A right-leaning disgruntled Republican comments on the news of the day and any other thing he damn-well pleases.
The Metro Council agenda for the Nov. 4th meeting is now available; the staff analysis is not. If you will wait, I will read it for you and tell what's important, but if you just can't wait, follow the link and help yourself.
Today is the last day for early voting. The ballot for the upcoming State and Federal General Election
includes races for the U.S. Congress, Governor, Tennessee State Senate
and House of Representatives, four amendments and the Wine-in-Grocery
Early voting is available at Metro’s Howard Office Building, 700 Second Ave. South, and these ten other voting locations.
ICYMI, check out the Washington Times’ article, “Obamacare sends health premiums skyrocketing by as much as 78 percent,” on a new study by State Farm that compares health insurance policies before and after Obamacare, showing how premiums have drastically increased since its implementation.
Sen. Alexander says Republicans are ready to take the health care debate in a new direction with “proposals that move our country step by step toward more freedom, more choices, and lower costs—repairing the damage Obamacare has done and preventing future damage.”
Read the full article here: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/28/obamacare-sends-health-premiums-skyrocketing-by-as/?page=all#pagebreakIf you are not as hip and Facebook code-word savvy as Senator Alexander, "ICYMI" is "in case you missed it." I had to think about it before it came to me. I know LOL and LMAO but I had to think about ICYMI. Anyway, ICYMI this is an informative article.
I have kind of lost interest in NashvilleNext. When the process first started a couple years ago, I attended several of the meeting and heard experts speak on a wide range of issue involving land use, planning, and mass transit and changing demographics. I have always been somewhat interested in these topics and do think that one of the reasons some cities are much more desirable places to live than other cities is because of wise planning. I found the sessions interesting and thought-provoking. I also took part in the on-line surveys and some of the discussion session. In the work sessions I put my opinions on little post-em notes and I put my allocated little post-em dots on the choices offered.
Recently however, I have felt like this is all one big "dog and pony show" and the results have already been determined and the public participation is just for show. Also, some of the choices come down to something like, "do you like good, or do you like bad?" I feel like we are being led to a pre determiend conclusion.
I was disappointing that there has not been much diversity of opinion at these meetings. This process started about the same time as the craziness about Agenda 21 was at its peak, when the John Birch Society was training Agenda 21 experts to resist any aspect of Agenda 21. People were being warned that there was a major conspiracy afoot to force us to give up our cars and golf courses and suburban lifestyle and all live in small apartments in the city. The Anti-Agenda 21 people were alerting us that you could id advocates of Agenda 21 if they used words like "sustainability," "communities," "affordable housing," and "justice". Everything from green ways to wide shady sidewalks to bike share programs to traffic calming was said to be part of the plot. Surprisingly, none of the anti-agenda 21 people showed up at NashvilleNext. They could have had field day! I guess I am glad they didn't show up but it would have at least presented some diversity of opinion. It would have made the meetings more interesting.
The value for planners of this NashvilleNext process is that after the plan is adopted they can say, this plan was developed by the people of Nashville in a long involved process and it really is the "people's plan," that it represents community consensus and that x number of people attended x number of meetings an x number of people participated on line. I don't know how much this process is going to cost us by the time we are finished. I tried to find that answer on line but couldn't. I think we would be about as well off it we would have let the planning department and their consultants draw up the plan, present it to the planning commission, then the Metro Council, had a public hearing, and then the Council adopt it. I don't think the NashvilleNext process makes the final product any more valid than if we would have followed the legislative process I outlined above and it would have cost a lot less.
While I have lost interest in the process, I still may attend one of the meetings to "see the possible future that Nashvillians picked." If one cares about the future of Nashville and wants to be informed, I think one should attend. I would suggest anyone who is thinking about running for Council attend and learn what is in the plan. Also, I hope that some people will dig deep into the final documents to see what it is we are exactly getting when the final plan is adopted. The process by which this plan was developed should not make members of the Council any less diligent in examining it before they adopt it.
Below is the announcement from Cumberland Region Tomorrow:
I think Bill Haslam has made an excellent governor. He has governed with common sense conservative values. He and the Republican-controlled legislature have advanced education reform and cut taxes and increased government efficiency. I could hardly be more pleased with a governor that I am Governor Haslam. So why am I not voting for Haslam in the upcoming election? Because I am in favor of all four proposed constitutional amendments.
It is designed to be difficult to amend our State constitution. In order for an amendment to pass, it does not just have to have more people vote for it than vote against it. A proposed amendment must get one more vote than 50% of the number of people who vote in the Governor's race.
For sake of simplicity assume 100,000 people vote in the governor's race. Assume not everyone who votes will vote on the amendments. There are some people who feel duty-bound to vote in every election but who may feel too uninformed about the amendments to cast a vote. Assume that 50,000 people vote for Amendment one and 45,000 vote against it. Does it pass? No. It would have required 50,001 votes to pass.
Now assume some people vote for Amendment one and do not vote in the governor's race. Assume only 95,000 vote in the governor's race and 50,000 vote for amendment one and 45,000 vote against it. Does it pass? Yes. One more than 50% of those voting for governor in this example is 47501. By not voting in the governor's race, you are lowering the threshold of the number required for an amendment to pass.
What is the risk of doing this? Mark Rogers a local Republican Party activist whose opinion I value said there is considerable risk. He spoke on this subject at a meeting of Caffeinated Conservatives yesterday. He said many of the vote-no-on-amendment-1 people will be driven to the polls by this issue alone. Despite that Charlie Brown is a clown and no one knows hardly anything about him and he has no credentials and experience, the no-on-one voters will vote for the Democratic nominee for Governor. Rogers says by failing to vote for Haslam, we could end up with Charlie Brown being our governor.
Is this likely? I seriously doubt it. I just do not think that many people will vote for Charlie Brown. If Haslam had a serious challenger I would not be advocating this strategy. While I respect Mark Roger's opinion, I think he is wrong. Not that many people will understand the value of abstaining from voting in the governors race. So, I am going to risk it and vote for the amendments and vote in races down-ballot and abstain from voting for governor. To lower the threshold of the required number necessary for an amendment to pass, will not require that many people to abstain from voting in the governors race. A few people abstaining from voting in the governor's race could make the difference in the vote on the constitutional amendments.
If you understand what I have been explaining there no need to read further. Some people cannot grasp that if more people vote for an amendment than vote against it, that is does not pass. Talking to them one-on-one and seeing their comments on Facebook, some people are just not convinced that that is correct. It is.
Here is the Wikipedia explanation:
Under the legislative method (which is a quite lengthy process), the Tennessee General Assembly must pass a resolution calling for an amendment and stating its wording, and must do so in three separate readings on three separate days, with an absolute majority on all readings. The resolution does not require the governor's approval.
The amendment must then be published at least six months before the next legislative election, but is not placed on the ballot at that time. Instead, once the legislative election is held, the proposed amendment must go another three readings, three day voting process. At this stage the amendment now requires approval of 2/3 of the legislature on each vote.
Finally, the amendment is placed on the ballot as a referendum coinciding with the next gubernatorial election. For the amendment to pass, the number of yes votes must be greater than one-half the number of votes cast for governor.Here is the wording from the State constitution:
Article XI, Section 3 of the Tennessee State Constitution
Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in the Senate or House of Representatives, and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be entered on their journals with the yeas and nays thereon, and referred to the General Assembly then next to be chosen; and shall be published six months previous to the time of making such choice; and if in the General Assembly then next chosen as afore-said, 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. And if the people shall approve and ratify such amendment or amendments by a majority of all the citizens of the state voting for governor, voting in their favor, such amendment or amendments shall become a part of this Constitution. When any amendment or amendments to the Constitution shall be proposed in pursuance of the foregoing provisions the same shall at each of said sessions be read three times on three several days in each house.
The highlight of the meeting is the address to the Committee by Mayor Karl Dean. He makes a push for mass transit and says now is not the time to put on the brakes, but he does. He says the project needs to move forward with the design phrase and meeting TDOT standards and Federal environmental impact studies need to move forward. He says, however, he will not be seeking state or local funding for the project for the upcoming year. (To see his remarks see timestamps 2:02:03-2:10:44.)
With this being Dean's last year in office, I think this kills the project. Only one of the announced candidates for Mayor has said he favors the AMP. I would be very surprised if this project moves forward. With little likelihood this project will be build, I hope the Council stops the project now instead of wasting a few more million dollars on design of a project that will not be build. The Council has already appropriated $7.5 million for this project and some of that has been spend, but I would assume not most of it. Unless the Council acts to stop action of the project, money will be spend to advance a project that is going nowhere. I hope someone in the Council is paying attention and can reclaim any unspent money. If the Council does nothing the whole $7.5 million will be wasted.
Most of this meeting is boring with charts and explanations of intersection wait times and number of turns and such as that. It is much more information than the average person would want to know. Here are the other highlights:
Richard Fulton, son of the former Mayor Richard Fulton, and a member of the AMP Advisory Committee gives a fast-passed description of the route and all of the lane changes from center lane to curbside and the turns a bus on the proposed route would have to make. After his route description he says, "Woe! And this is BRT"? "There has got to be a better way." He says he thinks that if the AMP is built, it will be such a disaster that it will set mass transit back decades. (See 1:39:26- 1:43:02)
Dianne Neal says the plan has the best of intentions but is a "cut and paste" and is not a comprehensive plan. We do not know that this is the best alternative. She points out that two key issues, ridership and finances, were not before the committee. She also says we now know the AMP will do nothing to ease traffic congestion. She says the AMP is an example of the Federal government dictating transit solutions to local government without concern that the plan is affordable and sustainable. (see 1:54:02- 1:57:55)
Here is The Nashville Business Journal report on the meeting:
Check back for my commentary and time stamp notation of the good parts.
Here is the Nashville Scene's report on the meeting:
by Andrea Zelinski, The Nashville Scene,Wed, Oct 29, 2014 - School board members spent two and one-half hours diving deep
into an outside report rekindling a years-long debate about the role of
charter schools in Nashville and discerning what advice the district
took from a two-year-old Tribal report. Here’s a breakdown of the major
takeaways, and then some.
1) Gentry favors a narrowed charter school policy.(link)
Dean slams brakes on the Amp
Scott Harrison Staff Reporter, Nashville Business Journal, Oct. 28, 2014- Nashville Mayor Karl Dean is passing the baton on the Amp, his controversial $174 million bus rapid-transit project.
In the final meeting of his Citizens Advisory Committee, Dean announced today that he will not seek state or local funding for the project in 2015. Given that next year is his last in office, doing so effectively means getting the Amp off the ground will be dependent on the next administration — should that administration choose to pick up the mantle. (link)
Restore Life to Tennessee: Vote Yes on Amendment 1!
Election Day: Tuesday, November 4
Early Voting: October 15 - 30
Speaker of the House Beth Harwell told the Paris Tennessee Post-Intelligencer she is is interested in the possibility of becoming the state’s first female governor. “I do love what I do, and it’s an honor to get to be speaker,” Harwell is quoted as saying. “Nobody knows exactly what the future holds, either personally or professionally, but if I had the opportunity to run for a statewide office, I would certainly be interested in doing that, and I would just have to see what the lay of the land is.” (link)
I am voting "yes" on all four proposed constitutional amendments. Of the four proposed amendments, amendment number 4 has received the least publicity. Amendment Four would simply allow veterans
to be added to the list of those charitable organizations that may apply
to the state to hold one raffle or "gaming" event a year to raise
money. All other charitable organizations are allowed to do this. The
word "veterans" is not in the language of the Amendment but 501(c)(19) is the section of the tax code that covers non-profit veterans groups such as American Legion and VFW. When the Tennessee constitution was amended in 2002 to allow other non-profits to apply to hold one "gaming" event a year, veterans groups were left out of that amendment.
Here is a link to a very good article that explains Amendment 4 in more detail: Amendment #4 adds veteran groups to gaming
By Jesse Richman and David Earnest, Washington Post, October 24 - Could
control of the Senate in 2014 be decided by illegal votes cast by
non-citizens? Some argue that incidents of voting by non-citizens are so
rare as to be inconsequential,
with efforts to block fraud a screen for an agenda to prevent poor and
minority voters from exercising the franchise, while others define such
incidents as a threat to democracy itself. Both sides depend more heavily on anecdotes than data.
In a forthcoming article in the journal Electoral Studies, we bring real data from big social science survey datasets to bear on the question of whether, to what extent, and for whom non-citizens vote in U.S. elections. Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races. (read more)
Mayor Karl Dean has just released a public service announcement promoting November 13 as Child Hunger Day. It has the requisite soft mood music in the background as Dean says there are 4,000 children suffering from hunger here in middle Tennessee. He ask us to take the 365 challenge and for just $1 a day you can change the life of a child suffering from hunger. You can view the PSA at this link.
Didn't we just have a whole month devoted to hunger? The month of September was Hunger Action Month so why is November 13th Child Hunger Day? Is not a whole month enough? It is not that I am a heartless bastard who wants kids to go hungry. I just don't believe hunger is that big of a deal in America. I do not believe there are 4000 kids "suffering" from hunger in middle Tennessee. Ask your self, do you believe it?
I believe that if there is any real hungry kids in America it is because of bad parents who sell the food stamps and spend the money on crack or booze or gambling instead of milk and groceries. To solve that problem, we must be willing to take kids away from bad parents which I would be willing to do. Giving the incidents of poor, neglectful, and abusive parenting and the failure of the foster care system, I think maybe it is time to bring back public orphanages and be willing to take kids away from parents who will not care for them. If they are in an orphanage, we know they will be fed.
Below is my commentary commemorating Hunger Action Month. The same commentary applies to Child Hunger Day.
This is Hunger Action Month and we are told that one in six Tennesseans "struggle with hunger." I don't believe it! I have never believed the hype about hunger. I remember a few years ago there was a ad, with sad music in the background, for some organization fighting hunger that went something like this: "It could be the person you work next to, it could be that person you ride the bus with every morning but x number of x number of people go to bed hungry every night." I didn't believe it then and do not believe it now. I thought, if they go to bed hungry it is probably because they are on a diet.
Most of my working career, I have worked one way or the other with poor people and people in crisis. I don't know that I have ever witnesses real hunger. At one time the place where I work was an outlet for Nashville's Table and Second Harvest Food Bank. The food people got from that place supplemented their budget and helped them, but I don't think many of the clients were hungry and maybe it was because of these agencies they were not hungry, but those agencies were there. Even among the homeless there is an abundance of free meals in Nashville. This is link to a list of 113 food pantries in Nashville.
What do people really mean by "hunger?" Well notice that the campaign does not say they are starving or have nothing to eat or do not know where their next meal is coming from; it says they "struggle" with hunger. I think "struggles with hunger" is synonymous with "food insecurity" and that means "without consistent access to enough nutritious food to live a healthy life." Here is how an article in Forbes called, 29 Uncomfortable Myths About Soaring Poverty In America described it:
21. Today, approximately 17 million children in the United States are facing food insecurity. In other words, that means that “one in four children in the country is living without consistent access to enough nutritious food to live a healthy life.”
Food insecurity is one of those odd numbers again. It’s whether the household has ever skipped a meal in the year, or had a less than adequately nutritious one, or even had to drop the quality of their menu, as a result of not having the money to buy food. So having to have pasta with ketchup for lunch and dinner because Pops blew the food budget on a bottle of whiskey counts here. We can indeed call this poverty if we want to but it’s obviously not an extreme form of it.We have 47 million Americans on food stamps (now called SNAP) and our local school system decided to give free breakfast and lunch to every child in school and end the necessity to qualify for free or reduced lunch. We are very generous to the poor in America. We are so generous that people become trapped in poverty and it is too expensive to stop being poor. If one is eligible for Aid to Dependent children, medicaid, public housing, earned income tax credit, food stamps and a free telephone and gets the free stuff such as clothes and schools supplies and Christmas gifts from non-profit agencies, it takes a lot of money to equal that same level of income one has living in poverty. If one tries to enter the workforce and fails, then they must requalify for those benefits and there may be a long waiting list for some of them. It is easier to stay poor.
|Ryan T. Anderson|