Categories
News News Blog

Deidre Malone in Talks to Handle Council Referenda Campaign

Advertising executive Deidre Malone of Malone Advertising and Media Group has confirmed that she is in negotiation with representatives of the Memphis City Council to handle the “public information” campaign on three ballot referenda that a council majority has voted to fund to the tune of $30,000 to $40,000.

Deirdre Malone

Malone, a former Shelby County commissioner, had previously announced her personal support for the referenda.

The council’s action, contained in a previously unannounced add-on resolution by Councilman/County Commissioner Edmund Ford Jr., was swiftly passed by an 5 to 3 margin Tuesday night, and immediately embedded in the public record by a “same-night minutes” motion from Ford.

The expenditure of public funds for a one-sided campaign on behalf of the referenda, sans benefit of mayoral approval or opportunity to veto, is the subject of an emergency hearing for a temporary injunction and restraining order against it, set for later Friday in the courtroom of Chancellor Jim Kyle.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Dark Ages Coming?

Memphis Congressman Steve Cohen‘s cell phone rings in telephone calls to the theme song of the old Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson? Who knew?

Whatever the answer was before, the updated answer is: Everyone who attended the 9th District U.S. Representative’s annual public issues meeting for constituents, held on Monday in his third-floor office at the Federal Building downtown.

The bouncy chords of the Paul Anka-composed tune that used to signal “Here’s Johnny” rang out once during the nearly two hours of Q-and-A between Cohen and his overflow crowd, and that sound lasted just long enough for the congressman to put the phone on hold and stash it away.

Cohen himself was as accessible and upbeat as the tune suggested, and both were ironically at odds with the basic message the congressman had for his constituents. That was summed up in his statement: “We’re going into a new Dark Ages that will make Dwight Eisenhower look like a progressive.”

That’s understating the case a bit. Eisenhower, a tough but genial presence known to his generation as “Ike,” was the Allied Supreme Commander in Europe during World War II, and his popularity never sagged very much during the two terms he served as president from 1953 to 1961.

Historians, in fact, have already begun to locate Eisenhower on the moderate end of the political spectrum. In Cohen’s forecast of things to come, the administration of President-elect Donald Trump might well make such past Republican conservative figures as Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan look like progressives.

Reviewing Trump’s cabinet appointments, for example, Cohen called Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions “the wrong person to be attorney general.” He regarded the president-elect’s designates for such agencies as the EPA, Energy, and Education as uniformly “awful,” enemies to the legitimate aims of their departments and cases of “the fox in the henhouse.” And, said Cohen, all the other appointees are “just billionaires.”

Said the congressman: “He’s cut out the middlemen; he’s put the billionaires in charge, which is called oligarchy. That happened in Russia, and it’s happening here.”

Cohen eased up only a bit for Elaine Chao, Trump’s Transportation Secretary designate. The congressman, a member of the Transportation Committee, said “I’ve met her; I know her. I’m going to try to get projects from her. Let’s leave it at that.”

The essence of Cohen’s forebodings was that the combination of a Republican Congress and President Trump would mean less money for desirable public programs, more privatization for the gratification of special interests, and an erratic foreign policy.

Cohen expressed some hope that a minority of relatively moderate Republican senators might be open-minded in forthcoming Senate hearings on the cabinet nominees. He named them as Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Susan Collins of Maine, and John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona. “And, hopefully, Corker and Lamar” (Tennessee Senators Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander.) 

Asked if he had hopes of being able to have a useful conversation with Trump himself, Cohen said, “Dr. Shea has passed away,” a reference to the late Dr. John Shea of Memphis, famous for his work in improving or restoring faulty hearing.

“What Trump has done is unleashed people so they feel it’s a cool thing to be mean and that it’s okay, and it’s not a cool thing to do at all.”

The congressman noted the occasional strains that have occurred between Trump and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. “He could get Paul Ryan upset. … He’s the guy who can bring an impeachment.”

Cohen had opened his meeting with constituents with a tease: “There’s an announcement coming.” He said that “in about three weeks, I’m going to be receiving a leadership position.” When that moment comes, Cohen said, it would mark the first time in 30 years that a Tennessean would be in the Democratic leadership.  

Jackson Baker

State Senator Randy McNally (R-Chattanooga) (center) was sworn in Monday as Tennessee’s new Senate Speaker and Lieutenant Governor.

• By a 7-4 vote on Monday, the Shelby County Commission approved another year’s appointment of former Commissioner Julian Bolton as special legal advisor to the Commission at a stipend of $65,000 a year. There were four nay notes — from David Reaves, Mark Billingsley, George Chism, and Steve Basar. The commission also approved a legislative package to present to the current session of the General Assembly.

Deidre Malone, founder and CEO of the Carter Malone Group, a public affairs, advertising, and consulting firm, has been named chairperson of the Memphis chapter of the NAACP and will be installed as such in a ceremony on January 22nd. Malone is a two-time candidate for Shelby County mayor, a former Shelby County Commissioner, and a long-time eminence in civic and Democratic Party affairs, having served the last extant version of the local party as a vice chair. She also logged several years at WLOK-AM as a news reporter and anchor and at WMC-TV, Action News 5, as a producer.

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

State Party Head to Local Dems: Settle the Carson Matter!

Mary Mancini

There are, as it turns out, more guaranteed circumstances than the two most often noted: death and taxes. Right up there with those two, in terms of inevitability, is the fact of discord in state and local Democratic Party ranks.

The latest instance of such is contained in a letter dispatched to members of the Shelby County Democratic executive committee from state Democratic Party chair Mary Mancini. The letter deals with the long-festering case of former local party chairman Bryan Carson, who was forced to resign by the county committee in February of 2015.

The Mancini letter, in essence, mandates the terms of a resolution of the matter by the Shelby County party and provides a short deadline for doing so.

The executive committee’s action in early 2015 came after the county party had been fined by the state Election Registry for its failure to comply with financial reporting deadlines and after Carson had been unable to account for the disposition several thousand dollars in party funds. At issue also was the fact that the chairman had apparently switched bank accounts for the party funds without express authorization by the executive committee and had made several withdrawals from ATM machines without providing receipts.

The amount of the financial discrepancy has never been determined with exact accuracy, but a preliminary audit performed by committee members at the time of Carson’s resignation estimated the unaccounted-for amount to be at least $6,000. Another ad hoc investigating group on the committee has since arrived at a higher estimate for the missing funds, in the vicinity of $25,000, but there has never been absolute agreement on the committee on the validity of either sum.

Through his attorney, Robert Spence, Carson admitted no wrongdoing but offered to settle the dispute by compensating the local party for the $6,000 sum at the rate of $100 a month. There is disagreement as to whether the full committee was ever apprised of the offer, which in any case ceased to be active.

Compounding the confusion was the fact that Carson’s elected successor as chairman, Randa Spears, as well as the local party’s first vice chair, Deidre Malone, had both abruptly resigned their positions in April, each giving the press of other obligations as the reason for their departure. The Spears-led party had meanwhile missed another financial reporting deadline for this year and had been assessed a fresh $10,000 fine by the Election Registry.

At its regularly scheduled monthly meeting on Thursday, June 2, the executive committee elected a new chairman, Sheriff’s Department Lt. Michael Pope, and acted on a motion by defeated chairmanship candidate Del Gill to prosecute Carson for embezzling the larger estimated sum. That motion passed, fairly handily, but there has been no formal action on the matter by the committee since.

All of that formed the background for the Mancini letter, dated Friday, June 24, to the Shelby County executive committee, care of chairman Pope.

Mancini’s letter begins with a citation of party bylaws and state codes that, she says, assign her “both a supervisory and organizational role over each of the county executive committees that operate throughout the state.” The letter follows with a cursory and none too indulgent recounting of the Shelby County’s ongoing problems (“many years of dysfunction,” as she puts it).

Mancini then comes to the nut of the matter, prescribing a settlement in accord with the dormant offer made to the party by Carson through his attorney:

“With a looming election that is shaping up to be of monumental importance for our state and our country, and for the health of your organization and executive committee, it is my responsibility to inform you that you must agree to the arrangement that Mr. Carson pay the amount of $6000 at $ 100 per month for 5 years and be released from any additional claims and that Chairman Pope must sign all the necessary paperwork to honor that agreement or you will no longer be in compliance with your charter issued by the Tennessee Democratic Party.”

Ironically, perhaps, Mancini had in recent months been sounded out by disgruntled party members wondering if voluntary surrender of the local party’s charter might be a feasible option. She had always answered no to such inquiries.

The deadline for “signing the necessary paperwork and forwarding it to Mr. Carson’s attorney is Friday, July 1, 2016,” Mancini concludes.

Some party members are questioning Mancini’s authority to mandate an or-else solution of this sort, while others are ready to acknowledge that she has the right. In any case, there is no pending meeting of the executive committee until the regularly scheduled one of Thursday, July 7 and thus no opportunity for a committee vote before Mancini’s deadline.

Chairman Pope, however, has indicated he is prepared to accept Mancini’s mandate, but his authority to do so without a committee authorization is questionable. To say the least, confusion persists.

Dynamic duo: During his first several congressional terms after being elected in 2006, 9th District U.S. Representative Steve Cohen cemented an alliance with venerable Detroit congressman John Conyers (D-Michigan), who then served as House Judiciary Committee chairman and regarded the Memphis liberal, a committee member, as something of a protégé and journeyed to Memphis on Cohen’s behalf.

When the Republicans captured control of the House after the election of 2010, the Conyers-Cohen tandem was not heard from with the same intensity, but it still existed. This week, after the landmark Supreme Court decision striking down the severe restrictions on abortion clinics imposed by a Texas state law, Conyers and Cohen reasserted themselves as a duo.

In a joint press release, Conyers, in his capacity as ranking member of the Judiciary Committee and Cohen, as ranking member of the Judiciary subcommittee on the Costitutional and Civil Justice, and Cohen, hailed the Court’s decision as a reaffirmation of “the fundamental cnstitgutional right of women to make their own decisdions about their health, their bodies, their families, and their lives.”

Said the two congressmen: “The Court correctly saw the Texas law for what it was, which was an attempt to severely restrict abortion rights and not one to protect women’s health” and that the Texas law “placed such substantial obstacles to a woman’s choice to have an abortion that its provisions were an “undue burden” on women’s constitutional right to choose….”

The Conyers-Cohen press release, one of several recently released by Cohen’s office, highlighted one of the incumbent congressman’s built-in advantages in generating media. Cohen has three opponents in the 2016 Democratic primary — Shelby County Commissioner Justin Ford, Larry Crim, and M. LaTroy Williams. Republican Wayne Alberson and independent Paul Cook will be on the November ballot.

More fallout: The Court’s decision on the invalidated Texas statute, incidentally, will almost surely have repercussions in Tennessee, where the General Assembly in recent years had enacted laws with provisions almost identical to those in the Texas law, which basically required doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and imposed rigid standards on abortion clinics resembling those for hospitals performing outpatient surgery.

Laws passed by the Tennessee legislature in 2012 and 2014 had made similar specifications, which have been challenged in the U.S. District Court in Nashville.

Promises, promises: The fact that a freshman seat In the U.S. House of Representatives — to be one of 435 — is the equivalent of landing an entry-level job in the federal government, the continuation of which is entirely contingent on the good will (or passing whims) of voters back home, is often lost sight of in the heat of campaigning. Candidates want to suggest that they can, all by themselves, shift national policy, and who can blame them?

Along this line, it will be hard for any of his competitors to beat two claims made by 8th District Republican congressional candidate David Kustoff in a TV commercial that just hit the airwaves over the weekend. The ad proclaims, of course, that Kustoff, the former U.S. Attorney for Western Tennessee, has impeccable credentials as a conservative and will, for example, oppose Obamacare, but it makes two additional claims that are unprecedented in their magnitude.

In the checklist of promises with which the commercial concludes, one learns that Kustoff will (drumroll) “end illegal immigration” and (thunder and lightning) “destroy radical Islamic terrorism.” Not to vote to do these things, mind you, but — well, just to do them.
Er…wow! •

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

The Shelby County Democratic Party Is in Crisis Mode Again

JB

Challenges by Del Gill (back to camera) to SCDP chair Randa Spears were a recurrent fact of life during a stormy year for the local party.

Yes, Virginia, there are functional, thriving Democratic Party organizations in Shelby County. There are the Germantown Democrats, whose monthly meetings at Coletta’s on Highway 64 are well-attended events attracting a variety of speakers on political and social issues. There are the Democratic Women of Shelby County, who include a cadre of committed activists. There are the Young Democrats, who are attracting new blood into the party and who are constantly interfacing with local elected officials to disperse useful information about governmental processes.

Nor is this a complete list, notes Dave Cambron, president of the Germantown club. The aforementioned organizations and several others, he notes, continue to conduct useful meetings, assist with political campaigns, and serve as organizational nuclei for interested Democrats, in and out of election years.

So yes, Democratic Party organizations are live and well in Shelby County.

It’s just that the Democratic Party of Shelby County, the official organization which in theory is the party’s flagship, may not be one of them. Cambron, a former SCDP vice chair who served a brief term as acting chairman last year during a difficult moment for the local party, declined to comment on what is shaping up as another period of crisis.

As of earlier this month, the party lacks a chairperson, former chair Randa Spears having resigned for reasons that may have something to do with her desire to focus more on the duties of her job at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital but may also have to do with what various Democrats describe as a kind of chaos that has descended upon the Party’s affairs.

These Democrats say that Spears, who was elected chair of the party in March of 2015 in the wake of a financial scandal involving previous chair Bryan Carson, has had to contend with persistent tension at party meetings involving Del Gill, her runner-up in the chairmanship election who, at meeting after meeting, has employed an unrelenting variety of parliamentary maneuvers to challenge the chair’s control.

Gill, of course, does not see himself as the problem. Rather, he appears to regard himself as a long-term, committed party member who has so far been unfairly frustrated from realizing his own leadership ambitions. He sees himself as a Democratic purist who has mastered both Roberts’ Rules of Order and the party’s own regulations, while his foes see him as pedantic to a fault, disruptive by nature, and egregiously self-absorbed.

In any case, he has to be regarded as a leading candidate for the local party’s chairmanship, which will be up for grabs again in June at a meeting presided over by Sheriff’s Department Lt. Michael Pope, a former party vice chair now serving as acting chairman. Several members of the party’s executive committee say privately they intend to resign if Gill is elected.

The leadership vacuum is just one of the party’s problems, of course. Another is that, for the second year in a row, the local party has failed to meet deadlines for filing financial reports with the state Registry of Election Finance and faces the prospect of stiff financial penalties as a result.

Then chairman Carson, Spears’ predecessor, was forced to resign in early 2015 when it was found that the party had not only missed the state Registry’s deadlines but that, as was revealed in an audit conducted by party member Diane Cambron, Carson could not account for some $6,000 in party fund expenditures.

It was then that David Cambron, Diane Cambron’s husband, became acting chair. He served in that role until the election of Spears in March, 2015.

Categories
News News Blog

Carter Malone and Taser International Cancel Controversial Contract

Deirdre Malone

The Carter Malone Group and Taser International have mutually agreed to cancel a contract for marketing services relating to the new Memphis Police Department body cameras.

The $880,147 subcontract with marketing firm Carter Malone made headlines this week because its president Deidre Malone also happens to be Mayor A C Wharton’s campaign manager. Malone would have been responsible for helping Taser promote its rollout of 2,000 body cameras for the MPD.

MPD Director Toney Armstrong announced last week that 50 officers are being trained with the cameras each day, and by early October, 500 officers will be using the cameras. By the end of the year, they should have 2,000 cameras deployed and operational. 

Malone issued the following statement:

“The contract between The Carter Malone Group, LLC and Taser International has been cancelled effectively immediately by mutual agreement. I want to reiterate that nothing was done that can be considered unethical or improper. I stand by the fact that I obtained the contract based on my firm’s qualifications and body of work and not for any other reason.

I appreciate the support from the individuals and various organizations for me and my firm. It is truly unfortunate that a woman and minority-owned company, that has a track record like The Carter Malone Group, has to be subjected to the type of criticism and allegations that have been subjected upon my firm. The City has made some strides in increasing the percentage of women and minority-owned businesses doing business with the City. I believe under the continued leadership of Mayor A C Wharton that percentage will grow.”

Categories
Cover Feature News

Gripes, Groans, and Grudge Matches in Shelby County Elections

The mid-summer election cycle of 2014 began July 18th, with a stronger than usual turnout for an early voting period that will last through Saturday, August 2nd.

When the final votes are tallied late on the evening of election day, August 7th, several factors will no doubt have affected the outcome — ranging from dissension among Democratic activists regarding party endorsements for judicial candidates to controversies surrounding key campaigns to candidate matchups that will either settle old scores or create new ones.

It is no accident that ferment among Democrats is a key factor in what happens in the run-up to August 7th and beyond. The Democratic Party began the campaign year with something to prove.

In 2010, all Democratic candidates for county office were defeated by their GOP counterparts, and the scope of that defeat, in the face of what had seemed a formidable demographic edge for the Democrats in a majority African-American county, occasioned a reaction among local party cadres that was equal parts chagrin, disbelief, suspicion of being cheated, and a resolve not to let it happen again.

But Shelby County’s Democrats, who in theory should have a more pronounced demographic advantage than even four years ago, are in fact threatened with the prospect of another Republican sweep. This is due more to a series of Democratic misadventures than to any artfulness on the part of the Republicans, though the GOP’s substantial edge in financial resources is a factor to be reckoned with, as well.

As one indication of just how wide that gulf is, Mark Luttrell, the Republican incumbent in the race for county mayor, arguably the premier race on this year’s county ballot, ended the second quarter of 2014 — and began the stretch drive of his campaign — with a balance on hand of $132,417, while his Democratic opponent, former County Commissioner Deidre Malone, by contrast, could boast of only $38,914. 

And even those figures did not hint at the actual disproportion. During the second quarter of 2014, from April 1st through June 30th, Malone had spent $25,172, while Luttrell had put in play the whopping amount of $290, 210 — money which, among other things, paid for a series of seemingly nonstop TV ads featuring the telegenic incumbent. Meanwhile Malone was largely dependent on free media, which was hard to come by.

Similar discrepancies exist among the parties in other county races that occupy a relatively small but crucial portion of a long ballot that also includes state and federal primary races and school board elections.

Here’s a preview of some of the key races. Others are in the article “No ‘Down Ballot’ in Shelby County This Year” in this week’s “Political Beat”.

Lauren Rae Holtermann

Deidre Malone Vs Mayor Mark Luttrell

COUNTY MAYOR — Not only does the GOP’s Luttrell have the advantages of incumbency and funding, he has a public persona that is likable enough that even opponent Malone has been forced to acknowledge that “Mark is a nice guy.” 

She has a case to make that Luttrell has been indifferent or worse in matters ranging from Head Start, from which he extricated county government, or Title X funding for women’s services, where he acted to defund Planned Parenthood, or that he is overcautious in general. But such matters are hard to dramatize to a general public. Meanwhile, Luttrell is adept in seeking compromise, which he did this week in agreeing with Democrats to establish a county pre-K program.

Clear advantage to Luttrell.

SHERIFF — Bill Oldham, the GOP incumbent, has attracted no criticism to speak of in his workman-like first four years, and it is hard to see how deputy Bennie Cobb, the Democratic nominee, who, like other Democrats, has had limited exposure, can draw the contrast he needs to interest swing voters in making a change.

Advantage to Oldham.

Lauren Rae Holtermann

D.A. Amy Weirich Vs Judge Joe Brown

DISTRICT ATTORNEY GENERAL — At the beginning of the campaign year, D.A. Amy Weirich, a surprisingly easy victor over underrated Democrat Carol Chumney four years ago, was anything but a household word, and was potentially vulnerable to an adroit campaign by former Criminal Court Judge Joe Brown, a bona fide celebrity from 15 years as TV’s “Judge Joe Brown” and the possessor of democratic (small ‘d’) instincts and a real, if fitful, craftiness.

But Brown also possesses an impulse to implode, something he had telegraphed via some rash statements in pre-campaign public appearances.

An early tangle in Juvenile Court, which earned him a contempt citation, may actually have benefited Brown, who assumed the role of a champion of the downtrodden. But his recent intimation that his opponent was a lesbian, an adulteress, and an exploiter, utterly without evidence, and sticking to it, was the kind of mistake it’s hard to recover from, though Brown has made strenuous efforts since — seeking to conciliate (and even champion) the LGBT constituency.

(For comparison, though, here was Brown ad-libbing at large last fall at a Democratic Party “roast” of former Mayor Willie Herenton: “I’m damned if I’m going to get all worked up about this stuff coming out of San Francisco, when gay rights are more important than people having employment rights!”)

Weirich, meanwhile, has raised ample money to publicize her image as a public-safety pro, even if detractors see her as an overzealous prosecutor more interested in winning cases than seeking justice. That, indeed, is where her own version of I-make-no-apology comes in.

Jackson Baker

Brown (top) and Brooks (bottom) found themselves immersed in controversy, to the detriment of their campaigns and the Democratic ticket.

Judge Joe, the wannabe party “boss” (a boast of his from early in the campaign) still has an undefinable amount of grass-roots appeal in the inner city, but, tied up apparently by his ongoing divorce, the money Brown was going to bankroll the party ticket with never showed, and his GOTV efforts may be working more for the other side at this point.

Weirich.      

JUVENILE COURT CLERK — This is the other race where a Democratic Party advantage seems to have morphed into its opposite. Outgoing County Commissioner Henri Brooks began the campaign year as the recipient of public honors. By her steadfast persistence she had, virtually single-handedly, forced the U.S. Department of Justice to mandate overdue reforms at Juvenile Court (though, in fairness to outgoing Juvenile Court Judge Curtis Person, some of these may already have been underway).

Brooks not only had Ruby Wharton, wife of the city’s mayor, as her campaign chair, she was the winner of the Ruby R. Wharton Award for her court-reform efforts. Essentially, all she had to do to coast to victory over the low-profile Republican incumbent, Joy Touliatos, was to make nice and exercise a modest amount of outreach to constituencies other than the African-American one she claimed as her own.

Somewhat famously, she didn’t. Within a two-month span, Brooks overplayed her hand at a commission meeting, publicly brow-beating a Hispanic witness and insulting two of her colleagues; then got herself charged with misdemeanor assault and lost her Methodist Hospital job after witnesses described her as the aggressor in an altercation with another woman in the hospital parking lot; and finally was revealed not to be a resident of the district she served and had to fight off colleagues’ efforts to unseat her.

Meanwhile, Touliatos’ placid personality and stable service began to look better and better.

 Advantage, Touliatos.

COUNTY TRUSTEE — Republican incumbent David Lenoir has generally impressed neutral onlookers as having done a good job and has raised oodles of campaign cash to boot. Democratic nominee Derrick Bennett has done little campaigning and has made minimal impact.

Advantage, Lenoir.

ASSESSOR OF PROPERTY — Even among Democratic pessimists, this is the one county office that still seems winnable. The party nominee, Cheyenne Johnson, is a respected and experienced incumbent who won reelection handily two years ago and was unkindly forced to do it all over again this year after a legislative act forced the assessor’s four-year term into the same cycle as other county offices.

Johnson is running a determined race and has abundant support, some of it crossover, but her relatively nondescript opponent, Republican Keith Alexander, can boast some basic credentials and hopes to ride the Republican ballot into an upset.

Still leaning Johnson.

CRIMINAL COURT CLERK — The illness of Republican incumbent Kevin Key elevated his major assistant, Richard DeSaussure, into his de facto replacement, and though City Councilwoman Wanda Halbert, the Democratic nominee, appears to be working hard and should not be underestimated, DeSaussure appears to have a firm hold on other GOP coattails.

Advantage, DeSaussure.

CIRCUIT COURT CLERK — Republican incumbent Jimmy Moore is well-connected across party lines, while his opponent, Democratic nominee Rhonda Banks, is a neophyte without any connections at all.

Moore, easily.

PROBATE COURT CLERK — Republican Paul Boyd, who has the distinction of being his party’s ranking African-American official in county government, rode the GOP tide to an upset win four years ago and has worked hard to build his public image, even to the point of turning up at Democratic Party events this year. (“I just want them to know I’m their clerk, too,” he explained.)

Meanwhile, Democratic nominee William Chism may have won his primary mainly on the strength of having the same last name as outgoing County Commissioner Sidney Chism, a well-known party presence but no relation. He remains someone most of his party mates could not pick out of a lineup.

Advantage, Boyd.

COUNTY CLERK — Republican incumbent Wayne Mashburn, son of longtime independent clerk Sonny Mashburn, carries the family mantle, while Democrat Charlotte Draper has to overcome her party’s doldrums and a reputation as a perennial candidate.

Advantage, Mashburn.

REGISTER OF DEEDS — GOP incumbent Tom Leatherwood, once a hot-blooded GOP state Senator, has long since rounded off his edges and settled into the role of an experienced and respected administrator. Democrat Coleman Thompson is likeable, but he, too, has become something of a perennial.

Advantage, Leatherwood.

If you’re keeping score, that’s a Republican lead in nine of the 10 offices on the countywide general ballot, with an outside chance of finishing 10 for 10. Going into the stretch, it would appear that the Democratic effort to recoup for the local party debacle of 2010 is doomed to fall short — and this despite an ever-widening African-American predominance in the county population as a whole, the demographic fact that was supposed to insure long-term Democratic superiority.

And there is the example of Boyd to suggest that Republicans, whose efforts at outreach to minorities have been on again, off again, have an opportunity to make real inroads if county government follows the lead of state government in establishing the GOP as the official party of choice.

 THE SHELBY COUNTY COMMISSION — The one aspect of county government where Democrats have an edge at present and can be expected to keep it is on the county’s 13-member legislative branch, currently containing seven Democrats and six Republicans.

The new commission that will take office in September is basically already formed and will likely have the same seven to six ratio. Democrats could fare even better in the future if current demographic trends continue, as seems likely. And the commission’s adoption of 13 single-member districts to replace the old system of large, multi-member districts should reinforce and enlarge their majority.

Here is the rundown on the 13 Commission seats on the ballot:

District 1 (North Shelby County): Incumbent Republican Terry Roland of Millington is unopposed for a second term. 

District 2 (Collierville): Republican George Chism is unopposed.

District 3 (Bartlett): The GOP’s David Reaves, currently a member of the Shelby County Schools board, is unopposed.

District 4 (Germantown): Republican incumbent Mark Billingsley is opposed by a game Democrat, Jackie Jackson, but should prevail.

District 5: This East Memphis enclave is in theory contested by GOP incumbent Heidi Shafer and Democrat Taylor Berger, but Berger discontinued his campaign efforts months ago and Shafer will walk in.

District 6: Democrat Willie Brooks is highly favored over Republican David Shiffman in this Frayser-based terrain.

District 7: Democratic incumbent Melvin Burgess is unopposed.

District 8: Incumbent Democrat Walter Bailey, a lion of the commission, is highly favored over Republican Julie Ray.

District 9: Democrat Justin Ford has this South Memphis terrain to himself.

District 10: Democrat Reginald Milton has an able Republican newcomer, Geoff Diaz, to contend with, but the odds are well in his favor.

District 11: Democrat Eddie Jones, unopposed in this Whitehaven-based district, hits paydirt after several previous tries for public office.

District 12: Democrat Van Turner, the lawyer and former local Democratic chairman, is unopposed.

District 13: Republican incumbent Steve Basar would seem to be well ensconced in an East Memphis/suburban district with an ostensible Republican majority, but Democratic nominee Manoj Jain, a physician, is working hard, showing up everywhere, including Republican Party events, and has an outside chance of pulling off an upset.

Likely upshot: New commission, new faces, new directions, but the same old seven and six.

STATE AND FEDERAL OFFICES:

Governor: Republican incumbent Bill Haslam is slated for a slam-dunk win over several nominal candidates in the GOP primary and will be heavily favored in November over the victor in a nondescript Democratic primary field, likely to be former Sullivan County Commissioner John McKamey, an amiable yellow-dog Democrat who has visisted Memphis several times from his East Tennessee bailiwick.

U.S. Senator: Incumbent Republican Lamar Alexander started getting ready for a likely Tea Party challenge to his renomination two years ago, sewing up all the party endorsements that counted and most of the loose change that was available, too, amassing a campaign war chest that, as of now, stands at well above $3 million.

Often considered a moderate, Alexander has adjusted his rhetoric in a more conservative direction and remains a clear favorite over a large GOP primary field that includes only two opponents with even an outside chance to challenge his dominance. 

One is Joe Carr, an eccentric right-wing state representative from Lascassas in Middle Tennessee who has some appreciable Tea Party support and has mustered campaign help from the likes of former Pennsylvania Senator and 2012 presidential candidate Rick Santorum and talk show host Laura Ingraham. 

The other Alexander foe, perhaps a graver threat to Carr’s hopes than to Alexander’s, is deep-pocketed Memphis physician/businessman George Flinn, the former Shelby County commissioner and frequent candidate who began his race by focusing mainly on a health-care plan he offers as an alternative to the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare). But Flinn, like Carr, responded to the stunning defeat of GOP House majority leader Eric Cantor in Virginia and the near defeat of Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran and upped his ante with a $2 million dump of his own cash into a race that now features several TV ads aimed at Alexander.

There’s a race on the Democratic side as well, with the leading contenders being two Knoxville attorneys, Gordon Ball and Terry Adams, both of whom have made frequent stops in Memphis during an all-out statewide competition that hearkens back to the old days of the solid Democratic South, when victory in a Democratic primary was, in the phrase of the time, tantamount to election.

That is no longer the case, of course, but Ball and Adams sense an opportunity to make at least a respectable dent in Alexander’s totals or, if the unthinkable should happen and Carr should overcome the incumbent Senator on a Tea Party surge, to have a legitimate chance at victory.

Ball and Adams are both solid campaigners, and they represent the poles of current Democratic thought. Adams was first in last year, having been recruited by the state party establishment. He focuses on the issue of economic inequality and is a rousing speaker on the stump. Ball, a multi-millionaire from his legal victories (including several over large corporations), is capable of self-financing and blends support of Democratic social policies with centrist political positions like his advocacy of a flat tax.

Adams never fails to note that Ball has in the past supported Republican political figures like Haslam and Alexander. Ball responds that some degree of political cross-pollination has historically been necessary in East Tennessee but is willing to write off his past backing of GOP figures as mistakes.

9th District, House of Representatives: Though there are nominal races on both the Republican and Democratic sides in the 8th Congressional district, which juts significantly into eastern Shelby County, it is all but a given that incumbent GOP Congressman Stephen Fincher of Frog Jump in Crockett County will triumph in his primary and in November.

Cohen brain trust at a recent event. From left: strategist Jerry Austin, campaign treasurer Henry Turley, campaign manager John Marek

It is probable, too, that 9th District incumbent Democrat Steve Cohen will emerge the winner, as usual, in a Democratic primary where, also as usual, he faces an opponent — this year’s version being lawyer Ricky Wilkins. It is unlikely, however, that Cohen will prevail with the 4-to-1 margins he has grown accustomed to against such prior primary rivals as Nikki Tinker, former Mayor Willie Herenton, and Tomeka Hart.

Wilkins’ cash on hand as of the June 30th reporting period was $87,034, no match for Cohen’s total of $887,251, but the challenger is running what seems to be a credible grassroots campaign and was able to boast the backing of 21 current and former elected officials at a press conference last week, though Cohen’s campaign has secured statements of disavowal from two of those, City Councilmembers Janis Fullilove and Edmund Ford Jr., neither of whom attended Wilkins’ press conference.

Even Cohen supporters concede that this year’s race will be a closer affair, however, and current estimates by neutral observers are in the range of a 70 to 30 percent edge for Cohen, with the possibility that the gap could close tighter than that, which gives the current race the sense of a grudge match that could continue in future campaign years.

In seeming acknowledgement, Cohen has mocked his opponent’s billboard slogan, “Ricky Wilkins, Your Next Congressman,” with the jibe that Wilkins can use it “over and over and over.”

There are no great issues dividing the two candidates, though Wilkins has made much over what he says is Cohen’s disinclination to get involved in “local” matters, like the running school-merger controversy of the past few years, while Cohen responds that his job is to defer to local officials, not to dictate to them.

Cohen is running on what he and his supporters regard as a considerable record of achievement in Congress, and even Wilkins plays off that sense with his frequently uttered tagline, “If you liked Steve Cohen, you’ll love Ricky Wilkins.”

Wilkins with supporters at a press conference.

Wilkins is African American, as all of Cohen’s previous primary opponents have been, and as something like two-thirds of the district’s voters are. Cohen has garnered significant majorities among black voters in his previous reelection efforts and hopes to do so again.

There is a Republican candidate, too. Charlotte Bergmann, a sacrificial victim two years ago and likely to undergo the same fate again. 

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

With Election Less Than a Month Away, Patterns Are Taking Shape

We are now less than a month away from August 7th, when the final votes in the Shelby County general election and state and federal primaries will be counted, and distinct patterns are taking shape.

Those races that were expected to be the most closely watched ones at the beginning of the election season — for the 9th District congressional seat, for Shelby County Mayor, for District Attorney General, for the District 29 state Senate seat, and for Juvenile Court Judge and Juvenile Court Clerk, among others — continue to command attention.

Although several circumstances — including charges and counter-charges, endorsements, demographics, and the like — are potentially influencing voter reactions, one factor that cannot be overlooked is the perennial one of money. Some candidates have it in spades, while others are struggling.

A word of caution: Lest it be forgotten, two candidates in the May 6th primaries for county offices — Kenneth Whalum, running for the Democratic nomination for County Mayor, and Martavius Jones, a candidate in the Democratic primary for the District 10 County Commission seat — nearly won races against highly favored opponents with more visible campaigns and vastly more funding.

Credit those outcomes to the power of name recognition, which remains a major factor in the current scene.

For what it’s worth, however, here are three examples:

• City Councilman Lee Harris, who is campaigning aggressively in his Democratic primary effort to unseat District 29 state Senator Ophelia Ford, garnering endorsements by the bushel and across the political board, is also raising disproportionate amounts of money — he boasts a 10-to-1 ratio over Ford’s in the reporting quarter ending June 30th. (His edge in money on hand is somewhat lesser — $28,646.29 to $11,549.66, a shade less than 3-to-1).

• Incumbent Republican County Mayor Mark Luttrell, whose ads have been omnipresent on TV of late, has a marked financial advantage over Democratic nominee Deidre Malone, with a reported $132,417 on hand as of the June 30th report, against $38,915.

• Rather famously, the Democrats’ nominee for District Attorney General, Joe Brown, whose colleagues on the party ticket were counting on him for help, both from the luster of his “Judge Joe Brown” TV fame and from his bankroll, has hit snags in both respects and reports only $745 on hand as of June 30th, compared to $269,227 for his opponent, Republican incumbent D.A. Amy Weirich.

In all three of these cases, the financial underdog is seeking a tactical edge elsewhere.

Ford had her first public event last week, a fund raiser/meet-and-greet at the funeral home of brother Edmond Ford on Elvis Presley Boulevard, gathering around her not only numerous members of the still powerful Ford extended family but supporters from elsewhere on the political spectrum, notably GOP County Commissioner Terry Roland, her former opponent in a 2005 special election.

Malone continued with a series of events targeting various components of the Shelby County body politic — meeting, for example, with a group of women’s rights advocates on Saturday at Pyro’s Pizza on Union, and contrasting her strong pro-choice stance with what she described as positions on Luttrell’s part that were ambivalent at best, particularly in his having chosen to disenfranchise Planned Parenthood in 2011 as the county’s partner in employed Title X federal funding for women’s health.

Brown, meanwhile, was working the grass roots, especially in the inner city, with his “Law and Order Tour” with sidekick Bennie Cobb, the Democratic nominee for Sheriff. He presided over an event last week at the Central Train Station downtown and made appearances at forums, like one held at St. Augustine’s Catholic Church on Sunday, where he continued to levy attacks on Weirich, blaming her for negligence in the matter of the much-discussed rape-kit backlog and questioning her use of federal and state funding.

• Early voting for the August 7th elections begins this Friday, July 18th, at the Shelby County Election Commission’s downtown location, and will continue there and, from Monday, July 21st, at 21 satellite voting sites until Saturday, August 2nd. (The locations of the satellite sites will be posted at memphisflyer.com.)

• In the wake of several meetings of the Shelby County Democratic Executive Committee hashing out disputes over the party’s endorsement of judicial candidates but leaving them intact, a group of Democratic lawyers, including former party chairmen David Cocke and Van Turner, is issuing its own ballot — including judges left off the party endorsement list whom they deem deserving.

These include Probate Court Judge Kathleen Gomes, Criminal Court Judge Mark Ward, and General Sessions Judges Bill Anderson, Phyllis Gardner, and John Donald, among others.

• The first fully separate cattle call for Board candidates took place Monday night at the First Baptist Church on Broad under the joint sponsorship of several ad hoc education organizations.

Present and accounted for were Chris Caldwell and Freda Garner-Williams in District 1; Stephanie Love in District 3; David Winston in District 5; Shante K. Avant in District 6; Miska Clay Bibbs in District 7; and Roshun Austin, Mike Kernell, and Damon Curry Morris in District 9.

Absent from the event, which took place during an off-and-on thunderstorm, were Teddy King and Anthony D. Lockhart in District 3; Scott McCormick in District 5; Jimmy L. Warren in District 6; and William E. Orgel in District 8.

The format called for each candidate to make an introductory statement and field one question from the moderator, Daarel Burnette II of the education periodical Chalkbeat Tennessee subbing for Keith Norman, the church pastor, who was absent. Though Burnette’s question was the same for each candidate, having to do with the candidate’s foremost objective as a prospective board member, there was a fair amount of variety in the answers elicited, most of them sensible and well informed, concerning issues ranging from curriculum to parent-teacher relations.

A final round of questions was solicited from the audience. Fielding a question about the desirability of separating “politics” from education, Kernell, a longtime state representative from southeast Memphis, was unique in embracing that inevitable pairing, saying that his experience and entrée with the state legislature could have positive results for his district and Shelby County Schools (SCS).

The nine-member SCS board being elected in this year’s school board elections from the city of Memphis and unincorporated areas of Shelby County replaces the provisional seven-member board, which was elected from the whole of Shelby County.

One of the members of the outgoing seven-member board, David Reaves of Bartlett, was an interested spectator Monday night, chatting amiably before the event with several of his current Board colleagues who were taking part in the forum. Reaves is now a County Commissioner-elect and will be swapping chairs in September.

Monday night’s event took place under the auspices of the Black Alliance for Educational Options. Ad hoc co-sponsors included representatives of Students First, Stand for Children, and the aforesaid Chalkbeat Tennessee.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Dotting the ‘”I” in Memphis Politics

JB

Sidney Chism and small fan at last year’s picnic.

Attendees at the Sidney Chism political picnic, held two weekends ago at the usual stomping grounds on Horn Lake, would have observed this scribe doing his annual duty there for several hours, and may have since wondered if and when I would publish an account.

For a variety of reasons, I have delayed posting my observations. I do indeed have some, along with a variety of interesting photographs from the event, and I’ll be putting samples of both online shortly, along with snapshots and notes about other aspects of the recent political season.

There has been what the late poet T. S. Eliot would call an “objective correlative” to my wait on dealing with the picnic. On the day of the event, Saturday, June 21st, I was leaving the picnic when my left foot sank deep into a perfectly disguised hole on the property, a good foot deeper than its surroundings but topped with the same deceptive flow of green grass.

I thought I’d wrenched a knee but was able to walk out on my own, and, since nothing except a little soreness occurred over the next few days, thought I must have gotten off light. Last Thursday night, however, after I’d been to two political events (moderating one), I started feeling punk enough to beg off on a third.

Starting about nine o’clock Thursday and continuing through the weekend, the left knee gave me its delayed constituent reaction, swelling up to double its usual size, hollering at me vigorously through the available nerve circuits and stiffening up so as to make me bed-ridden even before I got doctor’s orders to that effect.

I got the knee drained of fluid and shot with cortisone on Sunday, and that seems to have restored me to the ranks of the ambient. Knock knock.

And, being a respector of what may have been a karmic message, I shall delay no longer in shedding some light on what happened at the picnic (though the balance of my observations will be published in the “Political Beat Blog” online).

The most remarkable single circumstance was the apparent endorsement by host Chism of several candidates — two of them outright: Democratic nominee Deidre Malone and, most vociferously, Sheriff Bill Oldham, the Republican nominee for a position also sought by Democrat Bennie Cobb.

It will be remembered that Chism was actually censured some time back by his Democratic Party mates at a meeting of the party’s executive committee for his support of Oldham. Chism was not bashful about giving Oldham his best shout-out at the picnic, and he — the county commissioner who was given so often to denouncing Republicans as marching always “in lockstep” — was now boasting defiantly about his having “friends” in both parties.

On the congressional scene, Chism gave Ricky Wilkins, the Democratic challenger to incumbent Steve Cohen in the 9th district, what seemed to be at least an indirect nod, allowing (or encouraging) event emcee Leon Gray to introduce the challenger with Wilkins’ own billboard slogan, “our next congressman.”            

• The current congressman, Cohen, was conspicuously absent from the Chism event, but he is making his presence felt in other ways.

Undeniably stung by this past weekend’s announcement of a Wilkins endorsement by the Memphis Police Association, Cohen, who early in his career was the legal adviser to the Memphis Police Department, put on a show of force on Monday, backed by almost a score of union representatives trumpeting their own or the Memphis Labor Council’s endorsement of the incumbent congressman, who has normally enjoyed wall-to-wall support from local  unions.

• For the record, there’s been some feedback about that August 2013 letter (see Politics, June 26th) from Imad Abdullah, the then president of the Ben F. Jones chapter of the National Bar Association (NBA), to chapter members soliciting “attorneys of color” to come forth as candidates in the 2014 judicial election with the goal of running “one member per race.”

There were numerous reactions to the premise of that item — especially from current office-holders irked at having to devote a summer to running against what they consider to be premature or unqualified candidates. One comes from Criminal Court Judge James Beasley (who is himself unopposed in this election) in this week’s Flyer Viewpoint, p. 12.

Another came from David E. McKinney, the current president of the Jones chapter of the NBA. In a letter notable for its courtesy, McKinney insists, “I vehemently reject the notion that this chapter is engaged in endorsing judicial candidates in the upcoming election based upon their race or ethnicity.”

And, indeed, as he and others have pointed out, there has of yet been no slate of endorsees released by the Ben F. Jones chapter. One who has made this point was lawyer/congressional candidate Wilkins, who (with Charles Carpenter) was mentioned as follows in Abdullah’s letter:

“Thus, to keep us on an organized path, we have established a separate committee that is co-chaired by Charles E. Carpenter and Ricky E. Wilkins. This committee has been hard at work establishing a mechanism to reach a consensus candidate for each race.”

Wilkins spoke to the Flyer on Thursday and strongly denied that he had been part of any action to prepare a black candidates’ slate for this year’s election, though he acknowledged he had been briefed in general about plans to interest African-American lawyers in seeking judicial office and had responded with encouragement.

Whatever the case, the number of contested races in this year’s judicial election is reasonably high (though maybe not unprecedentedly so), and it would seem that incumbents, for the most part, are getting the better of it so far — at least in the Memphis Bar Association’s lawyers’ poll of judicial candidates, released on Monday.

(Those recommendations are available online at memphisflyer.com‘s “Political Beat Blog” and will be available in their entirety in future print issues.)

• Note to judicial candidate Alicia Howard, who has asked me for a retraction of my report last week, based on public commentary by former Democratic Chairman Van Turner and on a citation from the state Board of Professional Responsibility regarding her erstwhile suspension: 

It is a matter of record that the board in 2011 gave attorney Howard an 18-month suspension for “signing and notarizing her client’s signature to [a] petition without indicating the client’s permission to do so” and for submitting “applications to the AOC [Administrative Office of the Courts] billing for work not performed.” 

Those two findings were the heart of the case against her and the reason why Howard was cited by the board for seven separate breaches in categories ranging from “truthfulness” to “fairness” to “misconduct.”

Howard objected to my saying that she “was held liable for forging a client’s name to a document without authorization” and for “obtain[ing] payment from the state Administrative Office of the Courts under false pretenses.” I will gladly withdraw that attempt at layman’s summary in favor of the Board’s carefully parsed statements quoted above.

She points out also that she “practiced for over twenty years with absolutely no discipline history,” that she “disagreed with certain findings” and accepted “the harsh nature of the penalty” only after “considering the expense of prolonged litigation and the toll on my family and my personal health.”

Howard also contends that 12 months was lopped off her suspension time and that she was able to resume practice in January 2012.

 

• The Master Meal of the East Shelby County Republican Club, which normally has some out-of-county designate as its featured speaker (past example: former Arkansas Governor/TV host Mike Huckabee) got by on local talent this year — the party’s major county-wide candidates on the August election ballot, plus state GOP chairman Chris Devaney of Nashville.

But that was enough to swell the turnout to several hundred at the Great Hall of Germantown last Tuesday night. Included were candidates galore for other races, including not a few Democrats. An omen for what comes next?

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

RNC Adopts John Ryder’s Debate Proposal

There was a lot of politics in Memphis this last week or so. Last Tuesday, the voters of Shelby County went to the polls and chose nominees in Democratic and Republican primaries for county offices.

The most notable win was that of former County Commissioner Deidre Malone in a three-way race for County Mayor with the Rev. Kenneth Whalum Jr. and County Commissioner Steve Mulroy. She will oppose incumbent Republican Mayor Mark Luttrell on August 7th.

Both local parties subsequently held post-primary unity rallies in preparation for the county general election in August, which will coincide with judicial races and primaries for federal and state offices.

Then on Wednesday, the Republican National Committee (RNC) began a four-day spring meeting at the Peabody here, resulting most notably in a dramatic change in the way GOP presidential candidates will debate in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

In the long run, the consequences of the RNC meeting are likely to overshadow not only the local election results but a good deal of what is currently passing for momentous circumstance in national politics.

The major event of the RNC conclave was the passing of a motion by John Ryder, the Memphis lawyer who is both a national committeeman from Tennessee and the RNC’s general counsel, and who, further, was the impetus for the RNC holding its meeting in Memphis.

What the Ryder motion did was establish a machinery for the Republican presidential primary debates in 2016 that will exclude the national TV networks from any semblance of control over how the debates are conducted.

The motion — technically an amendment to “10H,” the RNC’s rule governing participation by candidates in presidential debates — was first presented by Ryder in a meeting of the RNC Rules Committee on Thursday.

Contending that only 7 percent of media members were Republicans, Ryder drew a portrait of a party whose prospective leaders in 2011 and 2012 had been hamstrung and misrepresented in televised national debates.

There had been 23 debates between Republican candidates, all totaled, too many and all of them too much under the sway of a media that was 93 percent hostile, said Ryder, who contended the result had been harmful — perhaps fatal — to the GOP’s hopes of gaining the White House.

Ryder’s amendment would create a 13-member committee to sanction a list of approved presidential-candidate debates. Eight members would be elected from the RNC membership — two each from the committee’s four regions — and five more would be appointed by the RNC chairman.

Once a committee so appointed determined an officially sanctioned list of debates, any presidential candidate participating in an unsanctioned debate would be prohibited from taking part in any further sanctioned debates. All details of the sanctioned debates would be overseen by the 13-member RNC committee — the rules, the questions, the choice of moderators, the length of answer time permitted to the candidate … everything and anything, in short.

“We would be in control,” Ryder said. Not “the Great Mentioner” (presumably meaning the media as a collective entity).

There were objectors to his proposal — notably Ada Fisher, a delegate from North Carolina, and Diana Orrock of Nevada, both of whom questioned its dampening effect on free speech, and from Morton Blackwell of Virginia, who concurred with them and expressed a further concern that the proposed RNC commission would be over-loaded with appointees by the chairman, who would have too much authority over the primary process and might be able to cherry-pick the presidential contenders.

But Ryder insisted that all these concerns were irrelevant to the need for the GOP to get out from under the control of a “hostile media.”

Ryder’s contention was further boosted by Randy Evans of Georgia, who rose to acknowledge to the rules committee that his 2012 candidate for president, home-stater Newt Gingrich, had profited from the free-ranging nature of that year’s debates.

But the issue was very simple, he said. “This is about control … the networks versus the party. No more is the mainstream media going to control what we do.” As he had put it earlier, in what was probably the defining line of the debate, a showstopper, “Somebody has to have the power to say ‘no’ to [CNN’s] Candy Crowley!”

In the end, the objectors to the Ryder amendment turned out to be only a handful, limited essentially to those few who had spoken against it. A Blackwell amendment to alter the way members were picked for the proposed commission went down hard, and then Ryder’s amendment sailed through the Rules Committee, 46 to 3, with one abstention, needing only the approval of the full RNC contingent at Friday’s General Session.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus began that session with a speech containing the following admonition: “We have an important mission …. When something gets in the way of that mission, we have to act. We all know that that roadblock so often is in the media. … In the past, Republicans would complain about it but didn’t act. That was the old way. By acting smartly in the most important cases, we’re getting results with the media.”

Priebus recapped his successes in pressuring NBC and CNN into halting plans last year for televised “tributes” to Hillary Clinton and in forcing an apology from Ebony magazine for an article he deemed unfriendly and unfair to Republicans. The next step, he said, prefiguring the debate on the Ryder proposal, was to “take ownership over control of our debates. The liberal media doesn’t deserve to be in the driver’s seat.”

When the time came to present his proposal to the full body, Ryder continued in that vein, citing once again “an academic study … which revealed that exactly 7 percent of journalists in America are Republican.”

That meant, he said, that “93 percent are not our friends,” and “so we have engaged in a process over several presidential cycles where the people who plan and organize and orchestrate the debates are composed of that 93 percent who wish us no good.”

The same objectors as before had their say, but the result was proportionally similar to that of the day before: 152 to 7 in favor of excluding the media from all control over Republican primary debates. The networks would be faced with a take-it-or-leave-it choice on televising the debates.

Now that it’s a done deal, what are the actual facts of the “academic study” mentioned by Ryder — the one allegedly demonstrating the existence of a media composed of “93 percent who wish us no good”? The study, by Indiana University professors Lars Willnat and David Weaver, shows something else entirely. True, it indicates that only 7 percent of responding journalists called themselves Republicans. But it notes that only 28.1 percent call themselves Democrats — meaning that the balance — 64.8 percent — proclaim themselves either Independent or something other than either Republican or Democratic.

Nothing in these figures suggests that this preponderant journalistic majority “wishes no good” to either Republicans or Democrats, both of whom, as declared party adherents, constitute small minorities of all practicing journalists.

The specter raised by Ryder and Priebus of a “hostile media” could, in other words, be raised almost as readily by Democrats as by Republicans, but the more obvious interpretation is surely that the majority of journalists prefer to consider themselves objective observers, not partisans of either side politically and certainly not enemies of either side.

In fact, the chief victims of the new RNC debate policy are likely to be neither Democrats nor the putatively offending networks but those candidates — long shots like Gingrich who got a new birth as a candidate in 2012 by upbraiding CNN’s John King for a question about his private life or political outliers like Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, whose heterodox mix of libertarianism and conservatism may not accord with the wishes of the GOP establishment and the RNC hierarchy.

Ironically, Paul was the principal speaker at Friday’s RNC luncheon and was already drawing flak from remarks made to some Memphis ministers expressing doubt about the value of requiring photo IDs for voting. Now that would be a topic well worth debating — if someone could be found to ask about it.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

A Pair of Showdowns

Just what does the term “minority” mean when applied to equal-opportunity provisions of government hiring and contracting in Shelby County? The issue got a workout at Monday’s Shelby County Commission meeting when Commissioners Henri Brooks and Walter Bailey objected to two seemingly routine constructions items listed on the Consent Agenda for the meeting.

Consent Agenda items, as against items specified as Regular Agenda, are items expected to encounter no opposition. Frequently, however, such items are pulled off the agenda at the request of individual members and subjected to discussion before voting on them.

Brooks, in particular, is a watchdog on items involving federal grant money and has them reassigned to the Regular Agenda to make sure they observe the Title VI equal-employment strictures of the 1964 Civil Rights bill.

A similar issue was at stake when she and Bailey interrogated Shelby County Public Works officials about one item, in particular, calling for roof replacement of a county structure on Mullins Station Road. After asking about the distribution of jobs on the construction project, Brooks was told that 29 “minority” workers would be employed, a clear majority of the work force.

Brooks probed further: How many of those were blacks? None, she was told. They were all Hispanic. In the hurly-burly of discussion that followed, it was explained by Public Works administrators, including director Tom Needham, that Hispanics comprised the brunt of the work force for all three firms that bid for the project.

Commission chair James Harvey, an African American like Brooks and Bailey, spoke to what he regarded as the unfortunate truism that both blacks and whites were less inclined these days to do hard labor “under the sun,” a term — and a point of view — swiftly objected to by Bailey, who opined that the bidding companies actively discriminated against African Americans.

In the end, a commission majority, including Harvey, voted to refer the contract matter back to committee and in the meantime to establish an ad hoc committee to reexamine the county’s hiring and contracting policies so as to make sure that the employment of blacks, who now constitute a majority of Shelby County residents but remain a “minority” in Title VI terms, is actively sought.

• The obvious first question about last Thursday’s first extended debate of Democratic county mayor candidates at the Professional Building on Airways is: Who won? And the answer is clear: The sponsoring Shelby County Democratic Party, which is still trying to regain its health after the electoral wipeout of 2010.

All three Democratic candidates vying in the Democratic primary of May 6th for the right to oppose Republican incumbent Mayor Mark Luttrell in August — Shelby County Commissioner Steve Mulroy, former Commissioner Deidre Malone, and former school board member Kenneth Whalum Jr. — gave good accounts of themselves.

They managed to suggest their differences, some in fairly bold shades, but they did so without the kind of unpleasant in-fighting that could foster alienation later on among party factions.

Indeed, there was a moment toward the end of the debate when the three competed to see who could intone variations on the phrase, “We are all nice people,” with the greatest enthusiasm. And all made the obligatory promise that they would support whichever of the three should get the party’s nomination.

But each, as indicated, had their moments of clear self-definition.

Mulroy, who has championed anti-discrimination and living-wage proposals, among numerous other such issues, defined himself, no doubt correctly, as having been the county commission’s “most progressive activist” — able thereby, in a phrase that thrust in both an ethical and an electoral direction, to “heal the racial divide.”

The way for a Democrat to defeat the Republican incumbent county mayor, Mulroy said, was not to parrot the other party’s rhetoric but to “be consistent” and present an “aggressive contrast.” Two cases in point were the commissioner’s advocacy for universal pre-K and for a stepped-up blight-reduction program.

Whalum, pastor of New Olivet Baptist Church in Orange Mound, was equally determined to differentiate himself from the other two, but his way of doing so was to declare himself unabashedly as a partisan of Memphis concerns, rather than as some bridge-building exponent of Shelby County as a whole. He made much of the fact that he, uniquely of the three, had opposed the December 2010 surrender of the Memphis City Schools charter.

Two of his chief issues are basically intramural ones — an insistence that city government make good on its delinquent $57 million maintenance-of-effort debt to Shelby County Schools, soon to be a de facto city system; and that, in order to strengthen city neighborhoods, SCS keep open the nine inner-city schools it has marked for closing.

Malone, a PR executive with a mixed business/governmental résumé, has a longtime record of activism within the Democratic Party, name recognition from two terms as county commissioner and a previous mayoral race, and a history of involvement with a variety of civic causes.

One of the latter is her membership on the EDGE board, the cross-governmental public/private body that establishes local industrial recruitment policy. Opponent Mulroy made an effort to turn that credential into a two-edged sword in Thursday night’s debate by suggesting that the “people who sit on the board right now” had been lax in providing construction opportunities for women and minorities and guilty of promising results “that have just not happened.”

Malone countered that by expressing pride in her membership, noting that the deals struck to attract new Electrolux and Mitsubishi plants, widely suspect as giveaways, had preceded her involvement, and insisting that she had been “adamant” about bringing labor to the table.

Mulroy’s somewhat veiled challenge to Malone on the EDGE issue was one of several thrusts by one candidate against another that might have led to serious controversy but didn’t. In Thursday’s debate these tentative efforts came out of periodic candidate-asking-candidate segments devised by debate host Greg Coy of Fox Channel 13 to conform with the model of the Lincoln-Douglas senatorial debates of 1858.

Malone launched two sallies of that sort that she deigned not to exploit to any real conclusion. She asked Mulroy a direct but vaguely stated question about the Title X credentials offered by Planned Parenthood in 2011 when the commission majority opted instead to shift federal funds for women’s services to Christ Community Health Services.

All that did was give Mulroy — who had joined with the majority back then, as he has said, so as to impose strict monitoring conditions — a springboard for his consistent demand, backed by Planned Parenthood advocates, that the Title X contract be rebid now in light of a weak statistical performance by CCHS.

That was as nothing, however, to Malone’s surprising neglect of Whalum’s potential bombshell answer when she asked if the former school board member, who has made a major campaign issue of the $57 million owned by the city of Memphis to SCS, had not at one point argued that the city should not make such a payment at all.

Whalum, clearly more than a little abashed, admitted that he had, later contending somewhat lamely that at that early point in school board litigation versus the city there had not yet been a court ruling in the board’s favor.

What the candidates basically did was leave small trail markers on paths they might pursue closer to the May 6th primary vote, when the competition will presumably have become more heated.

Future joint appearances by the three candidates may well see them picking up on the aforementioned trail markers and leaving behind some of the comity on display Thursday night.

Early voting for the May 6th primary extends from Thursday of this week through Thursday, May 1st.