With the upcoming Kentucky U.S. Senate race now front and center, and with allegations floating around that Mitch McConnell influenced former Gov. Matt Bevin to drop former Lt. Gov. Jeanean Hampton from his re-election ticket in favor of state Sen. Ralph Alvarado, it's time to look back two decades at a longstanding Bluegrass political question that has never been answered.
Did McConnell and former Gov. Paul Patton have some sort of deal in place to protect each other's political viability? That in exchange for the Republican Party not fielding a viable candidate against Patton when he ran for re-election in 1999, that Patton would not run for Senate against McConnell in 2002? The existence of such an agreement has been rumored for years, but no one has ever gone on the record to confirm or deny it. There might have been some -- gasp -- collusion or quid pro quo going on.
To examine the matter, let's go back to 1995. Patton was elected by slightly more than 21,000 votes over Republican Larry Forgy. The state GOP had not experienced its ascendency yet, so by the standards of the day, that was considered an extremely close margin. That race had some parallels to this year's gubernatorial election. Like 2019, the 1995 race was decided in Jefferson County. And like 2019, there were allegations of election improprieties. Unlike this year, though, criminal charges were actually filed against a handful of Patton's operatives and backers. That court case ended when Patton issued controversial pardons -- again, a parallel to this year -- for those charged.
Patton was the first Kentucky governor eligible to succeed himself in office. By the time 1999 rolled around, he had a record to either run on, or run from. And two of his positions had been quite controversial. He supported changes to workers compensation rules for employees injured on the job in a way that many felt negatively impacted coal miners' black lung claims. And he backed the removal of the community college system from the University of Kentucky's control, to be moved under a new umbrella covering community and technical colleges.
So, Patton was vulnerable. He even admitted after the 1999 election that he could've been beaten. So, you would have expected the Republicans to be chomping at the bit to finally claim the office that had eluded them so narrowly four years prior, and to win it back for the first time since Louie Nunn left office in 1971.
Again, the Republican Party was still in its ascendancy in Kentucky. The GOP had not firmed up its grip on the federal delegation, and control of the General Assembly was a distant dream back then. Forgy opted against another run at the office. But surely there was some strong Republican candidate waiting in the wings, who could have been backed by the McConnell machine that was gaining strength at the time.
Nope. No Republican with a legitimate shot of unseating a vulnerable incumbent stepped forward. Party leaders made no effort to recruit a viable candidate. The primary came down to a perennial candidate named David Williams who had switched parties (no relation to the future GOP state Senate leader) and a delightful but out-of-her-league lady named Peppy Martin. Martin won the nomination, but was no match for Patton, who cruised to victory. Martin is probably best known for wearing a prom dress to her election night event.
In retrospect, a look back at the election results shows just how susceptible Patton was to being beaten. Martin carried four predominately Republican counties in eastern Kentucky, but she also surprisingly won three counties in the coalfields (Perry, Harlan, and Letcher) that are Democrat strongholds. Patton's margin of victory in many other Appalachian counties, including his home county of Pike, was far less than one might have expected.
So why didn't the GOP field a strong challenger against Patton? Conventional wisdom of the day was that a Democrat running for re-election in Kentucky was guaranteed a victory, and that Republicans didn't want to run a potential future candidate's political outlook by sacrificing him or her to an incumbent. Contrast that to this year, when it was considered an upset when a Democrat beat an unpopular Republican incumbent.
But it didn't take long for an alternative theory to emerge. Patton was said to be looking ahead to 2002's U.S. Senate race, when McConnell would be up for re-election. Although McConnell was already the most powerful Republican in the state, he still hadn't climbed to the apex of political power. He didn't have nearly as much muscle to flex back then as he does now. So from thence came rumors of a deal: If McConnell wouldn't get the state Republicans behind a gubernatorial challenger in 1999, Patton would not run for Senate in 2002.
As it turned out, a deal wasn't necessary. McConnell beat his 2002 challenger, Lois Combs Weinberg, daughter of the late Gov. Bert T. Combs, by a 65-35 margin (the reverse of what voter registration was in Kentucky at the time). Weinberg was so bad of a candidate that it's rumored even her stepmother, Judge Sara Combs, didn't support her. A possible Patton run in 2004 against the then-first-term incumbent Jim Bunning to reclaim what Democrats regarded as "Wendell Ford's seat" evaporated in controversy. The Tina Conner scandal torpedoed Patton's political future as an elected official, although he's since re-emerged as something of an elder statesman for his party.
So, here we are, 20 years later. McConnell's fingerprints were all over two Kentucky GOP primary races earlier this year, secretary of state and attorney general. Not only do some think he was behind Hampton's removal from the gubernatorial ticket, which they think contributed to Bevin's loss, but they see McConnell behind a systematic purge of staunch conservatives who worked in Bevin's administration. So McConnell's wheeler-dealer skills have been honed and he's still using them.
There's no doubt that McConnell is a master political manipulator. But did he get some solid practice in the art two decades ago? It's a question that many longtime Bluegrass political observers would love to have answered. Maybe one of these days, when someone is brave enough to ask McConnell when they're writing yet another profile of him, or sometime when Patton has had a few too many of the beverages he's said to be fond of, there will finally be a confirmation or denial on the record to finally put an end to the speculation.
Friday, December 27, 2019
Friday, December 20, 2019
Republicans fail their first test of the Beshear administration
It's been a busy week in education circles in Kentucky, and none of the news has been good for those of us who are hoping to see major improvement and reform in our schools.
On his first day in office, Gov. Andy Beshear dissolved the existing state Board of Education, created a new one, and appointed a number of liberal opponents of school reform and defenders of the status quo. All but one of the members of the ousted board filed a lawsuit that day and sought an injunction to halt the action until the case is decided.
The following day, the new board met and forced the resignation of Wayne Lewis, the state's education commissioner. That day and the next, the lawsuit plaintiffs lost their bids for an injunction in Franklin Circuit Court, the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court, meaning the new board will remain in place until the court case is completed, which may take a year or two.
So, after all this occurred, what happened? Republican legislative leaders waited until all the controversy had subsided, then issued a statement criticizing Beshear's decision.
The old saying goes that talk is cheap. So, the statements by Senate President Robert Stivers and House Education Chair Regina Huff can be judged worthless. They accomplished nothing. "Cowardly" would be an appropriate adjective.
If these Republican leaders were really as unhappy as they claimed, they should have done something earlier in the week instead of just saying something on Friday.
Why didn't they seek to intervene in the lawsuit filed by the ousted board members? Why not file an amicus brief and ask to be heard by the courts? Stivers is an attorney. He could have written the brief and argued the motion himself.
This was an ideal opportunity for the GOP-controlled legislature to show that it will not allow the new Democrat governor to run over it, and that it will stand up for conservative principles in the face of the new liberal onslaught directed from the office on the back side of the first floor of the Capitol. But in its first test of the next four years, Republicans failed miserably.
Perhaps the Senate has something up its sleeve. Maybe it plans to reject Beshear's reorganization when it comes up for approval in that chamber when the General Assembly convenes next month. But that comes too late for Wayne Lewis, who's already taken a job at Belmont University in Tennessee. The legislature had its opportunity to take an early, bold stand last week when the ousted board members went to court, but it squandered it.
It's already been pointed out why conservatives should look upon the GOP-controlled legislature with skepticism. Last week's failure to act when the opportunity was there for a strong stance does not inspire confidence.
It's shaping up to be a long four years for Kentucky.
On his first day in office, Gov. Andy Beshear dissolved the existing state Board of Education, created a new one, and appointed a number of liberal opponents of school reform and defenders of the status quo. All but one of the members of the ousted board filed a lawsuit that day and sought an injunction to halt the action until the case is decided.
The following day, the new board met and forced the resignation of Wayne Lewis, the state's education commissioner. That day and the next, the lawsuit plaintiffs lost their bids for an injunction in Franklin Circuit Court, the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court, meaning the new board will remain in place until the court case is completed, which may take a year or two.
So, after all this occurred, what happened? Republican legislative leaders waited until all the controversy had subsided, then issued a statement criticizing Beshear's decision.
The old saying goes that talk is cheap. So, the statements by Senate President Robert Stivers and House Education Chair Regina Huff can be judged worthless. They accomplished nothing. "Cowardly" would be an appropriate adjective.
If these Republican leaders were really as unhappy as they claimed, they should have done something earlier in the week instead of just saying something on Friday.
Why didn't they seek to intervene in the lawsuit filed by the ousted board members? Why not file an amicus brief and ask to be heard by the courts? Stivers is an attorney. He could have written the brief and argued the motion himself.
This was an ideal opportunity for the GOP-controlled legislature to show that it will not allow the new Democrat governor to run over it, and that it will stand up for conservative principles in the face of the new liberal onslaught directed from the office on the back side of the first floor of the Capitol. But in its first test of the next four years, Republicans failed miserably.
Perhaps the Senate has something up its sleeve. Maybe it plans to reject Beshear's reorganization when it comes up for approval in that chamber when the General Assembly convenes next month. But that comes too late for Wayne Lewis, who's already taken a job at Belmont University in Tennessee. The legislature had its opportunity to take an early, bold stand last week when the ousted board members went to court, but it squandered it.
It's already been pointed out why conservatives should look upon the GOP-controlled legislature with skepticism. Last week's failure to act when the opportunity was there for a strong stance does not inspire confidence.
It's shaping up to be a long four years for Kentucky.
Wednesday, December 18, 2019
Our eyes are on Daniel Cameron
In an act of graciousness, Gov. Andy Beshear appointed Daniel Cameron to fill the unexpired term of attorney general when Beshear vacated that office to become governor. Cameron took office Tuesday and will serve out the remaining weeks of Beshear's old term before being sworn in for the term to which he was elected next month.
Republicans who are holding out hope that Cameron will be what Andy Beshear was to Matt Bevin, or Greg Stumbo was to Ernie Fletcher, should get an early indication on whether or not he will disappoint them. There a handful of issues already on the table that Cameron can address to assure them that he will be diligent in his duties.
Here are three things he could do immediately:
Republicans who are holding out hope that Cameron will be what Andy Beshear was to Matt Bevin, or Greg Stumbo was to Ernie Fletcher, should get an early indication on whether or not he will disappoint them. There a handful of issues already on the table that Cameron can address to assure them that he will be diligent in his duties.
Here are three things he could do immediately:
- He should announce that he will not be investigating the pardons and sentence commutations issued by outgoing Gov. Bevin. The governor's right to issue pardons is absolute, and granted by the state constitution, and there's no evidence of any wrongdoing or impropriety in the way they were done. There's only speculation and wishful thinking by Bevin's political opponents in both parties. And in the matter of the one that's drawn the most scrutiny, the accusations of police and prosecutorial misconduct in that case certainly raise questions about the legitimacy of the conviction.
- He should declare his intent to take over defense of the various abortion restriction laws passed by the General Assembly should the new governor decide to no longer do so. After all, Bevin's office's legal team took on the cases when as attorney general, Beshear declined to defend the laws against court challenges. Cameron should be proactive and tell the state that his office will step up.
- He should join the lawsuit filed by the ousted members of the Kentucky Board of Education against Beshear for his first-day act to dissolve and reconstitute the board. If he's not allowed to become a plaintiff in that case, he should file his own lawsuit.
A Republican attorney general and GOP control of the General Assembly have been frequently cited as two reasons for conservatives not to fret too much over Beshear's term in office. The legislature has already given the state's GOP base plenty of reasons to be distrustful of them. Now it's Cameron's turn. Will the new attorney general do the right thing and stand on principle? Or will he follow in the footsteps of his political mentor, Sen. Mitch McConnell, who has perfected the art of shying away from a fight and going along with liberals and their policies to get along?
In his first week in office, Beshear pandered to every aspect of his constituency. A week later, Cameron gets a chance to prove himself. Can we as conservatives be proud of him, or is he going to contribute to what could unfortunately turn out to be a long four years for Kentucky? He's in the spotlight.
Sunday, December 15, 2019
A rare defense of Mitch McConnell against an unfair criticism
Anyone who knows me knows I'm not a fan of Mitch McConnell. Kentucky's senior senator and the current majority leader of the U.S. Senate is the personification of the Republican establishment that seems more interested in siding with liberals and Democrats than with the base of his own party.
He's also a political opportunist who demands loyalty but shows none. When times get tough for Republicans, he abandons them. Just ask Ernie Fletcher, or Alabama's Roy Moore.
I went from being a vocal McConnell supporter during his 2002 re-election campaign to vowing that I would never vote for him again just three years later. And indeed, I haven't. If he's had a worthy primary challenger, such as Matt Bevin in 2014, I cast my ballot for them. If not, I wrote someone in. And I didn't vote for McConnell in the general elections either. I certainly didn't vote for Bruce Lunsford in 2008, or for Alison Lundergan Grimes in 2014, but McConnell didn't get my vote either.
My list of grievances with McConnell is long. And while I've always been on his side on things like First Amendment issues, I'm no fan of his fondness for big government, and his predicable support for liberal Republicans over conservative ones is frustrating. He'd rather pass a bill that increases government spending and programs than shut down the government to force cuts. While his record on judicial appointments is admirable, it's absurd to think that any Republican Senate majority leader wouldn't do likewise.
But there's at least one criticism of McConnell that's floating around as he seeks his seventh six-year term in the Senate that is totally off-base and needs to be refuted.
McConnell's 2020 re-election campaign has been on the left's radar screen for several years. National left-wing interests are going all-in on prospective challenger Amy McGrath's candidacy. But even before she entered politics via her failed run for Congress last year, McConnell's years of service had become an issue.
It's no secret that Kentucky doesn't do well in a lot of national rankings. We rank low in a lot of good categories, and we rank high in a lot of bad categories. You've probably seen the memes on social media, saying that after more than three decades of McConnell's service in Washington, Kentucky is a terrible place and McConnell needs to be replaced.
It would make a nice story if it was true. But the reality is that all of those things that are being pointed out are state issues, not federal matters. And which party's had a stranglehold on control of this state for longer than McConnell's been in the Senate? Hint: it's not McConnell's party.
Kentucky Democrats own every one of the state's failures and shortcomings, from educational attainment to health issues to poverty rates. Most of us have seen but two Republican governors in our lifetimes. The GOP has only had control of both houses of the General Assembly since January 2017. Democrats still hold the lead in voter registrations and in the overall number of local elected officials (last year, for the first time, Republicans finally netted a majority of county judge-executive positions.) Republicans haven't had control of the state for long enough to fix our issues, much less create them.
So, to blame Mitch McConnell for the state's problems is to be intellectually dishonest.
Democrats tried to do this in 2014 in a controversy that focused on my hometown. Prior to a public appearance in Beattyville by McConnell, the editor of one of the local newspapers -- well-known as being a liberal Democrat -- asked him about what his plans were to bring jobs to Lee County and other areas of the state with high unemployment rates. McConnell answered, correctly, that job recruitment is not a duty of the U.S. Senate, but is instead a job for state agencies. The editor wrote a biased story pegged on that comment. Local Democrats invited Jerry Lundergan's Daughter to town for a round-table, which the editor gleefully attended. The matter ended up in her ads, replete with an image of the misleading story's headline. It didn't work, either locally or statewide. McConnell beat her in Lee County by 36 points, and he scored a 12-point victory statewide despite a number of polls that predicted his defeat.
Now, they don't even have that platform to use. Job creation has skyrocketed during the past four years of Matt Bevin's gubernatorial administration. So far, it seems McGrath's primary focus is going to be to blame McConnell for a toxic ideological divide in the nation. (As if the partisan impeachment effort isn't a bigger contributor.)
As I've mentioned, there are plenty of reasons to dislike the incumbent senior senator. Liberals have Merrick Garland and Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh; conservatives have his avowed opposition to tea party principles and candidates and his affinity for big government.
But if you're going to criticize McConnell, do so on sound intellectual footing. Blaming him for state problems that are the state government's responsibility is not a valid reason to oppose him.
He's also a political opportunist who demands loyalty but shows none. When times get tough for Republicans, he abandons them. Just ask Ernie Fletcher, or Alabama's Roy Moore.
I went from being a vocal McConnell supporter during his 2002 re-election campaign to vowing that I would never vote for him again just three years later. And indeed, I haven't. If he's had a worthy primary challenger, such as Matt Bevin in 2014, I cast my ballot for them. If not, I wrote someone in. And I didn't vote for McConnell in the general elections either. I certainly didn't vote for Bruce Lunsford in 2008, or for Alison Lundergan Grimes in 2014, but McConnell didn't get my vote either.
My list of grievances with McConnell is long. And while I've always been on his side on things like First Amendment issues, I'm no fan of his fondness for big government, and his predicable support for liberal Republicans over conservative ones is frustrating. He'd rather pass a bill that increases government spending and programs than shut down the government to force cuts. While his record on judicial appointments is admirable, it's absurd to think that any Republican Senate majority leader wouldn't do likewise.
But there's at least one criticism of McConnell that's floating around as he seeks his seventh six-year term in the Senate that is totally off-base and needs to be refuted.
McConnell's 2020 re-election campaign has been on the left's radar screen for several years. National left-wing interests are going all-in on prospective challenger Amy McGrath's candidacy. But even before she entered politics via her failed run for Congress last year, McConnell's years of service had become an issue.
It's no secret that Kentucky doesn't do well in a lot of national rankings. We rank low in a lot of good categories, and we rank high in a lot of bad categories. You've probably seen the memes on social media, saying that after more than three decades of McConnell's service in Washington, Kentucky is a terrible place and McConnell needs to be replaced.
It would make a nice story if it was true. But the reality is that all of those things that are being pointed out are state issues, not federal matters. And which party's had a stranglehold on control of this state for longer than McConnell's been in the Senate? Hint: it's not McConnell's party.
Kentucky Democrats own every one of the state's failures and shortcomings, from educational attainment to health issues to poverty rates. Most of us have seen but two Republican governors in our lifetimes. The GOP has only had control of both houses of the General Assembly since January 2017. Democrats still hold the lead in voter registrations and in the overall number of local elected officials (last year, for the first time, Republicans finally netted a majority of county judge-executive positions.) Republicans haven't had control of the state for long enough to fix our issues, much less create them.
So, to blame Mitch McConnell for the state's problems is to be intellectually dishonest.
Democrats tried to do this in 2014 in a controversy that focused on my hometown. Prior to a public appearance in Beattyville by McConnell, the editor of one of the local newspapers -- well-known as being a liberal Democrat -- asked him about what his plans were to bring jobs to Lee County and other areas of the state with high unemployment rates. McConnell answered, correctly, that job recruitment is not a duty of the U.S. Senate, but is instead a job for state agencies. The editor wrote a biased story pegged on that comment. Local Democrats invited Jerry Lundergan's Daughter to town for a round-table, which the editor gleefully attended. The matter ended up in her ads, replete with an image of the misleading story's headline. It didn't work, either locally or statewide. McConnell beat her in Lee County by 36 points, and he scored a 12-point victory statewide despite a number of polls that predicted his defeat.
Now, they don't even have that platform to use. Job creation has skyrocketed during the past four years of Matt Bevin's gubernatorial administration. So far, it seems McGrath's primary focus is going to be to blame McConnell for a toxic ideological divide in the nation. (As if the partisan impeachment effort isn't a bigger contributor.)
As I've mentioned, there are plenty of reasons to dislike the incumbent senior senator. Liberals have Merrick Garland and Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh; conservatives have his avowed opposition to tea party principles and candidates and his affinity for big government.
But if you're going to criticize McConnell, do so on sound intellectual footing. Blaming him for state problems that are the state government's responsibility is not a valid reason to oppose him.
Friday, December 13, 2019
More reasons to distrust Kentucky's GOP legislature
Anyone who's holding out hope that the Republican-controlled Kentucky General Assembly will stand unified in opposition to the state's new Democrat governor, Andy Beshear, saw a couple of more reasons to question that hope this week as the Matt Bevin administration gave way to the incoming governor.
There's plenty of justification to question the legislature's commitment to conservative values. The "new majority" hasn't exactly behaved in a conservative manner over the last couple of years. And during the past week, legislators have shown that they aren't shy about jumping on a fellow Republican and sidling up to his critics.
The first instance happened Monday, when the legislature's contract review committee voted not to approve the Bevin administration's decision to award the state's Medicaid managed care contract to five companies, including the non-renewal of contracts for Passport Health and Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
That committee's decision was not binding, however, and the Bevin administration overrode the recommendation and proceeded with its original decision.
The press categorized it as a last-minute rebuke of the outgoing Republican governor by his own party. And it's possible that the new administration will attempt to reverse the decision. But on its surface, the administration's decision wasn't a bad call. Anthem has administered the health insurance for state employees and teachers for years, and has shown itself to be unable to control costs. Coverage gets worse every year, with employees having to pay more out of pocket through rising costs and deductibles. And problems with Passport's coverage are well-documented if you've paid attention. It's not hard to find complaints about their service.
And then there's the matter of the pardons, and one Republican legislator's knee-jerk reaction to them.
Kentucky's Constitution gives the governor the power to pardon criminals or commute their sentences. Practically every governor makes use of that power, often during their final weeks in office. Rarely has much been made of this practice, but that wasn't the case this time around. After Bevin's pardons became public, they became the subject of intense criticism -- likely fueled by inflammatory hostile press coverage, compounded by the grandstanding statements of prosecutors whose involvement in the cases ended with the guilty verdicts and would have no knowledge of the rehabilitation, repentance and redemption of the defendants during their incarceration.
After staying silent when Steve Beshear pardoned dozens on his way out the door four years ago, Republican state Sen. Chris McDaniel somehow found it necessary to become outraged when a governor from his own party did what his Democrat predecessor did four years ago.
McDaniel has filed a bill that would propose an amendment to the state constitution that would bring a halt to a governor's ability to issue pardons a month prior to the gubernatorial election, and in the period between that election and the inauguration.
This is probably the point where it should be mentioned that McDaniel was the running mate of Jamie Comer, who famously lost the 2015 GOP primary to Bevin by 83 votes. Makes one wonder if there aren't more than a few sour grapes behind his proposed amendment. Although Bevin's no longer in office, McDaniels' proposal is clearly a slap at him.
The problem with far too many Republicans is that they seem almost eager to clash with their fellow Republicans. Kentucky is full of GOP members who can't resist a chance to jump into the political bed with Democrats. During a time when, more than ever, the Republicans need to stay unified, they seem intent on engaging in infighting.
It doesn't bode well with a new governor in office who's already showing resistance to conservative policies. If the Republican majority is more interested in fighting other Republicans than the governor from the opposing party, it's definitely going to be a long, hard four years.
There's plenty of justification to question the legislature's commitment to conservative values. The "new majority" hasn't exactly behaved in a conservative manner over the last couple of years. And during the past week, legislators have shown that they aren't shy about jumping on a fellow Republican and sidling up to his critics.
The first instance happened Monday, when the legislature's contract review committee voted not to approve the Bevin administration's decision to award the state's Medicaid managed care contract to five companies, including the non-renewal of contracts for Passport Health and Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
That committee's decision was not binding, however, and the Bevin administration overrode the recommendation and proceeded with its original decision.
The press categorized it as a last-minute rebuke of the outgoing Republican governor by his own party. And it's possible that the new administration will attempt to reverse the decision. But on its surface, the administration's decision wasn't a bad call. Anthem has administered the health insurance for state employees and teachers for years, and has shown itself to be unable to control costs. Coverage gets worse every year, with employees having to pay more out of pocket through rising costs and deductibles. And problems with Passport's coverage are well-documented if you've paid attention. It's not hard to find complaints about their service.
And then there's the matter of the pardons, and one Republican legislator's knee-jerk reaction to them.
Kentucky's Constitution gives the governor the power to pardon criminals or commute their sentences. Practically every governor makes use of that power, often during their final weeks in office. Rarely has much been made of this practice, but that wasn't the case this time around. After Bevin's pardons became public, they became the subject of intense criticism -- likely fueled by inflammatory hostile press coverage, compounded by the grandstanding statements of prosecutors whose involvement in the cases ended with the guilty verdicts and would have no knowledge of the rehabilitation, repentance and redemption of the defendants during their incarceration.
After staying silent when Steve Beshear pardoned dozens on his way out the door four years ago, Republican state Sen. Chris McDaniel somehow found it necessary to become outraged when a governor from his own party did what his Democrat predecessor did four years ago.
McDaniel has filed a bill that would propose an amendment to the state constitution that would bring a halt to a governor's ability to issue pardons a month prior to the gubernatorial election, and in the period between that election and the inauguration.
This is probably the point where it should be mentioned that McDaniel was the running mate of Jamie Comer, who famously lost the 2015 GOP primary to Bevin by 83 votes. Makes one wonder if there aren't more than a few sour grapes behind his proposed amendment. Although Bevin's no longer in office, McDaniels' proposal is clearly a slap at him.
The problem with far too many Republicans is that they seem almost eager to clash with their fellow Republicans. Kentucky is full of GOP members who can't resist a chance to jump into the political bed with Democrats. During a time when, more than ever, the Republicans need to stay unified, they seem intent on engaging in infighting.
It doesn't bode well with a new governor in office who's already showing resistance to conservative policies. If the Republican majority is more interested in fighting other Republicans than the governor from the opposing party, it's definitely going to be a long, hard four years.
Thursday, December 12, 2019
This is why conservatives get frustrated
If what happened today is an indication of how the next four years are going to go, conservative Kentuckians are in for a long, rough ride.
It's also indicative of why so many of us stay frustrated at and rail at the moderates and go-along-to-get-along Republicans who'd rather make nice with Democrats than stand on principle and fight for what's right.
Two days after new Gov. Andy Beshear replaced all members of the state Board of Education, and before final resolution of a lawsuit the ousted members filed, the new board -- loaded with Democrats -- forced the ouster of Commissioner Wayne Lewis.
For those of us who were girding for a battle, and who actually believed Lewis when he said he wouldn't go quietly because there was no cause for him to be dismissed, it was a major letdown.
Those of us who had fears about how the Republican majority in the General Assembly would deal with the new governor had those fears justified. How can we have any confidence that the House and Senate will keep the new liberal governor in check, when the education commissioner who vowed to fight ended up caving with a whimper?
The pandering to the educational bureaucracy couldn't be more plain. Beshear promised them the moon during his campaign. He couldn't wait beyond his inaugural day to appoint an entirely new state school board. That board couldn't even wait a full week after taking office, or before the courts decide if they're even legally entitled to be members, before doing their master's bidding and giving the axe to someone who actually thought shaking up the educational system and doing something different might possibly mean better schools.
Unfortunately for the former board, and ultimately for Lewis, those members who sued failed to get emergency injunctive relief to stop this morning's meeting in which Lewis was pushed out. While the judges most likely properly ruled that the board members themselves could not show irreparable harm, Lewis most certainly can. But he wasn't party to the lawsuit. Now, if the ousted board members win what will be a protracted court battle, Lewis is still gone even if they get their seats back.
Lewis did get a nice golden parachute. One media report stated it's four months' salary and health insurance. And he'll have a job waiting for him somewhere, possibly back at the University of Kentucky where he was before becoming commissioner. But his advocacy for better education will be gone from the place where it's needed the most.
Many of us were looking forward to a controversy. We wanted the new board to try to remove Lewis for cause, and we wanted him to fight them as hard as possible. We hoped that finally we'd found someone who'd stand on principle instead of giving in the way so many do. But we were let down. For all his tough talk in previous weeks, his actions proved hollow. He had no comment on why he decided to resign instead of staying to fight for his job immediately after the decision was announced. Maybe someone will get him on the record to try to explain his about-face.
Staunch conservatives don't want surrender. We're not interested in comity. Going along to get along, at the expense of our core beliefs, is not an option. We want policy victories. If it requires engaging the opponents in messy situations, that's what we're seeking. It's a big part of why someone who's not cut from the traditional conservative mold, like Donald Trump, enjoys so much support. Trump's not willing to just sit there and take it like so many of his predecessors. He fights back. We haven't had very many Republicans willing to do that in recent history. It's refreshing to see.
In the meantime, looks like that group that former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal refers to as "the surrender caucus" has gained another member. When they have their Christmas dinner, they'll have a seat for Wayne Lewis at the table.
It's also indicative of why so many of us stay frustrated at and rail at the moderates and go-along-to-get-along Republicans who'd rather make nice with Democrats than stand on principle and fight for what's right.
Two days after new Gov. Andy Beshear replaced all members of the state Board of Education, and before final resolution of a lawsuit the ousted members filed, the new board -- loaded with Democrats -- forced the ouster of Commissioner Wayne Lewis.
For those of us who were girding for a battle, and who actually believed Lewis when he said he wouldn't go quietly because there was no cause for him to be dismissed, it was a major letdown.
Those of us who had fears about how the Republican majority in the General Assembly would deal with the new governor had those fears justified. How can we have any confidence that the House and Senate will keep the new liberal governor in check, when the education commissioner who vowed to fight ended up caving with a whimper?
The pandering to the educational bureaucracy couldn't be more plain. Beshear promised them the moon during his campaign. He couldn't wait beyond his inaugural day to appoint an entirely new state school board. That board couldn't even wait a full week after taking office, or before the courts decide if they're even legally entitled to be members, before doing their master's bidding and giving the axe to someone who actually thought shaking up the educational system and doing something different might possibly mean better schools.
Unfortunately for the former board, and ultimately for Lewis, those members who sued failed to get emergency injunctive relief to stop this morning's meeting in which Lewis was pushed out. While the judges most likely properly ruled that the board members themselves could not show irreparable harm, Lewis most certainly can. But he wasn't party to the lawsuit. Now, if the ousted board members win what will be a protracted court battle, Lewis is still gone even if they get their seats back.
Lewis did get a nice golden parachute. One media report stated it's four months' salary and health insurance. And he'll have a job waiting for him somewhere, possibly back at the University of Kentucky where he was before becoming commissioner. But his advocacy for better education will be gone from the place where it's needed the most.
Many of us were looking forward to a controversy. We wanted the new board to try to remove Lewis for cause, and we wanted him to fight them as hard as possible. We hoped that finally we'd found someone who'd stand on principle instead of giving in the way so many do. But we were let down. For all his tough talk in previous weeks, his actions proved hollow. He had no comment on why he decided to resign instead of staying to fight for his job immediately after the decision was announced. Maybe someone will get him on the record to try to explain his about-face.
Staunch conservatives don't want surrender. We're not interested in comity. Going along to get along, at the expense of our core beliefs, is not an option. We want policy victories. If it requires engaging the opponents in messy situations, that's what we're seeking. It's a big part of why someone who's not cut from the traditional conservative mold, like Donald Trump, enjoys so much support. Trump's not willing to just sit there and take it like so many of his predecessors. He fights back. We haven't had very many Republicans willing to do that in recent history. It's refreshing to see.
In the meantime, looks like that group that former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal refers to as "the surrender caucus" has gained another member. When they have their Christmas dinner, they'll have a seat for Wayne Lewis at the table.
Wednesday, December 11, 2019
The fun has already begin
Not 24 hours into his term as Kentucky's new governor, Andy Beshear found himself on the end of a lawsuit. Looks like turnabout is fair play for the man who spent the majority of his term as attorney general suing the man he replaced as governor.
Beshear had promised to take steps to remake the state Board of Education with members more to his liking, with their mission being first and foremost to dismiss Commissioner Wayne Lewis for the sin of actually wanting to improve education in Kentucky in a way that might upset the status quo and the balance of power for the Kentucky Education Association and Jefferson County Teachers Association.
Even before his public swearing-in ceremony on Inauguration Day, he signed an executive order dissolving the existing board, establishing a new one, and appointing a host of political cronies and contributors to it.
Along the way, he established on the first day of his term that he's a hypocrite.
Given the nature of Beshear's campaign promises, the board members saw it coming. It didn't take them long to choose a spokesman and announce that they were filing suit to stop the new governor's actions. All but one of the members have joined in the suit.
Governors abolishing and restructuring boards is nothing new. It was probably most famously done when Ernie Fletcher got rid of the old Kentucky Racing Commission and established the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority. But when outgoing Gov. Matt Bevin took similar actions with other boards, Beshear went to court, arguing that the move was improper and illegal. Beshear lost that battle, but if he thought it was an improper action then, why has he suddenly reversed course and thinks it's OK now? Around here, we call that being hypocritical, if one professes to have values or beliefs, but abandons them for personal gain.
The ousted board members argue, however, that the circumstances are different in this instance. They say that the appointment and structuring of the state school board is specifically addressed in the provisions of the Kentucky Education Reform Act of 1990, and the governor is not following applicable law in this instance.
Political observers will recognize a few familiar names on the list of Beshear's appointees. Democrats David Karem and Mike Bowling, former legislators, jump out. (And don't forget that Bowling is a former law partner of Greg Stumbo; that certainly doesn't bode well for the new board's ability to act in the best interests of the state.)
(To the media's credit, some stories indicated that a number of the new board members were contributors to Beshear's campaign; some reporters went ballistic last week when Bevin said one high-level appointee had to make a campaign contribution to get their jobs and failed to research the contributions of those who had been announced.)
This promises to be messy. The replaced board members have vowed to take the dispute all the way to the state Supreme Court. The new board is going to look into firing Lewis without cause on Thursday morning (Dec. 12), and he's stated he will not resign and will require the 90-day notice of dismissal that's included in his contract. Word has it that there's a steep financial penalty the state will have to pay if they fire him without cause prior to the expiration of his contract. And it's highly possible the Senate will not go along with Beshear's appointments or restructuring, as is required for them to take effect. And, will incoming Attorney General Daniel Cameron get involved in the suit? He is taking office next week to fill out Beshear's unexpired term until he's sworn in next month for his own term.
In his inauguration speech, Beshear promised a spirit of cooperation and a new day in Kentucky politics. But even before he stepped up on that stage and started speaking, his actions showed that his words were hollow. He didn't even bother having a conversation with the education commissioner, whose position is supposed to be insulated from politics, before putting the wheels in motion to have him fired. Lewis' predecessor left on his own after Bevin appointed members to fill expired terms. He could have chosen to stay.
But there's great irony in the new governor getting a taste of his own medicine before the sun had set on his first day in office. Some of us are probably enjoying it a little more than we should.
Beshear had promised to take steps to remake the state Board of Education with members more to his liking, with their mission being first and foremost to dismiss Commissioner Wayne Lewis for the sin of actually wanting to improve education in Kentucky in a way that might upset the status quo and the balance of power for the Kentucky Education Association and Jefferson County Teachers Association.
Even before his public swearing-in ceremony on Inauguration Day, he signed an executive order dissolving the existing board, establishing a new one, and appointing a host of political cronies and contributors to it.
Along the way, he established on the first day of his term that he's a hypocrite.
Given the nature of Beshear's campaign promises, the board members saw it coming. It didn't take them long to choose a spokesman and announce that they were filing suit to stop the new governor's actions. All but one of the members have joined in the suit.
Governors abolishing and restructuring boards is nothing new. It was probably most famously done when Ernie Fletcher got rid of the old Kentucky Racing Commission and established the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority. But when outgoing Gov. Matt Bevin took similar actions with other boards, Beshear went to court, arguing that the move was improper and illegal. Beshear lost that battle, but if he thought it was an improper action then, why has he suddenly reversed course and thinks it's OK now? Around here, we call that being hypocritical, if one professes to have values or beliefs, but abandons them for personal gain.
The ousted board members argue, however, that the circumstances are different in this instance. They say that the appointment and structuring of the state school board is specifically addressed in the provisions of the Kentucky Education Reform Act of 1990, and the governor is not following applicable law in this instance.
Political observers will recognize a few familiar names on the list of Beshear's appointees. Democrats David Karem and Mike Bowling, former legislators, jump out. (And don't forget that Bowling is a former law partner of Greg Stumbo; that certainly doesn't bode well for the new board's ability to act in the best interests of the state.)
(To the media's credit, some stories indicated that a number of the new board members were contributors to Beshear's campaign; some reporters went ballistic last week when Bevin said one high-level appointee had to make a campaign contribution to get their jobs and failed to research the contributions of those who had been announced.)
This promises to be messy. The replaced board members have vowed to take the dispute all the way to the state Supreme Court. The new board is going to look into firing Lewis without cause on Thursday morning (Dec. 12), and he's stated he will not resign and will require the 90-day notice of dismissal that's included in his contract. Word has it that there's a steep financial penalty the state will have to pay if they fire him without cause prior to the expiration of his contract. And it's highly possible the Senate will not go along with Beshear's appointments or restructuring, as is required for them to take effect. And, will incoming Attorney General Daniel Cameron get involved in the suit? He is taking office next week to fill out Beshear's unexpired term until he's sworn in next month for his own term.
In his inauguration speech, Beshear promised a spirit of cooperation and a new day in Kentucky politics. But even before he stepped up on that stage and started speaking, his actions showed that his words were hollow. He didn't even bother having a conversation with the education commissioner, whose position is supposed to be insulated from politics, before putting the wheels in motion to have him fired. Lewis' predecessor left on his own after Bevin appointed members to fill expired terms. He could have chosen to stay.
But there's great irony in the new governor getting a taste of his own medicine before the sun had set on his first day in office. Some of us are probably enjoying it a little more than we should.
Tuesday, December 10, 2019
I hope he fails
In January 2009 -- has it really been nearly 11 years ago since this happened? -- as Barack Obama was on the cusp of being inaugurated as president, The Wall Street Journal contacted a number of prominent American commentators, political figures, business leaders, and others to submit a 400-word essay on their hopes for Obama's presidency.
Included in that invitation was Rush Limbaugh, America's foremost conservative voice. But instead of submitting his written thoughts, Limbaugh famously took to the airwaves on his radio show and gave his thoughts.
"I don’t need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.’"
"What they purposely got wrong was they reported that I was hoping America failed, that I was so rank partisan that I was willing for my country to suffer in order for Obama’s presidency to fail. And it was the exact opposite. I wanted Obama to fail so that my country would not. I wanted Obama’s liberal agenda, his socialist community organizer agenda to fail.," he said two years ago in response to continued mentions of that incident.
Why say this here and now? Just as Limbaugh hoped that Obama would not succeed in implementing policies that would hurt the nation, I feel the same way as Andy Beshear takes office as Kentucky's governor.
I hope he fails.
That does not mean I want Kentucky to fail. On the contrary. I love this state and want it to succeed beyond anyone's imagination. I want to prove all those stereotypes wrong that the big-city dwellers and coastal elites have about us. I want our economy to soar. I want our freedoms to be preserved. I want to see life protected and government constrained. And I want to see the progress of the past four years continue.
We aren't going to get that with Beshear in charge. He's already indicated he wants to make changes to the state board of education and replace the commissioner. That would preserve the status quo instead of making it possible to reform our public schools and implement changes that would lift our educational system out of the abyss it's in. He wants to stop the implementation of work requirements for Medicaid, meaning more people will continue to leech off the system without earning their benefits. He will roll back regulatory restrictions on abortion clinics, reversing four years of protection of innocent life. And given the history of his father, who's his ideological twin, regarding pension reform, it certainly doesn't bode well for any attempts to preserve pensions for current public-payroll retirees and workers while ensuring there's some sort of viable retirement plan for future employees.
Those of us who are hoping that Kentucky doesn't retreat from its forward progress during Beshear's term have to hold our hopes out for the Republican-dominated General Assembly, and Attorney General Daniel Cameron, but it could be that our hopes are misplaced. The legislature certainly hasn't behaved in a conservative fashion the last year or so, and keep in mind that Cameron is a protege of the quintessential "go along to get along" Republican, U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell. And with a number of conservatives blaming McConnell for co-opting Matt Bevin's administration and re-election campaign, they're viewing Cameron with skepticism. Will he target Beshear's administration the way Beshear did Bevin when Beshear was attorney general? Or will he take a more conciliatory path?
Hoping Andy Beshear fails in implementing his liberal agenda after four years of a Republican, mostly conservative governor, isn't wishing ill for the state or its residents. To the contrary, it's looking out for the state and its best interests. While all of us should be in prayer for the new governor for strength and wisdom, none of us who call ourselves conservatives should in any way want him to proceed with liberal policies that we think will put the brakes on this state's forward progress and throw it into reverse.
So, for the next four years, we will hope that the new governor is stymied in implementing misguided decisions. We will view gridlock as a good thing if it keeps harm from being done, and will support inaction over improper action. We'll cheer on the Republicans in the legislature and the other constitutional offices when they stand on principle, and criticize them when they yield to a liberal agenda. We will pray for Kentucky to continue to thrive as it has the past four years.
That thriving will not occur under the policies of the past, under the leadership of politicians cast from the same mold as those who led our state into the abyss for decades. Which party has controlled this state for 40 of the past 48 years? Not the Republicans. Republicans have had two four-year shots at trying to clean up decades of bad decisions. In both cases -- Ernie Fletcher 2003-07, and Bevin 2015-2019, Democrats got angry because their old way of doing things had been upended in the name of progress.
If Andy Beshear can move this state forward without doing harm to our values and our economy and our educational system, then by all means I hope he succeeds. But is that really possible under a liberal framework that imposes regulations that stifle growth, limit freedoms, restrict innovation, and return to failed ways of doing things?
So trust me. I have the commonwealth's best interests at heart when I say to Andy Beshear: I hope you fail.
Included in that invitation was Rush Limbaugh, America's foremost conservative voice. But instead of submitting his written thoughts, Limbaugh famously took to the airwaves on his radio show and gave his thoughts.
"I don’t need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.’"
Needless to say, the left and the Republican establishment went bonkers. How could he say that? How dare he wish ill upon the country?
But naturally, that's not what Limbaugh meant at all, if anyone cared to listen to the context beyond the shock value of the four words. He explained it carefully: Obama's policies are bad for America, and if he succeeds in implementing them, it will be harmful to the country. Therefore, I want him to not succeed in what he wants to do.
Even eight years later, the left couldn't get over what he'd said.
Or, again in his own words: "I did not and never have and never will want America to fail. Never. No way. This was my point of trying to articulate the difference. I wanted Obama to fail implementing things like Obamacare. I wanted Obama to fail in letting the Iranians have nuclear weapons. I wanted Obama to fail at keeping our borders open. I wanted Obama to fail at everything he did. I wanted Obama to fail at the stimulus. I did not want America to fail. I wanted America to be saved."
Or, again in his own words: "I did not and never have and never will want America to fail. Never. No way. This was my point of trying to articulate the difference. I wanted Obama to fail implementing things like Obamacare. I wanted Obama to fail in letting the Iranians have nuclear weapons. I wanted Obama to fail at keeping our borders open. I wanted Obama to fail at everything he did. I wanted Obama to fail at the stimulus. I did not want America to fail. I wanted America to be saved."
Why say this here and now? Just as Limbaugh hoped that Obama would not succeed in implementing policies that would hurt the nation, I feel the same way as Andy Beshear takes office as Kentucky's governor.
I hope he fails.
That does not mean I want Kentucky to fail. On the contrary. I love this state and want it to succeed beyond anyone's imagination. I want to prove all those stereotypes wrong that the big-city dwellers and coastal elites have about us. I want our economy to soar. I want our freedoms to be preserved. I want to see life protected and government constrained. And I want to see the progress of the past four years continue.
We aren't going to get that with Beshear in charge. He's already indicated he wants to make changes to the state board of education and replace the commissioner. That would preserve the status quo instead of making it possible to reform our public schools and implement changes that would lift our educational system out of the abyss it's in. He wants to stop the implementation of work requirements for Medicaid, meaning more people will continue to leech off the system without earning their benefits. He will roll back regulatory restrictions on abortion clinics, reversing four years of protection of innocent life. And given the history of his father, who's his ideological twin, regarding pension reform, it certainly doesn't bode well for any attempts to preserve pensions for current public-payroll retirees and workers while ensuring there's some sort of viable retirement plan for future employees.
Those of us who are hoping that Kentucky doesn't retreat from its forward progress during Beshear's term have to hold our hopes out for the Republican-dominated General Assembly, and Attorney General Daniel Cameron, but it could be that our hopes are misplaced. The legislature certainly hasn't behaved in a conservative fashion the last year or so, and keep in mind that Cameron is a protege of the quintessential "go along to get along" Republican, U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell. And with a number of conservatives blaming McConnell for co-opting Matt Bevin's administration and re-election campaign, they're viewing Cameron with skepticism. Will he target Beshear's administration the way Beshear did Bevin when Beshear was attorney general? Or will he take a more conciliatory path?
Hoping Andy Beshear fails in implementing his liberal agenda after four years of a Republican, mostly conservative governor, isn't wishing ill for the state or its residents. To the contrary, it's looking out for the state and its best interests. While all of us should be in prayer for the new governor for strength and wisdom, none of us who call ourselves conservatives should in any way want him to proceed with liberal policies that we think will put the brakes on this state's forward progress and throw it into reverse.
So, for the next four years, we will hope that the new governor is stymied in implementing misguided decisions. We will view gridlock as a good thing if it keeps harm from being done, and will support inaction over improper action. We'll cheer on the Republicans in the legislature and the other constitutional offices when they stand on principle, and criticize them when they yield to a liberal agenda. We will pray for Kentucky to continue to thrive as it has the past four years.
That thriving will not occur under the policies of the past, under the leadership of politicians cast from the same mold as those who led our state into the abyss for decades. Which party has controlled this state for 40 of the past 48 years? Not the Republicans. Republicans have had two four-year shots at trying to clean up decades of bad decisions. In both cases -- Ernie Fletcher 2003-07, and Bevin 2015-2019, Democrats got angry because their old way of doing things had been upended in the name of progress.
If Andy Beshear can move this state forward without doing harm to our values and our economy and our educational system, then by all means I hope he succeeds. But is that really possible under a liberal framework that imposes regulations that stifle growth, limit freedoms, restrict innovation, and return to failed ways of doing things?
So trust me. I have the commonwealth's best interests at heart when I say to Andy Beshear: I hope you fail.
Saturday, December 7, 2019
When will the economic boom reach rural America, eastern Kentucky?
Let's get this out front from the start. I am very happy that Donald Trump, not Hillary Clinton, won the 2016 presidential election. She did not have the solutions to revive the moribund economy the country experienced during Barack Obama's two terms. Trump's record on economic issues shows that he was, indeed, the correct choice to move our country forward.
Similarly, I'm glad that Kentuckians elected Matt Bevin as their governor in 2015, instead of Jack Conway. Bevin's accomplishments in job creation and business expansion are unquestionable. It's a safe bet that the state will move backwards in those areas the next four years because voters chose not to re-elect Bevin and picked Andy Beshear instead.
On a national and statewide basis, things look great. Every bit of economic news that comes out is good. National unemployment is at an astoundingly low 3.5 percent. The stock market has been on a tear, consistently setting new high levels. Wages are increasing. Everything seems rosy. Happy days are here again.
But those of us far from the big cities, urban centers, and four-lane highways see this only on the news. We're not seeing it in our daily lives, in our hometowns.
If a rising tide lifts all boats, why are our vessels still taking on water? Why do the "haves" continue to do well, while the "have-nots" keep on looking for this success that's happening all around us? When is this economic boom that's taking place everywhere else going to reach us?
We're told that there are more open jobs than workers to fill them, but our unemployment rates remain high, and people have trouble finding suitable employment. When businesses locate or expand in Kentucky, they do so in communities where unemployment is low instead of those places where people are craving possibilities close to home.
Wages may be increasing elsewhere, but they're stagnant in small towns, where people are increasingly having trouble making ends meet.
A bull market makes good headlines, but means nothing to those who don't have investments or retirement accounts.
Why are the opportunities that are so freely flowing to prospering communities passing the struggling ones by?
Eastern Kentucky has its challenges, but it has resources that should be attractive to any employer. Chief among them is an ample available workforce of people who are looking for jobs, or looking for better opportunities. There are plenty of available locations for new businesses, from abandoned storefronts to empty industrial buildings to reclaimed strip mining sites. Water and electricity are available just about anywhere a new venture would want to locate.
And what of those challenges? Highway access, broadband internet availability, and cellphone service are the three biggest hurdles. These are areas where the government could step in to help.
Much of this region is plagued by inaccessibility. Modern routes like the Mountain Parkway, Hal Rogers Parkway, US 23, KY 80, and US 25E have opened up large swaths of the mountains, but trying to get between some of our county seats remains an adventure. Anyone driven from Hazard or Hyden to Harlan lately? Beattyville or Booneville to Jackson? McKee to Manchester?
It's obvious where the state needs to invest its highway construction dollars to improve access and promote economic development, but there seems to be a policy in place to give prosperous areas more at the expense of the places that really need the help. For years, two exits on I-75 served the Toyota plant at Georgetown. Now, there's a third interchange there. Bullitt County, south of Louisville on I-65, already has five exits, and a sixth one is being built on a rushed schedule. Bowling Green recently got a new exit from I-65, and Glasgow has two new exits on the Cumberland Parkway. Elizabethtown got a new exit for the Western Kentucky Parkway.
Yet the state made major cutbacks on its long-promised reconstruction of KY 30 between Owsley and Jackson counties. The project was scaled back to eliminate passing lanes on the new section under construction between Travellers Rest and Tyner. That means there will be no truck lanes whatsover on the 20-mile stretch between Levi and US 421. The extension of that route into Lee County continues to be pushed back, and the project to link that segment to the existing route north of Beattyville has disappeared from the state's road plan.
AT&T's neglect of both broadband internet and cellphone service in the counties it serves borders on the criminal. No company is going to want to locate in an area where it can't communicate with the rest of the world. Although they're making progress on both fronts, they still lag far behind what this area needs to be competitive.
When we see dozens, and sometimes hundreds, of new jobs being announced for places like Louisville and the northern Kentucky/greater Cincinnati area, we get frustrated because the state is making investments in those prosperous places instead of the struggling small communities and rural counties.
During the recent gubernatorial campaign, Beshear touched on this. He said that the Bevin administration had concentrated on the urban areas, while he was going to bring job opportunities to the entire state. When pressed on this, he mentioned agriculture. That's not going to work in the mountains, where our terrain isn't suitable for farming.
Too many of our residents are already having to commute significant distances for jobs. This costs them time and money. It should be easier for folks to be able to work near their homes, especially if there are plenty of people seeking work in those communities.
Similarly, I'm glad that Kentuckians elected Matt Bevin as their governor in 2015, instead of Jack Conway. Bevin's accomplishments in job creation and business expansion are unquestionable. It's a safe bet that the state will move backwards in those areas the next four years because voters chose not to re-elect Bevin and picked Andy Beshear instead.
On a national and statewide basis, things look great. Every bit of economic news that comes out is good. National unemployment is at an astoundingly low 3.5 percent. The stock market has been on a tear, consistently setting new high levels. Wages are increasing. Everything seems rosy. Happy days are here again.
But those of us far from the big cities, urban centers, and four-lane highways see this only on the news. We're not seeing it in our daily lives, in our hometowns.
If a rising tide lifts all boats, why are our vessels still taking on water? Why do the "haves" continue to do well, while the "have-nots" keep on looking for this success that's happening all around us? When is this economic boom that's taking place everywhere else going to reach us?
We're told that there are more open jobs than workers to fill them, but our unemployment rates remain high, and people have trouble finding suitable employment. When businesses locate or expand in Kentucky, they do so in communities where unemployment is low instead of those places where people are craving possibilities close to home.
Wages may be increasing elsewhere, but they're stagnant in small towns, where people are increasingly having trouble making ends meet.
A bull market makes good headlines, but means nothing to those who don't have investments or retirement accounts.
Why are the opportunities that are so freely flowing to prospering communities passing the struggling ones by?
Eastern Kentucky has its challenges, but it has resources that should be attractive to any employer. Chief among them is an ample available workforce of people who are looking for jobs, or looking for better opportunities. There are plenty of available locations for new businesses, from abandoned storefronts to empty industrial buildings to reclaimed strip mining sites. Water and electricity are available just about anywhere a new venture would want to locate.
And what of those challenges? Highway access, broadband internet availability, and cellphone service are the three biggest hurdles. These are areas where the government could step in to help.
Much of this region is plagued by inaccessibility. Modern routes like the Mountain Parkway, Hal Rogers Parkway, US 23, KY 80, and US 25E have opened up large swaths of the mountains, but trying to get between some of our county seats remains an adventure. Anyone driven from Hazard or Hyden to Harlan lately? Beattyville or Booneville to Jackson? McKee to Manchester?
It's obvious where the state needs to invest its highway construction dollars to improve access and promote economic development, but there seems to be a policy in place to give prosperous areas more at the expense of the places that really need the help. For years, two exits on I-75 served the Toyota plant at Georgetown. Now, there's a third interchange there. Bullitt County, south of Louisville on I-65, already has five exits, and a sixth one is being built on a rushed schedule. Bowling Green recently got a new exit from I-65, and Glasgow has two new exits on the Cumberland Parkway. Elizabethtown got a new exit for the Western Kentucky Parkway.
Yet the state made major cutbacks on its long-promised reconstruction of KY 30 between Owsley and Jackson counties. The project was scaled back to eliminate passing lanes on the new section under construction between Travellers Rest and Tyner. That means there will be no truck lanes whatsover on the 20-mile stretch between Levi and US 421. The extension of that route into Lee County continues to be pushed back, and the project to link that segment to the existing route north of Beattyville has disappeared from the state's road plan.
AT&T's neglect of both broadband internet and cellphone service in the counties it serves borders on the criminal. No company is going to want to locate in an area where it can't communicate with the rest of the world. Although they're making progress on both fronts, they still lag far behind what this area needs to be competitive.
When we see dozens, and sometimes hundreds, of new jobs being announced for places like Louisville and the northern Kentucky/greater Cincinnati area, we get frustrated because the state is making investments in those prosperous places instead of the struggling small communities and rural counties.
During the recent gubernatorial campaign, Beshear touched on this. He said that the Bevin administration had concentrated on the urban areas, while he was going to bring job opportunities to the entire state. When pressed on this, he mentioned agriculture. That's not going to work in the mountains, where our terrain isn't suitable for farming.
Too many of our residents are already having to commute significant distances for jobs. This costs them time and money. It should be easier for folks to be able to work near their homes, especially if there are plenty of people seeking work in those communities.
The protestors protest when they're being protested
How many ways are there to express this concept? "They can dish it out, but they can't take it." "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."
Far too often, people can't stand the same scrutiny they want to put others under. Why do Antifa activists wear hoods or masks? They're afraid of what would happen should their identities become known.
And when many activists or protestors do voice their opinions openly, they're not real happy when they're challenged. And their followers get defensive when it happens.
During the recent battles over pension reform and education funding and policy in the Kentucky General Assembly, a number of high-profile protests took place. Several were organized by formal entities such as the Kentucky Education Association and Jefferson County Teachers Association, but others were promoted by independent activist groups.
The most prominent group that came out of the protests calls itself KY 120 United. They're responsible for any #KY120United hashtags you may have seen on social media. They claim to speak for educators and public employees, but I have always made it plain that as a state employee, they in no way speak for me or advocate for me. In fact, I oppose most of the initiatives they support. I'm in favor of reforms that will preserve and protect pensions for teachers and public workers, but they've opposed the efforts. I want education at all levels improved across this state; they seem interested in maintaining the status quo and rejecting any move to change things for the better and ensure a better education for every student.
One of the founders of KY 120 United is a Fayette County Board of Education employee named Wynema Brewer-Candy. She's more commonly known as Nema Brewer. She's been identified in several news stories for her role, but only some stories have made note of the fact that she's not a classroom teacher.
Late in the gubernatorial campaign, as she and her group were leading the charge for Andy Beshear's candidacy, her salary and job title were brought up by conservative interest groups and individual activists as a matter of discussion. She is listed as a communications specialist with an annual salary of $88,369.01.
Think about that for a minute. Here is someone in a non-academic role, working for a public school system, making that much money, yet they complain about pay and funding in education.
"Wonder how teachers feel about their fearless leader making $90,000 a year just to tweet," was the way the Kentucky Freedom Coalition phrased its discussion of the matter.
While it's generally true that most private sector jobs pay more than their public sector equivalents, that doesn't appear to be the case for non-academic school system positions. Ms. Brewer's salary is around twice what state government pays its career communications professionals, and is about $30,000 more than a similar private sector position with a similar title.
I would say "title and duties," but hang on a minute.
When this became an issue in the gubernatorial race, I shared it on social media. It didn't take long for me to get a couple of angry responses from people who know and work with her, or have worked with her in the past. One's a college classmate, and the other is a friend from my area who's relocated to the Bluegrass. Both assured me that I was very out of line for bringing this up, and that Nema Brewer is a very hard worker who earns and deserves every penny that she makes.
Funny thing is, despite these assurances that she works hard and is deserving of her paycheck, they couldn't (or wouldn't) tell me exactly what she does.
I'd never heard of Nema Brewer until KY 120 United came along. She's not the spokesperson for Fayette County Schools. She's never quoted in the paper on education-related issues and her name isn't listed as the contact person for any press releases I've ever seen come from the school district there. The communications director who does all that gets a six-figure salary. That's a whole lot more than the communications directors earn at just about every state agency I can think of. In fact, Gov. Matt Bevin's communications director only makes three-fourths of that, and his press secretary gets about half Brewer's salary. And their names are front and center in just about any communications from the governor's office or statements to the media.
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems funny that teachers upset about education funding and their pay aren't picketing at their local superintendent's office, asking why a non-certified administrator is making so much more than they are. (Or why they voted for the son of the governor who chronically underfunded their pensions, but that's already been noted.)
Administrative salary bloat is a real thing in just about every school district in the state. Even in some of the poorer, smaller counties, superintendents can pull down salaries in excess of $100,000. The number of six-figure administrators in Fayette County was the subject of a recent television news investigative report. And who knows what that figure is in Jefferson County, consistently home to Kentucky's worst schools and those who most resist changes in how children are educated or schools are funded?
After Brewer's salary and job became an issue, she made social media statements saying she would not be intimidated into silence. News flash: No one's trying to intimidate or silence her. They're just pointing out the irony of a non-educator making twice as much as many teachers goading them into illegal sickouts, when the teachers ought to be asking hard questions of their local school boards instead of protesting in Frankfort.
I'm not sure why Brewer or any of her fan club would be surprised that she's gotten scrutiny. Anyone who ever steps out into the public arena dons a figurative target. How many conservative activists have had their lives exposed over the years? In Kentucky, one outspoken Matt Bevin supporter has seen it happen -- in part because she helped spread the word about Nema Brewer. It's the same thing that happened when teachers protested at a business that was formerly owned by former state Sen. Joe Bowen.
When two Bevin supporters recently spoke out about election integrity, the press and the opposition made it a point to dig into their backgrounds. They expected that. Why should the founders of KY 120 United expect anything different than what the founders of Citizens for Election Integrity-Kentucky received?
Nema Brewer got her wish, for now anyway. Beshear 2.0 will take office next week. And she'll still be making her huge salary while teachers find out there's not enough Andy Candy in the dish to give each educator in the state a $2,000 raise. The same wave that finally flipped the House of Representatives will be rolling over Kentucky again next year, when President Trump's on the re-election ballot. That means that the next "Remember in November" campaign is likely to end as badly as the first one did. While the philosophies at the Labor Cabinet and Department of Education may be changing, there will also be a change in the attorney general's office, and Daniel Cameron will probably find it prudent to prosecute any teachers who illegally take sick days to protest in Frankfort during the upcoming legislative session.
Far too often, people can't stand the same scrutiny they want to put others under. Why do Antifa activists wear hoods or masks? They're afraid of what would happen should their identities become known.
And when many activists or protestors do voice their opinions openly, they're not real happy when they're challenged. And their followers get defensive when it happens.
During the recent battles over pension reform and education funding and policy in the Kentucky General Assembly, a number of high-profile protests took place. Several were organized by formal entities such as the Kentucky Education Association and Jefferson County Teachers Association, but others were promoted by independent activist groups.
The most prominent group that came out of the protests calls itself KY 120 United. They're responsible for any #KY120United hashtags you may have seen on social media. They claim to speak for educators and public employees, but I have always made it plain that as a state employee, they in no way speak for me or advocate for me. In fact, I oppose most of the initiatives they support. I'm in favor of reforms that will preserve and protect pensions for teachers and public workers, but they've opposed the efforts. I want education at all levels improved across this state; they seem interested in maintaining the status quo and rejecting any move to change things for the better and ensure a better education for every student.
One of the founders of KY 120 United is a Fayette County Board of Education employee named Wynema Brewer-Candy. She's more commonly known as Nema Brewer. She's been identified in several news stories for her role, but only some stories have made note of the fact that she's not a classroom teacher.
Late in the gubernatorial campaign, as she and her group were leading the charge for Andy Beshear's candidacy, her salary and job title were brought up by conservative interest groups and individual activists as a matter of discussion. She is listed as a communications specialist with an annual salary of $88,369.01.
Think about that for a minute. Here is someone in a non-academic role, working for a public school system, making that much money, yet they complain about pay and funding in education.
"Wonder how teachers feel about their fearless leader making $90,000 a year just to tweet," was the way the Kentucky Freedom Coalition phrased its discussion of the matter.
While it's generally true that most private sector jobs pay more than their public sector equivalents, that doesn't appear to be the case for non-academic school system positions. Ms. Brewer's salary is around twice what state government pays its career communications professionals, and is about $30,000 more than a similar private sector position with a similar title.
I would say "title and duties," but hang on a minute.
When this became an issue in the gubernatorial race, I shared it on social media. It didn't take long for me to get a couple of angry responses from people who know and work with her, or have worked with her in the past. One's a college classmate, and the other is a friend from my area who's relocated to the Bluegrass. Both assured me that I was very out of line for bringing this up, and that Nema Brewer is a very hard worker who earns and deserves every penny that she makes.
Funny thing is, despite these assurances that she works hard and is deserving of her paycheck, they couldn't (or wouldn't) tell me exactly what she does.
I'd never heard of Nema Brewer until KY 120 United came along. She's not the spokesperson for Fayette County Schools. She's never quoted in the paper on education-related issues and her name isn't listed as the contact person for any press releases I've ever seen come from the school district there. The communications director who does all that gets a six-figure salary. That's a whole lot more than the communications directors earn at just about every state agency I can think of. In fact, Gov. Matt Bevin's communications director only makes three-fourths of that, and his press secretary gets about half Brewer's salary. And their names are front and center in just about any communications from the governor's office or statements to the media.
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems funny that teachers upset about education funding and their pay aren't picketing at their local superintendent's office, asking why a non-certified administrator is making so much more than they are. (Or why they voted for the son of the governor who chronically underfunded their pensions, but that's already been noted.)
Administrative salary bloat is a real thing in just about every school district in the state. Even in some of the poorer, smaller counties, superintendents can pull down salaries in excess of $100,000. The number of six-figure administrators in Fayette County was the subject of a recent television news investigative report. And who knows what that figure is in Jefferson County, consistently home to Kentucky's worst schools and those who most resist changes in how children are educated or schools are funded?
After Brewer's salary and job became an issue, she made social media statements saying she would not be intimidated into silence. News flash: No one's trying to intimidate or silence her. They're just pointing out the irony of a non-educator making twice as much as many teachers goading them into illegal sickouts, when the teachers ought to be asking hard questions of their local school boards instead of protesting in Frankfort.
I'm not sure why Brewer or any of her fan club would be surprised that she's gotten scrutiny. Anyone who ever steps out into the public arena dons a figurative target. How many conservative activists have had their lives exposed over the years? In Kentucky, one outspoken Matt Bevin supporter has seen it happen -- in part because she helped spread the word about Nema Brewer. It's the same thing that happened when teachers protested at a business that was formerly owned by former state Sen. Joe Bowen.
When two Bevin supporters recently spoke out about election integrity, the press and the opposition made it a point to dig into their backgrounds. They expected that. Why should the founders of KY 120 United expect anything different than what the founders of Citizens for Election Integrity-Kentucky received?
Nema Brewer got her wish, for now anyway. Beshear 2.0 will take office next week. And she'll still be making her huge salary while teachers find out there's not enough Andy Candy in the dish to give each educator in the state a $2,000 raise. The same wave that finally flipped the House of Representatives will be rolling over Kentucky again next year, when President Trump's on the re-election ballot. That means that the next "Remember in November" campaign is likely to end as badly as the first one did. While the philosophies at the Labor Cabinet and Department of Education may be changing, there will also be a change in the attorney general's office, and Daniel Cameron will probably find it prudent to prosecute any teachers who illegally take sick days to protest in Frankfort during the upcoming legislative session.
Friday, December 6, 2019
Lazy, agenda-driven "reporting" hastens journalism's demise
It's no secret that the journalism business is in big trouble. The big traditional print outlets are seeing their circulations decline and their credibility eroding, and the well-known broadcast outlets are losing viewers and trust at an alarming rate. High-profile lawsuits against a number of those outlets by Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann don't help, and neither will the multimillion-dollar suit Congressman Devin Nunes filed against CNN for its false report that he met with Ukrainian officials in Austria in an attempt to dig up dirt on Joe Biden.
There are lots of reasons for the decline of the media. Biased coverage, poor business decisions, and bad reporting are chief among them.
At a time when newspapers are begging for readers and trying to make themselves relevant once again by adopting catchy slogans such as "Democracy Dies In Darkness," one would think that reporters would make an effort to write complete and unbiased stories when they cover current events.
A recent story by Jack Brammer from the Lexington Herald-Leader shows this not to be the case at all. Lazy, biased reporting still rules the day at one of Kentucky's two largest newspapers.
On his way out of office, Gov. Matt Bevin has been giving interviews to a number of radio stations across the state. He has either ignored or declined the Herald-Leader's request for an exit interview. And why should he talk to that paper? It has been hostile to him since he won the Republican gubernatorial nomination four years ago.
Unable to get his own interview with Bevin, Brammer decided instead to write a story centered on various comments Bevin made in those radio interviews. The focus of the story that came out was that Bevin had stated that incoming Gov.-elect Andy Beshear had sold a high-level appointment to a campaign contributor.
"I’ve heard of one person who has been appointed who told the person whose place he is taking that he had to pay. He had to make campaign contributions to get his appointment,” the story quotes Bevin as saying on a radio station in Cadiz. Brammer's story chastises Bevin for not naming the appointee or offering any proof that the allegation is true.
Isn't that the job of the press? Don't they investigate and verify the statements of officials and politicians every day? Isn't that why there are scads of fact-checking sites out there? Isn't that why reporters and pundits hang on every word President Trump utters, trying to prove them false?
So far, Beshear has made two announcements of appointments to high-level positions. His first announcement, last week, was mainly of people who work for him in the attorney general's office moving up with him. He made another announcement this week, in which he gave Lt. Gov-elect Jacqueline Coleman a cabinet secretary's role, and verified what many people suspected, in that Rep. Rocky Adkins -- whom Beshear defeated in the gubernatorial primary but became a prominent Beshear backer in the general election -- would get a key role in his administration.
Also in that announcement, Beshear stated that former Lexington mayor and failed congressional candidate Jim Gray would be his Transportation Cabinet secretary. That appointment came as a surprise to most, as the prevailing thought was that Adkins would get that job.
The Kentucky Registry of Election Finance has this neat little feature on its website, where anyone can search for campaign contributions. After first seeing Brammer's story Wednesday night, it took me about five minutes of work on my smartphone to determine that Jim Gray, this surprise appointee, had contributed the maximum of $4,000 to Andy Beshear's gubernatorial campaign. He gave two separate $1,000 contributions to Beshear's primary effort last winter, then a $2,000 gift to his general election campaign this summer.
If I could find that out, and take the time to research it, why couldn't Brammer? Wouldn't the prudent course of action for an unbiased, impartial journalist be to look into the contributions of everyone Beshear has appointed to date, then ask those individuals and the governor-elect for comment?
In the case of Gray, I can think of a number of pertinent questions to ask.
- "Did the two of you know each other previously? If so, how well? What was the nature of your relationship?"
- "Did the two of you ever discuss campaign contributions"?
- "When was Gray's appointment first discussed? How long had he been under consideration for a cabinet secretary's position?"
It could be that both Gray and Beshear would deny any connection between Gray's contributions and his appointment, but at least the questions and answers would be out there in the public domain for all to see. In any case, it's an obvious matter that one should expect a serious journalist to pursue.
The major media outlets in this state have a history of overlooking or blatantly ignoring information that would make Democrats look bad, or present Republicans in a better light. Look how doggedly the Courier-Journal tried to make Bevin's purchase of a home an issue. Yet during the Ernie Fletcher administration, the press overlooked pertinent facts concerning Greg Stumbo's investigation that could have made a difference in public perception had they been widely known.
Jack Brammer's been a political reporter for a long time. He knows how to research stories. Is he just phoning it in now, waiting for a buyout from McClatchy? Did laziness or bias impact the way he reported this story? Why didn't he do some simple investigation and then ask questions about what he could have found out? If someone who lives two hours from Frankfort can find this out from the comfort of his home, why can't a reporter who works in the capital city do it while on the job?
As a commenter noted on the H-L's story, there's no direct evidence of a quid pro quo (that certainly seems to be a popular phrase these days.) While that's true, there are legitimate questions that could be asked, and should be asked by responsible reporters. Ask them, get denials on the record, and then let the people make up their own minds based on the evidence. The fact that the question never got asked takes that possibility away from the populace.
Volumes could be, and have been, written about journalism's decline. The clock is ticking on the traditional media, as more and more sources of information become available to the public. When journalists don't do their due diligence on stories, they do their industry no favors.
Kentuckians wise to doubt legislature's ability to keep Beshear in check
One of the silver linings that's frequently mentioned when discussing the black cloud that will be Andy Beshear's term as Kentucky's governor is the fact that both houses of the General Assembly are firmly in Republican control.
The GOP holds a veto-proof supermajority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, and that's not likely to change next year when all 100 House seats and half of the 38 Senate seats are up for grabs on a ballot that will be headlined by the highly-popular President Trump.
The reasoning is that the Republican legislature can reject Beshear's proposals, pass its own initiatives, and then override any Beshear vetoes.
But can we really trust the General Assembly to do the right thing?
The newly-minted GOP majority started out like gangbusters when the legislature held its short session in 2017. On the strength of that new power, with a Republican governor in office, they approved right-to-work legislation, repealed the prevailing wage requirements for state- and locally-funded public works projects, tightened restrictions on elective abortions, and passed several other top-of-the-agenda initiatives that had languished for years because Democrats still controlled the House.
Unfortunately, after that, the legislature had nowhere to go but down, which it did. The Republican majority levied a sales tax on services such as veterinary fees and auto repairs, and then overrode Gov. Matt Bevin's veto. The GOP passed a drastic increase in fees for a number of transactions in county clerks' offices.
And it gets worse. Republicans continue to beat the drum for an onerous gas tax increase -- its leading proponents are GOP legislators and the ostensibly-conservative Kentucky Chamber of Commerce -- and some Republicans are even indicating they'll sign on to "red flag" gun confiscation laws that throw due process out the window.
Indeed, House Republicans invited Beshear to their caucus retreat, to begin the day after his Dec. 10 swearing-in. Beshear has not, of this writing, said whether or not he'll attend, but it's likely he won't be able to because of the immediate demands of his new office.
It's nice to fantasize that the GOP will tell the new governor to sit down and shut up and stay out of the way, but given the "new majority's" track record, they'd probably express a willingness to cave on core principles and express the "go along to get along" mentality that causes conservatives to mistrust and despise the Republican establishment.
The Senate has struck a more defiant tone. For one thing, leaders have said that any Beshear-backed proposal to legalize casino gambling is dead on arrival. But given the way that the Senate -- and the House, too, for that matter -- bucked a governor from its own party so many times, there's no reason for optimism.
Legislative leaders have said they're willing to work with the new governor on items that will improve the state. But seriously, how can supposedly conservative Republicans agree that the policies that will be proposed by a liberal Democrat would improve things? Of course, the "conservative" legislature has already shown itself to be too liberal on a number of important issues, which is disappointing to those of us who hoped for years that Kentucky voters would "flip the House" and get that body in line with the Senate on priorities.
Hope for the best, but expect the worst -- given the current legislature's track record in acting in a conservative manner, that's the safest bet for those of us who don't want to see Beshear's agenda implemented, and the line held on Kentucky regressing back to the old way of doing things until the Republicans can retake the governor's office.
The GOP holds a veto-proof supermajority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, and that's not likely to change next year when all 100 House seats and half of the 38 Senate seats are up for grabs on a ballot that will be headlined by the highly-popular President Trump.
The reasoning is that the Republican legislature can reject Beshear's proposals, pass its own initiatives, and then override any Beshear vetoes.
But can we really trust the General Assembly to do the right thing?
The newly-minted GOP majority started out like gangbusters when the legislature held its short session in 2017. On the strength of that new power, with a Republican governor in office, they approved right-to-work legislation, repealed the prevailing wage requirements for state- and locally-funded public works projects, tightened restrictions on elective abortions, and passed several other top-of-the-agenda initiatives that had languished for years because Democrats still controlled the House.
Unfortunately, after that, the legislature had nowhere to go but down, which it did. The Republican majority levied a sales tax on services such as veterinary fees and auto repairs, and then overrode Gov. Matt Bevin's veto. The GOP passed a drastic increase in fees for a number of transactions in county clerks' offices.
And it gets worse. Republicans continue to beat the drum for an onerous gas tax increase -- its leading proponents are GOP legislators and the ostensibly-conservative Kentucky Chamber of Commerce -- and some Republicans are even indicating they'll sign on to "red flag" gun confiscation laws that throw due process out the window.
Indeed, House Republicans invited Beshear to their caucus retreat, to begin the day after his Dec. 10 swearing-in. Beshear has not, of this writing, said whether or not he'll attend, but it's likely he won't be able to because of the immediate demands of his new office.
It's nice to fantasize that the GOP will tell the new governor to sit down and shut up and stay out of the way, but given the "new majority's" track record, they'd probably express a willingness to cave on core principles and express the "go along to get along" mentality that causes conservatives to mistrust and despise the Republican establishment.
The Senate has struck a more defiant tone. For one thing, leaders have said that any Beshear-backed proposal to legalize casino gambling is dead on arrival. But given the way that the Senate -- and the House, too, for that matter -- bucked a governor from its own party so many times, there's no reason for optimism.
Legislative leaders have said they're willing to work with the new governor on items that will improve the state. But seriously, how can supposedly conservative Republicans agree that the policies that will be proposed by a liberal Democrat would improve things? Of course, the "conservative" legislature has already shown itself to be too liberal on a number of important issues, which is disappointing to those of us who hoped for years that Kentucky voters would "flip the House" and get that body in line with the Senate on priorities.
Hope for the best, but expect the worst -- given the current legislature's track record in acting in a conservative manner, that's the safest bet for those of us who don't want to see Beshear's agenda implemented, and the line held on Kentucky regressing back to the old way of doing things until the Republicans can retake the governor's office.
Thursday, December 5, 2019
Teachers' temper tantrum took down Bevin
By this time next week, Kentucky will have a new governor. With the decision by Gov. Matt Bevin not to contest the election in the General Assembly after a recanvass of the 5,000-vote decision showed no substantive changes in the vote totals, and with the certification of the results by the State Board of Elections, the way is paved for Andy Beshear to be sworn in as the commonwealth's 59th chief executive.
How did this happen? In a state that's trending Republican despite Democrats still holding an advantage in voter registration numbers, and in an election where every other Republican running for statewide office won by impressive numbers, how did an incumbent Republican who had the backing of a president who's immensely popular in the state manage to lose, especially with the state's economy bustling like never before?
There are a number of theories out there. One is that his tiff with Lt. Gov. Jeanene Hampton hurt him at the polls. Bevin alienated Hampton's supporters by not choosing her to run with him for a second time, and angered them when his administration fired members of her office staff, without consultation with or approval by her.
While that may have played a role in voting decisions by members of Hampton's inner circle -- Hampton herself admitted that she voted for Libertarian candidate John Hicks instead of Bevin -- it's doubtful that move itself cost the incumbent the race.
The night of the election, the Libertarian Party of Kentucky issued a classless statement saying it was pleased that its candidate had played spoiler and cost Bevin the election. Indeed, Hicks drew about 28,000 votes statewide, but it can't be ascertained for certain that all of those were votes that would otherwise have gone to Bevin. Libertarians tend to favor drug legalization, and Beshear had never indicated that he's for the legalization of marijuana or other drugs for recreational use. Hicks probably got his support from voters in both parties for whom being able to legally get stoned is their top-priority issue.
(It should be noted that the Libertarian Party also fielded a candidate in the auditor's race, who received more than 46,000 votes., so not even all Libertarian voters cast their ballots for Hicks.)
So again, how and why did this happen? Why did so many voters split their tickets to vote for Andy Beshear, yet picked every other Republican on the ballot?
The most correct answer is that Kentucky teachers threw a temper tantrum at the ballot box and voted against a candidate who was actually trying to ensure their pension system is solvent because they didn't like they way Bevin said some of the things he said.
In all honesty, Bevin wasn't wrong in his criticisms of public educators. Their actions in protesting at a business not even owned by the primary legislative author of the pension reform bill were misguided. They did put children at risk when they illegally called in sick so they could miss work and go to Frankfort to rally.
But perhaps the governor could have phrased some of his points a little better. Instead of saying that he was certain a child was molested or ingested poison or tried drugs because school was unexpectedly called off, he could have said something like this: "Parents can anticipate snow days and make plans for child care in advance. But when teachers decide the night before to call in sick en masse so they can attend a protest, and it forces school districts to cancel classes at the last minute, it forces parents to scramble to make plans for child care, and sometimes children can be left in less-than-ideal conditions because school was closed on short notice."
It's the same 100-percent true sentiment, but expressed in milder terms. (And Bevin's words did prove to be prophetic when a child was shot in Louisville on one of the sickout protest days when school was called off and kids were left at home.)
Teachers also didn't like being called out for their improper use of sick days to attend protests. Most public agencies differentiate between annual/personal/vacation days, which can be used for any purpose; and sick days, which are reserved for times when the employee or a child is sick or has a doctor's appointment, or for bereavement. Jefferson County even allows a certain number of teachers to miss a certain number of days a year for political or lobbying purposes.
What would happen if a state employee used sick leave instead of annual leave to go to Frankfort to protest lack of raises, insurance cost increases, or funding levels for their agency? Why should teachers not be held to the same standards?
Much of the discontent with Bevin came from the aforementioned Jefferson County. Louisvillians are quick to remind the rest of us that they are Kentucky's economic engine, and the rural areas of the commonwealth would be in sad shape if they weren't propping us up. The Jefferson County Teachers Association was one of the loudest pro-Beshear groups out there.
Yet, when rankings for all public schools were announced a couple of months ago, the bottom 20 in all three levels (elementary, middle, and high) was dominated by Jefferson County schools. How can that be? How can the richest county in the state, with all these great teachers, have such bad schools? And why does the JCTA so loudly oppose any reforms that might actually improve the state of education in the hub of Kentucky's economy?
The state's educational bureaucracy cast its lot with the son and ideological twin of the governor who neglected their pensions, instead of with the governor who tried to preserve pensions for current teachers and retirees and ensure a viable retirement system for future educators. They chose to support someone who will keep the educational status quo, instead of moving forward with reforms to improve schools and produce smarter, more prepared students.
They'll quickly find their support was misplaced. Beshear promised a $2,000 annual raise for teachers. Where is that money going to come from? There's no sentiment among the electorate for a tax increase, and gimmicks like casino gambling, sports betting, and drug legalization won't provide the necessary funding. Besides, teachers already get two raises a year -- an annual across-the-board percentage increase , and a "step increase" whereby their pay goes up for each year of seniority they accrue; a second-year teacher makes more than a first-year teacher, a seventh-year teacher makes more than a sixth-year teacher, and so on -- while state employees have had a net loss of pay over the last 12 years due to the Steve Beshear furloughs.
Under a friendly Republican administration, Kentucky's economy has grown the past four years. Beshear's Kentucky won't be nearly as attractive to job creators as was Bevin's Bluegrass State. If the state's growth slows or reverses, how will Beshear keep all his promises?
But the teachers had their tantrum last month, and they got their way. Kentucky's made a lot of progress the past four years, but they pressed the "pause" button on that to indulge their own hurt feelings. Too bad they had to harm the rest of the state in the process.
How did this happen? In a state that's trending Republican despite Democrats still holding an advantage in voter registration numbers, and in an election where every other Republican running for statewide office won by impressive numbers, how did an incumbent Republican who had the backing of a president who's immensely popular in the state manage to lose, especially with the state's economy bustling like never before?
There are a number of theories out there. One is that his tiff with Lt. Gov. Jeanene Hampton hurt him at the polls. Bevin alienated Hampton's supporters by not choosing her to run with him for a second time, and angered them when his administration fired members of her office staff, without consultation with or approval by her.
While that may have played a role in voting decisions by members of Hampton's inner circle -- Hampton herself admitted that she voted for Libertarian candidate John Hicks instead of Bevin -- it's doubtful that move itself cost the incumbent the race.
The night of the election, the Libertarian Party of Kentucky issued a classless statement saying it was pleased that its candidate had played spoiler and cost Bevin the election. Indeed, Hicks drew about 28,000 votes statewide, but it can't be ascertained for certain that all of those were votes that would otherwise have gone to Bevin. Libertarians tend to favor drug legalization, and Beshear had never indicated that he's for the legalization of marijuana or other drugs for recreational use. Hicks probably got his support from voters in both parties for whom being able to legally get stoned is their top-priority issue.
(It should be noted that the Libertarian Party also fielded a candidate in the auditor's race, who received more than 46,000 votes., so not even all Libertarian voters cast their ballots for Hicks.)
So again, how and why did this happen? Why did so many voters split their tickets to vote for Andy Beshear, yet picked every other Republican on the ballot?
The most correct answer is that Kentucky teachers threw a temper tantrum at the ballot box and voted against a candidate who was actually trying to ensure their pension system is solvent because they didn't like they way Bevin said some of the things he said.
In all honesty, Bevin wasn't wrong in his criticisms of public educators. Their actions in protesting at a business not even owned by the primary legislative author of the pension reform bill were misguided. They did put children at risk when they illegally called in sick so they could miss work and go to Frankfort to rally.
But perhaps the governor could have phrased some of his points a little better. Instead of saying that he was certain a child was molested or ingested poison or tried drugs because school was unexpectedly called off, he could have said something like this: "Parents can anticipate snow days and make plans for child care in advance. But when teachers decide the night before to call in sick en masse so they can attend a protest, and it forces school districts to cancel classes at the last minute, it forces parents to scramble to make plans for child care, and sometimes children can be left in less-than-ideal conditions because school was closed on short notice."
It's the same 100-percent true sentiment, but expressed in milder terms. (And Bevin's words did prove to be prophetic when a child was shot in Louisville on one of the sickout protest days when school was called off and kids were left at home.)
Teachers also didn't like being called out for their improper use of sick days to attend protests. Most public agencies differentiate between annual/personal/vacation days, which can be used for any purpose; and sick days, which are reserved for times when the employee or a child is sick or has a doctor's appointment, or for bereavement. Jefferson County even allows a certain number of teachers to miss a certain number of days a year for political or lobbying purposes.
What would happen if a state employee used sick leave instead of annual leave to go to Frankfort to protest lack of raises, insurance cost increases, or funding levels for their agency? Why should teachers not be held to the same standards?
Much of the discontent with Bevin came from the aforementioned Jefferson County. Louisvillians are quick to remind the rest of us that they are Kentucky's economic engine, and the rural areas of the commonwealth would be in sad shape if they weren't propping us up. The Jefferson County Teachers Association was one of the loudest pro-Beshear groups out there.
Yet, when rankings for all public schools were announced a couple of months ago, the bottom 20 in all three levels (elementary, middle, and high) was dominated by Jefferson County schools. How can that be? How can the richest county in the state, with all these great teachers, have such bad schools? And why does the JCTA so loudly oppose any reforms that might actually improve the state of education in the hub of Kentucky's economy?
The state's educational bureaucracy cast its lot with the son and ideological twin of the governor who neglected their pensions, instead of with the governor who tried to preserve pensions for current teachers and retirees and ensure a viable retirement system for future educators. They chose to support someone who will keep the educational status quo, instead of moving forward with reforms to improve schools and produce smarter, more prepared students.
They'll quickly find their support was misplaced. Beshear promised a $2,000 annual raise for teachers. Where is that money going to come from? There's no sentiment among the electorate for a tax increase, and gimmicks like casino gambling, sports betting, and drug legalization won't provide the necessary funding. Besides, teachers already get two raises a year -- an annual across-the-board percentage increase , and a "step increase" whereby their pay goes up for each year of seniority they accrue; a second-year teacher makes more than a first-year teacher, a seventh-year teacher makes more than a sixth-year teacher, and so on -- while state employees have had a net loss of pay over the last 12 years due to the Steve Beshear furloughs.
Under a friendly Republican administration, Kentucky's economy has grown the past four years. Beshear's Kentucky won't be nearly as attractive to job creators as was Bevin's Bluegrass State. If the state's growth slows or reverses, how will Beshear keep all his promises?
But the teachers had their tantrum last month, and they got their way. Kentucky's made a lot of progress the past four years, but they pressed the "pause" button on that to indulge their own hurt feelings. Too bad they had to harm the rest of the state in the process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)