What's on the Council Agenda for Dec. 16? Bailing out the Neighborhood Resource Center, regulating pedal pubs and Uber and Lyft, and the Bridgestone Bribe. (update)

Council meeting are really boring if you don't know what the Council is voting on, with an agenda and council staff analysis the meetings are still boring but not quite as boring. Follow the highlighted links for you own copy.

There are ten appointments to boards and commission on the agenda for Council confirmation. Unfortunately, the council does not take its role of confirming appointments very seriously and appointees get a superficial review in a little get acquainted session in front of the Rules and Confirmation committee.  It is not really a hearing but a pleasant chat. Citizens serving on Boards and Commission serve without pay and they provide a valuable service to our city and should be honored for their willingness to serve.  On the other hand by automatically confirming whomever the mayor appoints the Council is missing an opportunity to influence public policy.

One of the appointments this time is to the Human Relations Commission. The Human Relation does nothing of importance and should better be called the Department to Advance Political Correctness. The few things they do that need to be done could be done by other departments or the private sector. One thing they do that I like is sponsor the Festival of Cultures.  I always enjoy that event, but I am sure a private concern would take it over and continue it if the city steps aside or the Parks Department could take on the responsibility.

One thing the Human Relations Commission does that galls me to no end is their sponsorship of the Youth Pavilion at the Gay Pride Festival. The city should not be providing the twink booth or normalizing perversion among young people.  I wish someone on the rules committee, or if not in committee from the Council floor, would ask Mr. Jeff H. Gibson, the appointee to the Human Relations Commission, if he supports the city's sponsorship of the Youth Pavilion at the Gay Pride Festival. If he does, then he should be voted against.

There are no bills or resolutions on public hearing.

There are 22 resolution, all on the consent agenda at this time. A bill is placed on consent if it is assumed to be non-controversial and stays on consent it passes the committee to which it was assigned unanimously. However, on the floor, any Councilman may ask to have a bill moved off of consent and considered separately or may ask to have himself recorded as abstaining or voting "no."
These are the resolutions of interest:

• RESOLUTION NO. RS2014-1289 is the bill to offer incentives to Bridgestone to get them to stay in Nashville and expand. The way this really works is that it authorizes an economic and community development incentive grant to be made to the Industrial Development Board for the benefit of Bridgestone. It offers a grant of $500 per employee for the next seven years for all employees of Birdgestone above the 1100 who are already here.  Actually, if I were in the Council, I would vote for this but I would have to hold my nose and vote for it. I wish that was not the way business was done, but if we don't bribe them to stay, some other city will bribe them to relocate so we have to play the game. They will bring 1700 jobs to downtown and build a new 30-story tower in SoBro. They already have about 1100 employees in Nashville but the lease on their location near the airport is expiring and they were looking at relocating. The total metro incentive is about $50 million, mostly in a exemption on paying taxes for some years on the new building they will build downtown.  That is in a different bill. In addition to the Metro incentive the State is also offering an incentive. 

• RESOLUTION NO. RS2014-1314 is a "refunding" of $151 million of bonds.  This is sort of like refinancing your home to get a lower interest rate.  It could save the city about $5.8 million. This is a good bill.

• RESOLUTION NO. RS2014-1315  appropriates $9.3 million from the General Fund Reserve Fund (the 4% fund)  for the purchase of equipment and building repairs for various departments. The fund has over $37 million in it and this is a normal process. I hope Council is carefully monitoring the expenditures however to be sure they are justified.  Approving expenditures for departments is an opportunity for council to exert influence if a department has not been responsive to a Council member or has ignored the wishes of the Council.

• RESOLUTION NO. RS2014-1316 approves $100,000 to the Neighborhood Resource Center.  This non-profit has fallen on hard times recently having lost their United Way funding and some other things. Some of the things the NRC does I do not disagree with but I think the city should use caution in bailing them out.  Their are many worthwhile non-profits that need funding. The NRC is essentially a political organization teaching political activism with leaders of the organization trained in the Saul Alinsky tradition. From time to time the NRC promotes a leftist agenda such as they did in 2011 when they hosted a  Contract for the American Dream workshop. You can learn more about this leftist project here. If I were in the Council, I would vote against this resolution.

• RESOLUTION NO. RS2014-1319  authorizes the the purchase of property known as Kellytown, and the acceptance of  $400,000.00 from Friends of Kellytown. This property is 6.72 acres at the corner of  Hillsboro Rd and Old Hickory Blvd and was an Indian settlement from the 1400's and artifacts have been found on the property. The purchase price is $750,0000. The land will become a park.  I support this resolution. 
 

• RESOLUTION NO. RS2014-1330 establishes what it takes for an owner of property to be able to claim a property right under the Vested Property Rights Act of 2014.  In the past a person might spend a lot of money on planing in preparation of developing his property in a way that was perfectly legal at the time, then the local government would rush in and change the zoning which would make the plan non-conforming to the new zoning and thus prohibit the planned development.  The Vested Property Rights Act of 2014 attempts to prohibit that. I can see that this could cut both ways. In anticipation that someday in the future a city or county might zone property a certain way, an owner could go out and file a bogus preliminary plan lifted from some template.  So, local government get to establish what it takes for a property owner to establish a vested property right in a plan. I don't know if this resolution establishes the right level of planning for one to have a vested interest in the property based on a plan or not. This resolution requires a final plan before one is vested in the plan.  That seems pretty restrictive.  I hope the development community and property rights advocates have carefully reviewed this resolution and has studied this issue. 

There are seven bills on First Reading but I usually don't pay much attention to them until Second Reading. First Reading is a formality that allows a bill to be considered and it is bad manners to vote against a bill of First reading unless it is really atrocious.

There are 21 bills on Second Reading, but none of them are of much interest. Most of them are obtaining or abandoning sewer or drainage easements.

There are 30 bills on Third Reading. Most of them are zoning bills that would only interest nearby neighbors. Here are the only ones of interest:

• BILL NO. BL2014-925 would regulate pedicabs and pedal pubs. Pedicabs are the three wheeled non-motorized vehicles that travel in the 2nd Ave and lower Broad area. Pedal pubs are those traveling taverns powered by the customers, about eight on each side. These regulations would require a certain amount of insurance and certain safety requirements. I am OK with that. What I don't like is that Metro would allow them only after they prove a necessity for the vehicles. Metro can say "we have enough" and not allow new providers to get in the market. I don't think any business should have to show a need to enter the market. Requiring a certificate of necessity for new entrants into the market simply protects those already operating. Let whoever wants to try to make a go at it, have a shot. No one should be protected from failure or competition. What if one had to show a need before one could open a new restaurant? We would not have the great restaurant we have today, but we would have some really mediocre restaurants. There is no need to improve your service if you are protected from competition. There is probably never a "need" for a pedal pub. One pedal pub may succeed because of the type of beer they sale or the price of the beer or the bartender tells good jokes or the barmaid is cute and shows cleavage. Let them compete and let the market determine which ones survive. Also, the drivers of these vehicles must wear a uniform? Why? If I were in the Council, I would vote against this bill.
• BILL NO. BL2014-947 clarifies procedures related to fees, in-lieu contributions and other assessments. What this does is clarify that those fees are not frozen at the time first assessed but can be updated from time to time. There is a technical necessity for this and it is no big deal. 
• BILL NO. BL2014-952  regulates non-taxi livery services such as Uber and Lyft. I have used Uber and love it. It is fast, cheap, convenient, easy to use, and the vehicles are clean. Uber and Lyft have been operating in Nashville for about a year unregulated and this would regulate them. There has not been push-back from the industry against this bill so I assume it is something they can live with. The proposed regulation requires a certain levels of insurance and require the drivers to get an annual permit. I think minimum insurance requirements probably are reasonable and maybe some of the other proposed regulations. This bill would prohibit vehicles like Uber or Lyft from being hailed by the public the way taxis can be, but that is meaningless any way, since that is not they way they operate.  They are summoned by a phone app. When "Black Cars" made their appearance in Nashville, in an attempt to drive them out of business and protect the limo companies, the council passed a $45 minimum for a limo ride and made Black Cars operate under limo regulations. Last year  the Council removed the $45 minimum for a limo ride and they set a minimum at three times the flag drop for a taxi ride which would come to about $9. This bill abolishes the $9 minimum and says the MTLC can set a minimum subject to Council approval.  I do not think the city should be setting minimum prices for any service. A minimum fare does not protect consumers, but protects providers from competition and it stifles innovation. Since the Council could set a minimum with or without this bill, if I were in the Council, I would cautiously vote for this bill unless presented with a persuasive argument against it.
• BILL NO. BL2014-953  is part of the Bridgestone deal and approves the 20-year tax abatement.

Top Stories

Beacon Center Unveils New Policy Priority in Healthcare Package

Reform package shows benefits of "right-to-try" and drawbacks of Medicaid expansion

NASHVILLE – Today, the Beacon Center released its healthcare package, in which a brand new policy priority for the upcoming legislative session was announced. "Right-to-try" legislation would give hope to the terminally ill by allowing them to use experimental drugs that have passed safety testing, but have not yet been approved by the FDA.

“We are proud to press for this reform that would have will have an immediate benefit to terminally ill Tennesseans." said Beacon CEO Justin Owen. "We cannot afford to wait any longer to give the sickest among us the hope they so desperately need. This is an issue that both Democrats and Republicans can get behind.”

Top Stories

Nashville Chamber says School Board needs training to end divisiveness.

by Dave Boucher, The Tennessean, Dec. 16, 2014 - The Metro school board needs training so it can better understand its own policies on unity and stop "freelancing," according to an education committee report by the Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce.

The board's divisiveness could harm the district's ability to attract a new superintendent, so the board should hire a new district leader after Nashville picks a new mayor, the latest edition of the chamber's education report card also concludes.

"Over the past year, it is clear that the Metro school board has struggled to articulate a common vision for the school system," the report reads. (read)

My Comment:  There is something that really rubs me the wrong way about this.  Why should the unelected Chamber of Commerce tell elected officials in essence to sit down and shut up and keep their opinions to themselves. Now, don't get me wrong I almost always disagree with Amy Frogge, Jill Speering, and Will Pinkston.  I would like to see them each replaced with someone like Elissa Kim, but we cannot expect an elected board to all speak with one voice. In any elected body there is going to be more than one point of view or they are nothing but a rubber stamp. If we want a board that all speaks with one voice; if we want "unity," then maybe we don't want an elected board.  At one time Metro's school board was appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Council. If that is what the Chamber wants then the Chamber should say so. It is arrogant and condescending for the Chamber to tell elected officials they need training in being less divisive.  While I am not a fan of Frogge, Speering or Pinkston, I would applaud them if they told the chamber to stick it where the sun don't shine.

Top Stories

Emperor Obama says, " I just took an action to change the law."

In case you missed it:
Prior to granting amnesty to five million illegal aliens President Obama had said as many as 20 times that he had no authority to do so. He had said that only Congress could change the law.  In 2013 he said that he was “not king” and “not the emperor” in response to questions about stopping deportations and providing temporary legal status to undocumented workers. Then when he granted amnesty, he claimed he did not change the law but asserting his authority as president to enforce the nation's laws with discretion and said what he was doing was not amnesty but deferred action and prioritizing deportations.

Well, yesterday he dropped the pretense. In response to a protestor who was unhappy that amnesty did not extend far enough he said, "what you are not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law.

The United States Constitution says the legislative power is held by Congress, not by the president. Under our form of government, the President cannot make laws.  Only Congress can make laws. From now on "President" Obama should be referred to as Emperor Obama.

Here is the video where is says, "I just took an action to change the law."




When he doesn't have his teleprompter, he accidentally tells the truth.

Top Stories

Neighborhood Resource Center Bailout deferred one meeting by Budget and Finance.

The resolution to grant a $100,000 subsidy to the Neighborhood Resource Center was deferred one meeting at the Budget and Finance Committee at the request of the sponsor.  To see the committee's discussion of this resolution see time stamp 28:15 to 33:37 in the video. Council member Ronnie Stein points out that $100.000 is a greater portion of an agencies budget than is most Council grants to agencies. He also says that before next meeting he would like to see a budget for the agency and see how the $100,000 would be spend.

Most discussion and explanation of legislation takes place in committee. Any bill that spends money goes to the Budget and Finance Committee, making Budget and Finance the most important committee of the Council.

This is the membership of the Budget and Finance Committee: Pridemore, Bill, Chair; Baker, Buddy; Bennett, Karen; Davis, Anthony; Dowell, Jacobia;Garrett, Tim, Vice Chair; Glover, Steve;Langster, Edith Taylor; Maynard, Jerry; Moore, Sandra; Pardue, Doug; Steine, Ronnie;Weiner, Sheri

Top Stories

More about the proposed bail out of the Neighborhood Resource Center

This was posted to the Google Group Nashville Neighborhoods:

Mina Johnson Dec 12 10:46AM -0600

RESOLUTION NO. *RS2014*-*1316*
< http://www.nashville.gov/mc/resolutions/term_2011_2015/rs2014_1316.htm>
Resolution to appropriated one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) from the
Undesignated Fund Balance of the General Fund of the General Services
District to fund a grant to Neighborhoods Resource Center for the purpose
of providing a portion of the funding for its program services.

The above agenda is on December 16th Council consent agenda.

I am not questioning if NRC is worthy of receiving $100,000 from Metro. I
understand NRC has been helping neighborhoods especially fighting against
crime and strength certain area of neighborhoods where help was desperately
needed.

I just have to wonder if there is a conflict of interest. The sponsor of
the bill, CM Scott Davis is a board member of NRC. CM Davis being a board
member of the organization regardless of a pay, and getting financial
benefit to that organization seem to have unfair advantage to other
Non-profit organization which would like to seek Metro assistance.

What do you think?

If you'd like to express your opinion on this resolution, Council Members
can be reached at councilmembers@nashville.gov

Thank you, Mike Peden, for having keen eyes on Metro financial.

Mina (West Meade)

Top Stories

The Neighborhood Resource Center Promotes MoveOn.org's leftist agenda

Tomorrow night, December 16th, the Metro Council will be considering a resolution to provide $100,000 to the the Neighborhood Resource Center.  I oppose that effort for several reasons. One of those reasons is that NRC promotes a leftist agenda. Below is an article I first posted in August 2011.  You can ignore the criticism of United Way since they are no longer funding NRC.

NRC's participation in promotion of the leftist Contract for the American Dream is reason enough that they should not receive public funding.

The United Way Funded Neighborhood Resource Center Promotes MoveOn.org’s Leftist Agenda.

The United Way of Metropolitan Nashville does a lot of good things. They support many fine programs that help thousands of people in our community. They help those in crisis with food and shelter and health care and counseling, they have helped hundreds of Nashville families affected by the May 2009 flood, and United Way supports programs to help lift people out of poverty. I have personally contributed to United Way. I admire the work of the organization and hesitate to criticize them. I am disappointed, however, that United Way is supporting an agency that is a engaging in blatant liberal political activism. That organization is the Neighborhood Resource Center.

NRC is an organization devoted to community organizing. They do some good things that almost all would agree are worthy endeavors, but they definitely have a liberal agenda. According to the United Way 2009 Income Tax return, the Neighborhood Resource Center received three grants that year, one for $231,958 and two smaller grants, one for $3500 and one for $1,698. United Way has funded the Neighborhood Resource Center since 1997. I have emailed United Way asking what the current level of funding is for NRC and have asked what programs that funding supports. When I get an answer, I will update this report. If I do not get the courtesy of a reply, I will also update and let readers of this blog know.  I have also offered United Way a chance to respond to this post.

I am sure that if United Way is asked about the funding for the Neighborhood Resource Center they will say that the grant is awarded for a specific program and funds received from United Way are not used for political activism. We all know that, that is not the way things really work. If NRC is receiving $237,000 from United Way, that funding is paying for overhead, salaries, and utilities and is also freeing up other NRC funds to be used for political activities.

On August 20, 2011 the Neighborhood Resource Center hosted a meeting at their Third Avenue headquarters for participants to discuss how to implement the Contract for the American Dream. The announcement for the meeting said, “We will be gathering to discuss how we can bring back our country and our state to one that values people over corporations and believes that we all do better when we all do better. Your ideas and networks are vital to the success of this Progressive movement.” Other organizations participating in the event included Progressive Democrats of America and Tennessee Citizens Action.

The Contract for the American Dream is a project of the far left MoveOn.Org. A whole host of other liberal and leftist organization are also partnering in the Contract for the American Dream campaign including Planned Parenthood, Progressive Congress.org, Progressive Democrats of America, Daily Kos, People for the American Way, and Code Pink.

The Contract for the American Dream is a major effort to energize the left. It calls for new massive government spending and wealth redistribution. The Contract calls for the following: “investment” in infrastructure, massive government “investment" in green jobs, a mandatory living wage, universal access to early childhood education and affordable higher education for all, universal single-payer health care, no changes to social security, higher taxes on the wealthy, an end to the wars and to bring home the troops now, a tax on “wall street speculator”, and to “ban anonymous political influence, slam shut the lobbyists' revolving door in D.C., and publicly finance elections.”  Would not everyone agree that that is a liberal partisan agenda?

If you work at a company that encourages participation in a United Way workplace campaign, you may want to ask the United Way spokesman who comes to urge your participation, why you should contribute to an organization that is political in nature and who works to achieve political objectives with which you disagree. You may want to consider withholding your funding of United Way and contribute directly to an organization you trust. If you work for one of those companies that “strongly encourages” participation and you feel failure to participate could endanger your continued employment, you may want to look into designating your gift to a particular United Way agency rather than the United Way general fund.

In addition to United Way of Metropolitan Nashville, other funding sources for the Neighborhood Resource Center include the following: The HCA Foundation, The Frist Foundation, Regional Transportation Authority, The Memorial Foundation, The Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation, James Stephen Charitable Foundation, The Temple (Congregation Ohabai Sholom), Hermitage Environmental Leadership Project, 61st Avenue United Methodist Church, and Organized Neighbors of Edgehill.

If you have any influence with any of the above organizations you may wish to raise a question as to why they are funding a liberal activist organization.The Frist family are conservatives, are they not? Why are they funding this left-wing agenda? The Regional Transportation Authority operates on tax dollars. What are they doing supporting a partisan liberal political organization? Next time the local government is asked to fund RTA, someone should ask.

Top Stories

The NashvilleNext "Preferred Future" is now available.

The "Preferred Future," a potential long-term direction for Nashville and Davidson County based on over 15,000 community inputs over more than two years of planning and public input, is currently online for public review along with videos and more. Read or download the entire Pick Your Nashville Results report  at the indicated link and go to this site to watch a video presentation.

I participated in this process from the very first, and found much of it of interest but I am not sure it is of much value. I attended several meeting and put little dots on charts on the wall and put sticky notes on boards and sit in my study groups and discussed things and added comments to online discussions, but I am not sure it all adds up to much. There is almost too much information. By the time the process was over, I was burned out with it and sort of felt like I was being led to a conclusion.

Sure 15,000 people participated but that does not mean they were representative of the community or made informed decisions. The conclusions of this plan should not be used as an excuse to raise taxes or curtail property rights.  The conclusions are very general. As an example, I agree with the conclusion that we want to "protect sensitive environmental features" but what does that mean?  How do you apply that generality to a specific situation. Does "sensitive environmental features" mean a wet lands with endangered plants or a waterfall or what?  And how do we "protect" it?  The "how" is very important.  If we determine that picturesque pastoral rural lands are "sensitive environmental features" and if we protect them from development, do we do it by taken development rights away from owners or by purchasing development rights?

I hope the Council does not adopt something based on this study without carefully understanding what they are adopting. I hope property rights advocates are paying attention. This process should not replace the democratic process of elected officials adopting a plan. The NashvilleNext should not replace professional planners developing a plan, presenting it to the council and the Council having a public hearing and then adopting it. I am not against planning, in fact I think planning can be important, but even a good plan can be stood on its head if circumstances change.  Music Valley drive and the Opryland Hotel Convention center were never part of any plan until Opryland was proposed. I don't know what the cost of developing the NashvilleNext plan was but I doubt we got our money's worth. I don't think NashvilleNext is very instructive and should not be given a whole lot of weight in decision making.

Top Stories

Alexander, Corker Statements on Gov. Haslam’s “Insure Tennessee” Plan

WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 – U.S. Senators Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker today released the following statements on Gov. Bill Haslam’s announcement of “Insure Tennessee,” which Gov. Haslam calls “an alternative approach” to the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare. The plan, according to the governor, is “a two-year pilot program to provide health care coverage to Tennesseans who currently don’t have access to health insurance or have limited options."

Alexander, the senior Republican on the Senate health committee, said: “Governor Haslam deserves credit for insisting upon a Tennessee plan that the state can afford, and Secretary Burwell deserves credit for being flexible enough to allow the governor to achieve that.”

Corker said: “I have had several conversations with Governor Haslam and appreciate the work he and his team have done to study this issue closely and negotiate a tailored solution that works for Tennessee. I'm glad the administration has finally allowed appropriate flexibility, and I'm pleased our state was able to adopt a solution that will build off of the innovative ways we deliver quality health care.”‎

Top Stories

Haslam Announces Insure Tennessee Plan, Tennessee's proposed alternative to Medicaid expansion

Provides health care coverage to more Tennesseans while addressing health outcomes and cost

NASHVILLE – Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam today unveiled his Insure Tennessee plan, a two year pilot program to provide health care coverage to Tennesseans who currently don’t have access to health insurance or have limited options.  Haslam has received verbal approval from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on the plan.  The next steps are for the state to submit a waiver to HHS and for the governor to take the proposal to the legislature for consideration.

The program rewards healthy behaviors, prepares members to transition to private coverage, promotes personal responsibility and incentivizes choosing preventative and routine care instead of unnecessary use of emergency rooms.

The governor announced that he plans to call a special session to focus on the proposal after the 109^th General Assembly convenes in January.

“We made the decision in Tennessee nearly two years ago not to expand traditional Medicaid,” Haslam said.  “This is an alternative approach that forges a different path and is a unique Tennessee solution.  This plan leverages federal dollars to provide health care coverage to more Tennesseans, to give people a choice in their coverage, and to address the cost of health care, better health outcomes and personal responsibility.

“Our approach is responsible and reasonable, and I truly believe that it can be a catalyst to fundamentally changing health care in Tennessee.  It is our hope that this plan opens the door in the future for innovation within our existing Medicaid program.  I look forward to working with providers across the state to advance payment reform and with members of the General Assembly to make this plan a reality.”

Five key areas of the governor’s plan include:

• A fiscally sound and sustainable program;
• Providing two new private market choices for Tennesseans;
• Shifting the delivery model and payment of health care in Tennessee from fee-for-service to outcomes based;
• Incentivizing Tennesseans to be more engaged and to take more personal responsibility in their health;
• And preparing participants for eventual transition to commercial health coverage.

Fiscally Sound and Sustainable Program
The program will not create any new taxes for Tennesseans and will not add any state cost to the budget.  The Tennessee Hospital Association has committed that the industry will cover any additional cost to the state.  The program will automatically terminate in the event that either federal funding or support from the hospitals is modified in any way.

New Private Market Choices for Tennesseans
Insure Tennessee offers several options of coverage for individuals below 138 percent of poverty ($16,100 for an individual and $27,300 for a family of three).  Tennesseans 21 to 64 years old will be offered a choice of the Healthy Incentives Plan or the Volunteer Plan.

The Volunteer Plan would provide a health insurance voucher to participants that would be used to participate in their employer’s health insurance plan.  The voucher, valued at slightly less than the average TennCare per-enrollee cost, can be used to pay for premiums and other out-of-pocket expenses associated with participation in an individual’s employer sponsored private market plan.
Participants in the Healthy Incentives Plan may choose to receive coverage through a redesigned component of the TennCare program, which would introduce Healthy Incentives for Tennesseans (HIT) accounts, modeled after Health Reimbursement Accounts (HRAs), which can be used to pay for a portion of required member cost-sharing.

Payment Reform Efforts
The governor’s Delivery System Reform Initiative lays the foundation for reform by addressing the underlying quality and outcome deficiencies that contribute to growing health care costs and unaffordable insurance coverage.  This initiative creates financial incentives for providers to provide high quality care in an efficient and appropriate manner so as to reduce costs and improve health outcomes. Insure Tennessee builds on this reform initiative by creating new participant incentives that align with the existing provider incentives.  Ultimately, bringing the health care consumer into the equation is critical to successfully controlling cost growth.

Personal Responsibility and Patient Engagement
The voucher program provides a fixed contribution that can be applied to the costs of a person’s private market plan.  All costs incurred in excess of the amount of the voucher are the responsibility of the participant.  This structure empowers individuals to make a choice about which plan is better for their needs and to manage their health care expenses to avoid additional costs.

Newly eligible individuals who choose to participate in the TennCare program and whose incomes are above 100 percent of poverty will be required to pay premiums and copays for services.  All enrollees, including those with incomes below poverty, will have modest pharmacy copays.  TennCare members “earn” contributions into their HIT accounts by performing healthy behaviors.  The account then can be used to cover copayment expenses.

Prepares Participants for Commercial Health Coverage
The design of Insure Tennessee is based on private market principles that provide incentives to participants to engage in their health care by actively managing their health care costs.  Through both programs, Insure Tennessee introduces a commercial health insurance experience which can help Tennesseans prepare for independence from public assistance.

Top Stories

Senator Alexander's statement on the spending bill and Senator Cruz's Point of Order.

Fiscal responsibility is about setting priorities, and I voted for this legislation because it helps keep spending in check while supporting projects that are crucial to Tennessee, as well as our country’s economic competitiveness and national security.” – Lamar Alexander

WASHINGTON, Dec. 13, 2014 – U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), the Senate’s top Republican on energy appropriations, today voted in favor of legislation to fund the federal government that “helps keep spending in check while supporting two projects that are crucial to Tennessee,” a proposal to build the world’s fastest supercomputer at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Uranium Processing Facility at Y-12. Alexander noted that the legislation complies with spending caps established by the Budget Control Act of 2011 and the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013.

“Fiscal responsibility is about setting priorities, and I voted for this legislation because it helps keep spending in check while supporting projects that are crucial to Tennessee, as well as our country’s economic competitiveness and national security,” said Alexander, the top Republican on the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy & Water Development, which oversees funding for Oak Ridge and Y-12. “Once again having the world’s fastest supercomputer in the United States – and once again having it in Oak Ridge – will help us remain a center for advanced manufacturing and scientific breakthroughs. Providing both funding and oversight of the Uranium Processing Facility supports jobs and national security, and continues our mission of completing this project on time and on budget.”

The omnibus legislation passed by the Senate provides funding for most federal government agencies for fiscal year 2015, which extends until Oct. 1, 2015. In order to slow President Obama’s executive order granting amnesty to 5 million illegal immigrants, the legislation only extends funding for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security through Feb. 27, 2015.

At $1.014 trillion, the legislation complies with the budget caps that Congress passed as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011 and amended with the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013. Alexander noted that the legislation only affects discretionary spending – such as funding for national defense, national labs and national parks – which currently accounts for about 35 percent of the federal budget, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Mandatory spending, which is not controlled by appropriations legislation and includes entitlement programs, makes up about 60 percent of overall federal spending.

Alexander continued, “Unfortunately, President Obama and the Democratic Senate majority have not worked with Republicans to address the real driver of the federal government’s nearly $18 trillion debt: out-of-control entitlement spending. I hope that changes with a new Republican Senate majority. We need to pass a plan like the Fiscal Sustainability Act I proposed with Senator Corker, which would reduce the growth of entitlement spending by nearly $1 trillion over 10 years.”
The funding for the supercomputer and the Uranium Processing Facility was part of the Energy and Water Appropriations bill, which Alexander helped author. It included:

• $104 million for supercomputing, following a November announcement by Alexander and U.S. Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz that Oak Ridge would build a supercomputer five times the speed of Titan, its current machine.
• $335 million for the Uranium Processing Facility, which processes enriched uranium for nuclear weapons systems. Alexander has pushed to keep costs under control, in part through the Red Team review led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory director Thom Mason.
• The closure of two facilities Alexander said perform duties that are redundant and can be accomplished more cost effectively elsewhere, saving taxpayers $120 million over the next ten years. The first is the New Brunswick lab in New Jersey, which does work on radiation that is used in the calibration of radioactivity detection equipment and that Alexander said can be done in various other parts of the federal government. The second is the closure of the Lujan Center in New Mexico, which performs scientific research with neutrons that Alexander said can be done at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee.

UPDATED 12/14, 10:00 ET:

Alexander voted against a constitutional point of order offered by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), saying, "I voted against the point of order because it would have invalidated the annual appropriations bill that is  needed and clearly constitutional. The bill funds the Department of Homeland Security for only three months, giving the new Republican Congress an opportunity next year to deal with the president’s unconstitutional executive amnesty."

Top Stories

Senator Bob Corker's Comments on the Spending bill and the Cruz Constitutional Point of Order

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) today released the following statement after voting against a spending bill known as a continuing resolution (H.R.83).

“I could not support this spending bill because it continues the regrettable precedent of spending above the budget levels established by the original Budget Control Act without proper offsets elsewhere in the budget,” said Corker. “Next year, controlling both chambers of Congress, Republicans will have the opportunity to govern responsibly by passing individual appropriations bills with more oversight of how taxpayer dollars are being used.”

Corker also commented on a Constitutional point of order raised by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas).
"‎While the president's executive actions on immigration are reprehensible and deserve a strong response, I value the oath I took to support and defend the Constitution too much to exploit it for political expediency,” said Corker. “The Constitution gives Congress the power to fund the government so to assert that the House-passed spending bill is unconstitutional is not only inaccurate but irresponsible." 

Top Stories