Nashville Joins National Campaign for Climate Change Action

NASHVILLE, Tenn.— Nashville has become the 42nd city to officially call on President Barack Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency to use the Clean Air Act to cut greenhouse gas pollution that is raising the risk of extreme weather events and worsening climate change. The Metro City Council passed a resolution Tuesday, joining cities such as Miami, Kansas City, Mo., and Gary, Indiana, as part of the Center for Biological Diversity’s national Clean Air Cities campaign

Similar resolutions have been approved in Albany and Ithaca, N.Y.; Berkeley, Santa Monica, Culver City, Arcata, Oxnard, Santa Cruz, Richmond, San Francisco and Los Angeles, Calif.; Seattle, Wash.; Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, Pa.; Tucson, Ariz.; Boone, N.C.; Keene, N.H.; Minneapolis, Minn.; Milwaukee and Madison, Wis.; Cambridge and Northampton, Mass.; Cincinnati and Oberlin, Ohio; Santa Fe, N.M.; Kansas City, Mo.; Salt Lake City, Utah; Miami, Pinecrest, Tampa and Gulfport, Fl.; Chicago, Ill.; Teton County, Wyo.; Eugene, Ore.; Boulder, Colo.; Burlington, Vt.; and Detroit, Mich.; Wilmington, Del.; Providence, R.I.; Gary, Ind., and Woodbridge, N.J. (link)

To read the resolution follow this link.

Here is how your council member voted:

“Ayes” Barry, Steine, Garrett, Tygard, Maynard, Matthews, Harrison, Hunt, Banks, Scott Davis, Westerholm, Anthony Davis, Bennett, Pridemore, Pardue, Jernigan, Stanley, Claiborne, Tenpenny, Moore, Allen, Baker, Langster, Weiner, Evans, Holleman, McGuire, Blalock, Dominy, Johnson, Potts, Bedne, Dowell, Duvall, Todd, Mitchell (36);

“Noes” (0).

Top Stories

Nashville first city in Southeast to ask the EPA to "fully employ and enforce" co2 limits

Last Tuesday night when the Metro council voted for a resolution urging the EPA to "fully employ and enforce" the EPA Co2 restrictions, Nashville joined 38 other cities which had already done so. However Nashville became the only cities in the Southeast to become a “Clean Air City.” (link)

Not a single vote was cast against the resolution. 

Top Stories

The Nashville Scene's report on the Council's pro-EPA resolution

Council Members Bring Resolution Supporting the Clean Air Act 
by Steven Hale on Tue, Nov 13, 2012

In an email to Pith, Holleman explained where the resolution came from and why he decided to bring it to the council.

"This resolution was brought to me by the student environmental advocacy organization at Vanderbilt," he wrote. "I agreed to support it because I think it's important that we send the message that we want act deliberately to be more sustainable in how we grow and behave as a city. The statement in this resolution seems particularly timely as we continue the conversation about how to build a more comprehensive mass transit system in our city."

Comment

I am still mystified, why this resolution did not get a single "no" vote. I just think that it is out of character for Robert Duvall to urge President Obama "to move swiftly to fully employ and enforce the Clean Air Act," yet he did and so did 35 other council members.


I am still waiting on an explanation of why some otherwise good conservative council members voted for this resolution that among other things say:

• “If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 392 ppm to at most 350 ppm” 

• ... climate change is already responsible every year for some 300,000 deaths, 325 million people seriously affected, and economic losses worldwide of $125 billion; 

• the Clean Air Act has produced economic benefits valued at $2 trillion or 30 times the cost of regulation

• We, the Metropolitan County Council, on behalf of the residents of Nashville, do hereby urge the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa P. Jackson, and President Barack Obama to move swiftly to fully employ and enforce the Clean Air Act to do our part to reduce carbon in our atmosphere to no more than 350 parts per million.

Top Stories

Josh Stites is not guilty of endorsing the EPA

In a recent post, I was critical of the Council for passing a resolution endorsing the EPA's enforcement of Co2 emissions and the Co2 emission limits the EPA has established.

When the clean air act was passed by Congress, there never was an intention that it gave the EPA authority to regulate Co2 emissions.  The EPA assumed this authority which will allow the unelected bureaucrats of EPA to halt industrial developments, to mandate vehicle mileage standards and mandate the level of allowable energy plant emission and allow or disallow virtually all development, should the EPA choose to use its authority.

I was especially critical of many of the "conservative" members of Council who voted for the resolution endorsing this EPA power grab  and I listed by name some who particularly disappointed me. I stated in my recent post that RESOLUTION NO. RS2012-478 had passed the Council unanimously. I was incorrect.

The EPA resolution was on the consent agenda. All resolutions that pass unanimously the committee to which they are assigned  are placed on the consent agenda and considered as a group and passed by a single voice vote of the Council.  At the council meeting, any council member may pull a bill off of the consent agenda and have it voted upon separately and he may also have himself recorded as voting against the resolution should he desire.

No one pulled the pro EPA resolution off of the consent agenda and no one asked to be recorded as voting no.

I wrote several of the Council members asking them to explain their vote. Below is the response I got from Council Members Josh Stites:

While I was there Tuesday night, I was not there during the Resolution portion of the meeting as I arrived late.  I'm sure no one requested that it be pulled from the consent agenda. I'm a little surprised that it was not pulled. It may be poor legislating but I'm sure it's safe to assume that some of the people you have listed below don't actually buy into the global warming hysteria, myself included. 

Josh

I appreciate his response and glad to set the record straight and learn that at least one of the Council members who I respect did not support this endorsement of the EPA's power grab of dictatorial power to enforce arbitrary standards.

The Vice Mayor never votes except in a tie, so it is incorrect to count her among the supporters of this bill, although I am quite sure she would have voted for it had she been casting a vote.  Of the 39 council members who may vote, three were not present when the vote was cast so were not guilty of voting for the bill. In addition to Josh Stites, Councilman Steve Glover  and Erica Gilmore were not present.

Here is how council members voted on the consent agenda, which included the pro EPA resolution. This is from the minutes of the meeting. I have highlighted those who especially disappointed me.

“Ayes” Barry, Steine, Garrett, Tygard, Maynard, Matthews, Harrison, Hunt, Banks, Scott Davis, Westerholm, Anthony Davis, Bennett, Pridemore, Pardue, Jernigan, Stanley, Claiborne, Tenpenny, Moore, Allen, Baker, Langster, Weiner, Evans, Holleman, McGuire, Blalock, Dominy, Johnson, Potts, Bedne, Dowell, Duvall, Todd, Mitchell (36);

“Noes” (0).

In addition to Stites, I also heard from Davette Blalock. I did not get a response really, but I got a link to the below website extolling the virtue of the resolution and showing that other cities are also doing the same thing. No comment accompanied the link.

http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/climatelawinstitute/cleanaircities/index.html

I have still not heard from any of the other council members explaining their vote. I can only assume they stand by their vote and their vote represented their honest believe about global warming, the roll of the EPA, and the EPA's establishment and enforcement of CO2 emissions.

If any Council member wishes to explain his vote, I would be pleased to print his explanation. 

Top Stories

The unanimous Council support for EPA CO2 regulation.

Below is the text of the resolution putting the Council on record supporting the EPA's regulation of CO2 and putting the Council on record agreeing that global warming is a scientific fact.  Out of our forty member council there is not a single global warming skeptic in the Council. I am surprised. 

 
This resolution passed unanimously. Unanimously! That means the "good" councilmen voted for it. That means Robert Duvall voted for it and Duane Dominy voted for it, and Josh Stites, and Karen Bennett, and Tony Tennpenny and Charlie Tygard and a handful of others, who I thought were conservative. Davette Blalock who I think of as one of the "good" councilmen  is even one of the sponsors.


Not a single one of them disagreed with this bill.  Please read it and see if you agree with it. I myself tend to believe global warming is a reality and I tend to believe the activity of mankind is a contributing factor.  However, I do not support this resolution. I do not want to give this much power to unelected bureaucrats.

CO2 is the stuff we exhale when we breath. When congress passed the Clean Air Act, they never intended to give the EPA power to regulate CO2. 

With this new power, EPA can rule by fiat. They can dictate the mileage standard for new cars. They can impose Carbon Pollution Standard for New Power Plants, they can prohibit the construction of new industrial facilities.  The ability of EPA to regulate greenhouse gases gives the EPA control of most of the U.S economy, should they chose to exercise it.  To learn more of what the EPA may regulate, visit the EPA's own website. 

One did not even have to argue the merits of the issue  to vote against it, one could simply ask to be recorded as voting "no." Even if one wants the EPA to regulate CO2 one could oppose this bill because it is not a matter that a city council should express an opinion on.  If we are going to have a local body express an opinion on this matter why not, the Federal Reserves inflating the money supply $40 billion a month?  Why not the Benghazi policy failure and cover up?  Why not the looming fiscal cliff.  There are no end to national issues the Council could opine about if they want to start debating national issues. 

I am going to forward this post to the "good" council members.  If any of them want to explain their vote, I will post it.

If you see your council member, you may want to ask him why he voted for this resolution. 

RESOLUTION NO. RS2012-478

A resolution supporting the reducing of greenhouse gas pollution under the Environmental Protection Agency Clean Air Act.

WHEREAS, the scientific community, most notably NASA, NOAA, and the IPCC support the following findings; and

WHEREAS, the decade from 2000 to 2010 was the warmest on record, and 2005 and 2010 tied for the hottest years on record; and

WHEREAS, the current level of CO2 in the atmosphere is approximately 392 parts per million (ppm); and

WHEREAS, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, Dr. James Hansen, stated in 2008: “If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 392 ppm to at most 350 ppm”; and

WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency determined that current and future greenhouse gas concentrations endanger public health, and according to the Global Humanitarian Forum climate change is already responsible every year for some 300,000 deaths, 325 million people seriously affected, and economic losses worldwide of $125 billion; and

WHEREAS, extreme weather events, most notably heat waves and precipitation extremes, are striking with increased frequency, with deadly consequences for people and wildlife; in the United States in 2011 alone, a record 14 weather and climate disasters occurred, including droughts, heat waves, and floods, that cost at least $1 billion each in damages and loss of human lives; and

WHEREAS, climate change is affecting food security by negatively impacting the growth and yields of important crops, and droughts, floods and changes in snowpack are altering water supplies; and

WHEREAS, scientists have concluded that by 2100 as many as one in ten species may be on the verge of extinction due to climate change; and

WHEREAS, the world’s land-based ice is rapidly melting, threatening water supplies in many regions and raising sea levels, and Arctic summer sea ice extent has decreased to about half what it was several decades ago, with an accompanying drastic reduction in sea-ice thickness and volume, which is severely jeopardizing ice-dependent animals; and

WHEREAS, sea level is rising faster along the U.S. East Coast than it has for at least 2,000 years, is accelerating in pace, and could rise by one to two meters in this century, threatening millions of Americans with severe flooding; and

WHEREAS, for four decades, the Clean Air Act has protected the air we breathe through a proven, comprehensive, successful system of pollution control that saves lives and creates economic benefits exceeding its costs by many times; and

WHEREAS, with the Clean Air Act, air quality in this country has improved significantly since 1970, despite major growth both in our economy and industrial production; and

WHEREAS, between 1970 and 1990, the six main pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act — particulate matter and ground-level ozone (both of which contribute to smog and asthma), carbon monoxide, lead, sulfur and nitrogen oxides (the pollutants that cause acid rain) — were reduced by between 47 percent and 93 percent, and airborne lead was virtually eliminated; and

WHEREAS, the Clean Air Act has produced economic benefits valued at $2 trillion or 30 times the cost of regulation; and

WHEREAS, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts vs. EPA (2007) that greenhouse gases are “air pollutants” as defined by the Clean Air Act and the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate them; and

WHEREAS, The City of Nashville prides itself on being a leader in the fight against climate change and for clean air and, by creating the Mayor’s Office of Environment and Sustainability, has shown its ability to be a green leader in the Southeast; and

WHEREAS, The City of Nashville strives to meet the goals set out by the Green Ribbon
Committee’s 2009 Summary Report, which addresses environmental and livability issues in Nashville.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT OF NASHVILLE AND DAVIDSON COUNTY:

Section 1. That the Metropolitan County Council hereby goes on record as supporting the reduction of greenhouse gas pollution under the Environmental Protection Agency Clean Air Act.

Section 2. The Council further goes on record as noting that climate change is not an abstract problem for the future or one that will only affect far-distant places, but rather climate change is happening now, we are contributing to it, and the longer we wait to act, the more we lose and the more difficult the problem will be to solve.

Section 3. We, the Metropolitan County Council, on behalf of the residents of Nashville, do hereby urge the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa P. Jackson, and President Barack Obama to move swiftly to fully employ and enforce the Clean Air Act to do our part to reduce carbon in our atmosphere to no more than 350 parts per million.

Section 4. The Metropolitan Clerk is directed to send a copy a copy of this Resolution to Lisa P. Jackson of the Environmental Protection Agency and to President Barack Obama.

Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after its adoption, the welfare of The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County requiring it.

Sponsored by: Jason Holleman, Erica Gilmore, Brady Banks, Burkley Allen, ,Lonnell Matthews, Sean McGuire, Bo Mitchell, Davette Blalock

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Referred to:	Health, Hospitals and Social Services Committee
Introduced:	November 13, 2012
Adopted:	November 13, 2012
Approved:	November 14, 2012

Top Stories

Texas Gov. Perry Says No to Obamacare State Exchanges

Texas Gov. Perry Says No to Obamacare State Exchanges

www.breitbart.com

On Thursday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry sent a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Seb..On Thursday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry sent a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to officially let her know Texas would not partner with the federal government in setting up health exchanges under Obamacare. 

Today's Tennessean reports, "State Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey expects fellow Republican Gov. Bill Haslam to announce that Tennessee will move ahead with plans to create a state-run health insurance exchange."  This is disappointing.  

Please contact your state legislator and the Governor Haslam and tell you do not want Tennessee to set up a health care exchange.

Top Stories

Update on the 11/13/12 Council Meeting: Lifetime health care for Council members approved, EPA endorsement, fairgrounds ...

Here is my summary of the council meeting.

There were no lengthy hearings on any of the bills on public hearing.

No resolutions were pulled from the consent agenda. The consent agenda consist of non-controversial resolutions, including memorializing resolutions. The council votes on the consent agenda has a group and passes all of the bills on that agenda by a single vote. Any council member may have a bill pulled from the consent agenda. If a bill is not pulled, then it is deemed that all of the items on the consent agenda have passed unanimously.

 I am dismayed that RESOLUTION NO. RS2012-478 was not pulled from the consent agenda. It puts the council on record as “supporting the reduction of greenhouse gas pollution under the Environmental Protection Agency Clean Air Act” and says that “climate change is not an abstract problem for the future or one that will only affect far-distant places, but rather climate change is happening now, we are contributing to it, and the longer we wait to act, the more we lose and the more difficult the problem will be to solve” and it urges “the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa P. Jackson, and President Barack Obama to move swiftly to fully employ and enforce the Clean Air Act to do our part to reduce carbon in our atmosphere to no more than 350 parts per million.”

 I, unlike some conservatives, accept the majority scientific opinion that global warming is a reality and that human activity is a contributing factor. I do not think that Al Gore cooked up global warming and that there is a grand worldwide conspiracy in the scientific community to perpetuate a scam. However, this resolution is a case of local government weighing in on an issue that the US Congress should be debating.

There is no end to issue the Council could express there will about if they want to start doing so. What about Agenda 21, the Benghazi policy failure and cover up, the decision of the Federal Reserve to inflate the money supply $40 billion dollars a month, immigration policy, the Supreme Courts Citizen United case, the looming fiscal Cliff, the issue of healthcare exchanges and any other number of federal and state issue? If the council is going to start going on record about national issues, there is no end to what they could opine about.

Why should we go on record that 350 parts per million is the correct level of CO2, why not 325 or 375 parts per million? With China building a coal-fired energy facility a month, does our minor curtailment of CO2 in the Nashville region make any significant dent in the problem.

Also, when Congress passed the Clean Air act, they never intended to declare the stuff we exhale as a pollutant. The Supreme Court has ruled that CO2 is a pollutant and the EPA has the right to regulate. This is a complicated issue. Metro Government should not have passed it. Metro Council should stick to local issues. I know we are locally affected by global warming, but we are also effected by issues of war and peace, a $16 trillion dollar debt and socialization of healthcare. If members of council members want to weigh in on those issues they should run for Congress or blog.

Next time you see one of your council members, especially one of the conservative council members, ask him why he voted for that pro-EPA resolution. He did.

Other Resolution, not on the consent agenda also passes without discussion

Bills on First Reading:

Usually all bills on First Reading are considered as a group and they pass unanimously. First Reading is simply allowing bill to move forward. Bills do not go to committee until after first reading.

Duane Dominy's bill, (BL2012-293) which would require the Fair Board to issue a Request for Proposals for private operators to lease and operate the fairgrounds while upgrading the site and maintaining current uses was objected to by Council Member Moore, which means it had to be voted on separately. (See 28:35)

Sandra Moore moved to defer “by rule,” the rule being rule 8 of the council which says that if a bill only effects one council district and the district council member is not a sponsor of the bill then if the district council member objects to the consideration of the bill on first reading , then the bill must be deferred one meeting. Council member Duvall raised a point of order and argued that the fairground is not an issue that effects only one district but is his overruled by Council staff. This bill will be back on the agenda on first reading on November 20.

This skids are being greased  to kill the fairgrounds and the advocates of doing so are going to pull out all of the stops.  Unless fairground proponents rally to save the fairgrounds, then it is a done deal. Call your council member and ask him to support Dominy's bill.


Bills on Second Reading

The bill that transfers the Transportation Licensing Commission to the Public works department (BILL NO. BL2012-281) passes by voice vote without discussion. While this does nothing to curtail Metro’s price and supply fixing of transportation services, it is still a good bill in that it will most likely end the bullying and abusive practices of the TLC, such as the inspectors illegally exercising police powers, carrying weapons and imitating police officers and intimidating taxi and limo drivers.

The speed cushions bill by Councilman Standley (BILL NO. BL2012-284) which was discussed quite a bit in the B & F committee was deferred to the second meeting in December and referred to Traffic and Parking Commission (see 37:40 for Standley’s explanation of his deferral)

Bills on third reading

The bill sponsored by Council Member Claiborne that would eliminate lifetime subsidized health insurance benefits for Members of Council after they leave office failed to pass. (See the discussion at 50:34 to 1:04:09) Emily Evans makes the point that this benefit is so expensive due to the turnover of the council. due to term limits. However, she urges her colleagues to vote against the bill and saying this bill does not really address the problem, which is term limits.

 Here is how members voted on the bill: 

“Ayes” : Barry, Steine, Garrett, Tygard, Banks, Jernigan, Stites, Claiborne, Weiner, McGuire, Blalock, Duvall, Todd, Mitchell (14)

Noes” : Maynard, Matthews, Harrison, Hunt, Scott Davis, Westerholm, Anthony Davis, Bennett, Pridemore, Pardue, Stanley, Tenpenny, Moore, Allen, Baker, Langster, Evans, Holleman, Dominy, Johnson, Potts, Bedne, Dowell (23)

This is a disappointing vote. Some of the people we think of as conservatives voted against it. For full disclosure, I receive this benefit, however, if I were serving in the Council, I would have voted for this bill. With the advent of term limits and a growing number of former council members, this is an expense the city cannot afford.

Top Stories

Another reason not to set up a State Healtcare exchange

"ObamaCare authorizes premium assistance in state-run exchanges (Section 1311) but not federal ones (Section 1321). In other words, states that refuse to create an exchange can block much of ObamaCare's spending and practically force Congress to reopen the law for revisions." (link)

If Oklahoma Wins Lawsuit, ‘The Whole Structure’ of ObamaCare ‘Starts to Fall Apart’

www.cato-at-liberty.org

Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt has filed a lawsuit challenging the Internal Revenue Service'...

Top Stories

Ron Ramsey on the meaning of the election loss, immigration reform, and more.

This is  Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey at his best. We are fortunate to have a state leader like Ron Ramsey.  I share his concern when he ask, "are there truly now more people in the wagon than pulling the wagon?"  He also worries that there will come a time when well-run states will have to bail out irresponsible states.

Ramsey talks common sense on immigration: “Now, I am not for amnesty, and we need to make sure we police the borders,”he says. "But let’s face the facts: They’re here, they’re hard-working people, they are Christian Roman Catholics, they think like we as Republicans do, they are conservative, and so we need to figure out a way for them to become citizens."

Top Stories

Why States Should Resist ObamaCare and Refuse to Setup Exchanges

This webinar was presented to elected officials in Tennessee and concerned citizens.

Date: Monday, November 12, 2012

Time: 11:00 AM - 12:00 PM CST

Michael Cannon of the Cato Institute, Byron Schlomach and Nick Dranias of the Goldwater Institute, and Twila Brase expose the pitfalls of having the state set up an Obamacare exchange and the advantages of not doing so.

Michael F. Cannon is the Cato Institute's director of health policy studies. Previously, he served as a domestic policy analyst for the U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee.

Dr. Byron Schlomach is an economist and works as the Director of the Center for Economic Prosperity at the Goldwater Institute. He has 15 years of experience working in and around state government.

Nick Dranias, is an attorney and the director of the Joseph and Dorothy Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Phoenix, AZ think tank the Goldwater Institute.

Twila Brase, RN, is the founder and President of the Citizens' Council for Health Freedom, a free-market resource for designing the future of health care.

Ralph Weber of http://MediBid.com moderated this panel discussion.

Top Stories

Report on 11/13/2012 School Board meeting: killing Smithson-Craighead, ...

Check back for summary, highlights and commentary.

Top Stories

More, Barfield Elementary Muslim Student/Toy Guns gifts-incident

Some of the citizens of Murfressboro who opposed the right of Muslims to build a Mosque are outraged that a Muslim fourth grader brought toy guns to schools to give to his class mates as gifts. They do not want to let this incident just fade away.

I hate to sound like an old man remembering my youth, but I do remember a time when bringing a toy gun to school would have not been a big deal. Also, almost every young boy carried a pocket knife. Oh well, times change. With zero tolerance and political correctness you cannot bring toy guns to school. And, in light of school shootings, maybe you shouldn't be allowed to do so.

This incident is being made into a big deal on the "Stand Up for The Rutherford Reader" list serve and among others in Rutherford County residents. Read about this incident here and here. If the kid had not been a Muslim, I can't help but think that it would now be forgotten. Give it a rest.

Not only are some parents upset that boys got guns, but that girls got dolls.  That sounds about right to me. Santa always brought guns for the boys and dolls for the girls at our house. 

The lesson from all of this is, do not try to be nice and give your classmates gifts.

Top Stories

Tennessee should not set up a Healthcare Exchange

This Friday Governor Haslam will have to make the decision whether Tennessee will set up an insurance exchange under Obamacare or let the Federal Government set up the exchange.  Either way we will have an Obamacare insurance healthcare exchange.

Several Republican governors have already declared they would not be choosing to set up the exchanges. Also, various conservative commentators and organizations are working to urge their governor to not set up the exchanges. I have had reservations about the State opting out.  I have wondered if the resistance was simply obstinate defiance or if there were strong reasons for opting out. I am going to trust those organization such as National Review and local expert such as Ralph Weber and conclude that Tennessee should opt out of setting up an exchange and let the Federal government set it up. 
 
One argument that is persuasive is that if we fail to set it up now, that we can set it up latter as made in the National Review piece below.  Another persuasive argument is that  defaulting to a federal exchange exempts a state’s employers from the employer mandate.  If this is correct, then that is reason enough.

Apparently for Governor Haslam this has not been an easy decision. He has been waiting to make a decision, waiting to see what some of the final regulations would be. If Governor Haslam does choose to go forward to set up the healthcare exchange, he needs to make a compelling argument that it was the correct choice to make. The burden of proof that they are making the right decision should be on those who choose to set up the exchanges. I have seen no rational, compelling argument for doing so. If setting up the exchanges is such a good idea, why is no one making the case.

Below, I am linking to several articles that explain why we should not set up a healthcare exchange.

Why governors should not implement state insurance exchanges under Obamacare

by Bill Wilson, Netright Daily
There is no question that if governors decide to implement such an exchange, they will be aiding and abetting the implementation of this law.

Tennessee Health Freedom Act From  Tennessee Eagal Forum I don't see how the Governor or a state legislator could justify supporting the Obamacare state health exchanges in view of the provisions of the Tennessee Health Freedom Act passed in 2011.  Obamacare Is Still Vulnerable Now is not the time to go wobbly. By Michael F. Cannon, National Review Online.    President Obama has won reelection, and his administration has asked state officials to decide by Friday, November 16, whether their state will create one of Obamacare’s health-insurance “exchanges.” States also have to decide whether to implement the law’s massive expansion of Medicaid. The correct answer to both questions remains a resounding no.

Top Stories

School Board Votes To Close Smithson-Craighead Middle School

School Board Votes To Close Smithson-Craighead Middle School

The Metro School Board voted to revoke the charter and close Smithson Craighhead Middle School during their regular meeting Tuesday.more>>

 

The vote was 8 to 1 for closure despite an emotional appeal from parents. 

Top Stories

Metro Council maintains lifetime health benefits for members

by Joey Garrison, The Tennessean  

Heavily subsidized lifetime health care benefits for Metro Council members –– a controversial perk for earning one of the 40 elected seats –– will continue on for the city’s future representatives as well as those currently in office. (read more)

Please check back, I will report more on this and tell you how they voted. Rod

Top Stories

School lottery is going on now

While we do not have enough school choice in Nashville, we have some.  If you have school aged children and an interest in participating in the Optional Schools program, i.e., the school lottery, please note that process is going on now.  It started on November 1 and will end on November 30.  You can find out more information by going to the MNPS website. Follow this link.

I had a niece and nephew who went to Hume Fogg and do not think they could have gotten a better education at the best, most expensive private school in town.

Top Stories

Meeting of the Metro Council's Budget & Finance Committee on 11-12-12

This committee meeting is only 34 minutes long. Charlie Tygard ask some a good question about the settlement of a law suit. "What is a 'log book error'"? he ask. As least someone is thinking and asking. Tygard also ask other good clarifying questions on other bills. In fact he seems to be one of the only ones paying attention.

The bill transferring the Transportation Licensing Commission to Public Works passes. Councilman Garrett asks if the TLC has voted on it and he asks for the opinion of the Director of Public Works. Councilman Stein makes a good comment and says "I don't know who knows and who doesn't know but it is a good idea no matter who knows."

The bill concerning authorizing speed bumps hits a speed bump. (see 17:29-30:50 for the discussion) Hunt and Garrett join the discussion. Councilman Stanley is the sponsor and does a good job explaining the bill. However, it fails committee 0 for and 10 against.

Top Stories

Distinguished Speaker Program: The Changing Middle East – Nov 13

Understanding Muslim Societies:
Political Authority in a Changing Middle East

Dr. Richard Bulliet, Professor of History, Columbia University

Tuesday, November 13, 2012, Program: 6:30 p.m.
Frist Lecture Hall, 4th Floor, Inman Bldg, Belmont University, Nashville (For more information follow this link)

Unless I get a better offer, such as dinner with my momma who is in town, then I plan on attending this event.  We are fortunate in Nashville to have several universities bringing lecturers and scholars to speak on important topics. Like this event, these public programs are usually free.  There have been various events in town exploring the nature of Islam and the threat of radical Islam.  I have attended several, however I have often felt those events offered a simplistic view of a complex problem.  Often the speaker is a self-taught expert. They tend to present Islam as monolithic and do not offer a balanced view on how to confront a complex foreign policy challenge.  This is a chance to hear from a scholar and deepen ones knowledge of this topic. Rod

 

Top Stories

Update: What's on the Nov. 13 Metro Council Agenda? The EPA, Health Insurance for former Council Members and more.

You can get your own copy of the Metro council meeting agenda at this link:Metro Council Agenda. From the agenda you can link to the analysis. Council meetings can be really, really boring if you don't know what the Council is voting on. With an agenda and analysis, they are just really boring. Boring it may be, but there is some really serious stuff on this agenda.

Ten bills are on public hearing, all of which are zoning changes or adding historic overlays except for one which would expand who could be a member of the Historic Zoning Commission. I do not anticipate that the bill expanding membership on the HZC would prove controversial and the others should interest no one but neighbors of the proposed rezonings.

There are thirteen resolutions all of which are on the consent agenda. A resolution is on the consent agenda if it passed the committees to which it was assigned unanimously. Bills on the consent agenda are usually not controversial and tend to be routine matters, such as accepting grants from the Federal or State Government or authorizing the Department of Law to settle claims against the city or appropriating money from the 4% fund. Resolutions on the consent agenda are passed by a single vote of the Council rather than being considered individually. However, any member of the body may have a bill pulled off of the consent agenda. None of the resolutions on the consent agenda are controversial or very interesting and I expect none to be pulled.

Bills on First reading almost always pass. They are considered as a group and are seldom discussed. First reading is a formality that allows the bill to be considered. Bills are not assigned to committee or analyzed by council staff until after they have passed first reading. Here are bills of interests on first reading.

• Bill BL2012-293 by Councilman Duane Dominy would require the city to consider Request for Proposals from private developers to operate the fairgrounds. For more on this bill follow this link.
  
  
• Bill BL2012-294 also by Dominy would require sole source contracts over $250,000 to be approved by a resolution adopted by the Metropolitan Council. I don't know what precipitated this, but it certainly seems like a good idea. This is a bill we need to watch. 

Bills on Second Reading. It is on Second reading, after bills have been to committee, that discussion usually takes place. Below are bills of interest on second reading.

• Ordinance BL2012-281 would transfer the administrative support for the renegade and dysfunctional Transportation Licensing Commission to the public works department. This bill needs to pass. Unfortunately, this bill would not end the ability of this agency to fix prices and control the supply of transportation services and other command and control anti-free market practices but would hopefully reign in some of the abuses of power exhibited by this agency such as imitating police officers and harassment of limo and taxi drivers. To read how this agency has abused its power and how the council has authorized transportation price fixing and curtailment of a free market in transportation follow this link.   

Bills on Third Reading: Third Reading is the final reading. If a bill passes third reading it becoms law unless it is vetoed by the Mayor, which has only rarely happened. Below are the bills of interest on third reading.

• Ordinace BL2012-266 by Council members Claiborne, Todd and Duvall amends the Metro code to eliminate the subsidized health insurance benefits for future members of council after they leave office. Currently the subsidized health insurance for former members of council costs Metro approximately $300,000 per year. With term limits and a younger council body, this subsidy would cost much more in the future if not eliminated. This bill deserves to pass. The bill was approved by the Budget and Finance and Personnel-Public Information-Human Resources-Housing-Committees. However it only barely passed. Here is how members of the council voted on second reading:      

“Ayes” : Barry, Steine, Garrett, Tygard, Matthews, Harrison, Hunt, Banks, Jernigan, Stites, Claiborne, Allen, Weiner, McGuire, Harmon, Blalock, Dowell, Todd, Mitchell (19) 

“Noes” : Maynard, Scott Davis, Westerholm, Anthony Davis, Bennett, Pridemore, Stanley, Tenpenny, Moore, Gilmore, Baker, Evans, Holleman, Dominy, Johnson, Potts, Bedne (17)

 “Abstaining”: Langster

This bill deserves to pass. Unfortunately, the media has not given this issue much coverage recently and unless some of the "noes" are lobbied to change their vote and some of the "ayes" are not lobbied to maintain their position, this bill will probably fail.  However, Pardue, and Duvall were absent on second reading. I don't know how Pardue will vote but Duvall will be an "Aye" vote. Langster will probably be a "no" vote. 

Dominy, Bennett, Tenpenny, and Evans are good council members. They were "noes" that should be "Ayes." If they are your councilman, please call them and try to reason with them. Persuade them to vote "aye" on third reading. I will report how members voted. This could be very close.

Memorializing Resolutions 
There are eleven Memorializing resolutions on the agenda. Memorializing resolutions do not have the force of law and are often not taken very seriously and often they do nothing but congratulate a sports team for a victory or a person for being honored or congratulate a person on their retirement. The Council staff does not even analyze them. However, they do represent the will of the Council and when they advocate a policy position they should be taken seriously. They should not be dismissed as merely memorializing and routinely passed.

The following memorializing resolution should be defeated. 

RESOLUTION NO. RS2012-478 

A resolution supporting the reducing of greenhouse gas pollution under the Environmental Protection Agency Clean Air Act. .... (link) 

First of all let me say that I, unlike many conservatives, accept the majority scientific opinion that global warming is a reality and that human activity is a contributing factor. I find the view that Al Gore cooked up global warming and that there is a grand worldwide conspiracy in the scientific community to perpetuate a scam quite preposterous. (To view my numerous post on the topic of GW follow this link.)  However, this resolution is a case of local government weighing in on an issue that the US Congress should be debating. If the council wants to take a position on this issue then we should also take positions on Agenda 21, the Benghazi policy failure and cover up, the decision of the Federal Reserve to inflate the money supply $40 billion dollars a month, immigration policy, the Supreme Courts Citizen United case, the looming fiscal Cliff, the issue of healthcare exchanges and any other number of federal and state issue.

With China building a coal-fired energy facility a month, I doubt that a minor curtailment of CO2 in the Nashville region will make any significant dent in the problem.

Also, when Congress passed the Clean Air act, they never intended to declare the stuff we exhale as a pollutant. The Supreme Court has ruled that CO2 is a pollutant and the EPA has the right to regulate. This is a complicated issue. Metro Government should not weigh in on it.  Stick to local issues. I know we are locally effected by global warming, but we are also effected by issues of war and peace, a $16 trillion dollar debt and socialization of healthcare. If council members want to weigh in on those issues, run for Congress or blog.

Top Stories

Veterans Day

Top Stories