Wednesday, April 26, 2017

The Bastiat Society meetings are always enjoyable.  They are a great opportunity to network and fellowship with fellow conservatives and the speakers are visiting scholars and top-notch experts in their field. To view the Bastiat Society Facebook page follow this link.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Ex-Nashville judge Casey Moreland indicted on federal bribery, tampering charges

Ex-Nashville judge Casey Moreland indicted on federal bribery, tampering charges

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Mayor Barry Calls for funding of light rail transit, new employee benefits, and other massive spending in State of Metro Address

Mayor Barry delivers her 2017 State of Metro address
Metro Press Release, April 26, 2017- Mayor Megan Barry called on Nashvillians to “embrace the future” during her 2017 State of Metro Address held at the Bridgestone Arena Plaza, where she discussed Nashville’s transit future while detailing her recommended $2.2 billion fiscal year 2017-18 budget. Metro is expected to have the lowest combined property tax rate in its history at less than $3.16 per $100 of assessed value following the 2017 property reappraisal.

“We cannot wait another year to start the process of building our first light rail,” said Mayor Barry. “I’m very happy to announce that today the work begins to create light rail service on the Gallatin Pike corridor. I’m excited to have the city start the process of making light rail available to our citizens. I’d drive across the river and put a shovel in the ground this afternoon if I could – and I might just do it anyway!”

Following the passage of Governor Haslam’s IMPROVE Act, Mayor Barry announced her intention to work with the Metro Council and community partners to develop and present a transit plan to Nashville voters that will include dedicated sources of revenue to build high-capacity transit along the Gallatin, Nolensville, Murfreesboro, and Charlotte Pikes, along with a Northwest Corridor from North Nashville to Clarksville.

Mayor Barry noted that the Gallatin Pike corridor is an obvious choice to start that process as it currently carries the most transit riders in the region, development along the corridor has demonstrated a market for transit-oriented development, and planning processes have shown that the neighborhoods along Gallatin support comprehensive mass transit.

“Nashville cannot wait any longer to embrace our future,” Mayor Barry said in announcing her intention to move forward with community partners to develop a transit referendum for the voters of Nashville. “We will be a 21st-century, transit-oriented city, and we are not going to look back 10 years from now and say we failed when we had to succeed.”

While looking towards the future of transit, Mayor Barry detailed her proposal to utilize the $119 million in new revenue that is a result of new buildings coming online and continued growth in business and tourism throughout the city. Highlights of the FY17-18 operating budget include:
  • $40.6M to promote fiscal responsibility through debt service payments, including $11.4M in reserves for future requirements.
  • $879M for Metro Nashville Public Schools, a 4.3%, $36M increase over FY16 to fund higher pay for teachers, literacy and ELL programs, and social emotional learning to help students manage emotions and maintain positive relationships.
  • $4M more for the Metro Nashville Police Department to fund 22 new officers for foot patrols that will enhance community policing efforts, as well as 48 new officers, 6 for each precinct, to better match the growth in population and improve response times.
  • $1.9M to the Nashville Fire Department to fully fund new EMS Medic units started in FY17, along with 14 new fire recruits and fire inspectors.
  • $18.1M in new funds to compensate Metro employees through a three-year pay plan, which will fund increments and 2% open range increases, along with a 2% cost of living adjustment for FY18, with 3% open range and COLA proposed for FY19 and FY20.
  • A $7M increase in the Metro Transit Authority subsidy, which is the largest single-year increase ever, to fund the elimination of transfer fees and extend the Music City Circuit to Tennessee State University along the Jefferson Street corridor.
  • $500,000 for the Metro Arts Commission to fund temporary public art projects and the THRIVE program to meet the neighborhood demand for public art and creative place-making projects, as well as increase funding for arts grants.
  • $500,000 to launch a Conservation Assistance Grant Program to leverage effective partnerships in conserving public and private lands and resources of conservation value in Davidson County.
Along with increases in pay, Mayor Barry announced that she will recommend a new Paid Family Leave policy to the Civil Service Commission that will allow Metro employees to take six weeks of paid leave to care for a new child, or a seriously ill spouse, child or close relative.

“It’s the right thing to do for the health and well-being of our employees, and it’s the right thing to do for their families,” said Mayor Barry about the proposed Paid Family Leave policy. “It’s also the smart thing to do, because we want to attract and retain the best employees.”

Mayor Barry will also be releasing a capital spending plan in May to coincide with the release of the Mayor’s recommended Capital Improvements Budget. Some highlights released during the State of Metro include:
  • More than $35M for MTA to purchase 31 new hybrid buses to replace our aging diesel fleet, upgrade the fare collection system, and fund the implementation of the nMotion strategic plan for transit.
  • $65M for sidewalks and paving, $3M for sidewalks connected to schools, $2M for bikeways, and a doubling of funds over the previous year for the Mayor’s Intersection Improvement Program.
  • $15M for body and dash cameras, along with $8M for new laptops and printer equipment for the Metro Nashville Police Department.
  • Funds to build a community center and 2 ice rinks in Bellevue, a pocket park on Jefferson Street, expand the Hadley Park tennis center and start design on a new Hadley Park branch library.
  • $25M in general obligation bonds to fund new affordable housing programs.
“Growth has brought many exciting opportunities to our city, but it’s also made it difficult for many residents to stay here. The demand for housing has raised prices throughout the city, and we’ve responded by attacking the problem on multiple fronts,” Mayor Barry said in announcing two new innovative initiatives to fund, build, preserve, and retain affordable housing options.

The first would be to leverage the $25M in bonds to fund new affordable housing programs to purchase and rehab low-income housing that is at-risk of becoming unaffordable to tenants, as well as a program to allow Metro to build new affordable housing on city-owned property. The second is the creation of a new program to allow Metro to offer expedited property tax abatements to incentivize developers to build affordable units and rehab existing units. All of this is in addition to the Mayor’s continued commitment of $10M in operating funds for the Barnes Fund for Affordable Housing, and $2M for the Housing Incentive Pilot Program.

Metro Finance Director Talia Lomax-O’dneal will deliver a more in-depth presentation of the budget proposal to the Metro Council at 1:00PM today in the David Scobey Council Chamber in the Historic Metro Courthouse. Following delivery of the Mayor’s budget proposal, the Council and the Budget & Finance Committee will conduct public hearings as well as hearings with each individual department. The Council is required to pass a balanced budget by June 30, or the Mayor’s recommended budget proposal goes into effect by default.

The State of Metro Address featured the best-selling and most awarded female gospel artist of all time, Nashville native CeCe Winans, whose latest album, “Let Them Fall In Love,” debuted at the top of the charts. Winans performed “Never Have to Be Alone” and “Peace from God” for the crowd of more than 1000 attending the State of Metro.

The Tennessee State University Aristocrat of Bands opened up the event, and Nashville’s 2016 Youth Poet Laureate and Nashville School of the Arts junior Gray Bulla read a poem written for the occasion.

Charles Strobel, founding director of Room in the Inn, gave the invocation for the State of Metro, which concluded with Blessings for Our City from four Nashville faith leaders - Pastor of Church Life Frank Stevenson of Olive Branch Church, Rabbi Laurie Rice of Congregation Micah, Imam Ossama Bahloul of the Islamic Center of Nashville, and Bishop Dr. José Rodriguez of Casa de Dios Apostolic Church - in English, Hebrew, Arabic, and Spanish respectively.

To read the Tennessean report on the State of Metro address see,  Mayor Barry commits to light rail on Gallatin Pike, kicks off public vote for funding transit,

To read the full text of the address follow this link: State of Metro address.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Mayor Barry's office slams debt limit proposal

by Joey Garrison , USA Today Network - Tennessee - Middle Tennessee’s leading anti-tax crusader has launched a petition effort to add a referendum to the November 2018 ballot that would let Nashville voters decide whether to limit Metro’s borrowing capacity by capping the city's debt level.

If the measure passes, it could complicate plans for a $6 billion regional transit system that Mayor Megan Barry wants to start funding.

The debt limit referendum, led by Nashville Tea Party President Ben Cunningham, a resident of Sumner County, would amend the Metro Charter in two ways: (read more)

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

The Tennessean reports, Nashville sued over new affordable housing law.

by Joey Garrison , USA Today Network - Tennessee -Metro Nashville was hit with a highly anticipated lawsuit on Monday by the free market think-tank Beacon Center of Tennessee over a new Metro policy that is aimed at jump-starting more affordable housing. 

"We are filing this lawsuit not just because we disagree with this 'affordable housing' plan, but because Nashville is acting unconstitutionally and in defiance of state law," Braden Boucek, director of litigation for the Beacon Center, said.

"Tennessee has expressly told cities they cannot pass these sorts of laws, which makes Nashville's mandate on 'affordable housing' both illegal and unconstitutional. Cities are not independent and cannot pick and choose what laws they want to follow."

But supporters of the ordinance, including bill sponsor Councilwoman Burkley Allen, have argued that the policy is a voluntary inclusionary zoning policy based on development incentives and not a mandate because the requirement is only triggered when a developer chooses to apply for new development rights. (link)

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Monday, April 24, 2017

Homebuilder Association sues Metro to overturn the Inclusionary housing law.

The below story is Reposted from The Beacon Center.

The Story

 Imagine being a young, hardworking professional who can already barely afford to pay rent in the city where you are just beginning your career. Next, imagine that your landlord raises your rent so that a person even poorer than you can afford to move in next door and pay less. Now you will have to move further away from your job and live somewhere less desirable because you can no longer afford your rent.

Are you mad? You should be. This is just one of the many unfair scenarios that Nashville’s leaders are about to bring into being thanks to their unconstitutional “affordable” housing plans. When Nashville government officials decided housing wasn’t affordable enough, they decided that homebuilders should solve the problem instead of government. Nashville recently enacted a law that, in certain instances, requires homebuilders to sell a fixed percentage of the homes they build at below market value. In other words, Nashville is demanding that people lose money on an investment in order to promote social welfare. Ironically enough, the people that Nashville thinks should bear the cost of addressing affordable housing—homebuilders—are the very ones who are most directly addressing the problem in the first place.

Homebuilders, like the thousands of small business owners and individuals our client the Homebuilders Association of Middle Tennessee (HBAMT) represents, increase the supply of housing, thereby lowering the cost of housing. The homebuilders want nothing more than to address any affordable housing issues by increasing the supply of housing. The biggest obstacles are Nashville’s restrictions on their ability to build homes, obstacles which increase with Nashville’s new “affordable housing” mandate. John Sheley, the trade organization’s Executive Vice President, has worked in his field for nearly 30 years and decided to take action on behalf of all builders to challenge Nashville’s new law.

And for good reason. This plan is illegal and unconstitutional, as it demands that private individuals bear the burden of addressing what some have decided is a public concern. It is no more acceptable to expect property owners to address public housing by losing money on the houses they build than it is to expect grocers to lose money on the food they sell to address hunger. If there truly is a lack of affordable housing in Nashville, then the government should get out of the way and let the free market and the builders solve it naturally by creating a larger supply. But they should not force private parties to do it on their behalf. Their current plan will make housing more scarce and decrease the availability of affordable housing. This is fundamental to the constitutional protection of private property rights. What’s more, it is also illegal because the state of Tennessee has a law that bans local governments from passing mandates forcing homebuilders to set aside residential apartment units as “affordable.”

The Problem

In September 2016, the city of Nashville passed a law that, with limited exceptions, requires homebuilders to set aside a portion of their development as “affordable” or “workforce” housing or instead pay a significant fee into a slush fund. As anyone who has been paying attention knows, a government program that begins with the term affordable is typically anything but. Need proof? Look no further than the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. That redistribution of wealth scheme has left working-class Americans with astronomically higher prices and fewer health insurance options, all in exchange for a worthless guarantee that it will be more “affordable.”

“Affordable” housing is essentially the Obamacare of housing. It makes it more expensive to build. This will result in developers building fewer homes, which will cause housing supply to dwindle. The extra costs will be passed on to buyers and renters, increasing their expenses. In both scenarios, it will cause prices to rise for those who can afford it the least: lower- and middle-income earners. If you think housing is expensive now, just wait until it’s “affordable.”

Not only will this mandate make housing less affordable, it will also create the same fiscal cliffs as many other welfare programs. If a person will have to pay more for their housing as their income increases, then they will be less likely to pursue moderate increases in pay or take on more work to move up in life. This scheme by Nashville’s government creates a disincentive for the poor to improve their lives.

A requirement that property owners set aside a certain percentage of their housing inventory to sell at below the market price (or setting price controls at all) is more than just inconsistent with the American tradition and offensive to rudimentary notions of free markets. Forcing developers to sell the apartments they build at a loss poses very serious legal and constitutional problems. Governments can’t condition things like building permits on the surrender of constitutional rights, such as the right to seek full value of one’s private property. Taking private property for a public purpose without just compensation is a takings issue that courts have ruled to be unconstitutional countless times. Cities can’t get around that by conditioning their agreement on the surrender of this or any other constitutional right.

On top of the constitutional and economic issues with this law, Nashville does not have the authority to enforce this plan in the first place. The state has never given cities the power to address affordable housing in this manner, and if there was any lingering confusion on this issue, the Tennessee General Assembly cleared it up in 2016 when affordable housing mandates began to surface in Tennessee. In response to the spread of these ordinances, the legislature passed a law prohibiting local governments from enacting affordable housing mandates as they relate to rental properties. Nashville passed its law anyway, even though it is illegal under state law.

The matter has already garnered a good deal of local media attention, as it should. And, given the spread of similar ordinances across the southeast (including an anticipated ordinance in Atlanta sometime next year), this trend of liberal cities thwarting constitutional protections set by state governments will only continue to worsen.

Bad policies that take hold in cities such as Nashville have a tendency to spread throughout the state. Nashville is blatantly disrespecting state lawmakers (and thereby the will of the people) who already voted to ban this practice. If Nashville can pass an affordable housing law in defiance of state law, then it can pass a $15 minimum wage law or a gun ban. We don’t want our cities to become sanctuary cities for liberal policies, therefore Nashville needs to be reigned in here and now.

In late July 2016, before the proposed ordinance was brought up for a second of three readings before the Metro Nashville Council, the Southeastern Legal Foundation and Beacon sent a letter to city officials analyzing the proposed ordinance from a legal perspective. We explained that the proposed ordinance not only violated state law, but that it was patently unconstitutional. The letter was raised by the Metro Council’s attorney and discussed in the hearing. The Council passed the ordinance anyway. Their willful disregard for the rule of law proves that, in this situation, the only way to protect the Constitution is in the courtroom.

It is now imperative that we take action to protect the property rights of Tennesseans and their values from out-of-control local governments.

The Law

We intend to challenge Nashville’s affordable housing mandate as illegal under Tennessee law and unconstitutional in violation of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The Ordinance Violates the Fifth Amendment.

The Takings Clause prohibits the government from taking one’s property without just compensation. Here, Nashville is not “taking” the developers property outright, it is demanding that they lose money in exchange for the city’s permission to develop, and if they do not want to do that, they can just kick into a slush fund to avoid the mandate. The courts have recognized these sorts of shenanigans before and have stated that a demand for a person to surrender a right in exchange for a permit is still an unconstitutional taking.

The Takings Clause exists because the Founders did not envision a country where governments could strong-arm private parties into paying for things the government did not care to pay for itself. The Supreme Court has made clear that the Fifth Amendment not only protects one from a physical taking, but also from governments that misuse the power of land-use regulation.

To prevent governments from circumventing the Takings Clause and from trying to accomplish indirectly what they cannot do directly, the Supreme Court applies the “unconstitutional conditions doctrine.” Under this well-settled doctrine, “the government may not require a person to give up a constitutional right…in exchange for a discretionary benefit conferred by the government where the benefit sought has little or no relationship to the property.” In other words, the Takings Clause prohibits Nashville from forcing homebuilders to choose between the permission they need to build and the right to receive just compensation from a taking. This “affordable housing” mandate is a prime example of the “gimmickry” that the Supreme Court so harshly rejected over two decades ago.

The Ordinance Violates Tennessee Law

The law passed in 2016 by the Tennessee legislature prohibiting local governments from enacting affordable housing mandates took direct aim at measures such as the one presented in this ordinance. Despite Nashville officials’ statements otherwise, the ordinance is not an incentive-based approach, which would be allowed under the new state law. The ordinance requires property owners comply as long as financial incentives are available. But when the incentives are available, not when they are provided to the property owner, the property owner must comply. The property owner has no ability to opt out.

The way Nashville’s zoning is currently structured, there is almost no place left to build. So homebuilders almost always have to ask the city to rezone the land to allow for buildings of a greater height or density before a project can go forward. And the city will not allow any changes (and thus will deny permission to build) unless homebuilders agree to its onerous demand that they address affordable housing by losing money on some of their homes. By requiring homebuilders to do so before Nashville will give them the permission they need to build, Nashville has imposed a kind of a condition on development. That’s exactly the sort of law that the state of Tennessee has said is illegal.

Due to the aforementioned reasons, the Beacon Center is filing a lawsuit against the city of Nashville and seeking an overturning of the city’s “affordable” housing mandate.

Case Logistics

The plaintiff in this case is John Shely with the Home Builders Association of Middle Tennessee. They are seeking clarification on the law and the overturning of Nashville’s affordable housing mandate. The defendant is the Nashville Metro Government.

Legal Documents


The Legal Team

Braden Boucek is the Director of Litigation for the Beacon Center. Prior to joining the Beacon Center, he worked as an Assistant United States Attorney, and before that for the State of Tennessee as a trial and appellate prosecutor.

Justin Owen is the president and CEO of the Beacon Center and is licensed to practice law in Tennessee.

The Beacon Center will work this case in conjunction with Southeastern Legal Foundation in Atlanta, one of the most established and well respected free market litigation groups in the nation. SLF will be represented by Kimberly Hermann, General Counsel for SLF. Prior to working for SLF, she was in private practice and an accountant for an international accounting firm.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Sunday, April 23, 2017

Republican Bill Lee announces run for governor of Tennessee

Bill Lee
Republican Williamson County businessman Bill Lee has announced his candidacy for Governor. He has no prior political experience. He is chairman and former CEO of Lee Company, a construction company that employees 1150 people. He is running on a campaign of  jobs, education and public safety.  He has a personal story of tragedy and faith and has been active in faith-based charitable work and will likely appeal to values voters as well as pro-business Republicans. To read The Tennessean story of his entry into the race follow this link. For a Tennessean story from March when Lee was "close to jumping in the race," see this link.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Friday, April 21, 2017

The vitriolic rhetoric being used to denounce those who voted for the gas tax.

I did not support the recently passed gas tax, officially called the Improve Act. I do not necessarily think that only gas taxes should fund roads.  My view is that when an agency has their own source of funding, there is less scrutiny and oversight to insure the agency is not wasting money. I tend to think all funding should be decided by the legislative body and every government function should compete with every other government function.  I would be pleased if there were no dedicated funding.

I was not persuaded by the argument that the gas tax is a user fee. In theory I like the idea of "user fees" for government services, but in reality there are few true user fees.  If you had to pay admission to use a park, that would be user fee.  If you had to buy a membership to use the public library, that would be a user fee. A toll road is a user fee. A tax on tennis shoes to fund sidewalks or a gas tax to fund roads is really not a user fee.

I was also reluctant to favor the gas tax, because in the past TDOT has wasted a lot of money.  Untold million were spend over the last forty of so years connecting every county seat to an interstate by a four-lane road.  I have driven on some of these roads to nowhere and often been the only car on the road for miles. For more on why I think this was a wasteful and ill-advised policy see this link where I expound on it.

Also, TDOT wasting of money is not a thing of the past. In 2013 over $42 million of the gas tax went to building a luxury jet port for the city of Cleveland. I don't know how many bridges could have been repaired for $42 million but with crumbling bridges it seems to spend $42 on a luxury jet port looks like an unwise use of money.

On the other hand, now that I have told you why I did not support the gas tax, let me say that I could not build up much passion about the issue.  In fact, on several occasions I was almost persuaded to favor it. This was not something I was going to man the barricades over or even march against.  There were good arguments in favor.  Things we want cost money and the gas tax has not been increased in 25 years.  I believe the argument that the gas tax has not been keeping up with the rising cost of building and maintaining Tennessee’s roads and bridges and that improved fuel efficiency standards and the rise of hybrid and electric cars are hurting gas tax collection. Also, we have capacity to raise the gas tax since we were one of the states with a lower gas tax. There is a big backlog of projects that need funding and we need the revenue.

Also, the increase in the gas tax is being offset by cuts in other taxes. It is basically revenue neutral.  The bill reduces the 5-percent Hall income tax by 1 percent each year until the tax is eliminated. It reduces the state sales tax rate for food from 5 percent to 4 percent and it makes some cuts to other taxes paid by manufacturers. I liked the tax cuts that were in the bill. For a summary of what the bill actually does see the legislative summary or read the bill at this link

Grover Norquist, founder of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), who has campaigned for lower taxes for decades declared his support for the IMPROVE Act. Norquist is the originator of the "tax pledge" in which candidates for office sign a pledge saying they will not vote for any tax increase.  Norquist said the bill was revenue-neutral.

I am disappointment at the vitriolic rhetoric being used to denounce those who voted for the bill.  To me, this is an issue about which reasonable and good people could disagree. I an disappointed in those who condemn those who voted for the tax as evil. I don't know how either side could be so dogmatic as to be assured that their position is 100% right and the other side totally wrong. 

John Harris of the Tennessee Firearms Associations has been in rant mode for days now. In a Facebook post  he said, "Hard working Tennesseans are getting really tired of the ongoing lies and corporate welfare from the Establishment Republicans in Tennessee. We have to have the help of the conservative caucus to expose these traitors so that they can be prosecuted where possible and defeated in all other instances." He is not calling them traitors to their country but as he uses the term in another post, he is calling them traitors to conservative principals. 

Harris has been especially critical of Representative Susan Lynn and has called for her defeat when she is up for reelection.  Harris is only one of the people expressing anger at those who voted for the bill. Many other conservative activist are also denouncing those who voted for the bill and calling them names and calling for their defeat.

I think a lot of the outrage is faux outrage and motivated by something other than the issue at hand.  Advocacy organizations have to keep their supporters riled up to remain influential. Getting people mad at other people is good for fund-raising.  Some people with political ambitions need to distinguish themselves from the incumbent office holders and issues like this create an impression on the part of some of the electorate that the incumbent is not conservative enough or is a RINO or is part of the political establishment. It gives the challenger an excuse to enter a primary.  Pundits and commentators do not build an audience by being reasonable and thoughtful.  You will not hear Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin or Rachel Maddow or Michael Moore say "on the other hand." Pundits and advocates always have to be adamant and indignant. Its good for ratings and business.

To those who opposed the gas tax bill, do you really think that people like Senator Jack Johnson and Representative Susan Lynn are big-government, tax-and-spend liberals who are traitors to conservative principals who need to be defeated?

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

How they voted on the Gas Tax (IMPROVE Act)

On Wednesday afternoon, April 19th,  the Tennessee House and Senate approved the IMPROVE Act also called the gas tax. The House vote was 61-35 in favor and the Senate vote was 25-6. Below is a list of how they voted. This is from the Tennessee General Assembly website



          Senators voting aye were: Bailey, Mike Bell, Briggs, Crowe, Steve Dickerson, Gardenhire, Ferrel Haile, Thelma Harper, Harris, Jackson, Jack Johnson, Kelsey, Bill Ketron, Sara Kyle, Lundberg, Massey, Mark Norris, Doug Overbey, Stevens, Tate, Jim Tracy, Bo Watson, Ken Yager, Jeff Yarbro, Mr. Speaker McNally -- 25.

          Senators voting no were: Mae Beavers, Janice Bowling, Dolores Gresham, Joey Hensley, Frank S. Niceley, Kerry Roberts -- 6.



          Representatives voting aye were: Akbari, Alexander, Bill Beck, Harry Brooks., Keven Brook., Camper, Carr, Carter, Clemmons, Coley, Cooper, Curcio, Daniel, DeBerry, Doss, Dunn, Eldridge, Farmer, Favors, Craig Fitzhugh, Forgety, Brenda Gilmore, Gravitt, Halford, Hazlewood, Hicks, Holsclaw, Howell, Darren Jernigan, Johnson, Sherry Jones, Keisling, Harold M. Love, Jr., Susan Lynn, Marsh, McCormick, McDaniel, Miller, Mitchell, Parkinson, Pitts, Jason Powell, Ragan, Ramsey, Sanderson, Charles Sargent, Shaw, Smith, Staples, Mike Stewart, Swann, Thompson, Tillis, Towns, Travis, Turner, White M., Whitson, Wirgau, Madam Speaker Harwell -- 60.

          Representatives voting no were: Sheila Butt, Byrd, Calfee, Crawford, Jeremy Faison, Gant, Goins, Hardaway, Hawk, Hill M., Hill T., Andy H. Holt, Hulsey, Kane, Kumar, Lamberth, Mary Littleton, Lollar, Judd Matheny, Matlock, Moody, Mark Pody, Powers, Reedy, Courtney Rogers, Rudd, Sexton C., Sexton J., Sherrell, Sparks, Terry, Van Huss, Terri Lynn Weaver, Dawn White , Williams, Windle, Zachary -- 37.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories