A Christmas Cartoon Book

Top Stories

The Tennessean reports "Kenneth Eaton to run for Nashville mayor again."

Kenneth Eaton to run for Nashville mayor again

Kenneth Eaton finished with just a few hundred votes in the 2007 race for Nashville mayor, but he’s giving it another shot nonetheless.

Top Stories

Raising the Gas Tax and a lesson about spending

It is clear that the ground work is being laid to raise the state gas tax in this next legislative session and there is a good argument to be made that it needs to be increased.  The tax which has not been increased since 1989 is not raising sufficient revenue to improve and maintain our highway system. Improved fuel efficiency standards and the rise of hybrid vehicles are hurting the collection of gas taxes. Also our interstate highway system and bridges are old now and major repairs are needed. There are bottlenecks and places that need new interchanges.  I am persuaded that there is insufficient revenue to expand and maintain the interstate system the way we have in the past if the tax is not raised.

That said however, in the past when money was flowing into the system we should not have spend it just  because we had it.  The biggest folly in my mind is that we had a state policy that every county seat would connect by a four lane road to an interstate.  I am not sure when this policy was instituted, sometime in the 70's I think.  I am not sure if it was ever completed for all 95 counties but if not, it was to most of them. I know the generalities but not the specifics. If some one can research the facts please post the information.

The logic behind this policy was that to bolster employment opportunities in rural areas we needed four-lane roads.  Counties would build industrial parks and entice companies to locate across the state. If there was not easy access to the interstate system, companies would not locate in rural areas.

When my daughter was a minor I would go pick her up from her mother's in McKenzie, Tennessee  getting off of I-40 at Parker's Cross Roads.   McKenzie was about thirty or so miles from the interstate. From the interstate to Huntington, the county seat of Carrol County, was about 20 miles and was a four-lane road.  Sometimes I would not see a dozen cars from exiting the interstate to Huntington.  Also, the little town of Huntington had a four-lane ring road by-pass, which was silly because it added miles to the trip and there was nothing to by-pass since it was much quicker to go through town. The few times I did take the bypass, I would go miles and miles and not see another car.

I also for many years had a grandmother living in Sparta, Tennessee which is the county seat of White County and I would go visit her in Sparta and would go though Sparta to a family reunions "on the mountain."  When I would go to Sparta, the four lane road from the interstate to Sparta would almost always be empty.

This plan to four-lane the state of Tennessee apparently did not achieve its objective. As of the 2010 census, the population of Carroll County was 28,522; in 1980 it was 28,285. In 2010 the population of White County was 25,834; and in 1980 it was 19567, not much growth. Looking at rural counties across the state, some had modest growth, some almost no growth and some continued to have declining population growth.  In addition to the cost, I think it is detrimental to the environment to encourage this kind of sprawl, and I prefer to keep the rural, rural. Building four-lane roads to each county seat gobbled up mass swaths of farm land and detracted from the natural beauty of rural Tennessee.

Rather than try to make each rural county a site for industrial development, I think it would have been wiser to pick six to eight mid-sized towns such as Jackson and Cookeville and focus development in those areas. Anyway, we have now spend that money and there is no getting it back.

The lesson form this is that if an entity of government has money to spend, they spend it even if they spend it foolishly. The only way government spends wisely is when money is scarce and then not all of the time.  It is a policy quandary; do you give an entity more money and see a lot of it foolishly wasted or not give sufficient money and see essential services surfer? I think it is hard to strike the right balance. I fear that if TDOT has more money, then the State may decide that every county seat needs a luxury jet port. 

Top Stories

The Nashville Scene ask, "Does Bill Freeman's Trash Truck Ad Deal Stink"?

Does Bill Freeman's Trash Truck Ad Deal Stink?

Top Stories

Haslam's alternative plan to Medicaid expansion and what others are saying.

After almost two years of delay and negotiations, Govenor Haslam has come up with a unique plan to expand health care in Tennessee that embraces a more conservative approach and that is agreeable to the Obama administration's Department of Health and Human Services.  At this point I find it a reasonable plan which should be carefully examined  and passed unless major pitfalls emerge.

Obamacare counted on states to expand Medicaid to cover people with incomes of up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level and at the same time Obamacare cut or eliminated most federal aid to hospitals for unreimbursed care. By not expanding Medicaid, Tennessee did not get the federal money that would have went to Tennessee but we lost the money that was going to pay for unremimbursed care. Still, hospitals had to continue providing care to the uninsured indigent. As a result, several rural hospitals in Tennessee closed and more will be forced to close, if we do not expand medicaid or if Congress does not reinstate payment for unremimbursed care to a former level or we do not adopt Governor Haslam's plan.

Under Obamacare, if we would have expanded Medicaid, the federal government would have paid 100 percent of the cost for the first three years and supposedly 90 percent thereafter.  Many were dubious that the 90% thereafter would be realized and suspected the Federal government would shift more of the burden to the state.  There was also concern that the 10% the states were to pay after the first three years, would be 10% of a greater and greater dollar amount and end up consuming a greater and greater share of state revenues and cutting into other critical needs, the way Teencare had done when Tennessee had its experiment with Tenncare.

Rather than expand Medicaid, Governor Haslam resisted and sought a Tennessee alternative to Medicaid expansion. It took two years of negotiation to get an agreement to an alternative plan from U.S. Health and Human Services officials. His plan has two different ways to provide health care to the people who would have been covered had we accepted the Obamacare medicaid expansion. One portion of is plan would offer vouchers that low-income workers could use to participate in employers' insurance plans. The other is build upon TennCare, the state's current Medicaid program. New enrollees in TennCare under this proposal will pay modest premiums and copays, and the plan will include incentives for things such as annual health screenings and quitting smoking.

This seems like a reasonable proposal to me. Of course my preference would be for Congress to completely undo Obamacare and institute the package of Republican alternatives.  In the meantime, I think Haslam's plan is pretty good and the State legislature should pass it unless new facts emerge that expose serious pitfalls to the plan. The plan will insure more people and stop hospitals from closing and the copay and premiums, ensure the recipient has "skin the game," as they say.

I am a big supported of the Beacon Center and usually agree with their position on issues but was disappointed when they came out with this press release on the same day Haslam made his announcement that a  deal had been struck with the Department of Health and Human Services to allow the the Tennessee Plan to move forward. Here is the Beacon Center's press release:

Beacon Strongly Opposes Governor Haslam's Medicaid Expansion

NASHVILLE – The Beacon Center of Tennessee firmly opposes Governor Haslam's move to expand Medicaid and the reach of Obamacare's tentacles into our state. As our recent study with State Budget Solutions and Federalism in Action exposed, President Obama's Medicaid expansion would cost our state’s economy $3.6 billion, while causing more than 67,000 Tennesseans to lose their jobs. Medicaid has failed to help the uninsured and impoverished.

A similar plan in Arkansas has been nothing but a complete disaster. We should instead seek sustainable solutions that provide accessible, high-quality care that can actually make a difference in the lives of those most in need. The Beacon Center's healthcare reform package for 2015—to be released tomorrow—proves that Medicaid expansion is both unaffordable and immoral. We will actively work with our state lawmakers to soundly reject this proposal and instead pursue meaningful alternatives that put the quality of life for Tennesseans first.

I will study the Beacon Plan, but it took two years for Haslam to strike a deal with DHHS so if all opponents of Haslam's plan can offer is some pie-in-the-sky plan that has no chance of DHHS approval, I think it is preferable to accept the Haslam plan than watch hospital close and thousands  of Tennesseans have no insurance and no local hospital emergency room.

Americans for Prosperity is also opposed to the Haslam proposal.  I think some conservatives think that the chances of eventually repealing Obamacare are greater if there are suffering people and rather than see Obamacare take root, they would prefer to do all they can to prevent it from working. While we work to replace Obamacare, I think we also must deal with the realities as they are and govern.

Both Senators Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker have praised the plan. Here are what some other are saying:

Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey as quoted in the press:

When a state has an opportunity to take power away from the federal government and institute real conservative reform, that is an opportunity that must be taken seriously. Governor Haslam has negotiated a deal which returns tax dollars back to Tennessee while using conservative principles to bring health insurance to more Tennesseans. I look forward to sitting down with my fellow legislators to take a hard look at what has been negotiated to make sure that the final deal, which must be approved by the legislature, is in the long-term financial interest of Tennessee.

A Facebook post from Professor Carol M. Swain, Ph.D:

The working poor need some relief. My mother's health care worker cannot afford Obamacare insurance. She can get a $31.00 premium w/ a $6,000 deductible. The policy will pay 50 percent of her cost after her deductible is met. She lost insurance after Obamacare passed. Republicans in Congress have done nothing to repeal Obamacare. Therefore, it makes sense for Governor Haslam or somebody to look after the welfare of the working poor.

Rep. Judd Matheny, R-Tullahoma as quoted in the press:

I appreciate what the governor has accomplished. This is not some cut and paste plan that other states have tried to sell as unique. I’ve talked with a lot of my colleagues, and I would say that not one has said they would reject the plan. We all have open minds, but there are going to be a lot of questions.

A Facebook post from  Rep. Jeremy Faison, R-Cosby:

I  just got off of the phone with a conference call with Gov. Bill Haslam. I'm encouraged Tennessee will be working to the best possible solution of the bad law Obama Care. From what I can gather so far, TN will be expanding Medicaid in such a way that it will work like a Federal grant to the state and we will run it. If you make less than 16k a year and are between the ages of 19 and 64, and you do not have access to healthcare insurance, this will be a plus for you. I will post more as I get a better understanding.
to see that

Top Stories

Latinos for Tennessee Opposes President Obama's Push for Cuba Relations

From Latinos for Tennessee - In the middle of this Christmas season, Latinos for Tennessee is shocked and saddened by yesterday's news that President Obama has decided to fundamentally change the nature of diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba. Once again, our president has chosen to entirely bypass the nation's legislature and proceed with his own agenda that undermines our country's strength in the global marketplace.

While we celebrate the release of the American prisoner Alan Gross from Cuban prison, we are dismayed that the president would open the door to negotiations with a terrorist regime. This dramatic change in stance sends a message to rogue governments around the world that the US will not stand in strong opposition to lawlessness and oppression, but rather that we have become weak and lax in our fight to preserve and promote democracy. Indeed, this is a sad day in the history of our nation.

Furthermore, while some may argue that the US has been too harsh on Cuba by not allowing diplomatic relations since 1961, in fact, the opportunity to re-establish those relations has always existed; however, the Castro regime has been unwilling to change and allow basic democratic liberties to its citizens. There are no free and fair elections, there are no independent political parties, and there is no free speech. Opponents of the Castro regime live with the fear of being imprisoned, or worse, if they participate in any activities that run counter to the ruling party. It has been the Cuban regime's unwillingness to change that has prevented economic and diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Therefore, Latinos for Tennessee stands in opposition to President Obama's push for normalized relations with Cuba where nothing is asked of Cuba in return. We continue to call for liberty, human rights, free elections, freedom of speech and an end to the oppression endured by the Cuban people.

Top Stories

Data on data: a look at testing

Reposted from Tn Edu-Independent- I wanted to share some interesting things from a recent policy brief I read from TeachPlus. The brief can be found here: The Student and the Stopwatch

This research brief looks at how much time students are actually spending on testing. We hear all sorts of things on this topic: we test all the time, we test students to death, etc.

When we look at actual data on the topic, it turns out that we don't test that much.

"Across 12 urban districts, the average amount of time students spend on state and district tests equals 1.7 percent of the school year in third and seventh grades and substantially less in kindergarten."

1.7 percent of the year. Not that much. One of the 12 urban districts they looked at was Shelby County (not MNPS), and they were at the lower end of testing hours.  So given we're in the same state, with the same set of state assessments, we're likely not far off from that same amount of time in Nashville:

Certainly, there is the question of interim assessments done by schools and districts throughout the year. But this study also factored a number of those tests in their findings.

" Teachers were asked to report the precise state- and district-mandated tests they administer and the precise number of minutes required by that test."

"The kinds of assessments profiled in this study as state- or district-mandated generally fall into two categories. The first category is end-of-year summative assessments largely required by the states, such as the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) or the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (T-CAP). These state-required summative assessments are often supplemented with district-required assessments that are used for formative or benchmark purposes. These can be administered infrequently, two to three times a year, or with greater regularity, as often as once every two weeks. Many of the districts included in this study have adopted assessment systems purchased from national providers, such as the Achievement Network (ANet), the Dynamic
Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), or the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA)."

One thing that's worth asking locally: Are the internal assessments that we have in the district throughout the year actually aligned with the state assessments? Are they telling teachers and school leaders accurate information to inform learning cycles, and doing so in a timely way?

You don't use a coffee cup to take a kid's temperature. Having internal assessments throughout the year that are supposed to tell you if your students are on the right learning trajectory or not doesn't make sense if those assessments aren't aligned to content standards and the state assessment (which incidentally, should also be aligned to the standards. I fully recognize districts in Tennessee are really in some form of Purgatory right now with Common Core standards for math and ELA but the old TCAP test - a misaligned assessment)

Some other things this TeachPlus research found:

• The variation in test time across urban districts is large, with high-test districts spending 3.3x as much time-on-testing as low-test districts.
• Urban districts spend, on average, more time than their suburban counterparts on testing. Suburban districts in this study average 1.3 percent or less of the school year on testing.
• Teachers calculate test administration time to be more than double the length reported in district calendars in elementary grades.

The testing debate certainly gets a lot of noise. As the TeachPlus brief finds:

"The debate over whether there is too much or too little testing occupies a prominent place in the policy discourse and in the media. However, the debate is largely ideological and devoid, ironically, of data on the amount of time students spend on testing."

If we're going to focus our energies on improving teaching and learning for all students in the district, one thing to spend our time on is to make sure we're prudent with the instruments we have to gauge student learning and learning progress. Those instruments are really important to help inform the learning cycle and give us meaningful data to inform instruction and professional development.

Top Stories

Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey's statement on Attorney General Slatery's decision to join lawsuit challenging Obama's immigration executive order.

I applaud Attorney General Slatery's decision to join the lawsuit challenging the President’s unconstitutional action on immigration.

Barack Obama tossed aside not just public opinion but key tenets of our constitutional democracy when he bypassed Congress to grant illegal immigrants defacto amnesty.

I'm proud that Tennessee will be among the states standing up to this truly shocking display of executive arrogance.

Top Stories

Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery joins lawsuit to challenge executive action on immigration

Press Release, Dec. 22, 2014 - Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery today notified the appropriate parties that the State will join a lawsuit brought by attorneys general and governors from 24 other states to challenge the President's recent executive action on immigration.

Slatery said, "Our office has carefully considered whether to join this lawsuit and concluded that it is in the best interest of the State to do so. While the subject of the executive action was immigration, the lawsuit is not about immigration. It is really more about the rule of law and the limitations that prevent the executive branch from taking over a role constitutionally reserved for Congress. The executive directives issued by the White House and Homeland Security conflict with existing federal law. They replace prosecutorial discretion, normally determined on a case by case basis, with a unilateral nonenforcement policy protecting over 4 million people. The directives also are rules that have been issued without complying with the Administrative Procedures Act. However frustrating and painstakingly long the federal legislative process may be, making law is the prerogative of Congress, not the executive branch. Congress can resolve all of the issues raised by this lawsuit, and the executive directives for that matter, by timely enacting legislation. But in the meantime the State cannot sit on the sidelines of this case, when unlawful directives of this magnitude grant lawful presence and other rights like work permits to such a large number. Asking a court to review this issue is the prudent choice, especially when state resources will be taxed under the directives to provide benefits like unemployment compensation and health care."

Tennessee joins Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin, in the litigation. The States' complaint was filed in the Federal District Court of Texas and requested a preliminary injunction.

Top Stories

How the Metro Council voted in supporting President Obama’s EPA Clean Power Plan.

In the Metro Council meeting of December 2, the Council passed RESOLUTION NO. RS2014-1300  sponsored by Council Member Peter Westerholm which expressed the will of the Council in supporting efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and supporting President Obama’s Clean Power Plan to reduce carbon pollution from power plants.

Here is the way the Council voted:
“Ayes.” Barry, Steine, Maynard, Harrison, Hunt, Banks, Scott Davis, Westerholm, Anthony Davis, Pridemore, Stanley, Moore, Allen, Gilmore, Baker, Langster, Holleman, McGuire, Harmon, Potts, Bedne, Dowell, Todd, Mitchell (24).

“Noes.” Garrett, Tygard, Bennett, Hagar, Glover, Stites, Claiborne, Tenpenny, Weiner, Blalock, Dominy, Duvall (12),

“Abstaining.” Evans, Johnson (2).

While the Council passed the resolution, I am delighted that 12 members voted against it. All of the Council members who I think of as the "good" councilmen, because they have in the past had a conservative voting record or identify as Republicans or just seem like rational, reasonable people voted against the bill with the exception of Carter Todd who is identified as a Republican but who voted for it. Emily Evans who I think of as one of the "good" council members voted to abstain.

I was also very pleased to see Karen Johnson vote to abstain. I personally like Karen Johnson a lot, but she does not self identify as a Republican or conservative, but I am proud of her for voting to abstain on this bill rather than voting for it.

In the past the Council has unanimously voted for some atrociously bad bills similar to this. A special recognition goes to Josh Stites who is on the Rules Committee. All memorizing resolutions go before this committee and Josh was the lone "no" vote in committee. If not for his "no" vote, this resolution would have been on the "consent" agenda and may have passed without descent or discussion. Also Council Member Duane Dominy deserves special recognition for his argument against the resolution on the floor of the Council.

Recently the State Senate Government Operation Committee took a look at the same EPA action that the Council voted to support and heard testimony from leading state and industry officials regarding this EPA rule. Of this EPA policy, Senate Government Operations Committee Chairman Mike Bell had this to say:

The testimony we heard Tuesday makes it very clear that the rules proposed by the EPA not only overstep their jurisdiction, but if enacted will cost Tennesseans greatly in terms of higher electric bills, job loss and productivity. The founding fathers never intended for the federal government to be preeminent in every facet of our daily lives. These rules go far beyond their constitutional authority, stripping the state of its authority in this regard and encroaching on the personal liberties of our citizens.

Tennessee Commissioner of Environment and Conservation Bob Martineau briefed Committee members on 97 pages of comments that the state made in response to the Clean Air Act rule. He said the state requested that the carbon emission reduction targets set by the EPA for Tennessee be “reduced and adjusted.” Several presenters at the meeting called the targets “unattainable.” They also said the proposed rules punish states, like Tennessee, which made early efforts to reduce carbon emissions prior to the 2012 benchmark used in calculating state-based reduction targets.

Paul Bailey of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Energy said their studies project an average annual increase in retail electricity prices of 14% to 18% over the next decade.


Justin Owen, President and CEO of the Beacon Center, told committee members, “These federal rules ignore the different and unique energy portfolios, needs and problems faced by each individual state. For example, because Tennessee relies more heavily on electricity generated by coal-fired plants, our state citizens will be burdened more severely than those in other states.”

Owen said a Suffolk University study shows that emission rules on new power plants could cost upwards of $208 million in Tennessee. The rule for existing plants could cost $394 million according to the study, while the mercury emissions rule could cost $727 million, for a total of more than $1.3 billion. 

While the State Senate held hearings on the issue, our Metro Council voted for the new EPA rules without any studies or hearings being done or any insight as to what the new rules would cost Tennesseans.  These issues are complicated and in my view the Council should recognize they are Councilmen and not U.S. representatives and should avoid putting the Council on record about things of which they have little knowledge. 

Top Stories

The United Auto Workers and VW Chattanooga "Win" 2014 Lump of Coal

Narrowly edge out Department of Labor and Workforce Development

NASHVILLE – In the closest vote in Lump of Coal history that featured hundreds of votes from across the state of Tennessee, the United Auto Workers and Volkswagen Chattanooga edged out the Department of Labor and Workforce Development by just 3 votes.

The Beacon Center awards this dubious distinction annually to the person or group in Tennessee who, more than any other during the past year, acted as a Grinch to Tennesseans by bah-humbugging the principles of liberty and limited government.

While there were many “strong competitors” this year, Tennesseans voted for a company and labor union who seemingly worked together to bilk the taxpayers of the state out of hundreds of millions of dollars. Even after workers at the VW plant in Chattanooga firmly rejected the UAW by a legally binding vote, the UAW has continued trying to bully its way into the plant, and VW has seemingly been more than happy to comply. This collusion makes both deserving of this award.

Not honoring the will of your workers is one thing, but it’s another issue entirely to do so while also accepting taxpayer money. While the UAW shenanigans took place, VW Chattanooga received $230 million from state and local taxpayers in the form of handouts to pick Tennessee over Mexico for its SUV line.

Beacon CEO Justin Owen had the following to say, “The United Workers Association and Volkswagen should be ashamed of themselves. VW has chosen to completely ignore the will of its hard-working employees, while at the same time stealing tax dollars from them and all Tennesseans through corporate welfare. Meanwhile, the UAW needs to learn that no means no. Instead of being gracious in defeat when the workers voted it down, the union tried every trick in the book to backdoor its way into the VW plant, despite not having the support of the very workers it was trying to unionize. This dubious duo has fully earned this award.”

You can see the full poll and descriptions here.

The final vote totals are below:

The United Auto Works and Volkswagen Chattanooga- 34.6%

The Department of Labor and Workforce Development- 33.3%

The City of Memphis- 17.3%

The Cleveland Jetport- 14.8%

Top Stories

Mayoral campaign turns dirty as in trash truck dirty

Today's Tennessean reports of squabble over campaign signs on the side of the garbage trucks of Gray Disposal.  I have seen candidates signs on the side of Gray Disposal garbage truck in campaigns for years and just assumed Edwin Gray was a civic-minded citizen who was showing his support for his preferred  candidate.  I did not know the space was for rent. 

According to the Tennessean some months ago Charles Robert Bone contracted with Edwin Gray and paid Gray $10,000 to let Bone have his signs on the side of Gray's trucks though the September election. Well, Bill Freeman gets in the race and goes to Gray and agrees to pay him three times what Bone had contracted to pay and persuades Gray to break his contract with Bone. Gray returned Bones money and will now display Freeman signs on his trucks.

Top Stories