Mayor Herenton has repeatedly told Memphis reporters that he has done no wrong and his upcoming testimony in the racketeering trial of former Atlanta mayor Bill Campbell is strictly for the defense. Fair enough, Mr. Mayor, but we must confess, the following comment from the WMC news Web site is a little strange: While he confirmed he was going to Atlanta to testify next week, Mayor Herenton would not answer which day he planned to travel, because, he said, he does not want the media to follow him there.
Month: February 2006
The two Americas of these Disunited States crashed in a
historical encounter this week at the funeral of Coretta Scott King. When the
two worlds collided, it was quite a spectacle. And the fact that it happened
at all will be the most momentous and lasting tribute to the first lady of the
Civil Rights Movement.
After her husbands death, Mrs. King proved to the world
that she could move mountains of hatred with her rare combination of strength,
poise, beauty, and dignity. At her funeral, it was fitting to see the
mountains of fraud and lies of this administration moved for a brief moment so
that her memory could be celebrated with the same truth and righteousness that
she gave to all.
By attending this most public of events, George W. Bush
found himself right smack in the middle of the Other America – the one that
wasnt pre-screened, monitored, and picked by his handlers. He became the
veritable Emperor sitting in a sanctuary of ten thousand people who refused to
reinforce neither his deluded version of reality nor his partys revised
version of history.
Reverend Joseph Lowerys reminding that there were no
weapons of mass destruction was the first salvo of truth that stripped the
Emperor, rendering him buck naked. When Senator Kennedy recalled that the
beatitudes of Jesus instructed us to be peacemakers, all of Bushs religious
hypocrisy was laid bare. Jimmy Carters remembrance of the wiretapping of
Martin Luther King and his family by the government seemed to be a sword of
truth that was particularly sharp and difficult to take.
As expected, the funeral had barely ended when the right
wing went into hyper mode replete with feigned outrage of the
inappropriateness of it all. Listening to Kate OBeirne of CNN calling Jimmy
Carter, Our most graciousless ex-president was both laughable and pathetic.
The folks at FOX News were seething apoplectics. That America had heard
the truth, not just their truth really had their bowels in an
uproar.
Our ever amusing and always undecipherable Congressman
Harold Ford, Jr., a Democratic contender for the U. S. Senate, contributed
this remark about the funeral to the progressive blog,
thehuffingtonpost.com: Funerals should not be ceremonies to fabricate a
lifes works. The resulting comments posted mostly by Democrats indicate the
congressman might be trying to explain his way out of this one for a while. At
the least, his choice of words was unfortunate, as the implication seems to be
that Mrs. Kings funeral was a contrivance used as a build up to commemorate
someone not truly deserving of the tributes.
However, his use of the word fabrication is rather
interesting, as the real fabrication lies in the pretense of a candidate who,
while running as a Democrat, never misses an opportunity to suck up to and
weasel down for Republicans. It is too bad for Tennessee and too bad for the
Other America that the congressman can only muster enough courage to criticize
those who had enough conviction to tell the truth. Instead of fighting those
who personify everything Coretta Scott King stood against all her life, he
apparently wants to join them.
Want
to respond? Send us an email here.
CITY BEAT: Election Deja Vu
Whats the difference between Terry Roland and Dick
Hackett?
Both are Republicans and both lost
incredibly close elections. But Roland challenged his defeat and Hackett didnt.
Hacketts act of statesmanship and
political calculation in 1991 probably influenced the course of history more
than anything he did during his nine years as mayor. And its relevant to the
current overblown controversy over Rolands 13-vote loss to Ophelia Ford in a
state Senate race of less heft and consequence.
The
lesson is this: What the news media report, what the courts rule, what the
lawyers spin, and what the state Senate does are only part of the story. The
X-factor is what individuals like Roland and Hackett do in the crucible of
personal experience.
A quick lesson in history and deja vu:
In 1991, Hackett lost to Willie Herenton by 142 votes out of 247,973 cast. Crank
candidate Robert Prince Mongo Hodges got 2,923 votes. In 2005, Roland lost to
Ford by 13 votes, 4,333 to 4,320. The same Robert Hodges got 89 votes. As a
percentage, Fords victory margin was greater than Herentons.
The 1991 mayoral election was flawed.
There were 609 overvotes, a term coined to explain the difference between
votes cast and signatures in the poll book. An accounting firm that audited the
election results said the differences are unreconciled, and the causes are
undetermined. The majority of the overvotes were in Herenton precincts.
Hackett had the audit. He had the
political savvy. He had two capable lieutenants, Bill Boyd and Paul Gurley, with
vast experience in Memphis politics. He had more than $300,000 to mount a legal
challenge or another campaign. And after three days of thinking about it, he
decided to let it go. He did not hire lawyers or private investigators or order
campaign workers or city employees to go out and search for dead voters, voters
with felony convictions, voters who lived outside of Memphis, or voters who
failed to sign either the ballot application or the poll book.
In 247,973 votes with the mayors
office at stake what would you say the odds were of finding some dead people,
some felons, some nonresidents, and various other skulduggery? Given that Roland
and his team found dozens of irregularities in an election in which fewer than
9,000 votes were cast, I would say they were pretty good.
Not only did Hackett let it go, so did
almost everyone else. The
Memphis Flyer, then less than two years old and full of bluster, did
a cover story detailing the irregularities, as Hackett called them, and bawled
for reform and investigation.
The Commercial Appeal, which has made such a fuss over Terry Roland,
was mostly silent. Attorney Richard Fields, who represents Roland, was notable
back in 1991 as one of two high-profile white citizens who openly backed Willie
Herenton.
U.S.
district judge Bernice Donalds ruling in the Roland-Ford case (in which Ford
and her supporters are the plaintiffs) made no mention of the mayoral election.
She cites another tainted cliff-hanger, the presidential election between George
W. Bush and Albert Gore, in which there were some 110,000 overvotes. A large
section of her order speaks to the issue of voters who fail to sign in twice,
but it is silent on dead voters and felons.
Although measures to detect
substantial mistakes or illegality may be heightened, she wrote, the standard
used to invalidate votes should not be.
There is a difference between voting
mistakes, and illegality and fraud. I am not learned in the law, but Donalds
order seems to say that voters cant be disenfranchised because there were some
mistakes but leaves hanging the issue of whether fraud, if proven, can void an
election. All it says is that elections must be conducted by the same standards
in every part of the state.
Donalds order doesnt
resolve the Ford-Roland controversy. Senate action wont resolve it, because
Fords lawyer has already vowed to come right back to court if she is ousted.
The manufactured outrage on both sides wont resolve it. Elections, at both the
local and national level, are imperfect. And Dick Hackett knew what he was doing
back in 1991.
Want
to respond? Send us an email here.
>
With the conclusion this week of the special session on
ethics, state legislators now are free to open, or reopen, any of several other
Pandoras boxes the most immediate of which is the on-again/off-again question
of who gets to sit in the state Senate representing Shelby Countys District 29.
Though Terry Roland, the Republican
candidate in last falls special election, continues to press his case, and
Democrat Ophelia Ford, declared the winner back then, still sits provisionally,
resisting Republican senators efforts to void the election, two circumstances
have blunted the edge of the drama and slowed its momentum.
One
was last weeks ruling on the case by U.S. district judge Bernice Donald, which
raised as many questions as it answered. Both sides immediately claimed victory:
Fords side did so because Donald appeared to invalidate Rolands numerous
challenges based on residence and improper registration procedures. Donalds
ruling further mandated that any effort to void the election had to conform with
statewide election practices that were observed before that special election
which was to determine a successor to Fords brother John Ford, a casualty of
the Tennessee Waltz scandal.
But Rolands side still possessed the
trump card that Donalds decision provisionally put in play: an up-or-down vote
on voiding the election. Senate Republican leader Ron Ramsey, who prevailed in a
preliminary vote of 17-14 some weeks back, has indicated he intends to proceed,
presumably with his hand strengthened by the accession to Republican ranks last
week of erstwhile Democrat Don McLeary
of Humboldt.
The
crossover vote of McLeary, then still a Democrat, in last months preliminary
Committee of 33 session is what gave Ramsey the majority he needed for a
formal and final vote by the Senate. It was the imminence of such a climactic
vote that resulted in a temporary injunction by Donald at Fords request. But
the legal uncertainties still need to be sorted out before Ramsey, Roland, and
the Republicans get to cross their Rubicon.
Another development that may have rendered the District 29 showdown somewhat
moot is the political tide that has further eroded the Democrats position in
the Senate. And though the issues of ethics in general and electoral reform in
particular were, and continue to be, integral to the District 29 situation,
those issues were always somewhat overshadowed by the pure politics of the case.
In the same week that McLeary made his
surprise announcement of a party switch, a Republican state senator from
Memphis, Curtis Person, announced that after 40 years as a legislator he would
be vacating his seat this year conceivably to run for judge of Juvenile Court,
where Person is currently a part-time administrator.
In
one sense, that would mean no change in the Senate lineup. Republican Person
will almost certainly be succeeded by a partymate. In another sense, however,
the exit of Person, a longtime friend and ally of Lieutenant Governor John
Wilder, a nominal Democrat, will have seismic consequences. Even though he
formally voted for Ramsey over Wilder for speaker in January of last year,
Person did so knowing that two other Republicans were going Wilders way,
assuring the venerable speaker a majority.
Whichever Republican ends up succeeding
Person is unlikely to be so ambivalent. (Nor, presumably, will the newly
chastened, formerly compliant pair of GOPers.) It could be an opportune time
for the long preeminent Wilder, who is presumably disinclined to be a
back-bencher, to consider retirement.
In any case, the high likelihood is
that octogenarian Wilder will not be a candidate for reelection in 2008.
Worsening the Democrats predicament is the fact that Wilders rural West
Tennessee district, which includes many new bedroom suburbs of Memphis, has been
slowly tilting Republican, and it could be ripe for plucking by the GOP.
The
bottom line: Even without an opportunity to avail themselves of District 29 by
means of a possible interim Republican appointee by the Shelby County Commission
(the Democrats would be heavily favored to win the seat back this fall), the
Republicans appear very much in the ascendant as short- and maybe even long-term
masters of the Senate. The magic figure of 20 seats, out of 33 overall, would
seem to be within their reach.
Want
to respond? Send us an email here.
This week, for the second time in a month, Mayor Willie Herenton
held a press conference to critique the press.
While that may be interesting to people in the media and some of
their viewers and readers, it has deflected attention from two more important
issues: the citys financial condition and the mayors political condition, both
of which can be affected by any sudden adverse development on the mayors legal
front. And it was this prospect teased on local television,
perhaps prematurely and incompletely that prompted the press conference on
Tuesday.
Dewey Clark, a witness in the corruption trial of former Atlanta
mayor Bill Campbell, has said that he gave Herenton $9,000 in Herentons
office. A wiretapped audiotape on which Clark said such has been introduced into
evidence at the Atlanta trial. The circumstances of this claim are unclear and
will remain so until Clark and Herenton provide more testimony in the trial,
which is expected to last several more weeks.
Statements made in federal court by government witnesses who are
under oath should be taken seriously. Clark, who is from Memphis, and Campbell
were good friends. Clark even lived in Campbells basement for a while. Herenton
and Campbell were good friends too. They took part in each others ceremonial
functions, traveled to Tunica together, and helped each other raise money.
The media and the public, understandably, have a big interest in
this. When Herenton testifies, he can be cross-examined by the prosecution.
Presumably, prosecutors will bring up the $9,000 payment. Herenton said he runs
an honest shop, and he has promised to raise his right hand and put his other
hand on a Bible and tell the truth when he testifies. He added that he will
speak about Clarks testimony and Campbells trial after it is over.
The media and the public and their elected council members have
an obvious concern with challenges, made directly or indirectly, to the probity
of this citys chief executive. Likewise, they have a legitimate interest in the
citys financial condition and changing forecasts from the Division of Finance
and Administration. Herenton hasnt yet explained in detail how he will cut
costs and possibly raise revenues at City Hall to balance the budget.
His criticism of some media reports as incomplete, biased, and
overblown is fair shooting. Reporters have learned this mayor gives as good as
he gets. You bait him, badger him, or, as one reporter did, put a hand on him at
your peril. By political standards, Herenton is direct and not especially
devious. On the other hand, we suspect that the former Golden Gloves champion
can be a hard man at close quarters, within or without the Marquis of
Queensberry rules.
Whether a television station had a scoop or a mini-scoop, a
bombshell or a blank and whether said station over-hyped it during the Super
Bowl is for viewers to decide.
The two pressing questions are whether Herenton can fix the
budget and whether he did anything illegal. Whether His Honor likes it or not,
both these stories are going to receive a full-court press from the media.
Want
to respond? Send us an email here.