Sen. Ramsey's Attack on the Supreme Court

Why is Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey intent on taking out 3 members of the state's Supreme Court? Is it a political power grab?

The reasons appear quite murky and dubious, and the impact a high dollar political election campaign will have on the state's judiciary branch will likely diminish the role of our third branch of government. Slate offers a good perspective (hat tip to KnoxViews for the link):

"Three justices on the Tennessee Supreme Court are facing an election-year attack, not for any particular decision they have authored or even for any unpopular opinion they have espoused. No, in an ugly campaign in Tennessee that appears to be getting ever uglier, Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey, who is also the state’s lieutenant governor, is attempting to oust three state Supreme Court justices in their Aug. 7 retention elections, chiefly for the judicial outrage of having been appointed to the high court by a Democrat.

"When judicial races turn into spending races, what suffers most is not Democrats or Republicans, but judicial independence and integrity. As has been exhaustively chronicled by one nonpartisan study after another, judges don’t want to be dialing for dollars from the attorneys who litigate before them, and litigants don’t want to appear before judges who dial for dollars. All of the data shows that the effect is a decline in confidence in the independence of the judiciary and a spending arms race that spirals ever more out of control.

POSTSCRIPT: Whatever happened to the "laser focus" on jobs or education?

An Open Letter to Gov. Haslam and the Tennessee Legislature

An Open Letter to Gov. Haslam and the Tennessee Legislature:

As a lifelong resident of the state of Tennessee, educated in public school as well as at a private Baptist college, I am compelled to write and express my deep disappointment and grave concerns over pending legislation, Senate Bill 893, regarding how Science is to be taught and not taught in our state.

Since it was brought forward in 2011, the aims of this law are crystal clear - it seeks to add room in our Science programs for non-scientific information. Our education system - and our young students - requires the strongest support from our Governor, our Legislature, and our communities, but this legislation instead claims that Biology and Science are flawed and mistaken at every level. It assumes controversies exist at their very foundations. It devalues Education itself.

If the state demands we "teach the controversies" regarding Science, then why not demand that the clergy preach about the controversies of their Religion? That would be ridiculous for the state to mandate, wouldn't it? This proposed law is equally ridiculous.

Holding Science accountable to Religious or Social systems will not encourage or nurture Education. 

It's worth noting that educators and scientists or biologists across the state did not propose nor support this legislation. Certainly, all our educational curriculums should - and for the most part already do - encourage critical thinking and respectful debate. Do you, Governor Haslam, believe otherwise or have any such proof of a dire lack in our schools? Or do you work instead to increase the level of skill and understanding demanded today in Science, Math, and Technology?

I understand and accept that political landscapes are constantly changing - allowing the ebb and flow of politics to override our Education system can only create errors in critical thinking.

So I encourage you to defeat this measure and to provide a stronger voice for Education and Science in Tennessee. 

This legislation stands in stark opposition to the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) Programs your office has been actively supporting. I feel you have to make a choice, sir, as to which educational approach you support.

Sincerely,

Joe Powell

State Pushes Anti-Science Laws To Governor Haslam

Grade school and high school are the academic locations Tennesseee's politicians want to use to determine the value of science and that of religion too. Yep. Science is some dubious scheme to make you doubt Jesus, according to the state legislature.

Nearly one year after this ridiculous idea first shambled into the legislature, the bill to order teachers to say science is a controversial topic is waiting for Gov. Haslam to sign it. Knox Rep. Bill Dunn has allowed Hixson Senator Bo Watson to run the legislation through this time. 

"The idea behind this bill is that students should be encouraged to challenge current scientific thought and theory,” said state Sen. Bo Watson, R-Hixson."

Yeah, forget education about the value of science or math or biology - let kids decide classroom by classroom if they believe any of it.

So, from last year, this original coverage via your Cup o' Joe post:

"Knoxville Rep. Bill Dunn was very careful in presenting HB 368 so it hides the anti-science goals, but the result is clear - science classes must present science itself as controversial and the bill promotes a deep lack of understanding of what "scientific theory" means. As for who should help create these low standards - not scientists, of course - but administrators. The bill only defines as "controversial" a select set of areas: "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning." And, as noted below, Rep. Dunn's legislation is the creation of evangelical Christians.Rep. Dunn's aim of injecting politics into school science classes is a dangerous act. And his proposed new state law is a part of a nationwide effort to use the schoolroom as a political tool to promote political agendas. These bogus ideas are labeled "Academic Freedom" bills, which sounds nice, but really point to a desire to eliminate critical study and reject the history of scientific investigation, and the legislation is drafted by evangelical organizations:

"... 'academic freedom' bills that are being introduced by state lawmakers around the country instruct educators to teach students about “both sides” of controversial issues—most notably on evolution. The Seattle-based, pro-intelligent design Discovery Institute is behind efforts to introduce many of these bills and has proposed sample legislation for lawmakers to follow.

Since the Louisiana bill was passed (making it the only state to have actually passed an academic freedom bill into law), proposed bills have included global warming and human cloning on the list of “controversial topics,” as they encourage “thinking critically” about the “relationships between explanations and evidence.”

More recently, in Kentucky, a bill was introduced in the Legislature that would encourage teachers to discuss “the advantages and disadvantages of scientific theories,” including “evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.”

Other troubling aspects of this dumbed-down educational law includes the following confusions for teachers:

"Some teachers may be unsure of the expectations concerning how they should present information on such subjects."

Whose expectations? Those of the uneducated and misinformed? The really loud folks who think science is a colossal hoax?

Schools must also insure " ...respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues."
Respect for the scientific method, peer review, and the actual scientific meaning of the concepts of "theory" and "experimentation" .... well, let's just push that aside. Since new data and observations are made in most scientific fields of study as a result of the work of scientists, then, yes, concepts and theories are often revised. But it's a huge leap in thinking to claim that science is mostly mistaken guesswork and inherently controversial."

----

And Haslam thinks he'll sign the bill unless the school boards of the state (schools is evil, ya know, full of unions and commies) tell him not to sign it. And he may just sign it anyway.

Meanwhile, from the  actual scientific community which works in the fields now labeled controversial ....

Among those expressing opposition to the bill are the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, the American Institute for Biological Sciences, the Knoxville News Sentinel, the Nashville Tennessean, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers, the National Earth Science Teachers Association, and the Tennessee Science Teachers Association, whose president Becky Ashe described (PDF) the legislation as "unnecessary, anti-scientific, and very likely unconstitutional."

Rep. Casada Wants Local Government to Meet in Secret Sessions

Rep. Glen Casada

I can't quite believe I have to write this post, reminding our elected officials that secret government meetings are illegal for a reason. Yet, here we are.

State Rep. Glen Casada and the Tennessee County Commissioners Association want elected officials to hold secret meetings. Rep. Casada is planning to offer new legislation which would make secret government meetings legal - a move he has to make since currently it is against the law.

There exists no reason for the change to secret meetings - other than denying public awareness, public participation and to demolish the way our democracy works.

As an editorial in the Jackson Sun noted:

"The actions of local government have a direct affect on the people who live in those jurisdictions. Local bodies set tax rates, create and enforce local laws, fund public education and other public services such as libraries, set policies for public school systems, appoint local boards and commissions, recommend and hire local public officials and set local government budgets. 

At no other level of government is public official accountability more important. While great attention is paid to state and federal government meetings, local public body meetings often are poorly attended by the public, and sometimes even by local media watchdogs. Keeping such meetings open and requiring public bodies to post public notices of meetings is the last defense the public has to ensuring its business is done in the open."

It's shameful enough already the state legislature does not have to follow the laws requiring open meetings. Rep. Casada and the TCCA must have something they want to hide - to allow them to do so will not end well.

Foreclosure Chances 38% Higher In Tennessee

72 Tennessee legislators said YES to shorten the amount of public notices published for home foreclosures this past week - despite information which indicates that such practices have very negative economic reactions - for homeowners and commercial property owners - and for the state's economy in general.

Tennessee is one of only 5 states (Michigan, New Hampshire, Tennessee Utah, and West Virginia) which do not offer a judicial review of foreclosures (25 states offer the option of either having a judge review the process or for a non-judicial review). While it is true such judicial reviews can offer greatly lengthen the foreclosure process, that's a result of offering greater consumer protections.

Since TN does not offer that option, some striking statistics emerge in recent studies:

"What we found is not only do these neighborhoods that do not require a judicial process have higher rates of foreclosure but as a result, they have a much steeper decline in housing prices and real outcomes”, says Mian. “It’s possible that the further decline of the broader economy makes people feel less wealthy and so they start becoming more cautious with new investments and buying debt.”

The researchers collected data from RealtyTrac.com, Fiserv Case Shiller Weiss, Zillow.com, and Equifax to study foreclosures, house prices, and delinquency rates by zip code, respectively.

The rate of foreclosure per delinquent home in 2008 and 2009 is twice as high in non-judicial states. A delinquent home has a nineteen percent chance of being foreclosed in a judicial state, but thirty eight percent in a non-judicial state."

As noted in last week's Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on the bill, mortgage attorney Steve Baker, "There is no compelling reason to shorten the time for publication of public notices," and further, "The more notices published for a sale, the more it helps to create a better market" for potential buyers.

Sen. Jack Johnson, sponsor of the bill, noted in his testimony "... it may be considered I have a personal interest in this bill" as he is a board member for a state bank. Other comments, from the Tennessee Bakers Association, said "banks pay the fees for the public notices if a mortgage holder can not." It's safe to say if a mortgage holder cannot pay their bills, then they will be unlikely to pay any publication fees.

Sen. Jerry Jones noted in her opinion piece in The Tennessean:

"We are facing economic challenges not seen for decades. But instead of helping Tennessee residents hold onto their homes and get back on their feet, this legislation will make it easier to foreclose and harder on working families to recover from hard times."

House sponsor of the bill (HB1920) Rep. Jimmy Matlock, also a banker, said in an opposing editorial:

"But it is a complicated issue and at any rate is nothing but a red herring to divert attention away from the real issue — money."

TN Legislature Pushes Forward on Bills Changing Public Record Laws, Foreclosures, Teachers Unions

As mentioned previously, a wide range of bills creating many changes to the state's laws on

-- Citizen requests for public records
-- Shorten the number of public notices for foreclosures
-- Eliminating collective bargaining for Teachers Unions

and many others remain under consideration, with some hearings to be held today. UPDATE: the House version of the foreclosure law (HB1920) was passed today on a vote of 72 Yes and 19 No.

There was some lengthy and often contradictory debate this week on a proposal being pushed by the Tennessee Bankers Association to reduce the number of public notices of foreclosures currently required. This bill not only affects homeowners, but all commercial property mortgages as well.

The bill (SB 1299) was approved on a vote of 5 to 4. However, it is most notable that the Senate sponsor of the bill, Sen. Jack Johnson, and two members of the Senate committee considering the bill, Sen. Doug Overbey and Sen. Brian Kelsey, all invoked what's called Rule 13. Rule 13 requires that voting members must state if they have a potential "personal interest" in the legislation being considered.

Rule 13 does not require them to not vote, just to state out loud: "... it may be considered that I have a degree of personal interest in the subject matter of this bill, but I declare that my argument and my ultimate vote answer only to my conscience and to my obligation to my constituents and the citizens of the State of Tennessee."

If such personal interests did require them to abstain from voting, the measure would have died.

During the debate, one aspect of the bill received wide approval, that of defining specifically what information describing the property to be foreclosed. Current law simply says "a brief description" and over the years, that has turned into an often very lengthy legal description, which is costly to create and to publish.

But it's the issue of reducing the number of times the notice would be published from 3 to 2 (the original bill would have made only 1 publication mandatory) which has the biggest impact. The cost of the publication also is disputed. TBA officials claim the notices serve little function, as most mortgage holders already know if they are behind in payments and facing foreclosure. But mortgage attorney Steve Baker refuted that, saying more notices means more people will and do attend public auctions of foreclosed property, and further, that since the state does not require any court oversight of foreclosures, public notices insure the most possible exposure to attract buyers and creates a more robust market for sales.

"There's no compelling reason to shorten the time for public notice," he said, adding "Tennessee already has one of the fastest and least expensive foreclosure processes in the country."

The TBA also claims the cost of publication is around $3000, though they offered no average cost figures. Newspaper publisher Eric Barnes testified the cost was only $212 per notice, currently making the cost just over $600, and added that in his area of West TN, banks will often publish notices in publications which charge the banks more. Further, the shorter descriptions being considered will also drop the costs of public notice publication by 30 to 40 percent.

Senators Overbey, Kelsey, Campfield, Bell and Yager voted in favor of the bill, while committee chair Sen. Beavers voted no, along with Senators Barnes, Ford, and Marrero.

Other bills which continue to get legislative approval include:

• SB0326: Opts out of Medicare and Medicaid and establishes state program funded by federal funds formerly spent on Medicare and Medicaid.

• SB0932 Weakens wage and hour and workers' compensation laws, makes it easier for employers to deny future medical claims for workers' compensation settlements, establishes presumption of natural/aging cause for workplace injury unless proven otherwise by injured worker, with additional special requirements for proving work related hearing loss and carpal tunnel syndrome.

• SB 1915: Increases campaign contribution limits, allows corporations to contribute to candidates; allows members of the general assembly and the governor to fundraise as candidates for other elective offices during session.

• SB0940: Makes it more difficult for whistleblowers and victims of discrimination to prove their cases against employers.

• *HB1875: Allows state officials to charge a fee for viewing or producing public records. (NOTE: The bill will create a new cost for public records requests based on the hourly wages of any and all employees who work to fill that request and for all the time they claim they require to locate, preview, redact, and copy the records being requested.)

• HB 0130: Abolishes teachers' unions ability to negotiate terms and conditions of professional service with local boards of education. NOTE: has already passed Senate, this is a special committee hearing in House. (NOTE 2: House Speaker Beth Harwell decided to cast a vote on this bill in order to break a tie vote, which would have killed this legislation.)

TN Legislature Hates Homeowners?

Tennessee's legislature is again making a bold stride backward. Their steady stream of legislation moving backwards certainly seems to be the theme of 2011.

Yesterday, legislators - led by Rep. Jimmy Matlock and Sen.Jack Johnson - moved a new bill to make it even easier for banks for rush through a foreclosure on homeowners. While nationally, 14 major mortgage firms were ordered to begin a process of reimbursement and corrective policies to provide more protection for homeowners struggling since the economic collapse -- a collapse brought on by "deceptive" practices in the mortgage market.

Rep. Matlock and Sen. Johnson introduced HB 1920 and SB 1299, which drops the number of required public notice publications of foreclosure from three times to just once. Currently, Tennessee homeowners have few protections - it can take as little as 21 days to foreclose on a property and the one way to halt it is to file bankruptcy and our state has one of the highest bankruptcy rates in the nation. The bill, as noted at the A Disgruntled Republican blog, would:

Their shorter process would be:
1. A single letter to the homeowner.
2. A single public notice in the paper.
(No property description in the public notice.)
(Errors would legally be allowed to appear in the notice.)
3. Sell the property at auction.

It's shameful.

But, as I said, given the constant moves against citizens in favor of corporate interests, this terrible legislation is likely to sail through the legislature and to hell with the consequences.

TN Legislators Ban Science in Science Class

The current crop of witless, superstitious legislators vote to keep Science out of Science classes in public school, thanks to Knoxville Rep. Bill Dunn.

Welcome to the Monkey House.

The Origin of the Anti-Science Movement.

Policing For Profit - A Practice In Need of Many Changes

In the first-of-a-kind report, law enforcement agencies across the country are raking in hundreds of millions of dollars by seizing property - even though quite often an individual is not even charged with a crime. The report from the Institute For Justice is here. And on a grading scale from A to D, Tennessee gets a D.

From their report:


"And considering law enforcement officials in most states don’t report the value of what they collect or how that bounty is spent, the issue raises serious questions about both government transparency and accountability.

Under state and federal civil asset forfeiture laws, law enforcement agencies can seize and keep property suspected of involvement in criminal activity. Unlike criminal asset forfeiture, however, with civil forfeiture, a property owner need not be found guilty of a crime—or even charged—to permanently lose her cash, car, home or other property."
---
"Federal forfeiture law makes the problem worse with so-called “equitable sharing.” Under these arrangements, state and local officials can hand over forfeiture prosecutions to the federal government and then receive up to 80 percent of the proceeds—even when state law bans or limits the profit incentive. Equitable sharing payments to states have nearly doubled from 2000 to 2008, from a little more than $200 million to $400 million."
---
"For example, in 2008, for the first time in its history, the Department of Justice’s forfeiture fund topped $1 billion in assets taken from property owners and now available to law enforcement. State data reveal that state and local law enforcement also use forfeiture extensively: From 2001 to 2002, currency forfeitures alone in just nine states totaled more than $70 million. Considering this measure excludes cars and other forfeited property as well as forfeiture estimates from many states for which data were unreliable or that did not make data available for those years, this already-large figure represents just the tip of the forfeiture iceberg.

The report from the Institute offers some common sense guidelines for change:

"The Institute for Justice recommends that, first, law enforcement should be required to convict people before taking their property. Law enforcement agencies could still prosecute criminals and forfeit their ill-gotten possessions—but the rights of innocent property owners would be protected. Second, police and prosecutors shouldn’t be paid on commission. To end the perverse profit incentive, forfeiture revenue must be placed in a neutral fund, like a state’s general fund. It should also be tracked and reported so law enforcement is held publicly accountable. Finally, equitable sharing must be abolished to ensure that when states act to limit forfeiture abuse, law enforcement cannot evade the new rules and continue pocketing forfeiture money."

ET Leaders Want Redlight Cameras Protected By State

Even as the state was promoting a moratorium on new "redlight cameras", leaders in the Tri-Cities told legislators to leave their cameras alone.

"Tri-Cities governments asked Northeast Tennessee lawmakers Friday to oppose legislation hindering development of red light/traffic enforcement cameras.

The request, called the “fun topic of the day” by Kingsport City Manager John Campbell, was among a number of legislative policy marching orders given to lawmakers by elected officials representing Kingsport, Johnson City and Bristol, Tenn., during a presentation held at the Millennium Centre.

After the presentation, lawmakers indicated that doing nothing about the cameras is probably not an option this year.

“There are a lot of bad actors out there, a lot of smaller municipalities which are installing speed cameras solely for the purpose of operating their general functions of government. ... These cameras should not be used for revenue enhancement,” said House Majority Leader Jason Mumpower, R-Bristol. “I think potentially, at the very least, we may put a moratorium on the operation of any new cameras before the end of this session.” Mumpower has already filed a number of pieces of traffic camera legislation."

---

"Two lawmakers on the House Transportation Committee, state Reps. Tony Shipley and Matthew Hill, have been dead center in the middle of the traffic camera debate.

Shipley, R-Kingsport, is seeking new attorney generals’ opinions on the constitutionality of the cameras.

“It’s not so much the camera. It’s the process and procedures (used by local officials),” said Shipley.

Said Hill, R-Jonesborough: “No one has ever said ‘We’re not for safety.’ The issue comes down to just respect for our citizens. ... We have to find a balance between those two.”

The state is looking into ways to make use of cameras meet the same criteria statewide. A common suggestion is that by extending the time of a yellow caution light, accidents will be greatly reduced. But the Tri-Cities folks want that left alone too.

Complaints and concerns remain as well since these projects are clearly a privatization of a law enforcement function, and once we are comfortable with such practices, then expect more to appear.

Michael at No Silence Here outlines the legislative issues regarding the use of these cameras from Rep. Shipley.

I'm pretty sure if the state can figure out a way to get steady income from cities and towns using such cameras, then expect their use to spread.

Fingerprints For Traffic Tickets?

Are we a nation of criminals, guilty until proven innocent?

The trends nationwide - and here in Tennessee - are more and more often pointing to "Yes".

For now, a new proposal which would allow for Tennesseans who get traffic citations to be fingerprinted is on hold until it comes up for a vote again next Thursday. This news means Sen. Joe Haynes knew there would not be enough votes to pass this bill ... today.

But police seem to want this law passed. They want new electronic ticketing equipment, they say, and hey, only someone guilty of something could be opposed to such a procedure, right?

" ... the ones who were most worried about it were likely the ones who were doing something wrong ... " (link)

Some communities already require this - and there are host of state-required licenses which demand fingerprints, such as optometrists in Texas and dentists in Tennessee. A new law in Chicago requires a fingerprint from someone who wants to sell their home, another law will require fingerprints in San Diego for those who skateboard. (In Tennessee, a law requiring a fingerprint to purchase a gun, however, has been eliminated.)

Arguments are constantly offered that such requirements prevent crimes, catch criminals, offer security, affect only those guilty, etc etc.

If fingerprints are the best way to catch a criminal or prevent a crime, then let's use technology and jump ahead a few years -- let's just require a DNA identification be created at your birth, an ID which will be kept in databases (never to be abused or misused, noooo). And if anyone ever gets a ticket or is arrested (not convicted, just arrested) or wants a job in real estate or dentistry or teaching or buying a car or using a parking garage, then they must be implanted with a tracking chip so we can keep tabs on them. Just in case.

Since our nation requires fingerprints now for so many jobs and transactions, why, we should already be safe as safe can be. And if these programs have not made everything perfectly safe, then more security, more demands must be placed on you, all of you, since none of you are to be trusted.

State OKs Guns On The Menu

The new Republican majority in Tennessee's legislature, aided by some Democrats as well, have been hard at work to make sure a person who has a permit to carry a gun can do just that when they go out to eat. Who knew going out for a bite to eat had become an exercise in danger?

The state House voted 70 to 26 to allow folks to carry their weapons into an eatery that serves alcohol - as long as they don't consume any alcohol.

Just exactly how will owners determine if someone who orders a drink or two is carrying a weapon? Will diners have to take a lie detector test? Maybe they'll just have to pinky swear.

Who voted vote for the new law?

Representatives voting aye were: Barker, Bass, Bell, Borchert, Brooks H, Brooks K, Campfield, Carr, Casada, Cobb C, Cobb T, Coleman, Coley, Curtiss, Dean, Dennis, Dunn, Eldridge, Evans, Faulkner, Ferguson, Fincher, Floyd, Ford, Fraley, Hackworth, Halford, Harrison, Hawk, Haynes, Hensley, Hill, Johnson C, Johnson P, Kelsey, Litz, Lollar, Lundberg, Lynn, Maddox, Maggart, Matheny, Matlock, McCord, McCormick, McDaniel, McDonald, McManus, Montgomery, Moore, Mumpower, Niceley, Odom, Ramsey, Rich, Roach, Rowland, Sargent, Shepard, Shipley, Swafford, Tidwell, Tindell, Todd, Watson, Weaver, Windle, Winningham, Yokley, Mr. Speaker Williams -- 70.
Representatives voting no were: Armstrong, Bone, Brown, Camper, Cobb J, Cooper, DeBerry J, DeBerry L, Favors, Gilmore, Hardaway, Harmon, Harwell, Jones S, Jones U, Kernell, Miller, Naifeh, Pitts, Richardson, Shaw, Sontany, Stewart, Towns, Turner L, Turner M -- 26.

Just what was the critical problem this new law resolves?

At the least, you might think the Legislature would create some method for making sure that people who have a court order to hand over their weapons after being cited with an order of protection. Sadly, such a program does not exist.

UPDATE: Some of the current laws which carve out exceptions to gun laws and which point out numerous contradictions here, via R. Neal:

"Commercial Appeal's analysis of problems with TN handgun permit process:

Dozens with violent history have gun permits

But instead of legislators trying to fix it, we get stuff like this:

HB 2081 by Towns: Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, authorizes persons over 65 to obtain a gun carry permit without having to complete a handgun safety course. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

*HB 2157 by Towns: Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, waives handgun permit fees for persons over 65. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

HB 0489 by Tidwell: Criminal Offenses - As introduced, allows person who has permit to carry a handgun to carry gun in place where alcohol is served for consumption on premises if person is not consuming alcohol or is not otherwise prohibited by posting provisions. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

HB 0521 by Rich: Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, allows persons with handgun carry permit to carry in public parks, public postsecondary institutions, and restaurants where alcoholic beverages are being served; allows judges and district attorneys to carry firearms where law enforcement can carry if they have permit or appropriate training. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13 and Title 70.

*HB 0798 by Campfield: Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, authorizes full-time faculty and staff at public colleges and universities in Tennessee to carry handguns if not otherwise prohibited by law. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

*HB 0960 by Tindell: Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, authorizes person with handgun carry permit to possess firearm in local, state, or federal parks. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13 and Title 70.

*HB 1395 by Evans: Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, prohibits employers from prohibiting persons possessing a handgun carry permit from transporting and storing a firearm out of sight in a locked vehicle on any property set aside for vehicles. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

HB 1781 by West: Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, restricts information required to be submitted by a participant in a handgun safety course and corrects reference to federal law; requires that documents required to be submitted for purchase of firearms that must be registered be executed by chief law enforcement within 15 days of request. - Amends TCA Title 4; Title 36, Chapter 3; Title 39; Title 40, Chapter 35; Title 45; Title 57; Title 58, Chapter 1 and Title 58, Chapter 2.

HB 1785 by West: Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, requires persons licensed to sell firearms to adhere to the guidelines prescribed by the federal "Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act"; removes state prohibition against sales of firearms to certain persons. - Amends TCA Title 39. (Note: allows purchase of gun if prior felony was pardoned, set aside, or the felon had civil rights restored.)

SB 0554 by Norris: Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, deletes requirement that the purchaser of a firearm give a thumbprint as part of background check process and that the TBI furnish thumbprint cards and pads to firearm dealers. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

HB 1801 by West Handgun Permits - As introduced, provides that "handgun carry permit" may be used interchangeably with "weapon carry permit" where applicable, thereby imposing any rights or duties that apply to persons with a handgun carry permit to persons who carry a lawful weapon. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

State Ignores Own Laws, Demands You Verify Right To Vote

State legislators led by Republican Sen. Bill Ketron thinks you, as a voter, needs numerous checks and verification just to cast a ballot. You just can't be trusted, he says, you must be pure:

"Senator Ketron claims he introduced the bill to “protect and purify” the ballot. And it will do just that - but not in the American “this is a democracy and we should be removing barriers to voting instead of creating them” kind of way.

As Senator Haynes said, we already have laws in place to punish those who commit voter fraud. Why do we need to erect additional barriers. Especially, I would add, when the incidences of voter fraud cases is virtually non-existent?

And if this law disenfranchises one person, then that is one person too many." via Liberadio(!)

Newspaper editorials cheer this legislation, comparing it to getting food stamps:

"Opponents claim Sen. Ketron’s legislation will somehow discourage voters from participating in the political process and unnecessarily stigmatizes those who would have to obtain a free photo ID by signing a pauper’s oath. By that reasoning, the federal government shouldn’t issue EBT cards for food to the needy because it identifies them as being poor.
Indeed, honest, open elections are the best protection society has against those who would try to subvert and steal political power."


So, voting, backbone 'o Democracy, depends on yet another ID, apart from the one you get when you apply to register to vote under existing state rules. And these new IDs are somehow linked to getting food stamps. Bottom line: voters cannot be trusted. Nor can the poor and needy.

Also, requiring a verifiable paper trail on all votes cast in an election is just evil, unnecessary, and Republicans in Tennessee are fighting against such accountability:

"In 2008, the Tennessee General Assembly passed bi-partisan legislation that would require optical scanning voting machines for all 95 counties in the state by 2010. Governor Bredesen signed it into law in June of ’08.

According to that bill, the estimated cost would be approximately $25 million and at the time the bill was signed into law, it was reported that Tennessee had approximately $31.4 million of the HAVA (Help America Vote Act) money available to make this upgrade. For more information on this check out Knoxviews at: http://knoxviews.com/node/10854

But now that the Republicans have taken control of the General Assembly and in turn will have the majority members on the County Election Commissions, and will also have the ability to replace the current Democrat Election Administrators in 95 counties with Republican Administrators, they want to stall the purchase of verifiable voting machines until 2012.

How can anyone who depends on elections to hold a job question the absolute necessity of insuring that every vote is accurately counted? And furthermore, how can those of us that vote stand by quietly and allow anyone to deny us the voting mechanisms that will insure that our votes are counted accurately. I don’t know about you, but if I have an important document on my computer, one that is not duplicated on paper anywhere else, I make a hard copy and file it. Some of us even pay for safe deposit boxes at local banks where we keep really important documents. What is more important then the validity of your vote on Election Day? (Via OpenPen)

The implication is that only voters are guilty of nefarious acts of deceit (though such proof isn't documented), while the state government just needs to herd you into groups easily managed and manipulated. Refusing to implement to already legislative-approved standards of HAVA shows that the real goal of Sen. Ketron's plan is to exempt election officials from creating a system which could eliminate fraud, and instead blame imaginary acts of voter fraud

Senator Southerland Making Water Pollution Easier, Legal

I hope you'll join myself and other telling our state legislators that their consideration of new laws regarding Tennessee streams and waterways is just plain wrong. Sen. Southerland has submitted SB0634, which prevents the public from helping to identify violations in the existing law. That's a bad idea, and one of many which are being considered by the legislature.

30,000 miles of waterways in Tennessee are in danger of losing protection, thanks to one bill, and the overall approach appears to be that no effort will be given to cleaning up pollution, but adding to it.

The Tennessee Clean Water Network has details on the 14 bills now filed:

These Bills:

• Don't do anything to clarify existing laws or processes – they change the law.
• Blatantly strip protection away from our waters.
• Grant permission to pollute our waters without justification.

SB0631/HB1616 – Prevents polluted waters from being classified as Exceptional Tennessee waters and removes the burden of proving an economic and social need for projects which impact Exceptional waters when the project is publicly funded.

• Don't give up on our waters. Just because they're dirty now doesn't mean we stop protecting them.
• The bill is in violation of the Clean Water Act. 40 CFR 131.12 clearly places the burden on the applicant to show social and economic necessity. The legislature can not shift the burden and stay consistent with federal law.
• Denies the public its right to participation in the process: Spending our money, polluting our water and we have no voice in the matter.

SB0632/HB1615 - 1) States "support" as used in the definition of wet weather conveyance means meeting the classification of fish and aquatic life even during low flow, 2) Excludes wet weather conveyances from "waters," 3) Requires TDEC to develop a waters determination training, 4) Allows for stream determinations to be made by an expert outside of TDEC.

• First half is an attempt to narrow the types of waterbodies protected under our laws. Since the changes are based upon water flow this would specifically lift protection from smaller streams during times of drought, when water protection is of the utmost importance.
• Developing a stream determination process is a good idea and one TDEC is currently working on.
• TDEC, as the public agency, should be the final decision maker on stream determinations.

SB0633/HB1617 – Creates definition of "limited resource waters" as those not attaining their designated uses due to natural occurrences or modifications and exempts them and wet weather conveyances from the definition of "waters."

• Strips protection away from our waters – could destroy approximately 30,000 miles of streams in Tennessee.
• Gives up on protecting those impaired from previous activities.
• Critical threat to smaller waterbodies.

SB0634/HB0973 – Prevents the prompting of enforcement inspections from anonymous communication and requires stream determination when a complaint is based upon discharging without a permit into an unnamed stream .

• Takes protection away from whistle blowers.
• Prevents the public from voicing their concerns and being protected at the same time.
• Increases burden on TDEC.

SB0198/HB0425 – Requires legislature to approve all rules and prevents the creation of emergency or public necessity rules.

• Create serious delays in the rule-making process.
• Grants too much power to the Legislative Branch – infringes on separation of powers.
• Neglects protection of state health and environment if emergency and public need actions can not be taken during times the Legislature is not meeting.

SB1738 - Provides those with permits allowing for a water withdrawal do not have to re-apply when there is a modification to their hours of withdrawal in their permit, but only request the modification form TDEC with an explanation of why the revision is necessary.

• More hours for them, less water for us.
• Provides private companies the opportunity to remove more water from our streams without public involvement. Often that withdrawal is a permanent water loss to our state.

SB1331/HB1204 - 1) Eliminates selenate when including selenium in those permits with a toxic effluent limitation 2) requires selenite to be the basis should water quality criterion be developed for selenium 3) Prevents impaired waters from being ETWs 4) For the purpose of anti-deg any alteration in waters which improves the condition or complies with naturally occurring conditions is de minimis.

• First half is an attempt by the coal industry to pollute our waters with selenium (selenate is the selenium by-product of coal mining).
• Gives up on protecting our waters.
• No project can be assumed to have a minimal impact unless fully evaluated. Example: Applicants have claimed they are improving the condition of a stream by culverting it, which is never an improvement.
• This allows anyone to impact our waters without justification.

SB1112/HB1622 – Requires air and water quality rules be consistent with and not exceed the requirements of federal statutes. Provides if there are no federal statutes the state can create those regulations if necessary to protect health, welfare, or the environment. Prevents any permit from having requirements which are not the direct basis of existing rule.

• Prevents Tennessee from protecting its unique resources when the federal government doesn't.
• States' rights: Why let the federal government determine what is best for our state?
• Limits Tennesseans from making its own choices.

SB1207/HB1205 - 1) Requires WQCB to hear and decide on permit appeal hearings within 90 days of receipt of petition; 2) provides the WQCB can deem an appeal frivolous and award fees and expenses incurred as a result of the appeal to the applicant; 3) states if a declaratory order is not heard by the WQCB within 90 days it is a refusal to hear the case.

• Denies the opportunity for hearings to be held in front of the WQCB if delayed.
• Bias towards permit applicants as the only partly eligible for incurring costs.
• Worded to assume applicant is not also appellant.

SB1312/HB1619 - Defines “CAFO” in accordance with federal law for the purpose of NPDES.

• Locks Tennessee into federal definition.
• States' rights: Why let the federal government determine what is best for our state?

Sen. Steve Southerland of Morristown is chair of the Senate Environment, Conservation and Tourism Committee, and Sen. Mike Faulk represents Claiborne, Grainger, Hancock, Hawkins and Jefferson County and sits on that committee.

You can contact Sen. Southerland via this page, Sen. Faulk here.

Far more immediate and important right now, the state needs to create new and better rules regarding coal waste ash ponds like the catastrophe in Kingston, where TVA's failure has devastated hundreds of acres and unknown miles of Tennessee rivers, streams and waterways.

R. Neal at KnoxViews has contact info on all related committees and their members.

RIAA's Ripoff Of Tennessee

The state's colleges and universities just got burned, forced by a new state law to shell out millions of dollars to police computer networks to make sure someone isn't downloading a song illegally. The state estimates the cost of this sweetheart deal for the RIAA at nearly $13 million initially and then another $1.9 million each year thereafter.

Gov. Bredesen, signing the law, on the eve of the CMA Awards says:

"The illegal downloading of music has a profoundly negative effect on the music industry. As home to so many record companies, music publishers, writers and artists, I am proud that Tennessee is taking action to prevent it."

But the truth is not one penny of this massive payout will go to any artists or record labels the RIAA represents.

Wired Threat Level notes that some 21 people, earning some $75,000 a year, will work this new software and hardware to monitor schools -- and the state says tough luck to those schools in need of teachers and students who face ever increasing tuition costs.

"The students may have more time to pilfer copyrighted works because their classes might be canceled for lack of funding. Using conservative estimates, the piracy measure is equal to the price of about 100 Tennessee professors' wages and benefits."

In the current fiscal year, the higher education system has had to cope with $100 million in budget cuts and more cuts are expected in the next budget.

But the RIAA got what it wanted - your money.

RIAA's CEO Mitch Bainwol makes it sound like this law will lend some benefit to musicians and store owners. But that is a load of crap.

"It's fitting that on the day the world focuses on Nashville and country music that Tennessee would take the lead in protecting the creativity that this state so uniquely inspires,” said Bainwol. “We have all seen the effects illegal downloading has had on Music Row – too many record stores have been shuttered and too many songwriters are out of the business of writing songs. This bill, the first of its kind in the nation, addresses the issue of campus music theft in a state where the impact is felt more harshly than most.”

It's sickening to hear Bainwol blame illegal file-sharing for the shuttering or record stores when it was in fact record labels that hastened their demise by cutting deals with big-box retailers like Wal-Mart that allowed them to undercut competitors with lower "loss leader" prices.

He also doesn't acknowledge that music has gone digital and that you don't need a Tower Records store for distribution. [Nashville's Tower Records closed two years ago.]

"We commend Governor Bredesen, Senator Tim Burchett, Rep. Rinks and all the cosponsors of the legislation for their leadership on this important issue, which will not only benefit those who care about music but American creativity and jobs," said Bainwol.

I highly doubt that singling out poor 18-22yo college students will do much to protect "American creativity or jobs." If anything, the only American creativity will see is from these individuals devising new means of sharing content with family and friends. The only jobs it will protect are those of the empty suits running the RIAA's legal offensive.

Abuse of Elderly In Tennessee Grows

Recent audits reveal critical flaws in Tennessee nursing homes, and the state's legislature this term decided that protection was needed not for those residents, but for protecting the owners of nursing homes from lawsuits. 22 facilities had admissions suspended in 2007 and 13 have already had similar suspensions so far in 2008.

A Chattanooga Free Times report today says:

"As state inspectors continue to find a record number of violations in nursing homes, two recent reports highlight significant weaknesses in Tennessee’s oversight of health care facilities.

An audit by the comptroller of the Treasury identified a number of shortcomings in the Board for Licensing Health Care Facilities, including failure to maintain a list of individuals who have abused, neglected or misappropriated the property of vulnerable individuals.

“That’s a very important function to have: a listing of anyone who is considered abusive and shouldn’t be working with vulnerable people,” said Art Hayes, director of state audit at the comptroller’s office and one of the audit’s leaders. “They’re not conducting all the investigations they should, they’re not holding the hearings timely and they’re not tracking people who are removed from the registry.”

The audit also found that the licensing board failed to investigate complaints in a timely manner, which can keep nursing home patients in dangerous situations and make gathering evidence difficult.
-----

The nursing home industry and its state regulators have corrected many of the problems noted in the audit, said Christy Allen, assistant commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Health’s Bureau of Health Licensure and Regulation. The bureau oversees licensing of health facilities and individuals.

The state performance audit comes on the heels of a May report from the federal Government Accountability Office that lists Tennessee as one of nine states that most often neglected to cite serious violations at nursing homes during inspections between 2002 and 2007.

In federal follow-ups to state surveys of health care facilities, surveyors found that Tennessee inspectors failed to record serious deficiencies 26.3 percent of the time, according to the GAO report."

In February of this year, R. Neal at TennViews, reported how the legislature was working to protect nursing home owners from lawsuits. The legislation, SB4075/HB4053, was amended in May and instead the legislature voted to create a committee to "study the effects of litigation on the nursing home industry" and report back by Feb. 2009.

As Neal wrote:

"Instead of allowing special interests to influence legislation, Tennessee should pursue better regulation and oversight of nursing homes to protect the safety and dignity of patients in these facilities. Who lobbies for the people?"

SEE ALSO: A post from Facing South notes a constant and growing increase in bankruptcy filings for those age 65 and over.