JB Smiley at Germantown Democrats’ picnic (Photo: Jackson Baker)
Most people are familiar with an adage, often attributed to the late Speaker of the U.S. House Tip O’Neill, that “all politics is local.”
Until it isn’t.
Tennesseans are becoming uncomfortably aware that state government is muscling into as many local government prerogatives as possible — in areas ranging from education to healthcare to social policy to, increasingly, law enforcement.
A number of current circumstances reflect what seems to be a war of attrition waged at the state level against the right of Memphis and Shelby County to pursue independent law-and-order initiatives.
Memphis City Council chairman JB Smiley spoke to the matter Sunday at the annual picnic of the Germantown Democratic Club at Cameron Brown Park.
Said Smiley: “You know, recently, I’ve been, against my will, going back and forth with someone in the statehouse who doesn’t care for Shelby County called Cameron Sexton. Yeah, he doesn’t believe that Shelby County has the right to exercise its voice.“
Sexton, of course, is the Republican speaker of the state House of Representatives who recently threatened to withhold from Memphis its share of some vital state revenues in retaliation for the city’s inclusion on the November 5th ballot of a referendum package soliciting citizens’ views on possible future firearms curbs.
The package lists three initiatives — a reinstatement of gun-carry permits, a ban on the sale of assault rifles, and the right of judges to impose “red-flag” laws against the possession of weapons by demonstrably risky individuals.
All the initiatives are in the form of “trigger laws,” which would be activated only if and when state policy might allow the local options. As Smiley noted, “That’s what the state did when they disagreed with the federal government when it came to abortion rights. As soon as the law changed in the country, [their] law became full and effective. That’s what we’re going to do in the city of Memphis.”
Simultaneous with this ongoing showdown between city and state has been a determined effort by Republican state Senator Brent Taylor and others to pass state laws restricting the prerogatives of local Criminal Court judges and Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy.
One piece of Taylor-sponsored legislation, passed last year, would transfer authority over capital punishment appeals from the DA to the state attorney general. Litigation against the law pursued by Mulroy and an affected defendant resulted in the measure’s being declared unconstitutional in trial court.
But the state Appeals Court reversed that judgment last week, seemingly revalidating the law and causing Taylor to crow in a social media post over what he deemed a personal victory over Mulroy, whom he accused of wanting to “let criminals off of death row” and whose ouster he has vowed to pursue in the legislature.
The fact is, however, that there will be one more review of the measure, by the state Supreme Court, before its ultimate status is made clear.
Some of the immediate media coverage of the matter tended to play up Taylor’s declaration of victory over Mulroy, ignoring the ongoing aspects of the litigation and overlooking obvious nuances.
One TV outlet erroneously reported the Appeals Court as having found Mulroy guilty of “inappropriate” conduct when the court had merely speculated on the legalistic point of whether the DA had appropriate standing as a plaintiff (a point that was conceded, incidentally, by the state Attorney General).
Mulroy’s reaction to the Appeals Court finding focused on the issue as having to do with governance: “The Tennessee Constitution says local voters get to elect a local resident DA to represent them in court. This law transfers power over the most serious cases, death penalty cases, from locally elected DAs across the state to one unelected state official half a state away. This should concern anyone, regardless of party, who cares about local control and state overreach.”
It is no accident that many savants in the legal/political universe regard the 1962 Baker v. Carr decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to be second to none among landmark judicial decisions.
This decision was brought on by a suit from Charles Baker, chairman of what was then the Shelby County Court, precursor of the present Shelby County Commission. On behalf of Shelby County, rapidly urbanizing at the time, as was the nation as a whole, Baker sought relief from un-democratic districting guidelines imposed by the state of Tennessee that unduly favored the state’s rural population.
The court held in essence that the Fourteenth Amendment required that the principle of one person-one vote be applied in the determination of legislative district lines.
While the decision had immediate and lasting repercussions on determining matters of voter eligibility, both in Tennessee and elsewhere in the nation, it has by no means eliminated gerrymandering based on partisan politics (e.g. witness the Republican legislative supermajority’s strip-mining away of Democratic Party rights in Nashville’s Fifth Congressional District), nor has it much diminished the edgy relationship between urban and rural interests in policy-making.
The latter issue has flared up again in the quarrel over whether Memphis voters should be allowed to vote their preference on several gun-control measures embedded in a referendum proposed by the city council but now endangered by the action of the county Election Commission in removing it from the November ballot.
In so acting, the Election Commission — dominated 3-2 by GOP members according to state mandate — has clearly responded to overt threats from the state’s Republican leadership to withhold from the city some $78 million in state revenues, if the referendum should go through as scheduled.
This was some of the “stiff resistance” promised by House Speaker Cameron Sexton, who articulated things this way: “Local governments who want to be progressive and evade state laws will lose shared sales tax funding.” The speaker likened the city’s referendum plans to “subversive attempts to adopt sanctuary cities [and] allow boys in girls’ sports.”
Some Memphians were expressing concern that the state’s retribution could also be visited on various large local projects dependent on previously pledged state subsidies, like those involving the zoo, FedExForum, and Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium.
It is worth recalling the actual import of the endangered referendum, authorized earlier by the council’s unanimous vote. In the words of its chief sponsor Councilman Jeff Warren, “Memphis voters will be asked whether they approve amending the city’s charter to require a handgun permit, restrict the storage of guns in vehicles in many cases, ban assault weapons sales after January 1, 2025, and enact extreme risk protection orders, sometimes called Red Flag Laws.”
All the referendum would do is solicit voter opinion, it would seem. Sexton chooses to see it otherwise, as a direct challenge to state authority.
Whichever interpretation is correct, the ongoing confrontation between city and state over a host of policy matters, of which gun safety is only one, is rising to fever pitch, as evidenced the rhetoric employed last week by Council Chair JB Smiley and various supportive council members, who announced their intent to sue the Election Commission to reinstate the ballot measure.
“Memphis has been shot and is bleeding out,” said Councilwoman Jerri Green. “We won’t back down, and we damn sure won’t be bullied,” proclaimed Smiley.
Memphis Mayor Paul Young meanwhile seemed to be trying to position himself at the nonexistent calm center, saying he understood the council’s “frustration” but expressing the view that the referendum ultimately would be “futile.”
Rep. Justin J. Pearson, D-Memphis, holding sign, gestures to House Majority Leader William Lamberth, R-Portland, on the left and pictured from the rear, while Rep. Jason Zachary, R-Knoxville, turns to the camera on August 29, 2023 in Nashville, Tenn. (Photo: John Partipilo)
Tennessee’s House and Senate speakers are threatening to punish Memphis by cutting its share of sales tax revenue — more than $75 million — if the city puts referendums on the November ballot restricting weapons, a move likely to force Memphis to sue the state.
Continuing a feud with the Democratic-controlled Bluff City, Republican leaders House Speaker Cameron Sexton (R-Crossville) and Lt. Gov. Randy McNally (R-Oak Ridge), announced Monday in a news release the legislature “will not tolerate any attempts to go rogue and perform political sideshows.” Their statement says they plan to withhold state shared sales tax to any local government that tries to circumvent state laws.
The speakers’ move comes in response to referendums set for Memphis’ November ballot asking voters whether they approve amendments to the city charter requiring a handgun permit, restrictions on gun storage in cars, an assault weapons ban after Jan. 1, and authority to enact extreme risk protections orders often referred to as red flag laws.
Following the Republican leaders statements, Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett said his office won’t allow the referendums, all but guaranteeing a lawsuit, according to multiple reports.
A Monday letter to Shelby County Commission Chairman Mark Luttrell from Tennessee Elections Administrator Mark Goins says state law preempts firearms regulation and extreme orders of protection from local ordinances and leaves “no authority” for the city of Memphis to propose charter amendments on them, thus any referendum would be “facially void and cannot be placed on the ballot.”
But Memphis City Council chairman JB Smiley said Monday, “We believe we’re right on the law.” If the council gives him the authority, he said he will instruct the city’s attorney to file for a declaratory judgment in Chancery Court to put the questions on the ballot.
House Speaker Cameron Sexton during the start of 2024 legislative session on January 9, 2024 in Nashville, Tenn. (Photo: John Partipilo)
Memphis City Councilman Jeff Warren, who sponsored the referendum resolutions, said he believes Sexton and McNally are confused on the issue, because the referendums would be “enabling” measures that couldn’t take effect without the approval from state lawmakers. Smiley agrees with Warren, saying the council would have to act on the referendums, too.
“What we’re hoping will happen is the state legislature will look at this and say, … ‘They’re trying to combat their violent crime by being able to do something about these people with these guns that don’t need them and are using them to commit crimes,” Warren said.
The local government would be able to enforce those resolutions only with state backing, he said.
Warren, a physician by trade, noted people in rural areas are more likely to need weapons to protect crops and livestock from varmints, but that the situation is different in urban areas such as Memphis, where people are “driving around in cars, doing donuts with AK-47s hanging out the car.”
Still, the House Speaker’s Office contends Memphis shouldn’t be trying to pass such measures if they don’t have the effect of law. It further believes they are a tactic to drive voter turnout in November, possibly affecting Republicans with marginal support such as Rep. John Gillespie (R-Memphis).
“With the recent actions of the progressive, soft-on-crime (district attorney) in Shelby County and the Memphis City Council’s continued efforts to override state law with local measures, we feel it has become necessary to take action and protect all Tennesseans’ rights and liberties. We hope they will change course immediately,” Sexton said in the statement.
McNally echoed the sentiment, saying, “The Tennessee Constitution clearly outlines the roles and responsibilities of the state and local governments. Shelby County needs to understand that despite their hopes and wishes to the contrary, they are constrained by these explicit constitutional guardrails.”
The Republican-controlled legislature has declined to pass any such proposals the past two years despite a mass shooting at The Covenant School in Nashville where six people, including three 9-year-olds, were killed in March 2023.
Memphis leaders say they’re searching for a solution to an “epidemic” of gun violence that escalated after the state’s General Assembly passed a permit-less handgun carry law.
Memphis Council member JB Smiley, Jr. (Photo: John Partipilo)
Memphis City Council chairman Smiley, co-sponsor of the referendums, said the legislature can’t legally withhold Memphis and Shelby County tax revenue.
Smiley contended “it’s anti-democratic if we don’t want to listen to the people,” and noted the council’s actions have not violated state law. He called the speakers’ statements “premature.”
“If they believe they’re within their right to withhold tax revenue that’s duly owed to the city of Memphis, we would like to see what the judges say,” Smiley said, predicting such action by the legislature would be found unconstitutional.
The state lost a handful of court battles with Nashville over the past two years after trying to control Davidson County’s sports, airport, and fairground authorities, in addition to cutting the number of Metro Council members from 40 to 20.
Republican state lawmakers have been at odds with Memphis Democrats for several years and passed a measure earlier this session turning back a Memphis ordinance designed to stop police from making “pretextual” traffic stops for minor violations that can lead to confrontations. The council approved that measure in response to the death of Tyre Nichols who died after being beaten by five Memphis police officers when he was stopped for reckless driving in January 2023.
In addition, Sexton and Republican Sen. Brent Taylor (R-Memphis) are trying to oust Shelby County District Attorney General Steve Mulroy, a Democrat, claiming he isn’t prosecuting criminal suspects effectively. Even so, the latest reports show the crime rate dropped in Memphis over the last year.
State Rep. Justin J. Pearson (D-Memphis) said the withholding of state tax dollars would lead to a lawsuit. Pearson was one of two lawmakers expelled from the legislature for leading a protest on the House floor for stricter gun laws in 2023 in response to The Covenant School shooting. The Shelby County Commission returned him to the General Assembly a week later.
Pearson contends Sexton and McNally “can’t help themselves but to unconstitutionally and anti-constitutionally reach into local governments’ matters.” The freshman lawmaker called their announcement “ridiculous, reckless and racist” and also referred to their actions as “tyrannical and authoritarian.”
He noted Sexton is now saying a “majority Black city can’t self-govern” after having him and Rep. Justin Jones (D-Nashville), both young Black men, expelled from the state General Assembly.
Pearson pointed out the nation was founded on the concept of “no taxation without representation” but that the speakers want to take Memphis’ state shared tax dollars because of the possibility that city voters could disagree with them about gun laws.
Sen. London Lamar (D-Memphis) accused Republican lawmakers of “dismantling” gun laws and allowing weapons to “flood” the state while “turning a blind eye” to the impact on families and neighborhoods. Under Republican Gov. Bill Lee’s leadership, the legislature passed a permit-less handgun carry law, and the age was lowered to 18 as the result of a settlement between the state attorney general and a group that sued the state.
Gunshot wounds are now the leading cause of death for Tennessee children, she said.
“The ballot reforms being considered by Memphis voters are common-sense measures designed to curb this epidemic of violence,” Lamar said. “Our community is crying out for solutions, and instead of being met with support, we’re facing intimidation from state politicians who should be our partners in ensuring safety and justice.”
House Minority Leader Karen Camper (D-Memphis) also blasted the speakers’ move, pointing out Shelby County generated $2 billion in sales tax revenue last year.
“To suggest that these vital funds could be withheld over a local decision aimed at ensuring public safety is shortsighted and counterproductive,” she said in a letter to McNally and Sexton.
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and X.
Brent Taylor exiting the SCEC (Credit: Jackson Baker)
State Senator Brent Taylor confided to the Memphis Flyer on Sunday the basic outlines of the procedure he intends to set in motion to remove Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy from office.
The plan, as the senator indicated, will depend on legislative action in a coming session of the General Assembly, either a regular session or a specially called one.
Taylor, a persistent critic of Mulroy for what the senator considers laxity in local law enforcement, says his plan is based on Article VI, Section 6, of the state constitution and would call for a removal resolution to be passed by both chambers of the legislature, to be followed by gubernatorial action to appoint a successor as Shelby DA.
State House Speaker Cameron Sexton has also acknowledged discussing the idea of ousting Mulroy with state Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti. Taylor promised to elaborate on details of his thinking and Sexton’s at a press conference at 2 p.m. Monday at the headquarters of the Memphis Police Association on Jefferson Avenue.
Both Taylor and Sexton fired off condemnations last week of Mulroy’s announcement of a diversionary program for non-violent previous offenders charged with illegal possession of firearms.
Gov. Bill Lee made passage of education savings accounts, a type of school voucher, the signature legislative goal of his first year in office and proposed creating a statewide school voucher program in 2024. (TN.gov)
In the end, the gulf between competing school voucher bills in Tennessee’s legislature was just too wide to cross.
Gov. Bill Lee acknowledged Monday that his push to create a universal school voucher program — which had been on the ropes for more than a month — was dead for the year after Republican leaders in the Tennessee House and Senate were unable to break through disagreements about testing and funding.
“While we made tremendous progress, unfortunately it has become clear that there is not a pathway for the bill during this legislative session,” Lee said in a statement Monday.
The Republican governor vowed to return with another plan next year and added that he’s disappointed for families “who will have to wait yet another year for the freedom to choose the right education for their child.”
The proposal’s failure this year hands Lee one of the biggest defeats of his administration, now in its second term.
It also signals that for all the momentum vouchers have in Tennessee — including a string of victories in the courts and legislature — Lee’s statewide proposal remains a divisive policy because of its potential to destabilize urban, suburban, and rural public school districts, and add a new burden on state finances.
For now, Tennessee only has its targeted voucher program in three urban counties, which provides taxpayer funding to 2,095 students to pay toward private school tuition, plus a smaller voucher program for students with certain disabilities.
As part of his broader school-choice agenda, the governor wanted his new voucher program to eventually become available to every K-12 student across Tennessee, regardless of their family income, and lawmakers took up two vastly different bills from the House and Senate.
But the chambers deadlocked on two issues, according to Senate Education Committee Chairman Jon Lundberg, the Bristol Republican who worked with House Republican leaders for weeks to try to reach a compromise.
First, in addition to creating a new private school voucher program, the more expansive and expensive House version sought to dramatically reduce testing and accountability for public school students.
“We had worked really hard to get those measures into place,” Lundberg said, “and believe it would be a step backward for our state.”
Second, the House version proposed increasing the state’s contribution toward public school teachers’ medical insurance coverage from 45 percent to 60 percent — and paying for it with funding earmarked for teacher raises.
That funding pathway closed last week when the legislature approved a 2024-25 budget that retained the $125 million that Lee had set aside to increase the annual minimum salary for public school teachers from $42,000 to $44,500, as promised last year by the governor.
“Ultimately, the House and the Senate had looked at education freedom scholarships through two different lenses,” Lundberg told Chalkbeat on Monday. “We looked at it as school-choice legislation. The House looked at it as a way to achieve both school choice and education reform.
“Our perspectives were just so different that we could not come together at the end,” he said.
Timing and cost were factors
As the legislature entered what’s expected to be its final week of the 2024 session, lawmakers worried about the timing of creating an expensive new program in the midst of flattening revenues and during an election year in which most of their names will be on the ballot.
The voucher program would have been expected to grow over time, likely subsidizing tuition for families who would have chosen private schools anyway. In the program’s second year, according to financial analysts, the Senate version’s projected cost was $287 million, while the House version was projected to cost $384 million.
The hurdles were especially problematic in the House, where voucher proposals have historically been harder to pass. To win more votes in that chamber, GOP leaders added enticements aimed at public school supporters to reduce testing time for students, require fewer evaluations for high-performing teachers, and give districts extra money to help with their building costs, as well as more funding for teachers’ medical insurance costs.
On Monday, House Speaker Cameron Sexton framed the debate as helpful for future talks even though it didn’t produce a consensus this year.
“Universal school choice came closer to a full vote than it had ever been in the past,” Sexton said in a statement. “We will continue working until all parents have the same opportunity to use their tax dollars to choose the best school for their child.”
Democrats, who were united in their opposition to vouchers, said the governor’s proposal ultimately crumbled because many Tennesseans pushed back on a plan that generated more questions than answers.
“From the start, the governor’s proposal was heavy on talking points and light on the substance of how it would work and how much it actually would cost,” said Sen. Jeff Yarbro of Nashville. “The funding and the accountability pieces were always going to be the sticking points,” he added, “because voucher proponents really want the funding without the accountability.”
Even as voucher supporters quickly promised to try again next year, groups representing the state’s teachers hailed the governor’s loss as a win for Tennesseans.
“Governor Lee’s proposal was poorly written, arriving late in session, and had zero accountability in the plan,” said JC Bowman, executive director of Professional Educators of Tennessee.
The leaders of Arlington Community Schools near Memphis, who issued a fiery statement in December denouncing Lee’s voucher plan as part of a systematic attack on public schools, said they were exhilarated by the legislation’s defeat — and troubled that the governor is already talking about next year.
“He hasn’t even taken a day to understand why his signature bill failed,” said Superintendent Jeff Mayo. “That tells me he doesn’t care to listen to our concerns. The end-game is to ultimately usher vouchers into Tennessee to fund private schools, despite the lackluster evidence that it will actually help students.”
Voucher policies have advanced under Lee
For years, school voucher advocates had watched their policy dream come up short in Tennessee before racking up a string of victories after Lee took office in 2019 amid significant turnover in the GOP-controlled legislature.
Lawmakers passed a bill on a narrow, controversial vote in the House of Representatives during Lee’s first year in office to help create an education savings account program.
The targeted program rolled out in 2022 in Memphis and Nashville for students from low-income families attending low-performing schools. Voucher opponents challenged the law in court and had some early legal wins, but the Tennessee Supreme Court declared the law constitutional in 2022.
After the program’s accelerated rollout and the addition of Hamilton County during its second year, the governor took another big step: proposing a separate statewide Education Freedom Scholarship program to launch this fall with up to 20,000 students, and eventually to eliminate all the geographic and family-income restrictions.
Dueling bills from the House and Senate easily advanced through education committees, but stalled for four weeks in finance committees before the governor accepted defeat.
In his statement Monday, Lee reiterated his reasons for pressing ahead, adding that he’s “never been more motivated.”
“It’s very simple,” he said. “This is about every Tennessee student having the opportunity to succeed, regardless of their ZIP code or income level, and without question, empowering parents is the best way to make sure that happens.”
Marta Aldrich is a senior correspondent and covers the statehouse for Chalkbeat Tennessee. Contact her at maldrich@chalkbeat.org.
Memphis reporter Laura Testino contributed to this report. Contact her at ltestino@chalkbeat.org.
Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.
A ticketing system that restricts public access to the Tennessee House of Representatives is allowable under the state’s constitution, according to a legal opinion from Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti.
In practice, the ticketing system has meant that Tennessee’s super-majority GOP House can control its audience while conducting public business. GOP lawmakers get 75 tickets and Democrats 24, all for the west balcony overlooking the House floor. The east side of the gallery remains open to the media and public.
Sexton has defended the policy against criticism, saying representatives want to ensure visitors they know are arriving have seats, even if they are a few minutes late. He said lawmakers could also share tickets and noted that Congress also has a ticketing system.
Establishing a ticketing system falls within the authority of the General Assembly to regulate and manage access to the Capitol building, the legal opinion, issued last week, said.
According to the opinion, “the Tennessee Constitution contemplates that sessions during which the General Assembly conducts its business will be open to the public, but it does not guarantee the public a right of access to legislative sessions,” it said.
The Tennessee Constitutions says that “doors of each House and of committees of the whole shall be kept open, unless when the business shall be such as ought to be kept secret.”
The ticketing system, the opinion said, “would not run afoul of the “open door” provision of (the Tennessee Constitution) because it would not close the doors to the public; it would merely manage public access to the limited space that is available.”
Tennessee Lookout is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@tennesseelookout.com. Follow Tennessee Lookout on Facebook and Twitter.
The Tennessee House of Representatives chamber was hot Tuesday but the vibe from the Speaker’s seat was icy cold at times, particularly when aimed at two-thirds of The Tennessee Three.
The House returned to business Tuesday morning after officially gaveling in the special session on public safety late Monday afternoon. That session brought some contentious rules from Republican lawmakers that sought to limit protests and limited what lawmakers could and could not say.
Back on the House floor Tuesday at 9 a.m., lawmakers organized the business of the session — what bills were assigned to committees and which legislators would comprise those committees.
The road to the moment was violent and turbulent. A Nashville school shooting claimed the lives of three nine-year-old students and three adults. Police also shot and killed the shooter. Protestors swarmed the Capitol in April, begging and shaming lawmakers for action on gun reform. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee promised a special session on gun violence that many of his own party did not support. Once called, busloads of protestors and gun-reform advocates piled into buses to Nashville, where they rallied, marched, chanted, and sang.
While the moment in the House chamber Tuesday was serious, lawmakers are people, too. Discussing unfinished business, Rep. Joe Towns (D-Memphis) maybe took liberties with procedure and addressed an elephant in the room.
“Look, I know Tennessee is not broke,” Towns began. “We’ve got plenty of money. Why is it so hot in this joint? This building is burning up.”
To that, House Speaker Cameron Sexton (R-Crossville) said his office had been working with maintenance staff to get the air conditioning turned back on in the building. Towns reminded the Speaker that Tennessee is a right to work state and that “we need to fire somebody.” The light-hearted comment brought chuckles in the chamber.
Rep. Justin Pearson (D-Memphis) did not get such a straight answer or warm reception from Sexton when he asked a similar question later in the floor session.
Pearson was sworn back in to his office Monday. That came after he and Rep. Justin Jones (D-Nashville) were expelled from the House earlier this year for a floor protest advocating gun reform. The national attention of the act brought heat to Sexton and the state GOP, and Jones and Pearson would continue to be a thorn in their sides.
If this wasn’t enough to cool the relationship between Pearson and Sexton, consider that two weeks ago, Pearson flatly called Sexton a “racist” in a Memphis Flyer story. To say the least, an exchange between the two Tuesday was contentious.
“I know we were talking earlier about air conditioning and things like that, but we’ve had lots of people coming to the Capitol to protest, and have their voices heard in this extreme heat and in this weather, and the water fountains here at the at the Capitol seem to have been turned off or not working,” Pearson said to Sexton, asking for information.
“That’s an inaccurate statement; that is not accurate,” Sexton said, quickly. “We’ve checked. That’s been a misrepresentation.” He, then, quickly moved on to recognize another lawmaker.
Not satisfied with the answer, however, Pearson later asked Sexton to clarify what he meant about the water fountains. Sexton said to his knowledge the water fountains were never turned off. On its face, the exchange seems simple. But just under the surface were hints at, perhaps, some possible GOP conspiracy to make the Capitol uncomfortable for those seeking gun control. Sexton’s quick and icy demeanor on the question seemed to hint that he knew an accusation lurked beneath the question.
Later, during an exchange with Jones, Sexton’s icy demeanor returned, this time showing him flex his legislative muscle with procedural rules on topics he seemingly wanted to avoid.
“I’m still seeking an answer as to whether members who were stripped of committee [assignments] will be restored to their rightful committees that you removed them from on April 3rd,” Jones began. Sexton immediately gaveled down the question, saying “you’re out of order” before Jones finished speaking.
Sexton moved on quickly but Jones asked why his question was out of order and why Sexton silenced his microphone. Instead of replying himself, Sexton let the House clerk explain to Jones that the body was on unfinished business and his question fell outside the scope of discussion.
“So members can ask about the heat in the building, but I I can’t ask about committees [that] constituents sent me here to represent them on?” Jones asked. ”Is that that what you’re telling me?”
Sexton, again, dodged the question, allowing the clerk to explain again about rules, finally explaining that “the House Speaker makes rulings on what is in order and not in order.” Sexton quickly moved on to other business.
If anything, the exchanges set the tone for what promises to be a turbulent session, even one so limited to a narrow slate of topics (that does not include gun reform). And it all happened before any real discussion began on the actual, meaty topics before the Tennessee General Assembly.
Committees have been scheduled on both the House and Senate sides of the legislature. Many of them are set to get underway Wednesday. The House isn’t set to meet for floor votes until noon Thursday.
Shelby County Democrats called for Tennessee House Speaker Cameron Sexton (R-Crossville) to resign Wednesday, and a watchdog group wants an investigation of Sexton’s government allowance for lodging.
The Tennessee Democratic Party (TNDP) passed a resolution this weekend “demanding” Sexton’s resignation. The group also began a public campaign that will include billboards and a petition.
On Saturday, our Executive Committee passed a resolution demanding the resignation of House Speaker Cameron Sexton. Today, we are beginning a public campaign and hope that you join us. When @CSexton25 visits his old hometown of Crossville, he’ll be met with a few new billboards. pic.twitter.com/A1Ocvbj3LZ
“Speaker Sexton has got to go,” reads the petition. “Not only did he lead the racist charge to expel Reps. [Justin] Jones (D-Nashville) and [Justin] Pearson (D-Memphis), he may not even live in the district he represents.”
The House expulsion of Pearson and Jones drew national interest. This raised Sexton’s profile, with many criticizing him for allowing his party to use such extreme measures for a modest charge of breaking decorum rules. Sexton called the protest “an insurrection.”
Reports then surfaced that Sexton secretly bought a Nashville home in 2021 and that his daughter attends a Nashville school, in a story first reported by the Substack Popular Information. This has drawn scrutiny on state residency requirements for lawmakers and put into question the per diem — the daily, taxpayer-funded allowance for food and hotel stays in Nashville — Sexton has claimed, even though he lives there.
A WKRN report then found that state Rep. Scotty Campbell (R-Mountain City) had been quietly found guilty by a state ethics committee of workplace harassment on charges of having inappropriate conversations with a 19-year-old legislative intern. Sexton did not move to expel Campbell, who resigned hours after confronted by a WKRN reporter about the situation.
credit: State of Tennessee I How it started. credit: State of Tennessee I How it’s going.
The Shelby County Democratic Party (SCDP) joined the state party’s calls for Sexton’s resignation Wednesday morning. The group’s major complaint was the expulsion of Jones and Pearson. They also listed the residency concerns, the non-action against Campbell, and a certain disregard for House rules.
Shelby County Democratic Party position on the resignation of TN House Speaker Cameron Sexton https://t.co/7iY0tWyOs5
— Shelby County Democratic Party (@Shelbydem) April 26, 2023
But they also complained about the “shocking comments” from GOP state Rep. Paul Sherrell’s (R-Sparta) during a debate on the death penalty. Rep. Scott Powers’ (R-Jacksboro) bill would have added firing squads to the state’s options for state executions.
credit: State of Tennessee
During a hearing of the House Criminal Justice Committee, Sherrell asked if Powers would add “hanging by a tree” to the proposal. He did not. Sherell issued a rare GOP apology about his statement the following day. Later, he was quietly stripped of his seat on the committee.
SCDP said Sherell likely knew about the “racist nature of his suggestion.” Also, they said Oklahoma officials were recorded to have made similar statements.
”Had even a censure been imposed on [Rep.] Sherrell, it might have discouraged the spread of such a senseless attack on a body of people harmed by such a callous and insensitive expression of hatred,” the group said in a statement.
Also on Wednesday morning, the Washington, D.C.-based Campaign for Accountability (CFA) asked the Davidson County District Attorney General and the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee to investigate Sexton’s per diem requests for potential tax fraud.
NEW: CfA is calling for an investigation to determine whether Tennessee House Speaker Cameron Sexton knowingly requested and accepted more than $79K in taxpayer money over the amount to which he was legally entitled. https://t.co/1DLDqsL8r8
— Campaign for Accountability (@Accountable_Org) April 26, 2023
“Tennessee law makes clear that only those legislators who live more than 50 miles away from the Capitol are permitted to receive a lodging per diem,” CFA executive director Michelle Kuppersmith said in a statement. “Speaker Sexton is not above the law and must be held accountable for any possible violations.”
The group claims Sexton ”appears to have gone to great lengths to hide his new Nashville residency, purchasing the house through the ’Beccani Trust,’ with only his wife’s one signature was on the deed.”
CFA analysis found that Sexton’s lodging per diems total about $79,954. They said the payments could violate Tennessee law. If so, it’s a Class B felony that could come with eight to 30 years in jail and $25,000 in fines. Sexton may have also violated federal tax law, CFA said, if he failed to report the money as taxable wages.
CFA’s complaint reminds judicial officials that the Davidson County District Attorney general prosecuted then-Nashville Mayor Megan Barry for similar charges. Those were theft of property charges stemming from domestic and international travel expenses the mayor and her bodyguard, with whom she was having an affair, improperly charged to the city of Nashville.
CFA also mentioned that, at the time, Davidson County DA Glenn Funk said, “it’s the role of the district attorney to bring charges when crimes have been committed even if those crimes are committed by public officials.”
Tennessee House Speaker Cameron Sexton speaks during a news conference at the State Capitol on Aug. 2, 2021. The Crossville lawmaker, who is one of the state’s most influential Republicans, recently made headlines by suggesting that Tennessee reject federal funding for K-12 education. (Courtesy of State of Tennessee)
Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news organization covering public education in communities across America. Subscribe to our free Tennessee newsletter to keep up with the Shelby County public school system and state education policy.
When House Speaker Cameron Sexton recently floated the idea of Tennessee rejecting U.S. education dollars to free its schools from federal rules and restrictions, he made the pivot sound as simple as making up the difference with $1.8 billion in state funds.
“I don’t think the legislation would be too hard to do,” he said last week after publicly declaring his desire to “do things the Tennessee way” at a Tennessee Farm Bureau reception on Feb. 7.
But the way federal funding works is pretty complex. Some districts and schools are more dependent than others on that money, which is directed to schools that serve disadvantaged students and programs that target certain needs ranging from rural education and English language learners to technology and charter schools. A related web of state and federal laws and policies created in response to the federal grants also likely would have to be unwound.
Sexton told Chalkbeat he’s working on legislation to “start a conversation” about the possibilities. And once filed, his written proposal might answer some of the many questions that Tennesseans are asking about what such a change would mean for kids and schools.
But for now, here are a few answers, along with more questions to ponder:
“I absolutely think we should do it,” Sexton told Chalkbeat.
Sexton noted that, based on the latest budget information, Tennessee could tap into $3.2 billion in new recurring revenues, which would more than cover any lost federal funds for education.
“Now is the time to look at it,” said Sexton, who as House speaker is one of the state’s most influential Republicans. “It doesn’t mean that you do it this year or you have to do it in the next six months, but it starts with the idea.”
Spokespeople for Republican Gov. Bill Lee and Lt. Gov. Randy McNally expressed openness to Sexton’s proposal, while several education leaders in Tennessee’s GOP-controlled legislature expressed outright enthusiasm.
“I would do everything in my power to pass that bill,” said Rep. Scott Cepicky, of Culleoka, who chairs a House education subcommittee and said he “wants Tennessee to have more autonomy when it comes to educating our kids.”
“It’s intriguing,” added Rep. Debra Moody, of Covington, chair of the House Education Instruction Committee. “I think my constituents at home would love it.”
Others were more reserved in their comments.
“It’s a thought-provoking idea, but I’d like to see details,” said Senate Education Committee Chairman Jon Lundberg, of Bristol. “I have questions about what federal strings would be removed and, more importantly, do those strings need removing? Right now, I don’t know.”
Can Tennessee say ‘no’ to federal money?
Probably. No state has rejected the funding so far, mainly because states typically need the money, which on average makes up about a tenth of their budgets for K-12 education.
But Republican leaders in other states have talked about the idea before, and Oklahoma lawmakers are currently considering legislation to phase out federal funding over 10 years for pre-K through 12th grade. A smattering of small school systems across the nation already have passed on federal money because of the cost of compliance.
“States do not have to accept federal funding at first glance,” said Matthew Patrick Shaw, assistant professor of law, public policy and education at Vanderbilt University. “These are carrot-stick programs in which the federal government has policy objectives and, in order to encourage states to go along with them, offers money that they believe states need to operate these programs.”
Would the change disrupt finances for students and schools across Tennessee?
Possibly, but a lot would depend on how it’s done.
Through a program known as Title I, the federal government distributes hundreds of millions of federal dollars to Tennessee schools that serve large concentrations of students from low-income homes to help improve achievement. If Tennessee replaced Title I funding with state money, would it still use the federal formula for distributing that money? Sexton hasn’t said.
The same question applies to federal funds that go to Title III programs to support English language learners, or for Title V programs to support rural education.
Sexton says Tennessee would still cover the costs of all of those programs, as well as free meals funded through assorted grants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
But in Memphis-Shelby County Schools, where all but eight of the system’s 155 district-run schools have Title I designations, some officials aren’t convinced about the stability of state funding.
“If Tennessee decided to do it our way, what does ‘our way’ look like?” asked school board member Amber Huett-Garcia, whose district expects to receive more than $892 million in federal funding next year.
“Would it achieve equity? Would Memphis continue to receive the share that it currently gets?” she continued.
More questions:
While Tennessee is currently flush with cash and able to backfill federal funding, could the state sustain that level if a recession hit down the road?
Are Tennesseans okay with paying federal taxes that support education spending, without getting any of that money back for their students and schools?
“You’re really making Tennessee taxpayers pay twice for the same underfunded public school system,” said Rep. John Ray Clemmons, a Nashville Democrat who chairs his party’s House caucus. “That is completely fiscally irresponsible and jeopardizes the entire future of this state.”
Huett-Garcia, of Memphis, asks: “What if there’s another global pandemic or a natural disaster, like when flooding and a tornado destroyed several schools in Middle Tennessee in recent years?” (Through three pandemic recovery packages approved by Congress since 2020, Tennessee has received more than $4 billion in federal funds for K-12 education.)
“At some point, we will need the federal government,” she said. “You have to consider whether halting our current federal funding mechanism could end up cutting us off from innovative funding or emergency resources in the future.”
What federal strings does Sexton want to cut?
Testing is the main problem, according to Sexton.
“I don’t think the TCAP test measures much of anything, and I think teachers would tell you that you’re teaching to a test,” said Sexton about the state’s annual test under the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program.
States that take federal money must give annual assessments in reading and math in grades 3-8 and once in high school. They also are required to administer a science test one time each in elementary, middle and high school grades. Thus, each state must give 17 tests annually, though no individual student takes more than three of those tests in a given school year.
Sexton said Tennessee could scrap TCAP — which Tennessee developed through its testing companies to align with the state’s academic standards — and create a better test with the help of its educators.
But several education advocates note that states already have more flexibility than ever to develop their testing, evaluation, and accountability systems under a 2015 federal law crafted with the leadership of former U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee.
“When shepherding the Every Student Succeeds Act, Sen. Alexander was laser-focused on Tennessee and what Tennessee would need to be successful,” said Sasha Pudelski, national advocacy director for the School Superintendents Association.
States receiving Title I funds also must participate in national tests of fourth- and eighth-grade students in reading and math every two years. Known as the nation’s report card, the National Assessment of Educational Progress allows comparisons across states and is an important marker for showing how students are doing over time.
Lundberg, a key education leader in the Senate, said such testing data is important for Tennessee.
“I want to make certain that we’re able to continue comparing Tennessee to Montana or California or Michigan,” he said. “If we really want to be No. 1 in the nation in education, we need to be able to measure apples to apples across states.”
Incidentally, the TCAP exam that Sexton wants to scrap is the same standardized test that a 2021 Republican-backed reading law uses as the only criterion to determine whether third-graders can progress to the fourth grade. Lawmakers have filed numerous bills this year to address concerns about the retention policy, which kicks in with this year’s class of third graders.
What other federal mandates are considered burdensome?
Few would dispute that accepting federal funding comes with a lot of red tape. Mounds of paperwork and numerous audits of how money is spent are all part of a huge bureaucratic infrastructure that comes with administering billions of dollars of federal funding.
But Sexton, who said there are “a gazillion restrictions” he doesn’t like, did not enumerate other burdens beyond testing, despite Chalkbeat’s multiple requests to his office for a list.
Marguerite Roza, a Georgetown University professor who researches education finance policy, said she suspects the bigger objections are related to current “culture wars” about curriculum and whether transgender students should be allowed to use school bathrooms or play sports consistent with their gender identity, which may not correspond with their sex assigned at birth.
“Those strings come from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights,” Roza said.
Civil rights enforcement is the mission of that office based on the passage of federal laws such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of education amendments passed in 1972, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibit discrimination based on race, sex, and disability.
And Tennessee has been at the forefront of culture war legislation. It passed more laws in 2021 aimed at limiting the rights of transgender people than any other state in the nation, according to an analysis by The Associated Press.
If Tennessee rejects federal funds, would the state still have to ensure students’ civil rights protections under federal laws, including for students with disabilities?
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, is a federal funding statute that says schools must identify students with disabilities and provide them with a free and appropriate public education tailored to their needs. But generally speaking, legal experts say, those requirements apply only to states that accept IDEA funds.
“If I were a parent of a child with a disability, this would be a major concern,” said Gini Pupo-Walker, state director for The Education Trust in Tennessee. “Would my child’s rights and needs be protected without the federal funding and oversight?”
Sexton says the state would still fund services that are currently part of IDEA and would come up with a similar program that he believes could be better.
But the Tennessee Disability Coalition says there’s no assurance that a Tennessee version would give families the same or better protections than under IDEA or other federal laws designed to protect students with disabilities.
“It’s hard for the disability community to trust Tennessee when our state’s track record hasn’t been so great,” said Jeff Strand, the coalition’s government affairs coordinator. “Our state institutions for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities have a long history of abuses, and we continue to see a troubling pattern of actions such as our state’s choice not to accept federal funding to expand Medicaid services.”
Another concern is where families could appeal when the system isn’t working for their students. Under IDEA, they can call for a meeting at school to speak with teachers, administrators, and case managers. If they’re not satisfied, they can appeal all the way up to the Office of Civil Rights. Dozens of disability-related cases in Tennessee schools are currently being investigated by that federal office, which has the power to take away funding from states or schools that don’t follow the law.
“It’s already tough to live with a disability in Tennessee,” said Strand. “A change like this would cloud a specific longstanding avenue that ensures that the rights of students with disabilities are being protected. And it clouds it for no good reason.”
Beyond IDEA, federal civil rights laws are hard to unpack because some are also linked to receipt of federal funds, so it may depend on how state laws are structured.
The Office of Civil Rights also enforces Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a civil rights statute which prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities, as well as Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, which extends this prohibition against discrimination to government services such as public schools, regardless of whether they receive any federal financial assistance.
Several legal experts believe many Tennessee families likely would turn to the courts over alleged violations of those laws based on the state constitution, which guarantees equal access to a system of free public education, or the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law and due process of law.
“If you want to know how this change would affect children,” said Vanderbilt’s Shaw about the possibility of rejecting federal funds and restrictions, “there’s just a lot of uncertainty.”
Marta Aldrich is a senior correspondent and covers the statehouse for Chalkbeat Tennessee. Contact her at maldrich@chalkbeat.org.
Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.
An activist who fought the establishment of a mosque in Tennessee more than a decade ago has been reappointed to the state commission that reviews and recommends books and instructional materials for local school systems to adopt.
House Speaker Cameron Sexton on Tuesday reappointed Laurie Cardoza-Moore to the Tennessee Textbook and Instructional Materials Quality Commission for a three-year term that ends on June 30, 2025.
The extension of her tenure on the panel, following her controversial 2021 appointment to a one-year term, comes as a new law gives the commission authority to overrule local school board decisions and ban certain school library books statewide.
The commission is scheduled to meet on Thursday to discuss its new responsibilities, as well as its review of math textbooks recommended by publishers.
Meanwhile, two national reports released last weekend found that attempts to ban books from U.S. school libraries are on the rise again this year, after reaching a historic high last year.
While most of the panel’s 10 commissioners are licensed educators, Cardoza-Moore is not. With an associate degree from the KD Conservatory College of Film and Dramatic Arts in Dallas, she is one of three members chosen by the governor and two legislative speakers — all Republicans — to represent parents and citizens.
She homeschooled her five children, who are now grown, and in 2005 founded Proclaiming Justice to the Nations, a Franklin, Tenn.-based organization that claims to fight anti-Semitism.
After supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, she falsely blamed Antifa, referring to the loose affiliation of anti-fascist activists who have been labeled “terrorists” by Republicans. In 2020, her group was named an anti-Muslim “hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
In a brief telephone interview with Chalkbeat on Wednesday, Cardoza-Moore denied that she is anti-Muslim and said she has been objective in her review of textbooks and instructional materials in her role on the commission.
“Curriculum has to comply with state [academic] standards,” she said. “I look to make sure that it’s accurate and unbiased and reflects the values of Tennesseans.”
Her reappointment requires a confirmation vote by state lawmakers when they reconvene in January. In 2021, the Republican-controlled legislature voted to approve her appointment along party lines.
Cardoza-Moore’s first term ended June 30 while she was running for the GOP nomination to represent her Williamson County district in the Tennessee House of Representatives. Her narrow defeat in August by Jake McCalmon made her reappointment possible, said Doug Kufner, a spokesman for Sexton.
In his letter to Cardoza-Moore on Tuesday, Sexton said her new term begins immediately.
“I am confident that you will perform the duties of office with the high standard of professionalism, dedication, and integrity that the citizens of Tennessee deserve and expect of their public servants,” the speaker wrote.
Cardoza-Moore came to notoriety in 2010, when she opposed plans to build a mosque in Murfreesboro, south of Nashville.
During her confirmation hearings last year, Democratic Sen. Raumesh Akbari, of Memphis, asked about her comments at that time saying the mosque was being built to serve as a terrorist training camp.
Cardoza-Moore responded that there “absolutely” were terrorists in the group, but Akbari said law enforcement found no proof of her claims.
She testified that she has worked to fight classroom content that she described as historically inaccurate and biased. But she declined to answer questions about her beliefs around teaching students about the nation’s history of colonialism and slavery, since her work on the commission during her initial term would focus on materials for math, based on the state’s textbook adoption cycle.
The scope of the commission’s work will soon widen.
In 2023, the state is to begin reviewing science, fine arts, and wellness books. In 2024, the adoption cycle calls for a review of materials in social studies and world languages. And under a new state law, the panel can start having a say on school library content, based on appeals of local school board decisions over challenged books.
Several who opposed Cardoza-Moore’s appointment last year say their opinions haven’t changed.
Akbari, who chairs the Senate Democratic caucus, said Wednesday that Cardoza-Moore is “unqualified” to serve on a panel that has “an important role in our children’s education.”
Leaders of the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization said her reappointment is a distraction from students’ education.
“Laurie Cardoza-Moore, a conspiracy theorist whose anti-Muslim rhetoric has endangered Tennessee families, has no business serving on any government commission, especially one that can influence what students read in their textbooks,” said Edward Ahmed Mitchell, national deputy director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
You can learn more about the commission on the state’s website.
Marta W. Aldrich is a senior correspondent and covers the statehouse for Chalkbeat Tennessee. Contact her at maldrich@chalkbeat.org.
Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.
