Categories
Letters To The Editor Opinion

What They Said (October 15, 2014) …

Greg Cravens

About Bruce VanWyngarden’s Letter from the Editor on Amendment 1 …

When I see the “Yes on 1” signs in yards all over town, I just want to go up to those people and say “Do you really know what that means?”

It means we voluntarily give up our rights to privacy. And we invite our elected state representatives and senators, whoever they may be, now and in the future, to make whatever kind of laws they want to make about a woman and her family’s personal business. I am especially bothered by churches that are promoting this idea that we should defer to politicians about our private medical decisions.

It is gullible to condone government overreach on a promise from elected officials who may not even be in office two years from now. If the “Yes” people want to say their religious dogma compels them to believe this or that about abortion, that’s fine. We all have a right to believe what we want to believe. But, when those same people want laws passed that force me to abide by their beliefs, that’s a violation of my rights under the Constitution.

It really does not matter which political party we align with or whether we are black or white, rich or poor. Women of all stripes and persuasions have problem pregnancies and are vulnerable to incest and rape. What a travesty it would be to pass an amendment to the constitution that affords no protection to us in those cases. Vote “No” on Amendment 1.

Tonya Wall

My husband is an Episcopal minister. We are both Christians and adamantly opposed to Amendment 1. Although some people view this amendment as a religious litmus test, we must really look at the bigger picture. Amendment 1, if passed, would threaten our cherished system of government. The proponents of the amendment in the legislative branch are basically saying to the judicial branch of our government, “Since you struck down the laws we passed in 2000, we found a way to get around it. We will just change the very document we’ve sworn to uphold.” The sad thing is that they have hooked people of faith onto the idea that they can legislate morality and undermine our system of checks and balances.

The passage of Amendment 1 would set a dangerous precedent and could become a slippery slope for many issues, not just abortion. The Constitution ought to be about protecting people’s rights, not taking them away. If you read the proposed amendment, you can see how vaguely it was written: “Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion … not even in circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.”

While none of us likes abortion, if we or someone we loved was in one of these extenuating circumstances, we would want these personal and very private medical decisions to be made in the doctor’s office and not in Nashville. Please respect the dignity and worth of each woman in our society by voting “No” on Amendment 1. And remember to cast a vote for the governor of your choice.

Janice Richie

Greg Cravens

About Jackson Baker’s post, “Bailey Hits ‘Deal … Political Machinations'” …

I hear there’s a special costume for Halloween this year, with a fuzzy grey-haired cowboy in a black mask and big 10-gallon hat, sitting astride a white stallion. They call him The Lone Dissenter.

OakTree

About Wendi C. Thomas’ column, “Husband Wanted. Unemployed Need Not Apply” …

I have an idea: How about the men not make the choices that will put them in prison and give them a record?

Breckrider

There are a lot of issues Wendi is pointing out here, and I can see why her critics like to give simple rebuttals like “don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.” They like these simple talking points, because it hurts to actually wrap their heads around the complexity of the issues.

Charlie Eppes

Categories
Letters To The Editor Opinion

What They Said (October 8, 2014) …

Greg Cravens

About the Best of Memphis 2014 …

Whole heartedly agree about the Best “New” Public Space. Tom Lee Park and Beale Street Landing make one long, beautiful riverside park full of fun things to do with a gorgeous view to boot! The Grizzlies’ RiverFit trail is wonderful and is used by all ages, races, and sexes. If you haven’t been to Tom Lee Park recently, you need to go soon!

Williamwebb

If I may loosen the lederhosen and get serious for a moment. Where is the best bar to get laid after 1 a.m.? This is not a worthwhile category?

Ern

Ernie, liebchen, in your case, depending on the lunar cycles, I’d say the zoo.

Mia S. Kite

About the Flyer‘s editorial on Amendment 1 …

Amendment 1 is dangerous. Read it carefully: “Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.”

First, it is an attack on our personal privacy. The language of the amendment is intentionally vague, but it clearly gives politicians the power to enact, amend, or repeal any laws they deem necessary to the point of restricting abortion even if it is required to save the life of the mother.

Secondly, a Constitutional Amendment is permanent or at least hard to undo. Because it is a theology driven initiative, politicians will be imposing their own religious beliefs on us, which may be quite different from yours. This violates our First Amendment rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

Our representatives will be able to “enact, amend, or repeal” whatever statutes they deem necessary, because you willingly gave up your voice.

We don’t all agree about abortion, but we can agree that we should not turn to politicians for spiritual or medical advice. Private medical decisions should be made by a woman based on her faith, in consultation with her family and her doctor.

Vote no on Amendment 1.

Meryl Rice

Whiteville

About Bruce VanWyngarden’s Letter from the Editor …

Thanks for bringing attention to Banned Books Week and explaining what it is and how books come to be banned, i.e. “removed from an American library somewhere, because they offended someone, somehow.”

At the Memphis Central Library, our Second Editions bookstore currently has a display of over 100 banned books for sale, including the classics mentioned in the editor’s column, as well as other familiar titles: The Bible1984Tuesdays With Morrie, The Cat in the Hat, most of Shakespeare’s plays, and many others. And, of course, my personal favorite, The Velveteen Rabbit.

Sherman Dixon

Friends of the Memphis Library

About banning plastic bags …

Hooray! The governor of California, Jerry Brown, has signed a bill banning the single-use plastic bags that we get at the grocery store.

This is a remarkable act, and I am thankful for it. I am appalled every time I go to Kroger or Fresh Market and watch the checkers mindlessly put three or four items into a bag. I watch as people sometimes leave with 20 plastic bags half full or less, and I think about that one person putting possibly 1,000 or more bags into a land-fill each year, just from their grocery store. It makes me want to scream.

I take recyclable bags to the grocery store. And I love taking my recyclable bags back to my car for the next time I need them. I love knowing I am doing one small thing to help preserve the environment for future generations.

I ask the citizens of Memphis and Tennessee to begin using recyclable bags. I promise you will feel better about yourself. And the environment and your children and grandchildren will be better off.

Judith Johnstone

Memphis

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Tennessee Senate Candidates Hit Snags

As has become increasingly evident — and was predictable from the start — the November 4th election ballot in Shelby County lacks the punch and volatility that was so evident in the August 7th “big ballot” election, with its myriad of party primaries, judges’ races, and eccentric personalities. 

The one possible marquee race for local and statewide voters, that for the U.S. Senate, saw both candidates — the highly favored Republican incumbent, Lamar Alexander, and his Democratic challenger, Knoxville attorney Gordon Ball — stumbling this week in their efforts to gain momentum and positive public attention.

Alexander, it will be remembered, polled only 49.5 percent — a minority — of the total Republican primary vote on August 7th, a circumstance that prompted him to go hat-in-hand last month in search of support from his closest challenger, Tea Party-backed state Representative Joe Carr of Lascassas.

Carr polled 40.6 percent of the primary vote, despite having spent only $1.1 million on his campaign against Alexander’s $7.1 million, and despite restricting his efforts essentially to his Middle Tennessee bailiwick. Carr campaigned very little in East Tennessee and was basically a no-show in populous Shelby County, home of another challenger, wealthy radiologist/businessman George Flinn, who polled 5 percent of the vote as a late entry.)

At their post-election meeting in September, at a Cracker Barrel restaurant on Carr’s home ground in Rutherford County, Alexander asked for his runner-up’s support but failed to get anything more than an assertion from Carr that he would “think about it.” The TNReport.com news site reported this week that Carr, having duly thought about it, still isn’t ready to endorse the GOP incumbent.

“It’s not up to me. It’s up to Senator Alexander. The ball’s in his court,” Carr was quoted as saying. Reportedly, he is insisting that the senator, who has issued a series of ambiguous statements about the hot-button issues of Common Core and immigration, be more explicit in opposing the former and standing against any variant of amnesty on the latter. (For what it’s worth, Democrat Ball has done just that.)

Apparently, there are other obstacles to a rapprochement between Alexander and his former primary challenger. Carr is said to be have been resentful that Alexander failed to return “five or six” would-be concession calls from him, beginning on election night, and made a point of extracting an apology from Alexander on that score when the two of them met in September.

Carr was evidently rankled also by a poll released shortly before the August election that misleadingly showed Senator Alexander leading his challenger by 30 percent.

If Alexander was having his problems in squaring personal and political accounts with Carr (and, by implication, with hardcore Tea Partiers), Ball remained luckless in his attempts to get Alexander to even talk directly about their differences on a debate platform (though the two will appear, along with other statewide candidates, in a Farm Bureau forum two weeks from now).

The Democrat had troubles of another kind, too, stemming from a Buzzfeed.com report that Ball’s campaign website consisted almost entirely of boilerplate cribbed verbatim from the published platforms of other Democratic Senate candidates  — including Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.

One example of many may suffice. 

Warren: “We need to put people to work rebuilding our roads and bridges, upgrading our water systems, teaching our kids, and protecting our communities — earning paychecks and keeping Massachusetts growing.”

Ball: “That’s why it is so important that we get people back to work right now, rebuilding our roads and bridges, upgrading our water systems, teaching our kids, and protecting our communities, earning paychecks and keeping Tennessee and America growing.”

Buzzfeed’s disclosure of this and the numerous other examples of cloned prose on Ball’s website forced an embarrassed response from the candidate (“I had no idea that this material was cut and pasted on my website from other sources.”) and a righteously phrased demand from state Republican Chairman Chris Devaney that Ball exit the race: “Gordon Ball, with nearly everything on his website plagiarized, should do the same and halt his fraudulent campaign today.”

Trace Sharp, a spokeswoman for the Ball campaign, would later set forth the obvious, that a campaign staffer, since departed, had assembled a series of statements on issues from various sources that Ball could concur with and placed them on the candidate’s website.

To reprise Horatio in Act One of Shakespeare’s Hamlet: “Needs no ghost come from the grave to tell us this.” Virtually all candidates, all of the time, lean heavily on boilerplate prepared by staffers for their public statements. Unlike major addresses, which usually are designed specifically for candidates by their speechwriters (or improved by the candidates themselves), talking points and website pronouncements hardly every reflect much originality.

To be blunt, it is highly doubtful that most of the aforesaid sources for the Ball website — Senators Manchin, Brown, Hagan, and Warren — were the actual authors of the remarks cribbed by the unidentified Ball staffer. And it surely wouldn’t be that difficult to uncover remarks made by Republicans — Alexander and Carr, say, on the evils of the “Obama agenda” — that displayed a remarkable sameness.

Still and all, this week’s disclosure was a setback for Ball, as Carr’s latest blowing-off of Alexander was for the Senator.

 

• But, if the U.S. Senate race may so far have failed to inspire many Tennesseans, other issues on the November 4th ballot — notably four constitutional amendments — were beginning to gain traction.

A case in point is Amendment One, which would essentially nullify a 2000 state Supreme Court decision that struck down the state’s power to impose significant restrictions on the right to abortion — going further in many ways than the U.S. Supreme Court itself had.

The amendment reads: “Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.”

Proponents of the amendment say that it merely makes the Tennessee Constitution neutral on abortion. Opponents say it is designed to roll back the hard-won rights of women and cite the last prepositional phrase, from “including” on, as being especially ominous.

Resisters to Amendment One had back-to-back meetings this week. The Tennessee Democratic Party held a Tuesday night fund-raiser at the Racquet Club to oppose the amendment, and Planned Parenthood was host for a scheduled “Clergy Perspective” event opposing the amendment at Evergreen Presbyterian Church.

Adherents were also active. Two examples: Proponents of Amendment One were conspicuous in passing out literature at the two-day Bartlett Festival at Freeman Park this past weekend, and an organization called Concerned Women for America held a press conference in Nashville on Tuesday to announce results of a poll purporting to show Tennesseans favor the amendment.

All of this is tip-of-the-iceberg. Clearly, much more public activity is coming on this issue, as, for that matter, on Amendment Two, which establishes a method of selecting state appellate judges via gubernatorial appointment, coupled with legislative ratification; and on Amendment Three, which would enact an explicit constitutional ban on a state income tax.

 

• Some 70 attendees at a “legislative forum” held by the Tennessee Nurses Association (TNA) last week got more gratification than they may have expected from a cross-section of public officials and candidates.

The number one item on the TNA’s wish list seemed to be a call for legislation in the next session of the General Assembly that would confer “full practice authority” on several categories of advanced nurse practitioners. 

Such authority, sanctioned in only 16 states, would grant the qualifying nurses latitude, independently of supervising physicians, to write prescriptions, make medical assessments, order tests, and make referrals. 

Among those endorsing the request were U.S. Representative Steve Cohen, a Democrat; state Senate candidate Flinn, a Republican; Democratic state Representatives Karen Camper of Memphis and Craig Fitzhugh of Ripley; and Tea Party U.S. Senate candidate Tom Emerson.