Tag: Tennessee General Assembly

Categories
News News Blog

Alcohol Sales Might Influence Zoo Gun Rules

CREDIT: Memphis Zoo/Facebook

Memphis Zoo/Facebook

The Memphis Zoo’s Zoo Brew event in May.

Selling alcohol at the Memphis Zoo would likely increase revenues, a spokesman said, but it may also be a way to stop allowing firearms on the property.

State Senator Brian Kelsey (R-Germantown) announced yesterday that he’d filed a bill that would allow alcohol sales at the Memphis Zoo. The primary objective in the news release about the bill was to allow the zoo another avenue for revenue.

The announcement came after a man shot himself in the leg in October, walking across the zoo’s parking lot. Firearms are allowed at Memphis Zoo. However, after the incident, zoo officials said they were reviewing the gun policy.

After the new bill’s announcement Wednesday, some on Twitter wondered if allowing booze and firearms to mingle in a public space filled with wild animals and children was a good idea.

Alcohol Sales Might Influence Zoo Gun Rules

Alcohol Sales Might Influence Zoo Gun Rules (5)

Alcohol Sales Might Influence Zoo Gun Rules (2)

However, some thought it was just fine and had worked at other venues where children were present and even at other zoos.

Alcohol Sales Might Influence Zoo Gun Rules (3)

Alcohol Sales Might Influence Zoo Gun Rules (4)

Nick Harmeier, chief marketing officer for the Memphis Zoo, said lawyers are still reviewing its gun policy and wondered if a new alcohol policy might sway it.

“Is this our loophole, per se?,” Harmeier said. “Is this how we can prohibit guns into the zoo?
[pullquote-1] “Our hands have been kind of tied on it because of a state statute. But now with alcohol sales during the day, can we now prohibit them?”

A bill during the 2018 Tennessee General Assembly session allowed for the sale of alcohol at Zoo Knoxville and the Nashville Zoo. Firearms are banned at both zoos, according to a Thursday check of their rules online.

Though both zoos got the legislative green light to sell alcohol earlier this year, neither have yet begun to sell it.

”I’m afraid that while the legislation has passed, we are still finalizing our policy regarding on-ground sales and our concessionaire is obtaining the necessary licenses and permits,” said Zoo Knoxville spokeswoman Tina Rolen. “We plan to begin sales in 2020. I can tell you that our policy will limit alcoholic beverages to defined areas in the zoo during our daytime operating hours.”

Memphis Zoo/Facebook

The Memphis Zoo’s Zoo Brew event in May.

Harmeier said zoo officials have not yet decided whether they’d do a “beer garden or whether we’d sell it throughout the premises.” But that the extra money would help support the zoo.

“It’s been very successful with other zoos and aquariums,” Harmeier said. “We’ve seen some of those other zoos hit (alcohol) sales of over $1 million now. As a nonprofit, you can take that money, that revenue, and put it toward exhibits or lots of things, like better pay.

“We want to make this the best zoo in the world and it takes revenue to do that.”

The journey of House Bill 0071, the ”liquor-at-the-zoo bill”

State of Tennessee

Rep. Rick Staples pitching the bill to allow alcohol sales at Zoo Knoxville earlier this year, wearing an ensemble that won him at least one vote on the bill.

The bill was not intended ”for people visiting the zoo to get inebriated and harass the monkeys.”

That was according to state Rep. Rick Staples (D-Knoxville), who carried a bill earlier this year in the House that would allow Zoo Knoxville to sell alcohol. Staples was peppered with questions — two questions, mainly — about his bill throughout the 2019 legislative session. The questions boiled down to, basically: Would the bill allow drunk people to mess with the animals? Would the bill allow drunk people to be around children?

Staples went to the lawmaking session in Nashville last year armed with a resolution for allowing alcohol at the zoo from the Knoxville City Council. He explained — time and again — that the council asked him to ask the legislature to allow it. It was enough to appease many lawmakers but not for others.

“I have the utmost respect for you,” began Rep. Kelly Keisling (R-Byrdstown) during a House Departments and Agencies committee meeting this year. “There’s just not enough clarity for me to support this at this time. I just have a problem with us not knowing absolutely positive that there’ll be no alcohol around children during zoo hours.”

In the dozen or so committee meetings and floor hearings on HB 0071 (what some took to calling the “liquor-at-the-zoo bill” even though Staples said many times the bill would allow “beer and wine”), Staples refined his pitch. In the beginning it was just a local bill for “Knoxville,” then, later, for “the Knoxville Zoo,“ and, then “for Zoo Knoxville,” he said, using the zoo’s formal name.

The bill would allow beer and wine sales, generally, at first. Then, it was refined to only certain locations and for after-hour, outdoor events like weddings and receptions. Then, to also include events during zoo hours.

By the floor vote on the bill, Staples had refined the pitch to be at the zoo’s “Aldo’s Cafe” (though the formal name is Aldo’s Grill) and its patio. The restaurant is located “between the hyena and zebra enclosure.”

Along the way to the bill’s passage, some minds (and votes) were changed on it, even through sometimes-ponderous circumstances.

During that House Departments and Agencies committee meeting, for example, Rep. Mary Littleton (R-Dickson) wondered if the zoo would have specific entrances and exits for drinking guests or “will people still be out after (an event) among the children?” Staples promised he’d get the information and the bill was halted for a week.

The next week’s committee meeting came. No one asked any questions about entrances nor exits. Littleton said she was unaware that Staples had a resolution from the Knoxville council, even though he’d told the committee he had one the week earlier. Either way, it satisfied Littleton who only said having such a resolution “was important.”

Weeks later, during a jovial day in the House Calendar and Rules committee, Staples introduced his bill, dressed in a white suit, purple shirt, and purple tie. The ensemble impressed House Majority Leader Rep. William Lamberth (R-Portland).

“I was going to vote against this bill but the sponsor is here wearing an ensemble of purple and white for the Portland Panthers,” Lamberth said of his local high school sports teams. “Their colors are purple and white.”

Staples responded, “thank you, Leader. It worked.”

But one mind was not ever changed, no matter what Staples said nor wore. Rep. Andy Holt (R-Dresden) argued against the bill, even on the day of its final floor vote.

Andy Holt

“Members, this is the liquor-at-the-zoo bill,” Holt began. “This one, to me, seems to be a bridge over a little further than some of us are comfortable with. I thought I’d killed this one already but it came back to life.”
[pullquote-2] “Folks, there just has to be some kind of limitation where we put liquor, where we put alcohol. We just put it in every nook and cranny across the state. In my opinion, (allowing it at a zoo) is just too far. I would ask you to vote no but that is probably not a shock to anybody in here.”

The final House vote on the bill was 55 for the bill to 39 against it. The Senate passed the bill with 24 for it, 0 against it, and two Senators were present but not voting.

Categories
Memphis Gaydar News

Tennessee Equality Project: ‘Slate of Hate’ Bills Back at Legislature Next Year

State Capitol building

When Tennessee lawmakers return to Nashville in about a month, so, too, will a slate of bills against the LGBTQ+ community called the “Slate of Hate,” according to the Tennessee Equality Project (TEP).

Here’s the latest on the bills from TEP —

The bills that will be back:

Among the bills returning is the anti-transgender student bathroom bill. It passed the Tennessee House this year and heads to the Senate State & Local Government Committee. This bill outrageously gives state legal support to public school districts that experiment with anti-transgender student policies.

Another is the adoption discrimination bill that would make private adoption/foster care agencies eligible for your tax dollars even if those agencies decide to turn away loving parents because of a parent’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or religious views. This bill has passed the House and will be on the floor of the Senate in the new year.

The old business license to discriminate bill will also return. It would prevent local governments from favoring businesses with inclusive policies in their contracting. That bill passed the House this year and will be up for consideration in the Senate State & Local Government Committee.


A new bill:

A right-wing organization in Tennessee recently announced its intention to have another go at attacking marriage equality. It’s called the “God-Given Marriage Initiative.” It would attempt to end marriage licensing and replace it with a man and a woman registering their marriage contract with the state. Where does that leave the LGBTQ community? We need to be ready to fight back so that we don’t have to find out.

Possible legislation:

A bill attacking transgender youth healthcare has been introduced in South Carolina. Legislators in Texas, Georgia, and Kentucky are said to be looking at similar bills. We should not be surprised to see such legislation in Tennessee.

Another possible bill is an attack on the inclusion of transgender people in Tennessee’s hate crimes law. In February of this year, the Attorney General issued an opinion saying that the word “gender” in the law means transgender people are covered and that means that Tennessee has the first inclusive hate crimes law in the South. But right-wing groups complained bitterly at the time and we should expect some effort to amend the law, leaving transgender people vulnerable again.

Categories
News News Blog

Tennessee Legislature’s Anti-Refugee Lawsuit Defeated (Again)

CREDIT: Courtesty of U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Courtesty of U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Children line up inside a U.S. immigration detention center.


A Tennessee appeals court upheld a lower court’s decision Wednesday to dismiss a lawsuit by state lawmakers aimed at blocking refugee resettlement in Tennessee.

The Tennessee General Assembly sued the United States Department of State on the grounds that refugee settlement in Tennessee violates the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit alleged that though Tennessee had withdrawn from the federal Refugee Resettlement Program, the federal government forced Tennessee to continue funding the program by “threatening the state with the loss of federal Medicaid funding.” The state said it had to “expend a substantial amount of state taxpayer money” to fund the program.

The lawsuit was dismissed in March 2018 by a federal judge who ruled there was a lack of standing by the legislature to sue on its own behalf and that the state failed to show that refugee resettlement in Tennessee violates the Constitution.

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision Wednesday, also stating that the General Assembly had not established its standing

“Accordingly, we do not reach the questions of ripeness, statutory preclusion, or whether the General Assembly stated a claim upon which relief could be granted,” the court’s opinion reads.

[pullquote-1] Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, said she “applauds the Sixth Circuit’s decision, which reinforces that this lawsuit should have never been brought in the first place.”


“What’s more, as a state and as a nation, we value fair treatment of refugees and compassion toward those in need,” Weinberg said in a statement. “Our country has a long tradition of honoring these values through our asylum system. There is nothing more American than allowing people the opportunity to seek safety and to work and care for their families.

“Today’s decision ensures that Tennessee will continue to uphold these important values. We will continue to remain vigilant and ready to act against politicians’ attempts to undermine refugee resettlement in our country.”

Lisa Sherman Nikolaus, policy director for the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition, said the legislature used this lawsuit to “stoke fear and division.”

“After two embarrassing defeats in the courts, the legislation must finally put this hateful lawsuit to rest and put our taxpayer resources to better use, such as funding public schools and increasing access to healthcare,” Sherman Nikolaus said. “Throughout the debate around the lawsuit, Tennesseans have shown up to defend the life-saving work of refugee resettlement.

“It is clear that our communities are ready and willing to welcome those seeking safety and protection in our country and will reject efforts by lawmakers to divide us.”

Categories
News News Blog

Lawmakers Want a More Transparent TVA

Lawmakers Want a More Transparent TVA

The Tennessee General Assembly and Governor Bill Lee added their voices to the chorus of lawmakers who think the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) should make all of its meetings open to the public.

TVA conducts its four, quarterly meetings in public. But committees meet in secret before those public meetings to discuss issues on the TVA’s upcoming agenda. A TVA spokesman said, though, committee meetings “are not decision-making meetings and a quorum of board directors is not present.”

In January, two Tennessee Congressmen — U.S. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Knoxville) and U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Memphis) — introduced the Tennessee Valley Authority Transparency Act of 2019. That bill ”would require meetings of the TVA Board to be held in public, properly noticed, and make available minutes and summaries of each meeting.”

State lawmakers in both houses passed a resolution this year signing on to the idea that TVA’s meetings should be public. It was passed unanimously in the Senate. It received only one “present not voting” action from one of the House’s 94 members present the day of the vote. Speakers in the House and Senate signed the resolution last Monday. Lee signed it the next day.

The resolution says all the lawmakers ”strongly support the passage of the Tennessee Valley Authority Transparency Act of 2019.”

“…it is vitally important to the citizens of Tennessee that TVA, as an entity created and protected by Congress, should conduct their business in the open and be as transparent as possible…,” it reads.

The state resolution was filed by Sen. Ken Yager (R-Kingston). He said he “could not agree more with what” Burchett was “trying to do” with his bill.

”We all know…that the TVA is the steward of billions of dollars of ratepayers’ money,” Yager said. “But they also make rules that govern the lives and effect the lives of everybody else in Tennessee, not the least of which are the property owners of this state.

“I just think in the spirit of transparency, and open government, these meetings — all their meetings — should be open. When Congressmen Burchett filed the bill, I wanted to give the legislature the opportunity to show their support with a resolution.”
[pdf-1]
When asked about the resolution Tuesday, TVA spokesman Scott Brooks said, “TVA is a federal agency and follows direction and guidance provided by Congress.”

Brooks also gave a list of details ”about our current efforts to remain open and transparent.” Here it is:
• TVA is one of very few government agencies that file detailed financial reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

• Significant decisions are preceded by various assessments according to the National Environmental Policy Act, which include public comment periods.
[pullquote-1] • TVA routinely posts detailed information through public channels, including public meetings, webcasts, our website and social media.

• TVA responds thoughtfully to FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests that come in from members of the public.

• TVA board meetings have been, and remain, open to the public.

• Board meetings are streamed live on TVA’s website and videos are available for viewing after each meeting.

• The board hosts public listening sessions prior to each board meeting.

• TVA Board committee meetings are not decision-making meetings and a quorum of board directors is not present.

• Confidential and sensitive information is shared in committee meetings to allow directors to provide better oversight.

• Committee meetings are often held in TVA operation areas that contain unique safety and security considerations.

When Burchett filed the bill in January he said, “I had a good, informative meeting with (former) TVA CEO Bill Johnson this week, and while I understand that TVA has reasons for not wanting to open all meetings to the public, as an entity created and protected by Congress, the public deserves to know the Authority’s business is as open and transparent as possible.”
[pullquote-2] Lindsay Pace, Tennessee regional organizer on the Renew TN campaign, wrote Monday that TVA’s board meetings are “highly scripted” with ”the real discussion between board members happening behind closed doors in committee meetings.” But the lack of transparency does not end there, Pace wrote on the blog for the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE). 
SACE

Cynthia Brown delivers public comments at one of the last TVA board meetings in which public comment was allowed to happen the same day as the board meeting. The public is no longer allowed to provide comment during the actual TVA board meetings.

“Currently, there are very few opportunities for the public to engage with TVA and what little interaction the public had has severely diminished with the change in structure to the board meetings,” Pace wrote. “Last fall, TVA made the decision to split the public listening session from the board meetings, with the listening session now being held the day prior to the board meeting and not live streamed online like the rest of the board meeting.

“Both the listening session and board meeting are held during typical workday hours, which has resulted in forcing many of those who want to attend to choose between the two, since taking consecutive days off work is not feasible for the majority of working people.”

Categories
Editorial Opinion

Spring “Blessings” from Our Lawmakers

CREDIT: REUTERS | Leah Millis

Spring has come, if you can call it that, what with the more-than-occasional nippy morning, the on-again, off-again temperatures that have been confusing dogwoods’ attempts to blossom, and the sporadic rainy torrents that somehow still feel more wintry than not.
Even so, let us count our current seasonal blessings. The document that presumably contains the truth about some alarming allegations against our president (the so-called Mueller Report) remains a distant, inaccessible mystery under the misleading cover of a four-page attorney general’s gloss. Meanwhile, that president is free to resume his assaults on human dignity, including, reportedly, a new plan by his dead-eyed special assistant Stephen Miller to resume separating children from their immigrant parents along our southern border. (Emma Lazarus and her do-goody inscription on the Statue of Liberty to “give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” be damned).

REUTERS | Leah Millis

Stephen Miller

And, as if to spread the blessings of Trumpism to those of us who are native-born, the president continues to vow to kill off entirely the Affordable Care Act, which he has so far only managed to cripple or inconvenience, here and there. Never mind the consequences for those rascals among us who have been blessed hitherto by the ACA’s coverage of pre-existing conditions. They can make do, as before — with thoughts and prayers.
There are developments on our state government front, too. Among the bills that have been hurtling toward passage in these last few weeks of the 2019 General Assembly are measures to impose a new state charter-school commission (read: bureaucracy) with the ability to override the wishes of local school boards on charter-school applications; state grants for parents to use in private Tennessee schools, called “education savings account” rather than the justly tarnished term “vouchers,” so as to confuse diehard defenders of public school education; a variety of anti-abortion measures, all anticipating that Trump judicial appointees will at some point achieve the specific gravity needed to ward off judgments of unconstitutionality; more end-run attempts to keep transgenders out of gender-specific restrooms; a bill permitting teachers with carry permits to take their guns to school; and one would-be constitutional amendment attributing all these and other splendors of man’s domain and God’s universe to, well, God.

The legislator who gave us this last one is an East Tennessee guy named James, though he calls himself Micah, after the prophet, something he would have us believe was a suggestion emanating from his personal pipeline to the almighty.

Maybe we expect too much and are ungrateful to the point of ignoring our real blessings like the ongoing presence of spring football and that avatar of the sport known as Johnny Manziel. Wait. It’s over with already? Oh, well, at least it’s stopped raining. Sort of.

Categories
News News Blog

Forum Aims to Stop Abortion-Ban Bill

CREDIT: Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi

Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi

Pro-choice advocates recently donned gowns in the gallery of the Tennessee Senate chamber. On those gowns were written ways women sought abortions before Roe V. Wade, ways such as ‘knitting needles.’

A forum aimed at stopping the passage of abortion ban legislation in Nashville is slated for Tuesday evening.

State lawmakers are now considering a bill that would ban abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected. House Bill 77 requires health care officials to record the presence or absence of a fetal heartbeat in a woman’s medical record and require results of the tests be offered to the to the woman.

[pdf-1]
Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi (PPTNM) says the plan would “criminalize abortion and set back reproductive rights a generation.” For that, the group is hosting a forum to join “faith leaders and community advocates for a rapid response forum to stop the ban on abortion.

“What happens in Nashville can hurt Memphis, and this radical ban on abortion services is no exception,” said Ashley Coffield, CEO of the Memphis-based PPTNM. “It’s time for us to stand up and be counted and let our lawmakers know we won’t stand for this assault on our health care.”
[pullquote-1] Coffield will be joined in the forum with Norma Lester, a nurse who will share her stories of caring for pregnant women before Roe v. Wade, and the Revs. Roz Nichols and Earle Fisher.

The Memphis Rapid Response Forum to stop the ban will be held from 5:30-7 p.m. Tuesday, April 2nd, at Freedom’s Chapel Christian Church Fellowship Hall (961 Getwell Road).

Categories
News News Blog

Legislators Want to Curb Local Control of Plastic Bags, Food Containers

CREDIT: Maya Smith

Maya Smith

Plastic bags like these could cost you 4 cents apiece.

The Tennessee Chapter of the Sierra Club is seeking signatures to help stop bills in the Tennessee General Assembly that would ban cities’ abilities to put any restrictions on plastic bags and single-use containers.

The House version of the bill passed on the floor in that chamber Monday. The Senate bill is slated to be heard Tuesday in the Commerce and Labor committee.

The bill ”prohibits a local government from adopting or enforcing a resolution, ordinance, policy, or regulation that:

• regulates the use, disposition, or sale of an auxiliary container

• prohibits or restricts an auxiliary container or

• Enacts a fee, charge, or tax on an auxiliary container.”

“This [bill] provides that this state is the exclusive regulator of food and drink sellers, vendors, vending machine operators, food establishments, and food service establishments in this state,” reads the bill. “This [bill] prohibits a local government from imposing a tax, fee, or otherwise regulating the wholesale or retail sale, manufacture, or distribution of any food or drink, food or drink content, amount of food or drink content, or food or drink ingredients…”

The Sierra Club called the bill “horrible legislation” and said it “would take away local communities ability to enact any restrictions or fees on single use containers, bags or eating implements (straws).”
[pullquote-1] “Single use plastics clog our stormwater systems, pollute our waterways, kill wildlife, and eventually result in microplastics in our water supplies,” reads the Sierra Club website. “Local communities know best how to handle their unique challenges with single use plastics and unless the state wants to enacted a ban across Tennessee, the General Assembly should stay out of their way.”

As of Tuesday morning, the club’s petition had 700 of the 1,000 signatures the club is seeking.

The Memphis City Council paused a vote on a new, local fee on plastic bags earlier this month as the state legislation made its ways through the Assembly.

The fee here is meant to curb plastic bag usage to reduce litter, especially in the city’s waterways, according to council member Berlin Boyd, who sponsored the resolution here.

The fee was initially 7 cents per bag but was lowered to 4 cents. If approved, it would take effect January 2020.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Clerb May Get a Legislative Windfall; “Bathroom Bill” Redux

NASHVILLE — That old saying about ill winds blowing somebody some good applies to the version of the community oversight bill passed on Monday night by the Tennessee Senate. In this case, it applies to supporters of the Civilian Law Enforcement Review Board (CLERB) in Memphis.

CLERB is the Bluff City’s equivalent of Nashville’s Community Oversight Board (C.O.B.), voted into being last November by voters in the state’s Capital city. It is the existence of the Nashville board and, in particular, the power of subpoena it was created with, that prompted the dominant Republican supermajority in the General Assembly to support Senate Bill 1407/House Bill 658, which would limit the powers of the C.O.B. — or of any community oversight board — to the mere advisory function toward the conduct of city law enforcement that CLERB enjoys.

In Memphis, only the Memphis City Council can employ a subpoena in relation to alleged excesses by the Memphis Police Department. CLERB can request one but cannot act on its own.

But SB 1407 contains amendments that would allow a methodology for subpoenas to be issued at the behest of a community oversight board. A Circuit Court or Chancery Court judge would have to approve the request, and it would have to be made by a chief of police, the internal affairs division of a police department, or a special investigator.

It is the provision for a special investigator that could expand the powers of CLERB. That was the conclusion reached by two Democratic Memphis state Senators — Raumesh Akbari and Katrina Robinson — in the wake of their No vote for the Senate measure, taken, as they acknowledged, out of solidarity with Nashville Democrats who resisted the measure. (The other Memphis Democrat in the Senate, Sara Kyle, also voted against the measure.)

But, as Akbari said afterward, almost in the hushed tone of someone who had found money along a walking path and realized she might have to relinquish it to a claimant at some point, “This would allow CLERB to hire a special investigator in Memphis and ask for subpoenas. That’s something they can’t do now.” Robinson concurred with that sentiment.

The “claimant” in Nashville that could nullify this apparent stroke of fortune for CLERB advocates is the other legislative chamber, where HB 658, the House version of the C.O.B. bill would make no allowance for any subpoena power for a civilian oversight board.

At some point, representatives of the two legislative chambers are likely to sit in conference to determine a final agreed-upon version of the oversight measure. Supporters of CLERB will find themselves waiting to see which way the wind blows.

• In the Tennessee General Assembly, legislation on matters of sexual orientation is often introduced in disguise or in Trojan Horse measures designed to conceal the actual purpose of a measure. Such was the case last Wednesday in the House Criminal Justice subcommittee, when HB 1151 by Representative John Ragan (R-Oak Ridge) came up for discussion.

In brief, what the bill does is designate a series of places (bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms) as “public areas” where laws against indecent exposure would apply.

Candidly enough, Ragan began accounting for the bill’s purpose with a “background” explanation that it was needed to “ensure clarity” because of the Obama administration’s having intervened on behalf of transgender students using facilities other than those for “whatever they were naturally.” Ragan went on to mention rulings that “created a lot of confusion” and threatened the state with a loss of federal funding.

He was about to delve further into those circumstances when Representative Michael Curcio (R-Dickson), evidently alarmed at this fiddling with the lid of a Pandora’s box and the overt disclosure of the transgender issue, interrupted with a challenge that Ragan’s explanation had nothing to do with “the bill that was called.”

Uncomprehending that he had pulled aside what was meant to be a veil, Ragan protested that what he had said was merely the necessary background.

Curcio interrupted again: “I don’t think it is.” And he stressed that the bill merely identified the aforementioned “public places” as areas where strictures against indecent exposure would apply. “And that’s all it does.”

Unavoidably, as discussion of the bill became general, it was acknowlledged that the bill went on to describe these newly identified places as “designated for single-sex, multi-person use, if the offender is a member of the opposite sex designated for use.”

It became obvious, in short, that HB 1151 was a redux version of the infamous “bathroom bill,” scrubbed away in the previous two legislative seasons, due largely to pressure from the state’s business communities.

Alarmed at the unintended forthrightness of the developing discussion, committee chair Andrew Farmer (R-Sevierville) took up the argument for the bill from both Ragan and Curcio, explaining, in effect, that there was nothing to see here. “We’re just making it clear that those are public places.” Indecent exposure, he said, was “already a crime.”

Representative Antonio Parkinson, a Memphis Democrat and this year’s chairman of the Shelby County delegation, wondered in that case why it was necessary to spell out restrooms, locker rooms, and so forth. Farmer replied that too many laws are “vague” and that they should be “tight.”

Parkinson persisted: “If a person walks into anywhere and exposes themselves to someone, that’s criminal already, so why are we adding this to it?”

Farmer repeated: “We don’t need vague laws. We need to be specific so the public understands our intent.” Parkinson threw up his hands. “If that’s true, we don’t have enough room or space in our law library” for the places that could be listed. “We didn’t list this room, and I’m not trying to be funny.”

As for Farmer’s concern that the public understand the intent of the legislation, Representative William Lamberth (R-Portland), the House majority leader, had meanwhile spelled it out:

“Until recent years,” Lamberth said, “it was not envisioned that individuals with anatomical differences would be in the bathrooms of the opposite sex.” The bill, he said, “recognizes that in today’s world there may be individuals biologically of one sex in a bathroom that may be marked for another sex.” A bathroom, he said, was “not actually in the code as a public place, though it may be more of a public place than it once was.”

With all the blinders off and the euphemisms cast aside, the newly revived bathroom bill was passed on this week to the full Judiciary Committee, which is very likely to become a highly public place itself.

…

Paul Rose (R-Covington) was sworn in last week by Lieutenant Governor Randy McNally (top, right) as new state senator for District 32, which covers a part of Memphis.

Categories
Politics Politics Beat Blog

Block Grants Bill Advances Despite Memphians’ Protest

Dwayne Thompson. Photo: Jackson Baker

JB

Dwayne Thompson musing during block grant hearing

NASHVILLE — Two Memphis Democrats, state Reps. Dwayne Thompson and Larry Miller, did their best on Wednesday to put the brakes on a proposal, emanating from the Republican leadership of the General Assembly, insisting that federal Medicaid funding to Tennessee be in the form of block grants.

But, like it or not, and there is no indication that Gov. Bill Lee is opposed to the concept, HB1280, which requires that the governor request the state’s Medicaid funding via block grants, advanced a step closer to him on Wednesday in newly strengthened form.

The bill was amended in the TennCare Subcommittee on Wednesday by voice vote and is on its way to the full House Insurance Committee with an amendment from the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Timothy Hill ( R-Blountville), requiring legislative approval of any block-grant arrangement reached with the federal government. Meanwhile, SB1428, the Senate version sponsored by Senator Paul Bailey (R-Sparta), is pending before the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee.

In the TennCare Subcommittee, Reps. Thompson and Miller objected to the amendment and then to the bill as amended. Thompson had asked sponsor Hill how many other states received their Medicaid funding via block grants and when Hill professed not to know, Thompson supplied the answer: “I understand that it’s zero.” He then asked why Hill was proposing that the state pursue the “experiment” of block grants.

Hill alluded to the state’s volunteer tradition. “It’s the Tennessee way,” he answered. “Why not?”

Rep. Jason Zachary (R-Knoxville) responded similarly. “Let’s be the first. Let’s be the precedent,” he said.

Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Matthew Hill (R-Jonesborough) then indulged himself in what he himself branded as a “joke” by saying, “Chairman Hill, this is a great bill!” He went on to express enthusiasm that Tennessee, “known for innovation,” could by passing the bill, escape the “fetters of federal intervention” and maintain control of Medicaid spending at the state level.

In a brief question-and-answer session with reporters afterward, Hill exulted that his measure had passed its “first hurdle” and was presumably on its way to full passage. He acknowledged that there was some opposition to the bill, to be expected “whenever you’re proposing something that’s cutting edge.”

Asked whether there was polling to suggest popular support for his bill, Hill said he hadn’t conducted any. But he expressed confidence that the bill has “broad support…certainly with this supermajority” and would pick up more support “as we go along.”

He said he had “sat down” with TennCare officials but could not say what their opinion on the measure was. He acknowledged that the terms of the bill could alter the way TennCare operates but did not elaborate.

Categories
Letter From The Editor Opinion

Call Them by Name

The weeds keep multiplying in our garden, which is our mind ruled by fear. Rip them out and call them by name. — Sylvia Browne

It was quite a week in Nashville. The biggest news out of the capital city was the horrific mass shooting that took place in a local Waffle House and resulted in the tragic deaths of four young people: Taurean C. Sanderlin, 29; Joe R. Perez, 20; DeEbony Groves, 21; and Akilah Dasilva, 23. All four were people of color; most of them were in college.

The shooter, whose name will not be mentioned here, was a fan of white supremacist “philosophy” and right-wing politics and did the killing with — what else? — an AR-15 assault rifle.

Same story, new town. God bless America. God shed his grace on thee.

The most compelling part of this terrible incident was the bravery displayed by James Shaw Jr., the young man who jumped the assailant while he was reloading and wrestled his weapon away from him. In this case, a good man who was unarmed stopped a bad man with a gun.

President Trump and the NRA quickly issued statements praising Shaw and his courageous actions.

No, they didn’t. Trump didn’t mention the incident, probably because it involved black victims, a black hero, and didn’t fit a narrative that appeals to his base. Or maybe he was distracted by his legal troubles or maybe because it wasn’t on Fox and Friends. Hard to tell.

The NRA’s response was the usual: If others in the Waffle House had had guns, they could have stopped the shooter, because the more guns we have, the safer we all are. They failed to acknowledge the fact that if the shooter had had a larger magazine, which the NRA favors, he wouldn’t have had to reload and could have kept killing until he felt like stopping.

Meanwhile, the Tennessee legislature was wrapping up its annual session this week. It was the usual GOP ideological shenanigans, leavened with a couple of sensible moves. They passed a motion to build a monument to “unborn children” on the state capitol grounds. This, of course, in the wake of last week’s measure to strip $250,000 from funds that were to be allocated to Memphis for its bicentennial celebration. It was a vindictive move, meant to punish the city for removing two Confederate statues from city parks, because small government means the state controls everything. Especially statues.

On the plus side, the legislature voted to honor Shaw for his brave actions at the Waffle House with a resolution filled with the usual “whereas” clauses. It was a nice gesture, even if it was boiler-plate. The legislators avoided actually doing anything meaningful by refusing to allow out of committee a proposed bill to close the loophole exploited by the Waffle House murderer’s father in giving his son weapons back that had been confiscated from him in another state.

The legislators also passed a motion that will allow Tennesseeans to vote in 2022 to remove slavery as a possible punishment for criminal activity. Yes, you read that right: Using slavery as a punishment is still legal in Tennessee. Not likely, admittedly, but legal.

Speaking of slavery and the Confederacy, I hope everyone read Jackson Baker’s report on the Flyer website about the debate last weekend between the GOP candidates for the office of Shelby County mayor. All three candidates expressed support for the state legislature’s move to strip $250,000 from the city of Memphis for taking down its confederate statues. That’s right. They liked the idea of the state controlling statues in Memphis-owned parks. And they all want to be your county mayor, so you should remember their names: Terry Roland, Joy Touliatos, and David Lenoir.

And you should remember whose side they’re really on when you enter the voting booth. I mean, as long we’re naming names.