to that date; January 21st, February 4th and 18th. All meetings begin at 4pm. The next meeting is December 17th. The actual location of the next meeting was also up for discussion. Several members expressed a desire to have the meetings streamed on either the City or County sites. The Large Mayor’s Conference room on the 8th floor of the County Administration building doesn’t have the equipment necessary to allow for live streaming. There was some discussion about moving the meetings to the City Executive Committee room, or the County Commission Committee room. It was decided to hold the next meeting at the Commission Committee Chamber to allow for streaming. While this may seem like a fairly mundane conversation, I was glad to hear that several Commissioners were concerned about access to the meetings and the documents those meeting produce. This discussion also folded into a broader discussion of transparency, including the development of a web site for the public to access information. The web site is forthcoming, but until some of the technical issues are ironed out documents are available on request, you can also find many of them here. The documents on my site are hardly comprehensive, but I am working to make as many available as possible, particularly until the Commission’s site is completed. Project Management was the next order of business on the agenda. Commission Secretary Lou Etta Burkins put together a preliminary planning document and gave a presentation to the Commission. In a previous post I discussed the timeline as mandated by the resolutions approved by the County Commission and City Council as well as Tennessee State Law in some detail. This document was more task oriented, and while it’s still a work in progress, it gave all in attendance an idea of the several issues that must be addressed as the Commission continues it’s work. Edited to Add: At a previous meeting a Staff prepared timeline was also distributed. From there, County Policy Advisor Kelly Rayne gave a brief presentation on the structures of the City and County Governments. While both have areas of overlapping functions, their structures are quite different. The County Government only has 6 divisions, though those divisions are quite deep in the services they provide. By contrast, the City Government is wide, with 14 divisions, even though only 5 are mandated by the City Charter (Article 8, starting on page 26). There was a great deal of discussion on how to best address areas of overlap in working to unite the two governments, and a detailed analysis of the subtasks of each division on the City and County side is forthcoming to help inform the Commissioners going forward. Other areas covered are the Courts and Constitutional officers, which are mandated or defined in State Law. Defining the best method for unifying the functions of government alone is a Herculean task. In the coming weeks and months I expect that, in addition to consulting with division directors on both sides of Main St., the Commission will break down into several committees or task forces to focus on these issues and make recommendations to the full Commission. Next on the agenda was a discussion of other consolidated cities. The four cities discussed were Nashville, Jacksonville, FL (1,2,3), Indianapolis, IN, and Lousiville, KY. This was pretty interesting. Each Metro government, as well as the manner, timeframe, and circumstances under which they merged is unique. While all of them share many characteristics generally, the specifics are quite different. Legislative bodies range from 19 to 40 members, and the manner in which the seats are distributed (single member districts or at large) is different for each government. All of this, of course, spurred some interesting discussion. Of the four cities, Marion Co./Indianapolis closest in total population. Louisville/Jefferson County, on the other hand, has a population of nearly 200,000 less, but shares some of the regional issues that Memphis has being near the border of another state (Indiana). What was most interesting to me was that while Nashville chose a Metro government the earliest and is the least populous of the four, it has the highest level of direct representation with 35 districts and 5 at large positions. For people, like myself, who are concerned with the level of direct representation that the proposed charter ultimately provides, this was of great interest to me. Knowing how other areas have done things, based on attitudes of the areas and the perception of needs is really intriguing. The biggest thing I took from this discussion is that there is no one right way to do any of this, though there are likely MANY wrong ways. I look forward to more discussion on this, and will be writing something about the makeup of the legislative branch of the proposed government in an upcoming post. The last two items on the agenda included a presentation by Scott Sigman from the Greater Memphis Chamber of Commerce about consolidated cities and a discussion of Committees/task forces. Scott is a native of Indianapolis and had some interesting first hand information about the manner in which the consolidation of city and county functions occurred there in 1970. I hope to have an electronic copy of his presentation up later on today. The committee discussion revolved around setting up five areas of concentration, however, I haven’t had time to really review this yet. I’ll update this post once I have more time. All in all, while the meeting was a bit on the dry side, it was interesting. It was encouraging to see just how engaged and committed the members of the Commission are in the process. Also the broad depth of perceptions is going to make for some lively discussions in the future. I’ll be updating this post throughout the day as time permits. Also, don’t forget to visit my resource page which I will also be updating as documents become available.

Be a Part of the Conversation

Steve Ross — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:35:54 +0000

Back in August, before the Metro Charter Commission was formed, I wrote a post about having a “frank and actionable discussion” about government. Yesterday, at Shelby Farms, I was pleased to participate in the launch of an organization whose mission is to help foster that discussion. Rebuild Government, organized by Brian Stephens, seeks to build community awareness and participation in shaping the Metro Charter process. I am honored to be one of the Co-Chairs of this effort. In the five and a half years that I’ve lived in Shelby County, the biggest thing I’ve seen lacking is the opportunity for citizens to have a direct voice in how local government works, outside of the regular election calendar. While I can’t speak for everyone, I’m sure just about every citizen of Shelby County has a suggestion for making government more effective, responsive, and representative of the community. This is our chance to not only raise our voices, but effect a change. The truth of the matter is that while opposition to “Metro Government” has been lining up for months now, that opposition has nothing to oppose but the process. Not one single line of a new proposed Charter has been committed to paper. And while it’s certain that the Metro Charter Commission will be meeting personally with citizens all over the County to listen to their thoughts and concerns, there’s no way that 15 Commissioners can effectively engage the nearly one million people that live here by themselves. That’s one area where this organization comes in. While Rebuild Government, makes no claims to be a surrogate for the Charter Commission, it does seek to be a conduit to help educate, engage, and empower the community on the activities of the Charter Commission and take advantage of the opportunity we have before us to build the best possible government for our community. Shelby County needs this discussion. We may or may not end up in a Charter that both city and county residents can live with, but without the conversation, we’ll never really know.

- Steve Ross is a Co-Chair of Rebuild Government, an organization committed to build community awareness and participation in the Metro Charter process by creating and giving voice to an informed and engaged citizenry. The views expressed in this space are not necessarily those of Rebuild Government, its Co-Chairs, organizers, or affiliates.

Democratic Apocalypse

Steve Ross — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:55:08 +0000

I don’t know about you guys, but I’m packing my shit and bustin’ up outta this state before Brian Kelsey, Stacey Campfield & an angry mob of the 2% majority that makes up the Tea Partiers come to town on white stallions, raids my house and puts me and my Democratic friends into some Red Dawn-esque re-education camp, or worse! Hell, now that Long Tall Johhny T. and Big Bad Bart are callin’ it quits, not to mention Phil and his Phunky bunch getting’ term limited out, we just might have to compete for an election! God knows, if there’s one thing Democrats hate more than anything it’s competition! Yessir, it’s a lookin’ pretty grim out there for folks like us. I guess we just oughta fold up shop here and start lookin’ for another state that’s more in tune with Tennessee Democratic values… I don’t know what state that is, but we need to be lookin’ and lookin’ hard. You can only pee in a busted radiator so many times before your truck starts smellin’ funky & I’m sure the effete liberal palettes of most Tennessee Democrats just couldn’t stand the thought of peeing standing up. /snark

Metro Charter Commission Meeting – 12/17/09

Steve Ross — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:27:21 +0000

Last night, the Metro Charter Commission met for the fourth time. From looking at the agenda one might conclude that it was going to be a barn burner with topics such as the fate of the two school districts, annexation, and Constitutional officers on the agenda. While the meeting was interesting, a barn burner it wasn’t. In fact, many of the “big fights” surrounding these issues are kind of moot based on opinions from the State Attorney General and County Attorney. Of course, these are just opinions. There’s still a possibility of litigation to actually “settle” these issues, but that seems unlikely at this point. So without further ado, here’s what happened. The first item on the agenda, after the normal opening business, was a presentation by Brian Stephens and Darrell Cobbins of Rebuild Government. This consisted, primarily, of informing the Commission about the mission of the group and a rundown of the activities that the group has planned going forward. I wrote about the organization, which launched Monday here. There were some questions for the group, one of which is a question I’ve been asked about 20 times since Monday. Commissioner and Millington Mayor Richard Hodges asked where the funding for this organization came from. Stephens replied that the early fundraising efforts had come from the business community, but that as the organization continues on it’s mission it will be soliciting donations from philanthropic organizations and individuals. The second question/comment came from Commissioner and former Collierville Mayor Linda Kerley. Kerley was concerned that the information given out to the public by the group be as accurate as possible and reflect the intent of the Commission. Stephens replied that Rebuild Government would accept any and all information from the Commission and work to ensure that the both the information distributed and the intent was as comprehensive as possible. This presentation was followed by a statement by Memphis Mayor AC Wharton on the issues of the Metro Charter and schools. The crux of his message was that because of the way that both the Shelby Co. Schools and the Memphis City Schools are established, that neither “body politic” could be forced to come together by any other entity. “…not gonna have a shotgun wedding.”, was the quote that perhaps most captured the sentiment of his message. The Mayor’s comments were followed by some quick business about the Commissions task forces. I hope to have a list of all the task forces, their Chairmen, and members soon. From there, things got a little interesting…but just for a second. Commissioner and City Councilman Jim Strickland put forth a motion to exclude the topic of schools from the entire purview of Metro Charter Commission discussions. Waiting in the wings was County Attorney Brian Kuhn, with testimony, an opinion and State Attorney General opinion on the state’s school provisions in regard to the formation of a Metro style government. This motion was tabled until after Kuhn’s testimony. County Attorney Brian Kuhn then started laying out his opinion, backed up by a State Attorney General’s opinion on what powers and responsibilities the Metro Charter Commission had in regard to the schools. As Mayor Wharton noted, because of the way the Shelby Co. and Memphis City schools are organized, two separately chartered organizations with separate legislative bodies, the Charter Commission has no right or duty to try and merge the two districts. According to his testimony, the only thing that the Charter Commission must do, is set forth the manner in which the two school districts are to be funded. But even the funding issue has a twist. According to Kuhn, a measure that may come up this spring in the State Legislature would allow taxing authority to school boards. Such a move would allow the Charter Commission to establish a process by which the two individual entities could tax constituents according to the needs of each district. This would eliminate one area of disagreement and fade some of the heat off of the resulting Metro Council or Commission, but would also increase the profile and importance of the boards for both Memphis and Shelby Co. schools. At this point, Commissioner and City Councilman Strickland amended his motion to only deal with the issue of funding. The motion was approved unanimously. Next, County Attorney Brian Kuhn talked to the Commission about Constitutional Officers, or officials that the state mandates every County have. In the opinion he provided to the Commission, Kuhn lays out in great detail the officers that must remain and what options the Commission have in front of them. According to the opinion, Sherriff, Trustee, Register, County Clerk and Assessor of Property are all mandated by the state. However, the duties of these offices are not. The Charter Commission can decide to define the duties for each of these offices as they see fit. Kuhn noted that in Davidson Co., for instance, the Sherriff was only responsible for the jails and courts. Also in Davidson, the Trustee only collects the taxes, an appointed official deals with investments and warrants (checks). This will likely be one of the more lively and possibly contentious discussions in upcoming Commission meetings. A discussion about the County and City government functions was largely tabled until a later meeting. As I noted in my post about last meeting, both function very differently, and with new administrations in both the City and the County, it is possible that some areas will be a moving target for the Commission, and the staff that seeks to help provide them the details of both. Kelly Rayne also gave a presentation on the current annexation plans and what will happen to them should the citizens of the Memphis and Shelby Co. decide to form a Metro government. On page 12 of the document is a map that describes the current annexation arrangement between the cities located in Shelby Co. If I’m understanding correctly, the resulting Metro government will either inherit Memphis’ current annexation areas, or will have to be given via the new charter, those areas. This, however, is a question that will likely be referred to the County Attorney, or the State Attorney General. Finally, the Commission spent some time on how to best deal with media interviews and Task Force scheduling going forward. Due to the holiday, the task force issue will be primarily dealt with after the holidays. Task Force meetings will be announced at the next Charter Commission meeting on January 7th.

This is Not Another One of Those Stupid End of the Year Lists

Steve Ross — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 14:58:58 +0000

… but I am glad that this year is finally almost over. In all seriousness, this year has been just plain crappy for just about everyone I know. The economy has sucked, the political dialogue has been shrill, and everyone, whether they recognize it or not, is worse off for the wear. I’m not positive that 2010 will be any better, but I pray that it’s no worse. Here are some of the things that made me want to stab myself in the eye this year. Republicans - I know for a fact that there are some sincere Republicans in this world. Some of them I am proud to call my friends. Unfortunately for them, and the GOP brand, they are not the ones that get phone calls from the media for interview requests. The result, is a national and state party that has positioned itself somewhere between the Know Nothing Party and a team of trained monkeys being fed a steady diet of Crystal Meth. The GOP has been foaming at the mouth, and doing just about everything in their limited power to obstruct solutions brought by the President and Congressional leadership, while offering NO ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION, period. Yet somehow, through all the ridiculous rabidity of the GOP, the media has taken their non-position seriously, and reported it on a continuous loop as if it’s some kind of real alternative. I hope they get what they deserve in 2010, heavy losses, but I fear that while their strategy won’t really “work”, it will appear to in the face of the next thing that makes me want to stab myself in the eye… Democrats - If I were to write a book about the past year in Democratic politics, I think I would call it The Weakest Majority or Rudderless Politics. From the actions of many in Congress, and to a lesser degree, the President himself, one would think that Democrats have a fundamental misunderstanding of furthering their agenda or even the most basic tenets of majority maintenance. From the ever-shifting rationales for opposing Health Care Reform to the unpopular sweetheart deals used to buy some legislators off, both houses of Congress, but particularly the Senate, seem mired in a “what’s in it for me” type attitude. It’s the kind of ridiculous self-hating stupidity that makes posts like this resonate with me, and pray for someone, anyone in the Democratic Party to show up with a pair of balls they haven’t borrowed from a lab rodent. Some National Bloggers - I’m not really sure when it happened, but sometime during the last year I began slowly weaning myself from certain national blogs and/or bloggers. The cause, a persistent and annoying line of reasoning that went something like this: Any kind of negotiation regarding the long and grueling Healthcare debate is the complete and total abandonment of the progressives that got you elected. Ugh. Invoking the names of former and current “progressives” including the recently deceased Senator for Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy, these individuals filled my inbox, and countered the national GOP’s steady stream of

NO!

with threats against fellow progressive Members of Congress if they didn’t deliver. Brilliant! The issue for me is not that I necessarily disagree with the policy positions of these people, but that their tactics are nucking futs. Virtually every plea, every call for support, every post that flooded my inbox like year-long projectile vomit came from an adversarial position, littered with threats and this and that and the other, while ignoring that the legislative process is not a dictatorship, but a negotiation. With the subtlety and tact of a bull in a china shop, these individuals spent the entire year yelling “The sky is falling” instead of putting together a consistent positive message that the majority of the population, that doesn’t keep a running tally of every legislative burp, could get behind. In short, they Tea Bagged their way into irrelevance. There most certainly is a place for issue advocacy in the political discourse. If I didn’t believe in it, I wouldn’t be writing this right now, but for the love of God, build a message beyond a series of threats that you can’t deliver on! Keep doing the petitions, and the letter writing campaigns and the phone calling, all of that stuff is good, but don’t marginalize yourself with rhetoric that puts you further out on the crazy side of politics than the REAL CRAZIES out there. You’re not only hurting your credibility, but also your cause. Tennessee Democratic Institutions - Coma and Aunt B have a couple of good posts up about some of the issues surrounding Democratic institutions in Tennessee, but I want to go a little further. Anyone who thinks the issue with Democratic Institutions in Tennessee, from the TNDP down to the lowliest of lowly county parties falls on the shoulders of one man or woman is trying to deflect blame from someone who probably REALLY deserves it, that someone either being them, or someone they support. The truth of the matter is that they all have issues that have been around longer than I’ve been paying attention. I could go on and on about all the crap that shoulda, coulda, woulda, but I’d just be rehashing posts from last November through February, so if you want to know what’s wrong, go back to those posts and apply it to just about everything that has a “Democratic” anything to it in this state, including myself. In all seriousness, there have been some baby steps in the right direction, but from the TNDP and the Caucus organizations down to the county parties it’s just not happening fast enough. I hope that by Jan 4th, when petitions are available for state races, there’s some kind of plan in place, at least that’s known by the leadership, that contests the 11 first term and the 10 second term House Republicans in November, in addition to dealing with the incumbents and any retirements/open seats that may come up, but I’m not all that hopeful. I haven’t seen a concerted effort from all the stakeholders to work together on anything but the House 62 special election and that was a nightmare. I hope like hell that November isn’t a replay of that. -- Here’s to hoping for a better year ahead, and for some of my “targets” to get their collective shit together. I don't think I can stand a 2009 part 2: Electric Boogaloo.

Classless

Steve Ross — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 15:46:55 +0000

As the old Sir Francis Bacon quote goes, “knowledge is power”. While that may be true, knowing something doesn’t necessarily give you the right to exploit it for personal financial or political gain. But people make choices, right or wrong, and there’s nothing you can really do, other than call them out when you disagree, knowing that it’s unlikely anything, other than the expression of some righteous indignation, will come of it. That’s where I’m at today. In this post yesterday the blog that bills itself as the home of controversy wrote that Memphis City Councilwoman Wanda Halbert would be fired from her job at FedEx. Now certainly, if this happened it would be news. But to the best of my knowledge, it hasn’t happened, which makes it gossip.

Gossip needn't be false to be evil - there's a lot of truth that shouldn't be passed around.

I don’t know if this is true or not, but I do know one thing, passing crap like this around is, if not evil, pretty damn rude and self-serving. Sure, Wanda Halbert is a public official, but she’s also a person, with all the positives, negatives, trials and tribulations that we all, as people have. By running a rumor as inevitability, the author has ignored that humanity for the sake of self-promotion, and that’s just classless. In the end, it doesn’t matter if you agree or disagree with someone. Certainly, I have disagreed with Ms. Halbert on many occasions, and will likely do so again. What matters is that you, at least try to treat people with dignity and respect, regardless of your opinion of them, or their opinions. I haven’t always done that, I know. We all slip from time to time. But in the end you have to ask the question, “What is the net impact of this information.” And if you’re the only one who benefits, then perhaps you should tuck it in your pocket and take a lap, or call the individual personally rather than using it as a platform for self-aggrandizement.

Charter Commission Meeting Cancelled

Steve Ross — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 18:08:48 +0000

From Matt Kuhn, Policy Advisor to Mayor Joe Ford:

The Charter Commission meeting scheduled tonight for 4 pm will be CANCELLED and rescheduled for Thursday Jan 14th at 4 pm in the 4th floor Commission Committee room in the County Building 160 N. Main.

There is, however, some good news, despite the cancellation due to CLUSTERFLAKE2010, the Commission’s web site is now up. It includes links to the Agendas and Minutes of the Commission. A list of members with their Commission email addresses, and a brief timeline of the important dates for the Commission. This is a good development for the Commission. Hopefully there will be more updates, like the inclusion of the various Task Forces, and the members who serve on them. This, however, may not be made available until the meeting on the 14th.

Whoopsie

Steve Ross — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:30:48 +0000

Well folks, this is what happens when you accidentally throw away your stylesheet on both your computer and server. me=idiot Obviously, I was working on a new look. Hopefully I'll have it fixed soon enough.