What's The Matter With Tennessee?

Considering a Campaign of My Own

2008-03-25T20:54:00.000-07:00

Why would anyone want to be on the school board? It is the classic position of all the responsibility coupled with none of the power, right? It is a part time job with full time duties. The combination of electoral politics and solid board judgment makes the job impossible from the start. And, have you seen the state of our schools? How could you make any difference in that?

As I have seriously considered entering the race for school board in district 9, these tidbits of conventional wisdom about the decision have never been far from my mind. It will take too much time for too little improvement, said many. You will grow frustrated as you try to bring people together who have spent too much time apart. Getting the board to focus on a few priorities, set high and accountable standards, and hold the Director responsible for meeting those ambitious goals is simply not possible, said many.

And they may be right. But there comes a time when it is time to stop speculating and start finding out. I have spent the better part of my 40 years as an observer and critic of politics and politicians. I have lived in the world of ideas. Iknow how to listen, consider, and debate. Though I have tried to eschew harsh and divisive criticism in favor of more optimistic and cooperative dialogue, the gap between what I have believed to be possible and what I have acted to bring about has always plagued my thinking. Identifying a problem about which I felt qualified to advance a solution but stopping short of that public commitment that puts me and my loved ones on the line has kept me from being the change I want to see. The risk so seemingly great...the reward so frustratingly elusive.

I have, in particular, devoted my life to education. As a teacher, I like nothing more than the moment of realization when the student grasps the concept for the first time. As a parent I long for those meaningful relationships between my children and their teachers that will cultivate in my children the passsion for life-long learning that my own great teachers instilled in me. As an educational administrator, PTO member, Parent Advisory Council member, and active parent I want to see reasoned discourse, and data-driven decisions that can rally support for the broad mission of educating all the children of Nashville. As a citizen of Davidson County, I yearn for the pride that comes from living in a city whose reputation for excellent public schools is second to none, attracting all the commerce and community involvement that vibrant cities with that reputation enjoy.

Do I imagine that the grueling sacrifices associated with a political campaign will enable me to realize all of those aspirations? Not really. Will incremental progress be enough to satisfy me? No. Am I likely to be frustrated. Seems like it.

So why do it?

I guess it comes down to a simple feeling of responsibility to the children and families of this community. We have an obligation to be sure that each child in our community is educated and ready for the future he or she will inherit. We need school board members who can work together and generate meaningful cooperation and creative efforts not only to leave no child behind but to propel each child into the future. We need a school board who can hire a director whose grasp of institutional management is realistic and nuanced. One who recognizes that generating ownership in the system, communicating effectively, and inspiring enthusiasm to work hard (whether the workers in question are students, parents, teachers, administrators, custodians, PE teachers, arts teachers, special ed teachers, ELL teachers, principals, counselors, city leaders, community activists, or any of the multitude of others in this community with a direct stake in the education of our children) are the essential ingredients for success in the common goal of educational excellence that we all pursue.

Can I help with that? I think I have the perspective, the experience, the empathy, and the patience to help with that in many ways.

I don't think I can afford to wait until a more comfortable time. Now is the time, and if I am going to confront the challenges and do my part, now is the time for that.

What's the matter with Tennessee? Nothing that can't be rectified by the active and serious efforts of committed and caring Tennesseans.

Perhaps it is my turn to do something.

Spring Service

2008-03-22T18:57:00.000-07:00

I have just returned from a great week working in Bay St. Louis, MS. I led a group of 20 high school students to work in the Gulf region as a way of spending their spring break getting to know and understand the incredible challenges still faced by the victims of Katrina, two and a half years after the storm.

The students worked hard and had a good time, but none of us were expert craftsmen when it comes to building a house. Nevertheless, we worked as hard as we could and did our best, and it was fun to see our effort produce results.

The reality of the situation is that even though we advanced the construction of the house somewhat, the homeowner gave us more than she could ever know. Not only did she insist on treating us to a craw fish boil, but she never stopped expressing her gratitude. And it was the experience of service that gave the students on the trip the greatest benefit.

Sometimes people are reluctant to help because they feel like they cannot do that much. My experience this week reminds me that it is the human interaction and the relationships that are the most significant outcomes when we work to help each other.

Relationships strengthen communities far more than any program ever could.

School Board #9

2008-03-11T20:12:00.001-07:00

So the speculation grows. Will Marsha Warden run for re-election this August? Now that Eric Crafton has picked up papers (3/11/08), we have to wonder if he is seriously contemplating giving up his Council seat in order to run. If so, what will his objective be?

I have to say that the campaign for School Board #9 is taking an unfortunate turn. I have no personal opinion of Eric Crafton, because I have never met him. I do know, however, that his positions and his tendency to grab headlines seems more likely to divide and distract the school board than to move us closer to the central goal of an excellent education for the children of Nashville.

I am well aware of the need for dramatic change in the way the school system pursues its goals, but it is clear that we need a school board that can forge consensus and compromise so that change advances those goals rather than leading us further from them. We need a school board that can govern as a board should, hiring and maintaining high expectations for the Director, making sure that the District's priorities remain clear and well-focused, and representing the entire community's common interest in high quality education for the children of Nashville.

The school board has been drawn too deeply into the micromanagement of the system responding to personality and politics when sound judgement and direction were earnestly needed. We need more board members who help to clarify and pursue high standards of performance not people who grab headlines for their controversial pronouncements.

As I said, I don't know Eric Crafton personally, and I have no reason to doubt his intentions, but I do know the presence he has in the papers of this city. I am afraid that the bold move of resigning his council seat and joining the school board will move the board further into controversy and micromanagement rather than helping it to move forward in its proper role.

As we seek a new Director of Schools, I cannot imagine a worse time for that to happen.

Guess he was Mr. Wrong

2008-02-16T06:26:00.000-08:00

Ben Wright submitted his resignation yesterday.

My first impressions of him turned out to be off the mark. Over the 7 months of Mr. Wright's tenure, he never lived up to the hopes we had for his job performance. Many found the information on his website questionable, and as he got further into his job at Bransford Avenue, he had difficulty finding his way.

How many more central office personnel will lose their jobs before a new administration is organized?

Sen. Clinton's Management Skills

2008-02-14T10:00:00.000-08:00

Now that some changes have been made among the personnel in the Clinton campaign, stories are swirling about a campaign that miscalculated the degree of opposition it would face, failed to establish contingency plans, and stuck with a failing strategy long after its failure became clear.

For example:

It's been said that one benefit of the torturous process presidential candidates must undergo is that it gives voters an extended view of their managerial ability. After all, this line of thinking goes, if a candidate can't organize a national campaign, he or she can't run the federal government.
If that's true, there are four emerging reasons why voters may want to take a second look at Hillary Clinton. So far, in a number of key areas, her campaign is falling short - and she won't solve the problem simply by changing campaign managers, as she did earlier this week. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/clintons_squandered_lead_can_s.html)

Margaret Carlson notes:

Clinton saw the New Hampshire result as her political resurrection, where she finally found her ``voice.'' But if the voice was different, the message was the same. Her Lazarus-like win kept her from looking any further into why she lost so badly in Iowa. It put off any move to change her insular staff and validated her original strategy in which the primaries were a mere formality.
Voters would coronate her partly because she had been first lady, because shewas a Clinton, and because it was her turn after all she had been through. It wasn't as much a matter of competing as it was waiting until Super Tuesday to accept the crown. (http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_carlson&sid=azceW2G4gToM)

One of the principal concerns about Barack Obama is that he will not be able to lead effectively and that his plans for Iraq represent false hope. It is safe to say that there has been plenty of false hope spread around regarding the Iraq strategy from the start. Remember the claim that, "We will be greeted as liberators?" It was that miscalculation, based on false hope that seems to have kept the Bush administration from making contingency plans in case a more hearty opposition emerged. Failure to plan for contingencies and effective reconstruction are widely regarded as among he more obvious managerial failings of the Bush administration in the Iraq War. They assumed that their cause was unstoppable, and acted without thinking it through. The result was a strategy that miscalculated the degree of opposition it would face, failed to establish contingency plans, and stuck with a failing strategy long after its failure became clear.

The military and tactical side of war will always be the purview of the Generals. No need to fear an inexperienced young president moving troops on a whim. The principal of civilian control of the military is not based on the idea that the president is a military strategist; it is based on the notion that the president has the wisdom, foresight, and humility to think it through. Self-assured and arrogant leaders make their mistakes less by alienating others than by failing to think it through. There is no reason that the Bush administration could not have planned for stiff opposition or implemented a strategy to win the peace. Yet, even after the glaring absence of such plans became obvious, the administration refused to change course, remaining loyal to Donald Rumsfeld even at the expense of the 2006 Congressional Elections.

Reading this account of the recent changes at team Clinton leaves me with the eerie feeling of déjà vu. I realize that a political campaign and a war are vastly different, and while George Bush's poor planning has cost lives, Clinton's poor planning stands only to cost her a chance at the presidency. Nevertheless, a political campaign is a managerial challenge, and while the presidency is much more than just management, Sen. Clinton has grounded her campaign on her particular strengths in that area.

Perhaps the question of voting to authorize the war is ultimately only the tip of the iceberg. Perhaps the management experience that Clinton and her team have brought to the campaign is more reminiscent of the Bush administration than she would hope to admit. If management, foresight, wisdom, and the humility to plan for unanticipated contingencies are skills we should value in a president, is Barack Obama really the more risky choice?

Yes we can change Tennessee!

2008-02-13T18:16:00.000-08:00

They say we cannot hope that our Senate representation will change.

They say Tennessee is a blindly Republican state.

They say that no one will challenge the third-ranking Senate Republican, especially not here in Tennessee.

They say that we are stuck with representation that uses fear of immigrants to justify its policy agenda.

They say we have to continue the culture wars of the Boomer generation even if we are younger than boomers.

They say that if we are younger than boomers, we are too young to understand.

They say that Tennessee is incapable of supporting a democrat state-wide.

They say that we would rather have laws encouraging discrimination against foreign speakers than health care for the sick.

They say that working people are greedy to expect a living wage for their time and effort.

They say that fear will keep us committed to a war that has done nothing to reduce our fear.

They say that we should deny aid to single mothers in the city so that they will take responsibility for themselves, but that the Iraqi government should remain on our dole 100 years or more.

They say that the improbability of change will paralze us, and that we will remain divided and cowered by fear until it is too late to act.

They said that a strong challenger to Lamar Alexander could not be found.

We say, "YES WE CAN!"

When Will Al Gore Endorse Barack Obama?

2008-01-28T14:51:00.000-08:00

Now is the time. With the leading figure among northern democrats now comparing Obama's campaign to his brother's 1960 campaign and the tactics of the former democratic president to those of Harry Truman, the time has come for the south's other leading democrat to have his say.

Sure, Mr. Gore may be a little gun shy. After all, he was early to endorse Howard Dean in 2004 only to see his potential influence as elder statesman and kingmaker in the democratic party evaporate with a scream. And, of course it is by no means certain that Barack Obama will win the nomination, but this time, Al Gore has nothing to lose.

He is now clearly established as an elder statesman and one with a Nobel Prize. He has established himself as a leading voice on one of the most significant challenges we face in the future Barack Obama is vying to lead. Al Gore would do us all a favor by linking the cause of combating global warming to a president with Barack Obama's vision. While we are going nuts with JFK parallels, it must be said that the Kennedy challenge of going to the moon is probably exactly what we need to address the challenge of global warming through technological advances sure to bolster our economic well-being rather than the inevitable and draconian conservation mandates that will emerge if we wait too long. It is possible that a clear conversation about the urgency of such an approach, combined with Obama's clearly established ability to inspire and motivate with great vision, could produce the "moon shot" that would make Gore's lifetime commitment to fighting global warming a reality.

And if not, what has he to lose? I suspect that the personal scars from his relationship with the Clinton's makes endorsing Hillary out of the question, and endorsing Edwards is so unlikely to produce a victory for him that Gore has only one choice left. It is a good choice.

Al Gore should endorse Barack Obama this week.

Is this the best we can get?

2008-01-15T06:53:00.000-08:00

Lamar Alexander has introduced legislation to "protect English." The frequently repeated reason to offer this protect is that in America most people speak English. But because most people speak English, you will forgive my not seeing the threat that English needs to be protected against. Curious, I searched further.

The law that Mr. Alexander is proposing would bar the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from bringing discrimination suits against companies with English-only rules. Simple enough. The argument seems to be that businesses have the right to tell their employees how to speak.

Now, if such a rule were actually related to job performance (speaking Spanish to an English-speaking customer and blowing a sale, for example), anti-discrimination laws would not prohibit the rule. Bona fide Occupational Qualifications are not discrimination, and a "Protect English" law would be unnecessary.

So, Alexander's law could only apply to employers who want to discriminate based on the language ability of an employee in situations NOT related to job performance.

The Protect English law is a pro-discrimination bill. To prove that, consider these two cases in which the EEOC became involved:

One was against a Houston ship captain who reportedly threatened sailors with a knife after they spoke Spanish in violation of his English-only policy on board. It was settled in December in favor of the plaintiffs for $31,000.
The other is pending against the Salvation Army, which fired two Spanish-speaking clothes sorters who violated the English-only policy at a branch near Boston. (The Tennessean, January 15, 2007)

Why is anyone in the Senate, let alone the person who is supposed to represent Tennesseans, spending time on legislation that protects an employer's right to pull a knife on a Spanish-speaking employee? And, if you can explain the safety issue associated with allowing Salvation Army clothes sorters to speak Spanish at work, I will be impressed. I remind you that if te Salvation Army can make that case to a jury, then they will be absolved. The only reason they need this protection is because the company must not be able to make a convincing job-related argument.

What about the economic health of the state? What about getting the Fort Campbell troops back home? What about securing nuclear materials abroad? What about finding Osama Bin Laden? What about balancing the federal budget? What about caring for the health of citizens and reducing the burden of excessive health care costs on our small businesses? What about promoting renewable energy technologies to ensure the health of our economy as well as the health of our planet?

English is not threatened. Discrimination is. Spending time protecting discrimination that is unrelated to job performance ought to raise some criticism. Here's mine.

Democratic Challenger Missing

2008-01-12T20:09:00.000-08:00

Since Mike McWherter decided not to run for Senate against the popular Lamar Alexander, the Democratic Party of Tennessee has yet to identify any serious challenger. That's too bad. I know it would be a long shot and then some to defeat Lamar Alaexander, but the Party ought to be able to find someone who can try. This election does, after all, have the potential to be a good one for Democrats, and I happen to believe that a young and inspirational figure campaigning to change the tone in Washington might do alright in Tennessee.

Of course, 2006 was a good election for Democrats, and Tennessee was the only place where that general trend went unrealized.

So, back to the question I asked at that time...the question on which I began this blog. What's the Matter with Tennessee? Has Tennessee become so conservative that anyone with a D by his/her name is doomed from the start? Surely not. What about moderate Democrats who believe in strong national defense (like Jim Webb) and/or who consider abortion worthy of limitation (like Bob Casey)? Couldn't a bipartisan who is not indebted to special interests, willing to accept reasonable limits on abortion rights, and strongly supportive of rationality in our national defense (that means avoiding over extension and sending troops into battles without a clear plan for post-war stability and reconstruction) do pretty well against Lamar? Sure Lamar is popular, and he is a good man who clearly favors discussion and compromise more than many of his GOP colleagues in the Senate, but he is a kind man in a bitter and divisive system. He is a leader because he knows how to operate in tat system, and he is popular, at least in part for all the earmarked funds he can bring to Tennessee from that post. It would take a serious challenge and a fairly significant vote shift, but don't the people of Tennessee at least deserve an option?

Partisan rancor is alot like the weather. Everyone talks about it, but nobody ever seems to do anything about it. The big question for Obama is can he? If he can do something about it, then he will need a new generation of Senators to help. Is Alexander up to the task? He may well be. I certainly respect his long record of service to the state of Tennessee, and he has always been kind to me, but a challenger is needed to force him to consider the new state of affairs and show us he is able to deliver what we increasingly want as a new tone in Washington.

Six years is a long time. He has not had to campaign since 2002. He beat Bob Clement that year. If he does not face a challenger this time, he will be able to serve 12 years without explaining to the people how he sees his job as our representative in the Senate.

If no one challenges this time, Tennessee will not even HAVE a Senate race until 2012 when Bob Corker's term finishes.

Is there no one available?

What's to Come?

2008-01-11T17:35:00.000-08:00

If Peggy Noonan is correct in this Wall Street Journal editorial, Hillary's new voice won't be all that new. I hope she is wrong. I wonder if Barack Obama's hope can sustain these approaches and stick to the message? I hope so.

And if we are to believe the new voice will be a softer, more conciliatory and more engaging one, how to square that with what is going on at HillaryIs44.com, a Web site that is for all intents and purposes a back door to her war room? There you will see that federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will soon "destroy" Barack Obama in a "scandal" involving an "indicted slumlord" who is Mr. Obama's "friend of 17 years" and with whom Mr. Obama has been involved in "shady deals."
This isn't a new voice, it is the old one, the one we know too well. The item was posted on Thursday, two days after Mrs. Clinton announced her new approach.
Between sobs she is going to try to destroy Mr. Obama. She is going to try to end him. She will pay a price for it--no one likes to see the end of a dream, no one likes a dream killer. But she will pay that price to win, and try to clean up the mess later.
(Wall Street Journal, January 11, 2008, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120000928241482363.html)

What's the Difference?

2008-01-11T07:44:00.000-08:00

People are now beginning to question Barack Obama's claim to being different. They say he votes the same way, uses the same advisers, and stands for the same ideas. People argue that Obama has accomplished little legislation in the present, bitterly divided Congress. The Clintons even say that Obama is no different for these reasons and follow that claim with accusations that his campaign is a "fairy tale," hoping to make the criticism stick both ways.

The goals that Barack Obama has do not have to be different. Those goals are clear. No one can reasonable argue that the goals he stands for are not clear and unequivocal. For too long, though, a candidate's goals have been lined up as litmus tests to determine whether or not one belongs in either party. That is how ideology works in a politics of partisanship. But partisanship shifts our attention to the goals that divide us and connects all reasonable approaches to those conflicting goals. When all the policy goals are listed, the top goal remains: To advance the political fortunes of the party or the individual.

The Barack Obama difference lies not in the goals he would pursue (health care for all, strong and unwavering national security, powerful education, and job creation) but in the MANNER in which he would pursue them and consequently in the likelihood that he would achieve them.

Critics of Barack Obama must answer one point first. Can you point to significant progress toward these goals that has come from divisiveness, bitterness, and attack?

Why was Hillary Clinton unable to achieve significant expansion of health care availability in 1993? Was it because she was not divisive enough? John Edwards thinks so, but Hillary Clinton doesn't answer that question very well.

Our greatest recent successes in legislating to solve our problems came as a result of the genuine bipartisanship following 9/11. Since that good will has been undone by the Bush administration's aggressively partisan approach, little or nothing of substance has been accomplished.

Cooperation and collaboration may be naive. It may not work, but it is a process worth trying since little progress can be identified by those who defend the divide and stalemate approach of the past 30 years.

There's Something Happening in Tennessee

2008-01-11T04:08:00.001-08:00

The Barack Obama HQ in Nashville is definitely an inspirational place. It is filled with people from all over the city who are drawn together by the common themes of the Obama campaign. I atended a meeting there last night, and I was struck by the energy and enthusiasm of the assembled group. Not only did the group seem to represent a wide variety of the people of Nashville, it also put forward a can do spirit that is refreshing in the age of wholesale politics.

All politics is local, and the people in the Obama capaign seem to understand that in ways that have been out of vogue in presidential politics for some time. The inspirational theme of the Obama campaign draws people into political action who have previously stayed on the sidelines. People turned off by the process, too busy to get involved, and too cynical to begin to hope are now talking to friends, wearing buttons, and putting their hopes into words.

The news since New Hampshire has been slowly, but consistently in Obama's favor. The close second place finish was really a significant gain compared with all pre-Iowa expectations, and the post-Iowa expectations aside, those gains seem to be holding in South Carolina, while significantly well-organized unions (SEIU and Culinary Workers) in Nevada and prominent Democratic leaders (John Kerry) keep breaking for Obama.

While the national endorsements and other state organizations are significant, I am most impressed by the way in which the New Hampshire results seem to have energized the Obama supporters to work harder. The room at the meeting was packed, and the ideas were good. There are many ways to get involved using your own skills and abilities whatever those may be, and people across the city and across the state seem to be responding to the call.

There's something happening in Tennessee. There is something happening here.

Is Karl Rove looking for a new job?

2008-01-10T19:55:00.001-08:00

Karl Rove, apparently with time on his hands since his lobotomy as Bush's Brain, has decided to take on Barack Obama and offer Hillary Clinton some free political advice. Testing what is sure to be the main GOP strategy against Obama in the fall, Rove trotted out charges of "lazy," "misstatements," and "saying one thing and doing another."

Karl Rove is getting tough on Barack Obama.
The man behind President Bush's two successful presidential bids, who once offered advice to Obama on how he could defeat Hillary Clinton, is now taking direct aim at him — calling the Illinois senator "lazy" and "given to misstatements and exaggerations."
"Mr. Obama has failed to rise to leadership on a single major issue in the Senate," Rove writes in a Wall Street Journal Op-Ed. "In the Illinois legislature, he had a habit of ducking major issues, voting 'present' on bills important to many Democratic interest groups, like abortion-rights and gun-control advocates.
And in a rare move, Rove praises Clinton for her "humanizing" moments on the campaign trail, and calls Obama just "as calculating" as the New York Democrat.
"For someone who talks about a new, positive style of politics and pledges to be true to his word, Mr. Obama too often practices the old style of politics, saying one thing and doing another," he said. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/10/karl-rove-takes-aim-at-obama/)

Of course, Karl, praising Hillary's political genius now previously tried to advise Barack Obama on how to deal with that very "humanizing strategy."

The comments are the latest musings from the man often refereed to as "Bush's brain" on the Democratic race for the White House. In an "open letter" to Obama last month, Rove suggested he "Blow the whistle on Clinton when she tries to become a victim."
"Find a way to gently belittle her whenever she tries to use disagreements among Democrats as an excuse to complain about being picked on," he said then. "The toughest candidate in the field should not be able to complain when others disagree with her. This is not a coronation." (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/10/karl-rove-takes-aim-at-obama/)

Isn't there a Republican candidate who could use Karl's advice?

Primary News of the Day

2008-01-10T19:51:00.001-08:00

Richardson pulls out.

Kerry backs Obama.

Thompson plays well in GOP debate in South Carolina.

Is Obama Too Elite?

2008-01-09T17:57:00.001-08:00

Some of the exit poll data from New Hampshire has the pundits speculating that, because Barack Obama is doing better among higher educated, and more well-off Democrats while Hillary Clinton polled better among the lower classes, he is now becoming a favorite of the narrow, new media elite, and Hillary Clinton is likely to roll on by capturing the real people.

If so, this impression will go down as one of the greatest hoaxes in political history. Hillary Clinton is no doubt sincere in her support for people in need. Heaven knows that I would be very happy with the empathy she could muster as president, but to suggest that she is a better candidate than Barack Obama for dealing with broken communities is to misjudge the case dramatically and, if you will pardon the irony, to completely ignore his superior experience. Barack Obama is a community organizer who understands both the multifaceted causes and consequences of poverty while simultaneously understanding that neither fierce class populism (Edwards) nor extensive government programs (Clinton) can alone address the challenges of America's communities in need.

I almost want to stop writing my reflections about Obama on a blog, since that seems to lend credence to those pundits who label him the candidate of the elite blogosphere (How these random musings have anything to do with elitism is hard to see, but I do understand the critique). Just because our (to borrow Kleinheider's phrase) parallel universe supports Obama does not mean that he all of a sudden loses his genuine EXPERIENCE in building communities and fighting poverty.

A good analysis of Obama and Edwards on the question of poverty and approaches to need can be found at: http://freedemocracy.blogspot.com/2007/07/david-brooks-edwards-obama-and-poor.html.

Time to CHANGE our EXPERIENCE with Washington

2008-01-09T17:31:00.000-08:00

Obama is genuine in his claim to approach politics without the rancor and divisiveness of the boomers caught in the culture wars (of whom the Clintons have become (willingly or not) the patron saints). Their idea is that to be a part of a Clinton or Bush America, one must walk in lock-step with his/her fellow ideologues that stymie action to deal with issues and challenges that we know (and have known for a long time) must be dealt with. After all, says the partisan, to deal with the issues and compromise is to "sell-out." If we solve the problems, what will accuse the other side of being responsible for in our next campaign?

Generational change is underway, and Obama speaks for it. Old politics, where taking a side means keeping the other side from accomplishing anything or even maintaining its dignity has to end, and as those of us born after 1960 come of age, we will increasingly be able to work together because we know that the challenges we face are more significant than the petty partisanship that keeps CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and a million polarizing Internet sites operational. I believe it was Bill Clinton who said, "That which unites us is far more significant than that which divides us." I bought it in 1992, but he was not able to deliver, and in the last 72 hours, his attacks on Obama have cast great doubt on his sincerity in having made that pronouncement.

Obama has really not wavered. Politics of unity and a refusal to vilify the opponent is called naive. It is taken as a sign of inexperience, but we have all had plenty of experience with the divide and stalemate approach, and Obama offers genuine hope that we can change that experience.

Is hoping for a better day naive?

2008-01-09T07:14:00.000-08:00

I made another small contribution to Barack Obama's campaign today. I want to help show that New Hampshire results have done nothing to dampen the enthusiasm I have for the important new politics that Barack offers. I believe that we will have to work hard to enact the change we want to see - not only the changes in policy that we desperately need, but also (and more importantly) change in the process of politics that our generation hopes for.

The politics of fear and division have done little to deal with issues that will impact our generation - warming, health care costs, social security, economic stability. I know that we need a unifying and collaborative politics to move forward.

When Barack stands up and says we can change the system, he is called naive and inexperienced. They say he needs to understand that only rancor and discord can ultimately win an election, and for too long, that has been true. But, as voters, we get what we pay for, and I for one am ready to shop for change.

Are Tennesseans ready to join me? I think they are.

If you want change, you have to work for it

2008-01-08T20:29:00.001-08:00

Once again, we have learned tonight that polls are no more valuable than anyone else's educated guess. If you pay attention and talk to people, you are as likely to predict the outcome of a race as any vaunted pollster. They will all seize glory when they get it "right," but there are always days like today in New Hampshire. In every election, there are more polls that are wrong than those that are right. Those who are right more often, however, gain credibility and currency that helps their predictions to translate into self-fulfilling prophecies often enough that they can make a living with prognostication little better than those predicting the imminent Patriots Super Bowl victory.

The Des Moines Register poll was the closest in Iowa, and I have heard it frequently celebrated since last Thursday. But the day of the caucuses, it was widely regarded as an anomaly when compared with the other polls. Today, 10-15 point margins for Obama in New Hapshire were predicted, so that the final 2% margin of defeat (something incomprehensibly fantastic from Obama's perspective just 1 week ago), is now reported as a crushing defeat for him. Is it possible the polls were wrong? Not if you listen to the pundits. The polls were right, and the people changed...maybe, but it is at least equally likely that polls are like broken clocks...right twice a day.

The campaign for this country is underway, and it is coming soon to your neighborhood. Who wins will be up to you and to me. Discuss, deliberate, talk with others, contribute, campaign, and vote. Leave prognostication to Chris Berman. Don't ever stay home because your candidate is supposed to win easily, or you will continue allowing others to make decisions for you.

Be the change you want to see. Get out of the armchair and into the game, because, unlike the Super Bowl, in this game there are no players but us.

Can Obama Win in Tennessee?

2007-12-22T12:11:00.001-08:00

He can win in Tennessee. He is the first Democrat in recent election cycles to embrace a 50 state strategy. This decision is crucial because it shows that he really does care and need every individual American in order to lead. The Democratic Party has created some of the problems that lead me to ask, "What's the Matter with Tennessee," because of its almost completely ignoring the state in particular and the south in general during the past 2 presidential election cycles. Creating the impression that Democrats don't need the south to win has bred far more resentment in the south than a moderate, thinking, and well-meaning democrat like Barack Obama ought to encounter. The slim, electoral college strategy of the Clinton/Gore/Kerry campaigns has to go if the arrogance that southern voters perceive in democratic presidential candidates is ever to be overcome.

Tennessee matters, and Barack Obama knows it. His campaign is reaching into every state on the strength of people who long to be relevant to the national leadership question again.

That is one strength that Obama brings to this campaign and one of the main reasons that he is a different democrat. Post your comments to add others.

Good for Him - I'll Be There

2007-09-19T13:01:00.000-07:00

Karl Dean will hold his first education town hall meeting on his first day in office in a school he ought to visit. Good for him! I, for one, appreciate this overt effort to symbolize and stick to his repeated commitment to public education.

I'll be there to support him, but what matter is that he will be there. It's just day one, and four years is a long time, but the journey of a thousand miles cannot begin without the first step. Way to go, Karl!

Why I voted for Karl Dean

2007-09-11T14:36:00.001-07:00

We have spent many words on this question during the last year, and today we have arrived at the conclusion. Ultimately, anyone who really cares why I voted for Mr. Dean can simply follow my thinking all the way back.

Bob Clement was the first candidate that I considered seriously, and given the people working for him, I felt like I might like him. Unfortunately, the more I got to know him, the less and less I found his promises believable. I have to admit that the anti-tax gimmick (my word here, not Mr. Dean's) was a big part of the final straw.

When I was fortunate enough to be asked by the Nashville Association of Black Journalists to ask questions on a panel at a late forum between the two men, I saw two men headed in different directions. I appreciated the demands that had been placed on them during this lengthy campaign, and I could see the strain in their faces. Yet, I could see more clearly the strain in Mr. Clement's face. I saw and heard in Mr. Dean's answers a man who has spent the past year really studying issues he did not seem to master early in the race and doing pretty well in learning them. Particularly, the pledge to make education his number one priority was shallow last spring, but last Thursday, I saw a steely resolve that showed me the face of a man making that promise and much more fully understanding what it will take to keep it than he did at first.

In Clement, I saw a man searching for the right "formula" to win an election. I saw him moving further and further from a strategy for governing. I saw him increasingly trying to say what was expected in order to pit groups in the city against one another to score a victory. Nashville no longer sounded "good" when he criticized the officials, the progress, and the direction of the city. Since he took the city from good to not good just during the campaign, I really came to doubt that he could successfully lead us from the "good to great" he so often promised.

In the end, it wasn't too hard to select a sincere man with strong commitments, a clear sense of priorities, and a willingness and ability to learn. Will I always agree with Mayor Dean, probably not, but I feel like he will listen when I don't, and in listening to us, he will make good decisions that we will at least understand.

That is the kind of mayor I want, so I voted for Karl Dean.

Thanks Tennessean

2007-09-11T14:21:00.000-07:00

For the up to the minute results box. Pretty cool.

The Anti-tax Mayor

2007-08-29T12:33:00.001-07:00

OK, I have looked at the U-tube piece that the Clement campaign is now asking everyone to watch. It is a series of clips from the debates, somewhat cleverly edited, but not all that cleverly. The piece runs pretty well as I remember the exchanges with a few exceptions, but the campaign-added narration really seems to force an argument that the clips don't support too well.

http://e2ma.net/go/708806015/600316/20883466/goto:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfNmhRQkFjo

In the end, you will see what you want to see in this ink-blot, but it does show conclusively that Bob Clement wants to win the Mayor's office in the way that is the most limiting to the power of the person to lead. This montage seems to confirm that.

So, will it work? It is clearly a strategy that has worked in other elections. Is it one that is likely to produce good leadership? I don't happen to think so, but I am sure many disagree with me. Will the number who disagree be large enough to elect Clements?

We'll see.

Karl Dean Sounds Like a Great Mayor

2007-08-29T07:37:00.000-07:00

The best I've heard him, and I have paid pretty close attention. If you missed the Liberadio interview Monday, you missed Karl Dean at his best. His apparent grasp of leadership issues is strong, and his focus on the issues shows itself to have some specific, tangible direction.

I recommend this interview strongly for anyone concerned about making a good choice in the mayor's race.

Way to go, Mary and Freddie!

Good work, Karl!

Who won?

2007-08-25T17:59:00.000-07:00

Always a tricky question since the debate faces so many diverse audience. Who won for me? Karl Dean...Hands down. He continued to miss numerous opportunities to show some of Clement's positions for the ridiculous and substance-free political plays they are, but he finally reversed the tax pledge question a bit. I am continuing to be curious about how all of those much more political positions that Clement is advancing will play against the more genuine positions that Dean puts forward. Dean could use better coaching, and he could be genuine will also being more political, but from the standpoint of this blog asking, What's the Matter with Tennessee, this election is a useful experiment. Here you have 2 democrats running fro an allegedly apolitical office. Clement is clearly assuming the traditional low tax, government bad positions that have worked so well in Kansas (see What's the Matter with Kansas) and other areas across the south and midwest. Dean is adopting the pragmatic managerial poasition that Bredesen, Purcell, and Clinton were able to make work in this area, but he has not scored the same kind of anti-Clement position that Purcell did with Fulton, or Clinton with Bush (I).

So, this election will let us see what's tha matter with Nashville? Will we as a city vote more for Clement and low tax pledges..Dean is right, these are gimmicks, but they are gimmicks that have worked repeatedly, OR will the city vote for the manager who will not play into gimmicks? Will the city trust a government official or vote for Clement because officials cannot really be trusted?

BTW - Isn't it ironic that Clement's arguments add up to an outsider, low tax, government bad campaign even as he claims 15 years in Congress?

This debate left me thinking that Bob Clement feels like his superior (read national/federal) experience will enable him to stoop down here and help the little people in Nashville deal with our situation. I don't agree. After this debate, I lean more toward Dean than ever.

You?

Closing statements

2007-08-25T17:54:00.000-07:00

Clement says city is diverse and international. I was 15 years in Congress. I am focused on the future. I have too many ideas to sit on the sidelines. I know I can make a difference. I can win. I am always up fornt. I will listen to the people to solve problems. Breaking through bureaucracy is what I want to do.

Dean ssya hard work, keeping word, and living within a budget. I am very proud of this city. I will bring passion to mayor. I love this city, and I will focus on clear prioriites. Now there are 3 agian. Education, Safety, and development. The first 2 contribute to the other 2. I lnow how the city runs. I want this job. It is not a consolation prize.

Channel 5 debate part 3

2007-08-25T17:47:00.000-07:00

Kids access to computers in classes first. (Dean)

Education question - mayoral takeovers:
Clement says school board is elected by the people and selects the Director of schools. I want that to work. A mayor is a CEO planner organizer chief architecht of the coty. Cannot sit on the sidelines. I want public school choice. Reform and accountability.

Dean will consider anything to improve schools. I think the board, business community, and diorector want to improve schools. We have some schools with 50% dropout rates. Unacceptable. Crime, economy, and morality undermined. As mayor, I will bring nonprofits and businesses together to solve the issue. Good list of ideas. Judge me on reduction of dropout rate. School board will help.

Clement wants career and technical education. Need it back. College degree is not key to second class citizens.

Showing clearly how little Bob actually knows about education on the ground today. My opinion. My experience. The ed is good, but Bob's response is overly simplistic and VERY dated.

Dean says affordable housing is crucial. Need to work with non profits. Office of affordable housing in Dean mayor's office. Our habitat has built neighborhoods.

Clement says low income affordable housing. Average price is over 190 thousand dollars for a home in Nashville now. Many great ideas. Need to take those good ideas and run with them. I like to take ideas and put them into action.

Channel 5 part 2

2007-08-25T17:37:00.001-07:00

Clement says he will not raise taxes for 4 years. 50 % increease over last 5 years. You need a break. Karl won't pledge.

Rich question: rehabilitation through worker training program?

Dean says the state should release innmates trained for jobs and educated. Substance abuse issues addresed. No revolving door. State is responsible. A pledge is a gimmick. I will not raise taxes. What does Bob mean? Will he veto a Concil tax increase?

Celement says Dean said via legal opinion that the people did not have a voice in raising taxes. What is your personal opinion?

Dean answers, Clement began assault on election night. Tennessean noted your poiunt was a stretch. As a lawyer, best legal advice. Referendum is the law. I will follow the law. Only the voters will increase taxes.

FINALLY....A turn to the silly question that Clement has been pushing.

Clement a lawyer is not a leader. Applause, but that is pretty silly.

Dean I will lead, and I will not raise taxes. PERIOD.

Nunez question about panhandling and homelessness:

Clement says aggressive panhandlers bother him greatly. Most are not, but those concern us. Where are the homeless facilities. Build a park.

BUILD A PARK FOR HOMELESS? IS THAT AN ANSWER?

Cleemt says we need affordable housing. We can do better.

Dean will support discouraging panhandling downtown. Pandhandling and homelessness are not the same. On homeless issue, I went and did the plunge. Substance abuse, mental illness, down on their luck causes need to be addressed. We need to treat it with housing units available.

CLement says homeless character changed (not all thagt recent a change, Bob). Bob expects the homelss to work. Need to do more for themselves.

Is Bob the most conservative Democrat in the state?

Wireless question:
Dean says that budget and revenue will prevent that commitment. I will look to private sectro to do it for profit. Stay focused on priorities.

Clement says that Karl is right. It is a major expenditure. Need a balanced budget; need to focus on priorities. Need accountability. Need an audit of each department. I am looking for efficiency. Management and publiuc finance are my background.

Channel 5 Mayoral Debate

2007-08-25T16:54:00.000-07:00

About to begin. I will run a live blog of the debate here. Feel free to chime in with comments.

LIVE BLOG:

Dean says education is first. Should exceed the quality of surrounding counties. That's the usual intro for him, and I am glad to see it.

Clement says: I have new ideas - education and public safety are 2 top priorities. We are improving too slow [sic]. We are not getting our money's worth. Need more acocuntability and reform. Money will not improve it. No blank check

REALLY, a blank check was what he led me to believe he would give. I worry here.

Barker question:
Corporate relocation high but we are losing to Williamson County.

Clement says you have to talk to companies. As Conbgressman I brought jobs to area. Schools were the Williamson County edge, and that's bad.

Dean says we have brought alot of Nashville business. We have been #1 for 3 years to relocate. In region, in last 4 years, 45% of jobs in Davidson County the rest spread among other 9 counties. Nashville needs to be a families live city - Great schools. Number one thing I'm devoted to doing.

Bob says we';re not doing well. Many jobs not in Nashville. Must strengthen Davidson core to keep taxes low - will not raise taxes in next 4 years.

Powell question:
Challenge to get young issues addressed. How will young professionals get involved?
Organizations great. Dean administration new finance, law directors and new deputy mayor. Spent life working for the city of Nashville. I will encourage young to be invovled.

Clement says young people's paradise. Need to expand on Music City brand. Can move from good to great. I will recruit all over the world. I have management experience. I am a consensus builder.

Dean says we need to keep taxes low. I do not intend to increase taxes. Clement has voted for taxes. I have told you what I am going to do.

Rand Question:
Infrastructure budget?

Clement says it is his bread and butter to build Nashville. Need safety. Inspect, check, and get state, federal, and local dollars. Public and mass transit. I voted for some taxes and tax cuts. I left Congress with a balanced budget.

Dean says infrastructure involves many issues. Water concern too. Aging pipes. Public transportation proposal for traffic problems most well addressed by rapid bus technology. TO encourage people to use masss transit. Now. 8 buses can be paid for right away.

Clement says I have secured funds for mass transit, rail, and bike paths.

Segovia question:
About 287 program - even as immigrants net positive in revenue to middle Tennessee.

Dean supports 287 (g) program and went down there last week. Once arrested it is a criminal justice issue. need all of that information. If here in violation of the law it is appropriate to notify. I am against illegal immigration. We need to be a welcoming city, though.

Clement says we need an effort at the local level, and we have that. I support Hall. It is a model prgram. I will work closely with Hall to get federal funds.

Dean illegal immigration issue is a federal failure. Clement voted against border patrols and cooperation with federal government. We welcome although against illegal.

Dorn question:
Special education shortage areas, but his wife got job offers from Williamson. Improve recruitment efforts.

Clemet sas should not have happened. We have to improve our system. We are among the highest on a per pupil basis in expenditures, but we could be taken over by the state.

FACT CHECK: This is a terrible misuse of information by \Clement. Why won't Dean call him on it???

Dean says we need strong education. It comes down to what we put into it. We ought to do best in recruitment.

BOY does this miss the point! HOW WILL WE DO IT??? I am almost 100% ready to vote against Clement for manipulating the "data" on per pupil expenditures (with no consideration of the needs of our children) and the NCLB numbers which MNPS is ahead in because it started a year ahead of other counties. But Karl doesn't call him out on it, and his answer plays into Bob's hands by acknowledging we should do better without saying how!

Do you like the Art?
Dean likes it. Is it a proper expenditure? Dean thinks yes. Good progran to buy art.

I agree, Karl. Way to stand up on an issue!

Clement makes fun of Ghost Ballet. What a good ol' boy answer. Is he for it or not? I appreciate music and art. Symphony Hall is great.

BOB YOU ARE NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION. It is the oldest trick in the book to mock the art and then support legislation for the art.

Dean goes on about art. All correct, but very disappointing that he refuses to call out Clement even when Clement refuses to address the question directly. Dean needs better debate coaching.

Public trqansit alternative fuels question:

Clement is for clean air and water. Wow. Al Gore's movie ought to wake us up. Warming is real. I will work with state and feds.

My evaluation...my blog. That was another weak answer.

Dean says we need to get state and local involved - I support following protocoals. We need alt fuels and buildings that are efficient. We need Greenways.

I agree, Karl. Good answer here.

Clement says he was the key to natrional greenways. We are 5th from the bottom with unhealthy kids in America.

I agree Bob.

Bartholomew Question: Name a good non-profit.

United Cerebal Palsy (Dean). I met people with Cerebal Palsy. They do a wonderful job. Reconciliation ministries works with families of innmates. I want to reduce recidivism. One way is to intervene to help kids at home.

Clement Boy Scounts, Girl Scouts, Oasis Center, Habitat for Humanity. Bob CLement House still standing built in 4 hours plus 39 minutes and some seconds...world record. Still stanidng. I will have an office of volunteerism in the mayor's office. We need to match the needs with the service. Some don't deserve help. I want to make a difference in people's lives.

I am sure that Bob Hall will interpret this answer, but it is hard to follow live.

Dean likes Oasis Center too. Would rely on non-profit sector.

Bowland question: How to pay for public-private coop.

Clement says we need a new convention center built on tourist taxes not property taxes. Baseball needs to be looked at in the thermal plant site.

Dean says I have no plans to raise taxes. Other revenue including state revenue. Governor understands our needs. Need more sales tax. Covention center helps. Much going on downtown. We need to build on it. They will pay taxes here.

Thoughts on the Channel 4 Debate

2007-08-22T20:41:00.000-07:00

Thanks to Music City Bloggers for tipping me to the on-line video of the debate. I have just had time to watch it, and (as usual, I am less cynical than you ;))I do recommend sections of it as pretty useful (http://www.wsmv.com/nashvillemayor/index.html).

Fast forward through the early sections where the candidates simply repeat the canned answers that have become so familiar, and ultimately unhelpful.

I thought the section with the video taped debates showed Karl Dean to be much better on education than I have seen him yet in the campaign. He made the clearest statement I have heard him make yet regarding what might happen in a situation where tax revenue runs short and his education priority is put to the test. If I hear him correctly, he is actually providing somewhat of an answer to the questions I asked after the JCC forum. It sounds like he really will fund education first in order to maintain a firm and consistent commitment to reforms and programs that take many years to see through to completion. Comment if I am wrong, but that is pretty close to what I have been waiting to hear. The need for stable and predictable funding was studied under the last mayor (and found to be important, but ultimately unattainable). If Karl Dean is truly committed to that, it could go a long way toward restoring confidence in the system for those families who currently choose Williamson County or private education when choosing where to live.

Bob Clement stresses public school choice here. OK, as far as that goes, but how will you get it done in cooperation with the school board and Director of schools remains an unanswered question.

There is still time to push this question further so that we get some real commitments about education instead of endorsement battles.

Is Karl Dean in Trouble?

2007-08-22T19:35:00.000-07:00

Hard to say, I suppose, since early voting is just underway, but it seems like the gaffe's just keep on coming. I am frustrated by Dean's apparent inability to engage Clement seriously on the PR side of things. He seems under prepared to meet a challenger who, at this point, has successfully captured the invincibly popular (although realistically at odds) positions of no new taxes combined with promises for everyone. Maybe a television-saturation campaign will ultimately work, but I don't watch much TV, so I'm not sure why the ads seem to work so well. While Clement's overall position lacks credibility, Dean seems unable to score any significant blows against it.

That bothers me because the choice for mayor now seems more difficult than ever. Do I vote for the man who promises everything I hope to see the city do, but whose no new tax pledge will require him to pass the bill to future generations through creative financing strategies (at best) or simply go back on his promises (at worst), OR do I vote for the man who seems unable to expose the flaws in that campaign by educating people about specific policy solutions that could serve to show him to be more realistic and capable?

One problem seems to be that Dean seems to be running an incredibly insider-driven campaign. The campaign seems confident that it is smarter and better than Clement. Despite a clearly broader-based, more visible, and more popular public campaign by Clement, the Dean camp seems to believe that being smarter will be enough to win.

I love smarter. I want competent, realistic leaders, but anyone who has followed my opinions for very long knows that I sincerely believe that genuine and effective leadership requires more than just smarts and competence. Leadership ALSO requires the ability to convince people to follow you in the smarter course of action. It is true that the smarter course is not always more popular, and I agree with the historical reality that no new tax pledges almost ALWAYS force unnecessary choices between courses of action that are truly better for the community and those we can actually afford. But, effective leadership means being able to convince the people in the community who are asked to sacrifice for the community's greater good to understand and accept (even if grudgingly) the need for that sacrifice. This is the most important leadership quality that a strong mayor must have, and neither of these two has convinced me he has that quality yet.

Lining up endorsements is just a dressed up public opinion poll. (And BTW - The latest apparent SNAFU from the Dean camp regarding endorsements calls into question the general competence of the campaign if nothing else). I still haven't made up my mind. Let's hear some specifics. Mr. Dean: Find a clear way to call Clement out on the basic credibility gap that most already suspect; Mr. Clement: describe specific courses of action that you will take which Dean will not. September 11th is approaching, and many of us still need help to make up our minds....At least I do.

Interesting

2007-08-20T15:34:00.000-07:00

The City Paper is reporting that a blogger has filed a complaint over Fred Thompson's testing the waters campaign with the FEC (http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/news.php?viewStory=57303).

I will be attending a Magnet Cluster Parents' Group meeting tonight, and I will be unable to watch the televised mayoral deabte live. I hope some of you will post your reactions to that debate here. I will try to get a look at it on tape when I get home.

I hope the format will yield some deeper exploration of the policies these men will pursue in office.

Impressed with Ben Wright

2007-08-17T05:53:00.001-07:00

I had the privilege to listen to Ben Wright detail some of his vision for the MNPS schools last night, and I have to say that I was impressed. He voiced a much more student-achievement focused philosophy than the previous Chief Academic Officer did. Dr. Wright's predecessor worked aggressively to articulate standards and focus on the curriculum, but that focus had become myopic by the time she left.

Dr. Wright's focus is more educationally sound, and his strategies (more later) for achieving his goals seem good. Of course, successful implementation will be determined by a host of variables that philosophy and goals cannot fully control, but at least he seems to be on the right track (no pun intended).

Mine is just an initial observation, and much remains to be seen about implementation and buy-in from the stakeholders in the system, but I was invigorated that a cooperative approach linking the Mayor, City Council, and school board with this new focus could, over time, really go a long way in changing the perceptions and realities in our schools. Now is the time for political leaders to call for that cooperative approach.

Missing in action on this are any serious journalistic efforts by print or television news in town to detail the educational philosophy Dr. Wright brings and any serious investigation or comment by either mayoral candidate. I am ready to be corrected if this statement is in error, but I do know that no press was present at the Parent's Advisory Council meeting last night where I was able to hear Dr. Wright detail his goals. That's unfortunate because he was talking about what we need to DO about the NCLB realities. We should have a thriving discussion and debate about action steps to follow moving forward in place of continual hand-wringing about the shape we're in.

By the way, in case you missed it, please help me get attention from the mayoral candidates for my questions about their intentions in the area of education funding.

Maybe Jerry Maynard Should be Mayor

2007-08-15T19:41:00.001-07:00

At the JCC Forum the other night, I was most impressed with Jerry Maynard. Megan Barry continued to stake out a strong position in support of the real choices that we must make if if our public schools are really the priority almost all of the candidates seemed to say there were, but Jerry Maynard did two things that moved me incredibly:

First, he put forward a specific, simply, affordable, and workable plan to improve educational outcomes. His individual strategic plan, signed by parents, and supported by a mentor scholarship program is the kind of idea that only someone with real experience working with at-risk youth could possibly advance. His grasp of the situation is solid, and his clear ideas show that he will be a Council member (would that he could be Mayor) whom we can count on to solve problems rather than passing the blame for them.

Second, and more significantly, Maynard was the only candidate that I heard to say that the City Council can do more than pay the bills for the schools. He said the Council should lead....LEAD. I have been writing here for quite awhile begging candidates who want to occupy city office to shoulder the genuine responsibility for leadership on the education issue.

What we mostly get is lip service..."I am the education candidate; education is my top priority," without a genuine and inspiring willingness to say, "I want the job because I want to be held accountable for the success of our public schools." That's powerful, and the city will get behind that kind of approach.

Many of the other candidates for the at-large seats literally said they would like to help schools, but all they can do is pass the budget. That's pretty hard to turn into an inspiring position supporting a property tax referendum if that were to be necessary. In fact, it is the same old conservative position that protects an individuals political stature at the expense of our city's children. When the Council members say, "We just pass the budget," it is a short leap in logic to the conclusion that they want people to believe the school board and district are solely responsible if schools fail. Mayor's by the way, can easily play this same game by implicitly allowing blame to fall on the school board, thereby justifying further (and more popular) tax reductions at the expense of kids.

Passing blame is only useful for protecting the political fortunes of individual politicians. Passing good public policy requires leadership, sacrifice, and risk-taking. That's why Jerry Maynard is the best mayoral candidate I have seen since the end of the first round. I guess, Mayoral stature on the City Council won't be all bad.

How does a write-in campaign go?

When will we hear answers?

2007-08-15T19:31:00.000-07:00

It is like clockwork. I don't see many responses here when I am not stirring up controversy. I don't really want controversy at all. I want to build contacts and committed people who can act together to hold political officials accountable. Unfortunately, the campaigns appear to feel no urgency in addressing the questions I posted two days ago. Is that because they do not see any particular interest among the readers of this blog here? Is it because the group of people who might read this are seen as irrelevant to the ultimate outcome of the election? I don't know.

I do know the questions are fair and evenhanded. They react specifically to nothing but the candidates' own words, the historical experience of the city budget, and a genuine concern for strong public schools.

Can each person who reads this post and wants to see an answer to the education funding questions in the previous post please leave the short comment, "Please answer the questions," in the comments section of this post? This is just an experiment in keeping with my curiosity about this forum and its potential to help regular citizens organize and hold people accountable. Remember, we are the human resource department here. Log on, leave the request, and let's see what happens. Let's see if we can get enough attention to elicit a response.

If nothing else, maybe one of the news organizations can make the candidates address these questions.

Follow Up Questions I did not get to ask

2007-08-13T19:30:00.000-07:00

Thanks to Avi Poster and the Nashville Jewish Community Relations Committee and the Jewish Federation of Nashville for sponsoring an interesting forum last night. Let me index my undigested thoughts on the event.

I arrived at 6:45 and was greeted by a row of Clement signs lining each side of the entry way. I walked in behind Mr. Clement who spent the 15 minutes prior to the event working the crowd. I did not see a single Dean sign when I walked in.

I don't know when Mr. Dean arrived, but I did not see him until just before 7:00 when the candidates assumed their positions on the front row of the room. The event followed a simple format that Mr. Poster remembered from his youth in Chicago. Each at-large council candidate was allowed 3 minutes to make the best case he or she could for our votes including in Mr. Poster's words, "the most specific actions they can take for the good of our community." Following the at-large candidates, the mayoral candidates were allotted 5 minutes to do the same.

Following the statements, the candidates took up positions around the room and addressed individual questions.

While Mr. Dean did not seem to have the visible support organization that Mr. Clement did, it was Mr. Dean who had the larger crowd around him to talk and ask questions after the event. I tried to get the questions I have been asking here to each man, and while I did get a minute or two with Mr. Clement, I was unable to make the front of the line with Mr. Dean until he was being whisked away for a television interview.

I want to be clear that I draw no conclusions from these details. I am reporting them just as they appeared to me. I appreciate, as always, the time these candidates give to make themselves known to voters, and I do not expect that I should have any more access to them than any other citizen. I was able to learn a great deal from the event, even without being able to address my more difficult questions.

That said, I would like to ask the following questions of each candidate, and I welcome anyone from either campaign who would like to post answers on this site to do so.

Mr. Dean:
You said that education is and will be your number 1 priority. I am interested in what that will mean in the actual events we are likely to encounter in the years ahead. As we have in the past, we are likely to face some serious budget constraints and the added challenge of limited ability to raise property taxes. First of all, do you agree that a tight budget is likely? Second, whether or not you agree, in the hypothetical circumstance that the mayor's office must limit overall spending considerably, how will you allocated resources between schools and other city priorities like public safety? In other words, what will it mean for schools to be the "number 1 priority?" Will you fund education first? Upon whom will you rely to give you an honest evaluation of the schools' needs? Will the school board, as the elected body accountable for school policy form the basis of your assessment? Will the Bransford Avenue administration be the final arbiter? Or will someone in your office make the decisions about which parts of the school budget are necessary and which parts are not?

Mr. Clement:
You were gracious enough to address one of my questions last night, and I think your answer leads to some other important questions like those posed to Mr. Dean above. I asked, specifically about your promise to reintroduce speech and debate teams in every high school. You know I am a supporter of debate, and I believe in competitive debating as a powerful force for education as well as school discipline and civic training, so when I asked how a mayor could get that done, you were direct and forceful in arguing that you would testify to the school board and generally be visible in promoting and even demanding that programs be reinstated. On follow up, I asked if that meant that you would put a red line around the debate team component of the school budget and refuse to allow a budget that cut it, and you said forcefully, yes. While I appreciate that commitment, and I support your willingness to be an active and involved mayor when it comes to education policy, your answer rightly raises questions about which items you will place under that kind of mayoral protection. Will you manage the decisions of the school board and district administration to the point that your management resembles a mayoral takeover of the schools? Are there other specific items that will be must do's for the school district? And if the cost of those items forces cuts in other parts of the school budget, how will you direct those cuts to fall?

Thanks to all for participating last night. These questions may seem tough, but they are the very questions that you will be made to answer if you become mayor, and I have been through too many uncertain budget years to make a decision with my vote if I don't have some idea about the thought process you will employ in tight times.

As Avi Poster said last night (I'm paraphrasing)...We are hiring you, and we owe it to everyone to have a thorough job interview. Thanks for answering.

Thoughts on a big day

2007-08-13T05:00:00.000-07:00

Well, it's the first day of school for Metro Nashville students. the first day of Standard School Attire and the first day as a District in NCLB trouble.

None of the larger issues matter to my kids. They are just excited to be getting back to see their teachers and friends. I would be remiss if I did not take a moment to thank all of the teachers and administrators who make the school experience so wonderful for so many in our city.

I spent yesterday at the Mayor's First Day celebration. I saw Karl Dean, but somehow I missed Bob Clement. I am sure he was there. Can anyone verify that? My gut impression on the scene was that Clement had more supporters with signs, but I was pretty secluded from my post at the Parent's Advisory Council table.

The District's Strategic Plan and virtually all of the articles on NCLB stress the importance of parental involvement. I think that parental support and involvement is indeed one of the most significant variables in determining the success of a school. Words in a newspaper or on a blog site pale in comparison to the daily involvement of thousands of parents and teachers in the daily work that our schools do. We all need to find ways to pitch in and support our students and our schools if they are going to be successful in their mission.

The Tennesseean's coverage today is pretty good. The opinion page covers NCLB questions pretty well, and Marc Hill's editorial on the continuing improvement of the schools delivers the kind of balanced optimism that we need in our community.

The Tennessean has also taken the time to detail the people behind the Mayoral candidates, giving an interesting and broader glimpse into the kinds of administrations each man may lead.

Finally, the GJCC is sponsoring what Avi Poster calls a, "Chicago-style" candidate debate tonight. That should be interesting, and if I understand the format correctly, audience participation will be encouraged.

I can't wait to see how that goes.

What is a blog?

2007-08-09T19:48:00.000-07:00

As I was under attack by two of the city's mainstream news editors last week, I took some blows in the interest of our common futures that I really should not have abided. I was accused of taking words out of context, which I did not do. I responded only to the claim that I was a nattering nabob, and defended the only claim I made which was that horse race journalism does not improve our political situation (never answered by Mr. Brewer), and suggested that my voice (unfortunately calling myself a blogger, rather than the citizen of Nashville that I am) was relevant in helping the mainstream press to ask good questions on our behalf. Everything else I was accused of by Mr. Brewer was hyperbole and distortion, and I will leave it to those who read my posts to confirm that. Because I believe so strongly in the power of reasoned discourse, I resisted the urge to engage in a shouting match when I was falsely accused of misrepresenting a post by Clint Brewer, and I let that accusation go for awhile, rather than to deny it outright.

As I have reflected on the experience and the exchange, I have increasingly felt that my responsibility to the people and the future of this city and my responsibility to my own family demands that I lay out my concerns clearly. With two recent and intervening days of posts about mayoral candidates who are in no political or rhetorical position to debate the real needs of this city that have received virtually no response, it occurred to me that I had let the citizens of Nashville down. While I originally entered the discussion with Mr. Brewer in the hope that we were basically seeking the same accountability from our politicians, his response convinced me that little could be further from the truth.

I speak now to point out that blog, blogosphere, and blogger are terms that are being used to silence citizens with opinions. Much like Reagan used liberal to silence any reasoned disagreement with his policies, many now use the label blogger to imply that the author of a blog is a wacko, siting around writing in his underwear. That impression is offensive and wrong, and while I have come to expect that kind of heavy-handed silencing rhetoric from politicians who don't want to address the specifics of their education plans, I was surprised to hear it from the editors of our papers. I understood journalism to be a noble craft and journalists to assume the weighty responsibility of making our officials answer to the concerns of real citizens. Just because I do not edit a paper does not mean that I do not take my words seriously or that I am somehow less entitled to speak my mind on the future of the city in which I have chosen to raise my family. Many bloggers have credentials that rival or exceed those of the journalists who lodged the attacks I endured last week, and while my initial impression was to play nice and try to convince Mr. Brewer and Ms. Garrigan of my basic humanity, all I got from them was scorn.

With all due respect to Sean, I am not eager to be fast-tracked into journalism, especially if it means that I must start disparaging legitimate opinions and questions from citizens in order to uphold "journalistic standards." Ms. Garrigan is right that I would not last an hour in journalism because I could not stand silent while I simply printed the press releases of the candidates and call that news. I could not take a victory lap for a poll that "nailed it" when all that was accomplished was fortune telling or prognostication. I would expect that I could only look the citizens of the city in the eye and say I "nailed it" when I managed to point out the superficial responses and manipulation of the process that the candidates so easily undertake. I am a citizen. I live here. I love this city. And just because all CNN and FOX News give us on the national level is prognostication, that does not mean I have to be grateful when I get it on the local level.

As a citizen, I need good journalists. That's why I tried to be so indirect and humorous in my criticism, but the subsequent attack was not funny. Not because I can't take criticism...I can, I do, and I expect it; but because I need so much better from the mainstream press. Mr. Brewer and Ms. Garrigan hold positions that privilege them to ask the questions that we citizens cannot ask. With that power comes responsibility, and I understand it is hard to bear, but turning on citizen voices, credentialed, experienced, compassionate, and well-meaning voices, undermines the very hope I have and abdicates that important responsibility, letting candidates off the hook.

Likewise, I believed that responsible journalists would want nothing more than engaged readers. These are the people that make it possible for them to ask the tough questions and print evaluations of the campaign press releases instead of simply being manipulated into printing whatever the campaigns want them to print. For the record, I offered critical evaluations of the coverage of all three papers, even though the Tennessean did not take me on. That is not to privilege the Tennessean, because citizens of Nashville deserve better coverage than our papers are giving us.

Horse race coverage means that the best the papers can do is accurately predict a winner before an election. I have pointed out the counterproductive side of that (with NO RESPONSE AT ALL FROM MY CRITICS), but even without the counterproductive side, what does that give us? In what way is that a public service worthy of celebration? That coverage might be useful if you were in Vegas gambling on the outcome of the contest rather than living in Nshville gambling you future on the policy decisions of the eventual winner during the next 4-8 years. Let's move to celebration of a press that makes the mayoral candidates tell us what they will do in the real budget crunch that we all know is coming.

Mr. Brewer gloated that he was 48 hours ahead of me on NCLB...WRONG! People who have been active in supporting public schools (including specifically me) have known that result was coming for some time (I mean years). Reactive journalism and reactive politics are supportive of each other. Anyone who asks the tough questions in advance is labelled a cynic or a doomsayer, and yet, invariably the events unfold, and all of a sudent, they are reported as news. We are not drawing this information from our overly-active imaginations; we draw it from careful, consistent, and reasonable assessment of the data.

This is not a personality contest, and it is time the so-called war between "bloggers" and journalists be called what it really is: a serious appeal by real, involved, active, experienced, and qualified citizens for a press that will ask the tough questions for us. We need you, Mr. Brewer and Ms. Garrigan. We cannot do it without you. Our voice is limited, but it is not illegitimate. Every time you label well-meaning citizen voices as radicals, liberal, or bloggers, you attempt to silence the people and play into the hands of the campaigns that manipulate your coverage.

This is not a personal attack, although I know I will be accused of that. I will not answer nitpicking manipulations and get into a further struggle. You say your door is always open, although you have no desire to have lunch with a real person. You would rather ridicule and attack me with false accusations than deal with my legitimate concerns.

Enough!

I have a family, and we love Nashville. I care about the education this city provides, and I know first-hand how crucial the complete support of the mayor is to achieving the education for Nashville's kids that they all deserve. I don't know the family status of either of my detractors, but I suspect we share in common a desire that this city will grown and prosper, and everyone pays at least lip service to the notion that universal education is a key component of that growth and prosperity whether we are parents of public school students or not. I know I believe it, and

I will not be intimidated by labels and attacks from journalists who act as if they have my best interests at heart when they successfully tell me who will win an election before it actually happens. When journalists tell me that candidate A will deal with the impending school budget crunch this way and candidate B will deal with it another way, then I will congratulate and thank them for their work. It is hard work, but it is essential work if our city is to move forward.

Until then, please do not label me a blogger. I am a citizen. You say your door is always open? Well, the only thing the new technology has done is to make THIS your front door. If you do not deal with these challenges on their merits here, and if you do not demand that the campaigns answer tough questions rather than expecting their press releases to be printed every day without evaluation, you can expect to see me at this door. I invited you to lunch, and you treated me like a misguided child. I am at your front door right now asking for more challenging coverage.

You and I would both be better off if our candidates were held to higher standards. You have the power and time to make it happen for both of us and all of the other citizens of Nashville. I am simply here as a citizen and reader to encourage you to do that.

We can't do it without you; andwe certainly can't do it if you treat us like an enemy.

Does Disagreeing with 77% Make you wrong?

2007-08-09T05:41:00.000-07:00

Where to begin? Bob Clement is hitching his wagon to the anti-tax movement. Pressing Karl Dean to express his opinion on last year's property tax referendum, Bob Clement is pressing the implicit assumption that the referendum is good policy. Karl Dean seems understandably reluctant to point out the potential damage this legislation will do to the City's budgeting process because if he does, he will immediately be labeled a tax and spend liberal who is out of touch with Nashville.

Kudos to Clement for painting Dean into a rhetorical corner, but shame on him for so completely sidestepping the real issues raised by that referendum. When voters have incomplete and biased information, leadership demands moving in another direction. Don't get me wrong, leaders should step out of line from public opinion only carefully, cautiously, and making every effort to help people understand and support the move. The blunt instrument that Clement is waving right now discourages any attempt to try to educate the people of Nashville about the quite reasonable disagreement that exits on this tax referendum issue.

Unfortunately, when the fiscal crunch hits, and we have not grown our way out of the problem (see More Statements on Education), severe budget cuts in education or a property tax increase will be our only choices. How will these two behave under those circumstances?

We know a property tax increase will be unpopular and presumed to lose in referendum. Only a full court press by the mayor has the chance to educate people to what will be lost and gained by such an increase. The mayor needs credibility on the issue, and unfortunately, neither man is showing the capability or credibility to argue for tough choices now.

Clement is sounding very much like a man who never met a tax he liked while also proposing a raft of new "ideas." One can easily wonder where the money for those will come from and what will remain when the crunch hits.

Dean, on the other hand looks almost incapable of making an aggressive argument for the money our schools will need. I understand the political game that Clement is playing, and right now, I blame him more, but I am discouraged by how completely that game (which will not go away) seems to paralyze Dean, whom I predict will gravitate toward more narrowly unpopular cuts rather than making the important case for a broad civic support and sacrifice on behalf of public education.

That's unfortunate, because it is all connected...to borrow a phrase.

Education Not a Real Issue in Campaign

2007-08-08T20:32:00.001-07:00

Platitudes!

Several Dean voters said they were drawn to his major campaign theme, "It's All connected." In a barrage of television advertisements, candidate forums and speeches, Dean made the case that reducing Metro schools' dropout rates would get kids off the streets, cut juvenile crime and eventually propel more residents into the city's work force.
"I think Karl will be business-friendly in terms of continuing growth and getting companies to move into Nashville," said Glynn Dowdle, president of Baron + Dowdle Construction. "You have to have good schools and police to attract those companies."
David Cain, an attorney with Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, said Dean "has a better understanding of what needs to be done with education."
"The dropout rate creates problems. The more people drop out, the more people we have here that can't be productive members of society. So we have an obligation to everybody.
Karl has a real understanding of that," Cain said. (The Tennessean, August 8, 2007)

WHAT? What will he do to reduce dropout rates? What is the mayor's role? There is no argument here yet. To illustrate, let me pose this question: If dropout rates increase next year, what will you do about it as mayor? Will you fire the schools director, take over the schools, add funding to the school budget, push the school board to accept a new program or school design?
It isn't so simple when you think about it in real terms, is it?

Your turn, Bob:

Joseph Sweat, who retired as executive director of the Tennessee Municipal League, said he committed to supporting Clement early on. But he also was impressed by Clement's emphasis on vocational education for some high school students. "That's something that's not stressed very often, and it's something we need," Sweat said.(The Tennessean, August 8, 2007)

Wow!
That's not all, I know. Bob Clement has hundreds of ideas on his web site. So does Karl Dean. I've read the ideas and the plans. It IS all connected, but that simply doesn't explain how we will get the education piece of it right.

I need to know, how will these ideas and plans come to pass? We know there will be a serious funding crisis in the next four years. How will these men address that? Do they have a proactive plan to manage the funding squeeze so that families who put their children in the schools will be able to feel comfortable that their education will proceed with minimal disruption, or will they each be forced to slash budgets and blame the school district for fiscal mismanagement?

Nashville is a great city. People who move here are always very impressed by how many of the aspects of big city life we have well figured out. Growth and development issues have been handled pretty well so far, and the big money in this mayor's race is primarily concerned to see that continue. But, of course, we all are. Smart growth is important. LEED standards on new construction are an important part of smart growth as is real, usable mass transit. These guys are not bad on those areas, but when the budget crunch comes, we need to know how these guys will react.

I am not confident at this point that either side has articulated a proactive plan to use the mayor's office to be sure that the school district plans and executes a solid strategy to make it through and continue to improve at the same time. I further don't believe that when the chips are down and kids are losing their teachers that either of these guys will put forward bold initiatives with a real chance to improve our schools.

And here's the punch line: I don't believe the voters are really demanding this of them. We hear all the time that education is very important to Nashville. I suppose. But are voters and government officials REALLY willing to make the sacrifices that will make our public education system strong? I want to believe, and I am looking for evidence. Many people at Bransford Avenue, on the school board, among the parents, and students of the district are working hard and making sacrifices.

What sacrifices are these mayoral candidates really willing to make for public schools that are actually strong enough to attract businesses?

More statements on education

2007-08-08T07:33:00.000-07:00

Michael Cass has pinned the candidates down a little more on what to do about funding schools in light of the property tax referendum requirement added by voters last year. In a Metro Dispatch entry raising the challenge that the next mayor will have to choose between cutting services and cutting costs,

Clement said he would find another way: growing the Metro tax base by recruiting new businesses to town and promoting tourism.“You can grow your way out of some problems,” he said.

Dean, meanwhile, said he would work to cut administrative costs. “Obviously, my preference would be to cut overhead and give more emphasis to providing the services,” he said. “But you have to manage the resources that are available.” (Metro Dispatch, August 8, 2007)

The contours of some different approaches are evident here. Dean's response mirrors the fiscal management approach of the Purcell administration, while Clement's approach follows the growth path as the solution to funding limits. Of course, these are both good and bad responses. They probably are not exclusive of each other, and the best solution lies in the middle. Dean needs to remember his point that "it's all connected," since the city's growth potential is ultimately weakened by poor public education. Funding uncertainty and continual belt-tightening also undermine parental confidence and participation in the system, however, so those parts are connected too.

So far, from my admittedly limited observation, neither man has articulated a clear picture of the Mayor's role in all of this. We need to grow, and we need to manage our spending wisely. Given. What will you do as mayor to see to it that we do both?

Education and the Men who Would be Mayor

2007-08-08T05:22:00.000-07:00

Today's City Paper gets the candidates on record on the question of what each would do to improve Nashville's schools in light of the NCLB sanctions. Each candidate seems to hit some of the important issues, but not surprisingly, each dodges the Mayor's role a bit, at least according to the article. Nevertheless, we are on the right track, and hopefully the next few weeks will offer opportunities for more probing follow ups to be asked.

Bob Clement:

“I will work with the school board and director of schools, but as next mayor I am not going to sit on the sidelines and say nothing,” Clement said about his efforts to move the system off the list. “I’m not going to be that kind of mayor. If it means being confrontational, if it means speaking my mind, I will do that.” (City Paper, August 8, 2007)

The City Paper had to go to Clement's web site to see what that might mean:

According to Clement’s Web site, his plan for education in the city is to oppose efforts to drain money from public education and fight to make schools stronger. (City Paper, August 8, 2007)

That sounds good, but we need to know what that means in terms of the mayor's role. Will Clement veto City Council budgets that do not include the money the School Board deems necessary to fund School Administration priorities? Will Clement fund education first and force budget battles over public safety instead? Will Clement employ staff who tell the School Administration what priorities will be acceptable? In short, to whom will he speak his mind and be confrontational?

Karl Dean:

Dean said the district’s improvements in the elementary and middle school levels are to be highlighted, but improvement was also needed in increasing parental nvolvement.
According to his detailed education plan, topping the priority list is parent involvement, increased graduation rates in high schools and support for teachers.
He suggested holding more school meetings in the neighborhoods and communities around Nashville to allow parents access to information about their child’s education.
“I do think it’s a complex problem and not unique to Nashville,” Dean said about the district’s new “corrective action” status. “I think I would look at increased parental involvement. I think you accomplish that by educating parents on how they can be involved and we should work to make it easy for them to do so.”(City Paper, August 8, 2007)

This reply also sounds good, and Mr. Dean is definitely right about the impact of parental involvement. Dr. Garcia has structures to help facilitate parental involvement in place, but broader participation is needed. So, how will Dean promote that involvement. Meetings in neighborhoods are a good start, but who will he rely on to organize and lead those meetings? Also, how will he cope with the challenges of families whose work schedules and other children do not allow participation at school? What will he do about magnet and enhanced option schools whose parents supply transportation from all parts of town and face extra hurdles in getting to the school to help? Parental participation is absolutely essential, but Mr. Dean needs to explain how he will use his power as mayor to promote it. Otherwise, parents too easily become the scapegoats for failing schools, and principals wind up spending more and more of their limited time educating parents rather than children.

Supporters of these candidates need to help me go deeper. Established news outlets cannot press and press on these questions because they don't have space, and if the candidates get tired of answering, the news outlet will simply lose access to the candidates. This space can be used to press harder because I have no access to the candidates here to lose.

I am glad we are on this track, and I commend the City Paper for asking the initial questions. I am pressing for more specifics. The NCLB news is not new. Everyone involved in education has known that these sanctions were eventually coming. Now they are here, and we need decisive action. We also need community-wide understanding of the situation and support for efforts to improve it.

No individual can do it alone, but the mayor can play a large role. I am looking for the mayor that help can do that.

Three Weeks is Too Long

2007-08-07T14:46:00.000-07:00

The Election Commission gives losing candidates 3 weeks to collect their signs according to the Tennessean. I think that's too long, and I place this on the campaign supporters. I have collected all the signs I placed, but if you pitched into a campaign by placing signs, I strongly encourage you to do your part and remove what you placed. I hope that everyone will do a little with the signs that are nearby. Even if you did not place a sign, you know which ones need to go.

Elections are messy, but let's all pitch in to at least reduce the criticism that democracy is intrusive.

Enough Diverting Fun - Back to Why this Blog Exists in the First Place

2007-08-07T06:55:00.000-07:00

I don't mind asking tough questions. If I am wrong, I am happy to be shown to be with warrants. Name calling makes me laugh, and sometimes I enjoy playing back with a name caller, but that's all in good fun.

This morning's main issue and central question should be, with Metro Schools now officially in NCLB hot water, what distinguishes how the remaining mayoral candidates will respond. It isn't as if these numbers are a surprise. Dr. Garcia has been talking about them for some time, and there are problems with NCLB.

I'd like to peel all of that away for a minute and ask supporters of each candidate to make the case for some specific actions the next mayor will take to deal with the issue.

We'll take as the null hypothesis that neither man will be any better suited to handle the situation than the other. Please tell me why the null hypothesis is wrong.

I guess I struck a nerve

2007-08-06T13:53:00.000-07:00

Clint Brewer has really gone after me for not conforming to the standards to which the MSM must conform. Liz Garrigan agrees that I wouldn't last a minute under the conditions that she must operate. I don't disagree with either of them, and I never set out to become a journalist.

However, if I am free to speak my mind about the impact of polls on voting behavior, but the exacting standards under which the MSM must labor does not permit that, then I think we may have a bigger problem.

All I did to provoke this response was point out that calling me a "nattering nabob" was just name calling, and that the last guy to use that phrae was in the wrong.

My original posts simply tried to point out other interpretations that the polls could be given as a way of reminding people that voting, not the polls ought to determine the outcomes of elections. That point is relatively non-controversial, but it almost never finds its way into the frontline news story. The editors will blog about it, but by their own disparaging of blogs, the work they do there lacks credibility compared with the work they do in print.

I let the gloating "We Nailed It!" post stand unchallenged, but what journalistic investigation could prove the hypothesis that the poll accurately REFLECTED the electorate was more true than the hypothesis that the poll CREATED the electorate? I raise a question, because the answer to this question is not proveable. One simply decides to believe that a poll is MORE LIKELY a reflector than a shaper.

For the record, my posts have raised questions about the three major print outlets in Nashville as well as other bloggers. Here's what Clint did not quote:

I am not saying that this poll won't end up being correct, but I would hate for any survey of 564 people to be correct because it led people to vote as if the poll were an instruction sheet. Everyone needs to make his/her own decision and vote that way. That is the only way democracy really works. Polls are fun to talk about, but if the polls shape how we vote, we are giving our decisions away.
In each election, there are many polls taken. Often on a national level, one of them ends up being pretty close to the results. The problem is that you never know which one will be accurate until after the results are in.
Don't let anyone (polls, bloggers, pundits) decide who you want to be your mayor. You get to make that decision on your own. With just a little over a week remaining, you still have time to consider all of the candidates thoughtfully, and make your own decision. If you want that decision to help shape Nashville's future, just be sure to act on it.

I am concerned that implicit questions of my ethics have been tossed around in comments to the post. What did I do in the above statement that was unethical?

Print journalists have hard jobs, and I respect their efforts to do them as well as they can. Why they don't report the negative implications of polling and horse racing is because if they did, it might leave them without a story on the polls.

I don't think that would be so bad, but it is not my place to tell them which of their opinions they can write.

I'd love to see a print article about the limitations of the polls and the potential that they will shape, rather than reflect the results. Until then, I guess I will have to keep putting that stuff here, in my own diary of personal opinions.

At least now someone important is listening, and I sincerely appreciate that.

Blog Influence?

2007-08-03T12:09:00.000-07:00

S-town Mike makes a good point about blog influence, but a useful rejoinder in the Knoxville Sentinel is worth considering as well.

Bloggers' role in Nashville's mayoral race
S-town Mike has a nice, succinct post on that issue. I think he's perhaps a bit humble on the issue, but then I'm not in Nashville and I haven't been covering the race. I will say, though, that the blogging of the mayor's race is the most I've seen in a city election, and I'm no rookie to blogging.
In his post-election post, Mike says:

Before any hyper-analysis and hyperventilating over the question of the influence of bloggers on elections starts up tomorrow, I just have to say that I do not assume that my endorsements of candidates have any more impact on people than any other voter who talks to friends and co-workers about whom they vote for. If candidates do not already have a base of people that they have organized or if they lack maximum media saturation, then the "netroots" cannot contribute much. However, in a close race, having bloggers in one's corner certainly doesn't hurt a candidate. It is one more medium among many.
He also comments:
I never had any delusions of grandeur of what I might do for the Briley Campaign, so his note of appreciation helps close tonight's results in my mind. Let's just put questions of influence to bed, which is exactly where I am now headed.
This may sound snarky but I'm serious. Don't sell blogging's impact short, Mike. After all, the bar has not been set very high:
Research suggests that newspaper endorsements have only a slight impact on election results. From 1940 to 2002, newspaper endorsements changed perhaps 1 percentage point of the vote.
(For the record, I've never liked newspaper endorsements. Their role in elections is antiquated to say the least, especially with the advent of the Internet. If I were an editor, I'd dump endorsements and use the space for something people actually care about.)

The influence cannot be zero. I met alot of new people with whom I expect to be able to continue to build a larger conversation. Even if it means no more than a face to face conversation, I at least met alot more people than I would have face to face. That's worth something.

All Right - I'll play a little...but just for fun, Clint

2007-08-03T06:56:00.001-07:00

Clint Brewer's triumphant celebration of his polling data lacks substance and relies on an allusion to a phrase deployed by Spiro Agnew to dodge discussions of his flaws (like tax fraud). I'll have a little fun with the allusion. It doesn't help his claims. As Inigo Montoya said in The Princess Bride, "I don't think that word means what you think it does."

The phrase, "nattering nabobs of negativism," was originated by Spiro Agnew. It is the argumentative equivalent of "you stink." As Agnew was being nailed to the wall for tax evasion and the Nixon administration's Vietnam policy was falling apart, Agnew was reduced to complaining frequently about the harsh criticism he experienced from the news media.

It's kind of ironic that the phrase would be deployed BY a member of the media against the criticism that the media has become a tool of the mainstream. Simply pointing out that polling and the "horse race" coverage of elections shifts attention from the real issues, I have become a nabob.

It was Agnew who preferred not to have to face criticism by what was then a watchdog press; holding people in power accountable.

Today, it is bloggers who try to hold the mainstream press accountable. The nattering nabobs of negativism were the good guys when they held Agnew accountable, and it seems to me that nabobs in this case may well do the same thing with a press that has lost its way a bit. The "nabobs" were right about Agnew's tax fraud. They were right about Nixon's criminal activities, and they were right about bombing Cambodia and Laos. The mainstream guys (Agnew and Nixon) didn't want to hear it, but since they were wrong, all they could do was dismiss criticism with name calling.

For the record, I agree completely with Clint's observations about Gentry's having run a solid campaign. My main points about polls, however, are not addressed in this triumphalist post, but you can read those elsewhere if you want to.

Here's to the nabobs. They usually force us to think.

First Blush

2007-08-03T05:39:00.001-07:00

The next horse-race is already under way. This morning's Tennessean
handicaps it this way:

The near-six-week sprint to the Sept. 11 runoff will contrast the candidates' differing visions: Clement's idea that Nashville is "at a crossroads" that will determine whether it goes "from good to great" against Dean's assertion that the city is already great and needs to build on its momentum.

Is it really that simple? Or artificial? Or meaningless?

What if I think the city is great but can and should get better? Don't both candidate sound-bites really support that idea? To think otherwise is to assume from Dean's perspective that Clement is a doomsayer who just can't stomach a progressive Nashville, OR from Clement's perspective that Dean is satisfied with good while Clement is striving for great. These simple and simplistic assertions and their implied criticism of each other will be around alot in the next few weeks. I hope that someone is willing to point out how unhelpful they are in deciding the real issues that confront our city. Can we dispense with the idea that these guys have conflicting visions about whether Nashville is good and whether we should strive to make it better or not? Neither could possibly disagree with either, and the whole silly mess will be nothing but a battle of meaningless semantics that will quickly turn to the personal attack since "real" evidence of the unprovable assertion cannot be found.

What is the issue? What does it all mean?

The Tennessean is willing to help us out. The ISSUES?:

The issues are: How will each candidate build a majority? How will they pick up enough votes from the David Briley, Buck Dozier and Howard Gentry campaigns to win?

WHAT?!?!?! Leaving aside the poor subject-verb agreement where are is used with only one actual issue, how can the horse race BE the issue???

Maybe I don't understand the term. My impression has always been that issues involved questions like what mass transit plan is better for Nashville and why? How will the mayor reduce dropout rates and make sure that our schools are the envy of the state?

In today's Tennessean the ISSUE of this election is how each will win the election? That's so circular my head spins.

I am going to call the campaigns' arguments for what they are. When I hear arguments that address the issues, I will lay those out for us to see and discuss. When I hear arguments that are just code for something I am supposed to feel, but which would be hard to say out loud, I intend to point that out.

Let's see where that leads us.

Exit Polls

2007-08-02T08:01:00.001-07:00

When I voted last week, I answered an exit poll outside the door. The company was Yacoubian Research, and they told me they were hired by Fox News. I am curious about that data. Where is it? Who has it? What do they think it says?

I know that the media outlets use exit polling data to improve the accuracy of their extrapolations on election night. Some returns plus the polls allow them to make very accurate calls early in the evening so that we can all go to bed knowing who won and still make it to work on time the next day...Remember 2000?

I also know that campaigns sometimes use this kind of information. I am not drawing any conclusions, but as I researched this question, I discovered that Yacoubian Research is a company from Memphis. It is named for pollster Berge Yacoubian who has advised many political candidates in his career, including Bob Clement (Memphis Flyer, February 7, 2002). I also discovered that Bob Clement's campaign has used Yacoubian in this campaign (now, I wish I could produce this evidence, but I cannot get the City Paper links to work. Google Clement and Yacoubian, and you will see the links...I just can't get them to display).

Here were the questions:

1. Whom did you vote for today?
2. For whom would you vote in a Clement-Dean run-off?

That's it. I am happy to be asked and answer these questions, and I did, but when the interview was over, I got to ask my questions. The pollster, who was very nice, by the way, said she was with Yacoubian Research and that this company was hired by Fox News.

This is not a blog about specualtion and inuendo. So, let me be clear: I could care less who really hired the group. I am willing to take them at their word, and I expect the Fox affiliate in Nashville will use the data tonight. I am interested in this poll as one who spends alot of time looking at them.

What is curious about this poll is that it only asked these two questions. The second question could easily be designed to elicit certain perceptions about the race. This practice is called push polling. I hope that the Fox affiliate will produce a story tonight in which they analyze this whole concept of defensive voting as it played out in this race. I can see a direction for interpreting the data from these two questions in order to extrapolate how much Briley and Dean affected each other and whether anti-Clement sentiment really played a role in selecting one candidate or another. We'll see. That could be interesting stuff.

I will only say this: If I were the editor in charge at Fox, I would try to use a company with a more plausibly independent face than Yacoubian which has obviously worked for one of the candidates in this election. I don't ever want this blog confused with a cynical conspiracy theory joint. All media whether institutional or blogospheric make selection decisions about what to include and what to exclude. I just want people to remember that so they will investigate further and make up their own minds. At Fox they like to say that they report, and we decide. I am just including a little more reporting that might be useful in deciding.

Leave a comment if you are polled today.

Good Discussion - Hope vs. Fear

2007-08-01T17:47:00.000-07:00

I like and appreciate the people who differ with me about the candidate they support. Their ideas and thoughts are important because they have them, and getting to know and hear those thoughts in this forum sharpens and improves my own. David Briley has my vote because he approaches disagreement this way. He is a leader who can listen and evaluate without becoming paralyzed by inaction. Many politicians today act decisively, even ignoring opposing views in order to show their ability to lead. I say leadership lives neither in the tyranny of decisive but blind action nor in the paralysis of endless conversation. David Briley has convinced me that he best understands this razor-thin expectation we place on leaders. He has led well. He listens, he learns, and he acts wisely. He is an inspirational leader. This city is on the verge of exploding as a major city in this country, and our destiny will be best shaped by forward looking, thoughtful deliberation coupled with the courage to act wisely. The danger, as David says often, is not that the other guys will be bad, but that they will not quite expect as much.

David Briley stands for hope and courage. He stands against the efforts to create fear of the other guys. What are the reasons people list for choosing the other candidates? Many (and a generalization here is always somewhat right and somewhat wrong) try to make you afraid to vote for David. They say, "A vote for David is a vote for Buck." "David wants to take over the world." "David denies Dean his rightful momentum."

They are all wrong. There are reasons to prefer the other candidates. As I have repeatedly said, they are all good men who will serve the city well. My vote is for hope...the optimism that we can be served BETTER than well. One candidate convinces me that he can do that - David Briley.

Now, those who take issue with my claims about democracy. Specifically, those who try to say that there is a logical fallacy in saying that person-to-person persuasion can actually determine the outcomes of an election...You have to understand my frustration. When you buy into that cynicism; when you deny hope; you create the fearful, discouraging world that you say you want to avoid.

This conversation will continue after tomorrow. I hope that the seeds of those reading this blog will lead many of you to join this conversation. Hope and optimism CAN work. In the end, hope and optimism will always overcome fear and cynicism in the same way that light overcomes darkness. But, unfortunately, fear can prevent us from having hope in the first place. If we can get a big enough group to reject fear and vote with hope, we will be able to make an incredible impact on our collective future.

Tomorrow is the first round. Win or lose this time, I say that one by one we can take back the political process and be the Nashvillians we want to see.

Here we go

2007-07-31T20:56:00.000-07:00

Well, good morning Nashville! One day to go. Thursday is an important election day. Let's do all we can today to involve as many citizens of Nashville as possible. Go ahead and take the risk. Talk to those 20-50 people you come into contact with each day; those people you don't want to "bother" with your political views. Today is the political equivalent of the Great American Smokeout. On that day, perfect strangers accost one another to discourage smoking. Is this irritating to smokers? Yes, but it is also in their best interests, and most smokers reflect on those unsolicited opinions, and some stop smoking.

So, today, I am declaring a Greater Metropolitan Nashville Political Apathy Out. Today, everyone is not only encouraged to share his/her opinion on the Mayor's race, everyone should realize it is his/her responsibility to share political opinions with anyone who hasn't voted. Only early voters are exempt...and no lying; but even early voters are obligated to speak with others. For the next 24-36 hours, everyone gets to know your opinion on the Mayor's race, your local council seat and the at-large candidates. You can do it, and we can all stay friends.

I know people find politics awkward, but the problem is not politics. The problem is the personalization of politics. Zero-sum attack politics leaves us all poorer, but politics that is positive sum enables us to engage our differences and search for compromises that leave us all better off. When politics is at its best, no matter who wins, everyone really wins, but increasingly we all treat politics like sports. In sports, if your team has a bad year, makes bad moves, or employs questionable characters, you stick with your team and hope they will straighten it out. Any Cubs fans understand what I'm saying? Lately, that's the way we've treated our political party affiliations, and it isn't something that is brand new, it has probably always been that way to a greater of lesser degree.

Yet, in politics, the question is not which TEAM wins...the question ought to be which IDEAS win, because when the best ideas are vetted, tested, tweaked, and accepted, WE ALL WIN. The goal is not showing loyalty to the team; the teams ought to be loyal to us. To make that happen, we have to be willing and able to walk away. In short, we need choices.

In this local election, we have some real choices. Each of us has to ask some important questions and do some real looking to find out which choices he or she prefer. What an opportunity!

So, make a decision. It matters. Then share your decision with everyone you see. Start by sharing it here, but make sure you share it with the real potential voters you meet every day. In If you do, you will be building a climate of discussion and dialogue...productive debate. It may feel awakward at first, but you will soon find it isn't all that threatening. Then, our candidates will have to impress us all in order to lead us.

The reference to What's the Matter with Kansas that is the allusion in the title of this blog is instructive here. Nothing is the matter with Tennessee if every person sincerly evaluates electoral choices, if those choices are real, and if we are all able to compromise in order to govern well.

Remember the Mayor's Role in Education

2007-07-30T21:20:00.000-07:00

It has gotten pretty far down the list of posts, so I want to bring it back because it is central to my judgement that David Briley will make a better mayor for education than the other candidates. He, more that the rest, has the experience and understanding that will enable him to hit the ground running with the proper role for the mayor's office in the educational policy context. Clement and Dean have good ideas, but it will take a while for these ideas to be translated into actions. The school board, and central administration guard the idea side of things by tradition and authority. The mayor must create a context in which those good ideas move forward and educational policy is supported and celebrated. Dean, Clement, Dozier, and Gentry may be able to do that, and on that list, I think Gentry has the most promising experience and statements, but Briley knows exactly how to do it. He has done it both at the Lockeland school and on the City Council. If you support public education, and everyone has called this the education election, then Briley is the clear choice.

Good work Rascoe and friends!

2007-07-30T20:57:00.000-07:00

I was happy to see the story of Rascoe Dean in the Tennessean. Rascoe was one of my favorite students, and as I always told his classmates and him in class, I did not care if their opinions matched mine, but I did care that they had an opinion. I am happy to see the involvement of young voters that Rascoe is getting for this campaign. Building that involvement at a young age will spread to a vibrant civic involvement that will bolster any community. For those who tend to attack the motives of people with different political opinions, I hope this story will make an important point. When I say I respect all the candidates in this race, and appreciate the passion of their supporters, I mean it. I made a choice that I feel passionately about, but in the end, politics is what allows us to debate our collective futures, agree and disagree, and find ways to move forward benefiting from all of that deliberation. It is important that Rascoe's generation be involved. This generation represents a demographic that doesn't vote much, and I hope this election, whatever the outcome will hook large numbers of young voters on that important civic participation.

Rascoe is doing his part, and I'm trying to do mine. Now, you do yours.

And so on, and so on....

2007-07-30T11:38:00.000-07:00

Well, this morning's City Paper is already handicapping the runoff between Dean and Clement. I wonder which campaigns released internal numbers showing that foregone conclusion? Fortunately, however, the article provides us yet another reason to vote for Briley. The paper predicts that the runoff will be ugly. Now, I am not going to spend much time on media criticism today. Suffice to say that no one can be sure who any of the alleged "sources" for this story are really working for. The press is too easy to manipulate for anyone to believe much of what each side "says" about the campaign. That's the point I've been trying to make about the inevitability claims by Clement and Dean supporters.

Enough. Thirty two of the visitors to this site said they thought David Briley was best qualified. If each of them found 10 new voters today, the number would be 320 tomorrow. If each of those found 10 new voters tomorrow, the number would be 3200. If each of those found 10 new voters Wednesday, the number would be 32000. That number, 32000 new voters turning out for one candidate on Thursday would more than lock up the election for that candidate. So, nothing is inevitable if people are committed to work for it. 32000 new votes, combined with the 12,000 plus already identified by the campaign would get close to the 50% mark to avoid a runoff. But, let's not get giddy.

Can you find 10 new voters today who will find 10 tomorrow, and so on, and so on....

RIP Skip

2007-07-27T19:00:00.000-07:00

I started this blog to join a political discourse in Tennessee, and for the past day I have resisted commenting on the loss of a good man. Yet, as a Demon Deacon and part of the Wake nation, I am deeply touched by the passing of Wake Forest Basketball Coach Skip Prosser. He began as a high school history teacher before moving into the upper echelons of college basketball coaching. I liked him because he was a leader I could be proud of. He did things the right way, treated others fairly, and taught his players to do the same. His sudden passing reminds us all to "learn like we will live forever, but live like we will die tomorrow."

If you want to read about a good man, click here.

I am taking time out to hug my family.

Enclave: No More Deliberation. My Mind is Made Up. David Briley Should Be Our Next Mayor.

2007-07-27T17:47:00.000-07:00

Enclave: No More Deliberation. My Mind is Made Up. David Briley Should Be Our Next Mayor.

Framing Funds

2007-07-27T06:34:00.000-07:00

Today's Tennessean headline reads:

Cost of Runoff in Mayoral Race Might Favor Two

The City Paper leads with:

Disclosures: Clement Raises More Dean Spends More

Two candidates are featured, and from one way of interpreting the data, this framing of the story might seem appropriate. Is there another story suggested by the financial disclosures? Look closely at the data compiled by the Tennessean:

Candidate: DAVID BRILEY
Money raised July 1-23: $62,053
Money raised overall through July 23: $600,000*** (*** not an exact figure )
Money left to spend: $32,829
Candidate: BOB CLEMENT
Money raised July 1-23: $115,646
Money raised overall through July 23: $1,365,033
Money left to spend: $548,278
Candidate: KARL DEAN
Money raised July 1-23: $356,210* (* includes $325,000 in personal loans)
Money raised overall through July 23: $1,201,000
Money left to spend: $8,973
Candidate: BUCK DOZIER
Money raised July 1-23: $46,807
Money raised overall through July 23: $532,278
Money left to spend: $83,686
Candidate: HOWARD GENTRY
Money raised July 1-23: $53,696** (**includes $23,000 in personal loans )
Money raised overall through July 23: $386,744
Money left to spend: $44,016

How about these headlines? Clement and Briley Leading the Pack in Late Fundraising OR Briley Continues to Outdistance Dean in Individual Contributions.

Now, I guess I am responding a bit here to the person who said that Briley supporters were disparaging to Dean when pointing out that Briley's individual contributions are larger than Dean's. While I don't think that Dean's ability to use personal funds for his campaign in any way disqualifies him or taints his candidacy, I do continue to be confused over why the newspapers give the impression that he has more support. I think the level of support is at least an open question, and that question ought to be reported honestly. Let's face it, some people are planning to vote for Dean because they believe he has the "better chance." But in assessing the candidates with the better chance, it is a trap to count personal contributions to one's own campaign. Those do not show support. The campaigns own sound bite on that spending acknowledges the long shot nature of Dean's campaign:

Dean spokeswoman Janel Lacey said the campaign has spent significant resources developing material for his door to-door “grassroots” campaign and emphasized, when asked about Dean’s personal contributions, that he “is not a career politician — so we’ve been working to build his name recognition.” (The City Paper, July 27, 2007)

Material for a door-to-door campaign is nothing like the very large door-to-door campaign that has already been underway a long time in the Briley camp. Lacking name recognition is something that reduces one's chances for winning, but the papers keep reporting this as an advantage for Dean. Not being a career politician is a swipe at Clement and frankly demeaning to people who dedicate themselves to public service. Some newspaper reporter ought to point out that Metro Law Director isn't exactly a private sector job. Karl Dean would not disparage people who dedicate their lives to public and political service, but this unexamined sound bite shows up almost every day in this city's newspapers.

Leaving out personal funds lent to the campaign, the candidates rank this way (All my numbers are drawn directly from the Tennessean and City Paper's reports):

Money Raised July 1-23 (the most recent period, an indicator of late, post-polling momentum):

Clement: $115, 646
Briley: $62,053
Dozier: $46, 807
Dean: $31, 210
Gentry: $30,696

Overall Money Raised through July 23:

Clement: $1,365,033
Briley: $600,000
Dozier: $532,278
Dean: $250,000 ($1.2 M (total); $950,000 in personal money)
Gentry: $363,744 ($386,744 (total); $23,000 in personal money)

So, if the story is about how much the campaign has to spend, then inclusion of personal money is most appropriate, but if the question is what does fundraising show about which candidate has broader support, then Briely's numbers show him solidly in second place and the more likely runoff participant when compared to any of the other non-Clement candidates.

Dollars don't vote. On election day, each contributor and noncontributor gets ONE VOTE. Briley clearly has more individual contributors than anyone with the possible exception of Clement. I see no objective way that this data cannot be interpreted to make Briley a favorite for the runoff. Will Dean supporters now vote for Briley because he has the "better chance?" I don't really think they should, but their unwillingness to offer shows the clear fallacy in the so-called strategy of defensive voting. But, I already revealed the circularity of that argument.

So, get away from polls and dollars and yard signs. Get back to the real question: Who is best qualified to lead Nashville into its future? David Briley is the favorite in that race.

That Buzz

2007-07-26T12:20:00.001-07:00

At lunch today, I ran into one of the people from the Briley event I attended last night, and I could tell that Briley's grasp of the city's challenges and opportunities in transportation had impressed him. As almost always seems to happen when David Briley gets the chance to speak thoughtfully, people were impressed. Far from political calculations, Briley readily admits where the tough questions lie, gives his impressions and, listens to perspectives that differ. These great qualities for a mayor came through once again last night, and I can sense the momentum growing.

Look for Briley supporters canvassing your neighborhood soon. Plenty of work remains in getting supporters to the polls, and you can help. If you are impressed, make sure that the people you know understand why. If you run into people who are not planning to vote, explain the significance of this election for the future of Nashville, and ask them to vote for David Briley.

Early voting runs through Saturday. Be sure to make your voice heard.

Dissapointing Coverage

2007-07-25T21:25:00.001-07:00

Check this out:

The forum was the 47th since Briley and Dean entered the mayor’s race last fall, according to Evans Donnell, a Gentry spokesman. Clement, Dozier and Gentry participated in three forums before then, Donnell said. (The Tennessean, July 25, 2007)

Did you know that? How many did you see? How available have these candidates made themselves for inspection by citizens as well as the media? By now, we ought to have a very deep sense of where each of these guys stands, and we ought to be nearing a pretty sophisticated set of criteria for making our decisions about the best choice we can make in the Mayor's race.

So, why are the mainstream media endorsements so shallow?

The Scene endorsement is particularly hard to follow. Here is what they say about the guy they chose:

Meanwhile, Karl Dean, the former Metro law director and public defender, is simply an honest broker with a focused message. He’s not politically insecure, and thus doesn’t engage in the kind of cunning doublespeak that others have demonstrated a willingness to practice. His rhetoric is plain and clear, lacking platitudes and kowtowing. Dean has an almost Kennedy-esque persona, and is a sort of Nashville Mr. Smith, a character whose slightly dorky disposition is so genuine as to be endearing.

OK. They celebrate this candidate for avoiding political tricks like saying one thing but not being prepared to follow through. I get that, but look closely at the VERY NEXT LINE:

While we can’t say Dean has offered a blueprint for reducing high school dropout rates in Nashville—which has been the core of his campaign message—we believe he possesses the skills to make such an impact on public education.

WHY? HOW? Is anyone paying attention to this? They like his honesty and his straight talk, and the core of his campaign is based on something that this endorser is not prepared to say he has a plan to accomplish. Now, bear with me, because I actually think this assessment is so far off the mark that it is not really fair to Karl. This observation is about the quality of this endorsement. I am not impressed with the reasoning in this piece, and it does little to add to the reasonable dialogue about who should be mayor.

It gets worse. Here is what they say about the guy the reject:

He [David Briley] has what is probably the finest mind on the 40-member Metro Council—not to mention one of the sharpest in the city. We share his enthusiasm for embracing sustainability, and we appreciate his accessibility and work ethic.

OK. He's very smart. Sounds like a good candidate.

But Briley is also one of Nashville’s most politically calculating
personalities, so much so that he strategizes himself in circles.

Really? That sounds bad. Any evidence? They follow with one piece of "evidence."

Examples are his recently released policy paper on dealing with illegal immigrants in Nashville and a TV ad covering some of the same terrain. While the whole of the policy paper is benign, one section—dealing with punishing local employers who hire illegals—is not only disingenuous, but also outside Metro’s authority, which Briley well knows. We believe Briley’s exploration of the topic was intended to exploit an anti-immigrant sentiment for political advantage.

OK, you are entitled to believe what you want, and this paragraph makes no claim other than that the author believes it to be true. But, you see, that's where I am disappointed. Forty-seven to fifty times these candidates have gone out in public to discuss their views. If Briley is flip flopping and playing political games, the people who have witnessed the forums have not reported it. In fact, the Tennessean reported that at tonight's forum, Briley, Dean, and Gentry all gave essentially the same positions on immigration. Yet a sweeping claim about Briley's character is based on that position and used to wave away all the work he has done while failing to hold the endorsed candidate to the same standard.

And that's the point. These endorsements are not based on standards. They are based on personal opinions and gut feelings. I have suggested standards at this site that describe important characteristics of the mayor to me, and my "endorsement" is clearly linked to those. Whether you agree or disagree with how I applied them, you can at least see and understand where I am coming from. That approach, I hope, adds to discussion and deliberation. The gut feeling (he is politically calculating because he is) really doesn't add understanding or enlightenment.

And that's disappointing.

Defensive Voting?

2007-07-25T05:24:00.000-07:00

I am writing to a small demographic today, but whether you are part of that demographic today or not, you will likely entertain the prospect of defensive voting at some point in the future, and I have been wrestling with some thoughts lately that I share for anyone who wants to hear them.

A defensive voter is one who passes on the opportunity to vote for the candidate he/she really prefers in order to vote for a candidate with "a better chance to win." Defensive voting becomes a significant issue in multi-candidate elections like the Mayor's race. So, in this race, someone may say, "I really prefer Briley, but I'm voting for Dean because he has a better chance to make the runoff." This strategic voting is seldom as strategic as it seems in conventional wisdom. I ask you to consider the following weaknesses to this line of thought:

First, chances of winning are unknowable. Assumptions about who is likely to win that are based on polls are always problematic, but beyond that, voting decisions determine who will win. Therefore, strategic decisions that deny the presumptive loser votes become self-fulfilling prophecies. If you think a candidate will lose, so you vote for someone else, then the candidate will lose. The defensive voter is not acting on realities as he/she usual feels. The defensive voter is SHAPING that reality.

Second, the "threat" that the defensive voter defends against is often exaggerated. In the Mayor's race, for instance, the Dean-Briley decision that many blogs are discussing usually evokes some hazy, incomplete description of the supposed horror of a runoff without either of these men. I am not willing to say that that outcome, even though it would not be my preference, is such a real threat that I should throw away my chance to vote for the person I feel will do the best job as Mayor. I have written many times that one of the Mayor's most important jobs is to lead through inspiration. If everyone votes for the candidate he or she believes will do the best job, and Dean and Briley are left out of the runoff, I am not willing to say that Bob Clement would not be a good option. If everyone votes his/her conscience, then whoever makes the runoff will by definition be a candidate who inspires a larger share of Nashville's people. I will have the chance to choose again. Bob Clement, Howard Gentry, and even Buck Dozier are good, honorable men who want to serve. The administrative needs of the city will be well-served by any of them, and the people they will appoint to run city offices will do well in those posts. This conclusion does not mean that I don't passionately prefer Briley's vision and fitness for the job over the rest, but it does mean that I don't really need to throw my vote away "defending" myself against a serious threat. Being able to rally the city is an essential part of leadership, and elections, in the absence of defensive voters, are one clear aspect of demonstrating an ability to do that. Defensive voting, on the other hand, denies a candidate who has already inspired people of the electoral proof of that inspiration.

I am writing today primarily to those who say, "I really prefer Briley (insert the name of your preferred candidate here), but I am voting for "x" because I think he has the better chance to win. Democracy means voting for the person you find best suited for the job. So, if you really think Briley (or any other candidate) is the best suited for the job, I encourage you to vote for him/her. This approach is less likely to polarize our politics and better suited to helping us move forward after an election working together to make our city great.

In football, the commentators often say that the "prevent defense" usually prevents a team from winning. Similarly, defensive voting often defends us against our first choice.

Do Polls Matter on Election Day?

2007-07-24T06:02:00.000-07:00

The latest poll is in. The City Paper published the results today. This poll shows dramatically different numbers than the previous polls, and that shows what I have been saying all along. Of course, those in the lead will say they are gratified, but they will fear that their supporters will stay home on election day figuring the thing is in the bag. Those behind, fearing their supporters will jump ship to a winner or stay home discouraged, will say that the polls don't matter since it is only the votes on election day that count.

Who is right? Well, they all are. Polls don't elect people. They can, however, affect the outcome if the voters respond to the polls by staying home.

Communication theorists refer to this tendency we have to avoid expressing opinions when we believe we are in the minority as "The Spiral of Silence" (Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The spiral of silence: a theory of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 24, 43-51). The rise of election tracking polls has definitely gone hand in hand with the general decline in voter turnout in America over the past 40 years. There are many reasons why people choose not to vote, but keeping a minority opinion to yourself is probably one of them.

Let me point out one more thing and then plead again for everyone to vote so that we can get a candidate that we really want. This poll asked 564 people who they want as mayor. That is interesting information, but I would rather know who all the people of Nashville want. And remember, even if this polls is perfect, it has a margin of error of 4.2%. That means that any number in the poll could be off by as much as 4.2%...up or down. So, let's look at those numbers to see what the poll really tells us:

Candidate Support:
Bob Clement 23%
Karl Dean 21%
Howard Gentry 21%
‘Buck’ Dozier 16%
David Briley 12%
undecided 5%
Kenneth Eaton 1%
Cheryl Lynn Tisdale 1%
Note: Poll of 564 likely voters was conducted July 19-22 and has a margin for error of +/- 4.2%. (City Paper, July 24, 2007)

If the Clement, Dean, and Gentry numbers are high by 4.2%, while the Dozier and Briley numbers are low by 4.2% (and remember that this kind of shift is likely among numbers since a vote shift from one candidate to another is both an increase for one and a decrease for the other), then all of the numbers start to look much closer together.

Further distortions come from the formulas that pollsters use to determine the significance of each voting demographic to the outcome. Briley and Gentry do well among younger voters according to this survey. When the results are calculated, the poll uses some (undisclosed) formula to weight the significance of support in different demographics based on past voting behavior. Since young voters traditionally remain pretty inactive on election day, especially in local elections, this poll very likely skews their impact on the numbers downward. If you want to change the results, change the assumptions. If a larger than expected number of young voters turn out to vote, we could just as easily see Gentry and Briley in the runoff. If a larger number of older voters turnout, then Dozier and Clement may benefit more. The point is that the voters actual decision to vote still matters and shapes the outcome.

I am not saying that this poll won't end up being correct, but I would hate for any survey of 564 people to be correct because it led people to vote as if the poll were an instruction sheet. Everyone needs to make his/her own decision and vote that way. That is the only way democracy really works. Polls are fun to talk about, but if the polls shape how we vote, we are giving our decisions away.

In each election, there are many polls taken. Often on a national level, one of them ends up being pretty close to the results. The problem is that you never know which one will be accurate until after the results are in.

Don't let anyone (polls, bloggers, pundits) decide who you want to be your mayor. You get to make that decision on your own. With just a little over a week remaining, you still have time to consider all of the candidates thoughtfully, and make your own decision. If you want that decision to help shape Nashville's future, just be sure to act on it.

Dropping Out?

2007-07-23T14:19:00.001-07:00

I have to say that some of the best work on this Nashville Mayor's race is coming from Rob Robinson at Think Train. His assessments of both Briley and Dean do a good job of identifying the strengths these two possess that will make them great leaders for our future. While he discounts Clement much more than I do, his grasp of Dean and Briley is really insightful.

Now, however, Rob is suggesting that one of the two drop out of the election. I feel sure it is too late for that strategy to work, and I feel like it may be too cute by half.

If Dean and Briley are the two best suited to serve as Mayor, why shouldn't they be in the runoff against each other? If the people now at odds with each other over the Dean-Briley divide really are such a narrow and inactive slice of the population that they cannot hope to turnout enough votes to overtake Clement, Dozier, and Gentry, then perhaps our little battle is very small. If, on the other hand, the issues these two men represent and the trustworthiness that they exude are really what the mainstream of this city wants, then there is no reason that turnout cannot be high enough to put them both on the ballot.

Why is it a given that Clement will be on the ballot? Has he inspired voters to turnout any more than these others? I doubt it. He is the most well known, and we have been steadily told that he is the front runner, but his support, as far as I have seen has been soft, and it has been gauged more on name recognition than likelihood of turnout. As far as I can tell, all of the candidates have been judged on name recognition in every poll so far.

TURNOUT is all that matters. If more Dean and Briley supporters actually go to the polls, there is no reason these two can't battle it out in the runoff.

The trick is to move away from the computer screen and find some new voters or apathetic voters who need to know how important this election is to the city of Nashville.

Do Netroots Matter?

2007-07-23T11:16:00.001-07:00

Returning specifically to my avowed purpose for beginning this blog last fall, the Nashville Mayor's race offers a real opportunity to see if blogging can make a difference.

Last fall, several of the close senate races were studied for the impact of local bloggers on turnout, especially among younger voters. If it is possible to get a blog-buzz going and see it produce a measurable increase in voter turnout for a specific candidate, we ought to be able to see it in an election with turnout predicted to be as low as this one. If everyone reading this blog makes sure that 5 people who would otherwise not have voted turns out, we could see a quick increase in the electorate.

Again, this approach could wind up favoring any candidate with a presence on the web. Are you up for it? If you have a blog that is into this effort to increase voter turnout among the netroots crowd, leave me a comment or send me a link, and let's push turnout in this important election higher.

To Poll or to Vote; That is the Question

2007-07-21T16:21:00.000-07:00

So, who will win? I have received some version of this question from several people in the last 24 hours. The answer depends entirely on you, the voter. When polling data helps you make up your mind whom to vote for based on who you think will win, the process becomes inverted. In elections, you vote for the candidate you want to win, and the polls either reflect that accurately or they don't.

Some polls show Clement in first with Dean surging Dozier, Gentry, and Briley battling for third. Clement's and Briley's support seems softer, and undecideds have gone to Dean over the last month, by and large. However, every poll shows something different, and they all show significant levels of undecided. Jeff Woods of the Scene criticizes the Channel 4 polling (take that for what it's worth) because it was done by random sampling with no attention to likely voters. Polls always produce at least as much controversy over their methods as they offer in enlightenment about the race. Of course, supporters of the front runner and charging candidates thin the polls show exactly what is happening while the rest of the pack tries to dispute them.

Dean and Briley are running similar campaigns and splitting similar voters. If Dean were not in, Briley would probably have easily advanced to the second round, but for some reason that I don't fully get, Dean supporters seem to dislike Briley on some personal rather than issue-based level, so Dean entered the race late and has run a good TV campaign to vault into serious contention. Dean also seems to be running a decent ground operation.

I spent this morning canvassing in East Nashville where Briley is very popular. I saw a projection that less than 100,000 could wind up voting, and early voting numbers have been low, so it should be any one's game in the first round. While it is hard to see an 8 point swing in polling data in a presidential election, that is exactly what Bush got in Ohio in 2004, and while some conspiracy theories dispute the claim, the last Bush campaign showed that attention to the get out the vote (GOTV) phase of the campaign can render polling data highly inaccurate. In a voter field of around 100,000 (about 1/3 of eligible voters in Nashville), very wide discrepancies between polling data and actual election outcomes are virtually certain. So all the campaigns will be focused on getting their supporters to turn out in these last few days. Early voting continues next week, and election day is August 2.

The bottom line is that whoever works hard in the next week and a half and whoever can convince more people to go to the polls during that time will win. Jesse Ventura was elected Governor of Minnesota by reminding people that the voting booth is not the betting window at the track. He reminded people that voting is supposed to be an expression of your personal choice for a leader, not your prediction of who you think MIGHT win. In horse racing, you win when you back the horse who wins. In elections you only win if the candidate you back is the right one. Unlike horse racing where you have no control over the actual race, in voting, your selection determines the winner.

Baseball fans will remember that there were "polls" or at least strong conventional wisdom that the lowly St. Louis Cardinals, winners of just 83 regular season games last year, would be eliminated from the playoffs in the first post season round. Fans of the now defending World Champion St. Louis Cardinals understand clearly that the discussions and projections add interest to the story, but the actual outcome is determined on the field. Elections are exactly the same.

So, make sure you exercise your control over the process. Now is the time, and every vote counts.

Why I'm voting for David Briley

2007-07-20T05:24:00.000-07:00

Those of you following this blog know that I have taken this campaign for mayor very seriously, and I have thoroughly investigated the candidates over the past year. I make no secret of the significance that I think this election will have for our city and our future. I can say that my investigation reveals what is so often true of the men and women who volunteer to lead our communities. In general, these people are bright and capable, compassionate and concerned, and incredibly generous with their willingness to put their lives on hold to work for the good of our community. The candidates for Mayor of Nashville this time around are certainly no exceptions to that general rule, and I am confident that the discussions and debates that have occurred in this campaign will benefit Nashville and its citizens no matter who is elected.

The nature of this year's campaign is also commendable. The issues have really taken center stage, and those who have clear visions for the future of this great city/county have been pressed to describe and defend those visions. These candidates have shown that politics about ideas is still possible and that personal slander and attack are not necessary to the political process. This fact gives me even greater hope for our ability as citizens of Nashville to come together to deal with the issues that will confront us in the years ahead.

I have said all along that my decision would be based on clear criteria that are important to me. I respect and appreciate anyone whose criteria differ from mine or who evaluate the candidates differently along these lines. If you are reading this post, however, you must have at least passing curiosity about what I think, and while I have left my conclusions until now and enjoyed the conversations with many of you that have helped me to clarify my own thinking, it is now time for me to share my thoughts. As always, my goal is to inspire conversation, so please feel free to respond to this post with any thoughts it may provoke.

I have investigated the Mayoral candidates according to the standards I laid out in My Conversation with Bob Clement's Campaign. To remember, my hopes for an education mayor include:

1. Creativity, innovation, and ideas (specific ones) for helping the public schools meet the unique challenges of educating for the next century rather than the past.
2. A willingness and ability to work the legislative and bureaucratic process to secure significant and well-managed monetary increases to support those good ideas.
3. A charismatic personality and the passion to inspire the people of the city to support public education.

As I have followed the campaign and thought about the issues that confront Nashville, I have begun to believe that these criteria, good for education, are also criteria that will help to identify the best candidate on other issues as well. I have broadened my assessment criteria to include the following:

Does the candidate have a clear vision for the future?
Does the candidate have the political and governing skill to realize that vision?
Does the candidate have the ability to inspire the citizens to see and support that vision?

I have decided conclusively that David Briley best meets the 6 criteria and is best suited to be the next Mayor of Nashville. I reach this conclusion knowing that it differs from those reached by some others whom I respect. I reach this conclusion confident that the other candidates would do a fine job and be excellent mayors. I simply believe that David Briley will be an even better mayor.

David Briley has impressed me with his vision. He seems to understand the dynamics of Nashville's current and future growth better than the rest. He has an effectively balanced perspective that can best be termed "wise growth." While other candidates have some very good ideas for the future of Nashville, David Briley seems to have a framing vision into which those ideas fit without becoming sidetracked or part of a single issue campaign. His sharp vision gives him a strong ability to inspire and guide political debates and deal proactively with issues that our city needs to address.

Nashville's Mayors Bill Purcell and Phil Bredesen have established a legacy of wise management and good government that has literally transformed this city over the last 16 years. The current slate of candidates for Mayor are all incredibly well qualified to continue this legacy. The city will be well-managed under Briley's leadership. However, the transformation that has taken place in the last 16 years makes the demands for leadership very different now than they were while Mayors Bredesen and Purcell were working hard to get the metro engine rolling. While each of these men is likely to keep that engine rolling at a high rate, David Briley, more than the rest, has impressed me that he has a clear idea how to be sure that the growth and development in this city will produce an even greater city and not simply more of the same. With all due respect to my friends in Atlanta, Nashville is great because it is not Atlanta, and David Briley convinces me that he understand how to chart a path for the future greatness of Nashville that will make this city both better and more liveable at the same time.

The role of Nashville's Mayor s changing with the city. We have had two great mayors who have taken us from a big, small town to the doorstep of a top tier city. Development, fiscal discipline, strong management, and growth have made this city incredibly popular and strong. David Briley seems to understand, better than the rest, what is required of a big city mayor. Big city mayors can be scary because they can lose touch with their communities, yet David Briley understands that challenge and seems very comfortable leading Nashville to greatness in ways that include all citizens of Nashville and bring us all along. Nashville will become a big city in the next 15 years whether we want to or not. David Briley understands that while the present direction is good, more of the same now will limit the potential that we have to shape our own destiny rather than having that destiny shaped completely by outside forces.

So, David Briley has an important vision, his vision is inspiring, he has the ability to mobilize effective actions both inside the halls of government and among the citizens of Nashville. He has the clarity of vision to understand the tools of a strong education system. His assessment of education issues in Nashville shows clearly that he understands not only the issues and challenges but also the relationship-building and hard work that a mayor must do in working with the School District, the School Board, and the City Council to make sure that all those involved in educating our children share the right vision for their incredible responsibility.

If you agree or disagree, I hope you will let me know. If you are in the 35% of undecided citizens, I hope you will consider my perspective, but whether you agree with me or not, I sincerely hope that you will take seriously the significance of this decision for our future as a community. Politics allows us to agree to disagree and still move forward together. The candidates in this campaign have given us all the opportunity to choose a future for our city, and we owe it to them to take that decision seriously.

David Briley has the clearest vision for a future grounded in our present strengths. He knows how to lead us to becoming a big city worth living in. He has an amazing grasp of the public policy details he will need to make good decisions, and he seems very capable of listening and hearing the good ideas that others have. He has the experience in leading, governing, coordinating, and inspiring that will enable him to bring out the very best in this city.

He can win, but that is something he cannot do without us.

That's why I'm voting for David Briley.

Upcoming Mayoral Forums

2007-06-25T04:20:00.001-07:00

The Tennessean publlished the following schedule for Mayors forums:

TUESDAY, JUNE 26

Nashville mayoral forum: Luncheon hosted by the Nashville chapter of the American Council of Engineering Companies of Tennessee and 10 other engineering-related organizations; candidates David Briley, Bob Clement, Karl Dean, Buck Dozier and Howard Gentry have accepted invitations to participate. The forum will focus on issues of concern to the engineering community. Event is 11 a.m.-1 p.m., Tennessee Engineering Center, 800 Fort Negley Blvd. Reservations are required by June 19 to Judy Logue at 242-2486 or jlogue@tnec.org. Additional info: Candy Toler, 242-2486.

THURSDAY, JULY 5

Williamson County Democratic Party meeting: 6:30 p.m., Williamson County Democratic Party headquarters, 112-B Fowlkes St., Franklin. Info: 790-3659 or Todd Sharp, tsharp@wcdemocrats.com or info@wcdemocrats.com.

TUESDAY, JULY 10

Young voters mayoral debate: 7 p.m.,Vanderbilt University's Ingram Hall. Contact Addison Pate for information, www.dcyd.org.

Young readers of this blog should especially note the July 10th forum at Vanderbilt Universiity. I'd love to have a liv report or several reactions to any of these forums.

Corrections and Fact Checks - Mayoral Forum

2007-06-08T04:51:00.000-07:00

Thanks to those who have helped with details and corrections from my hasty typing during the forum:

LEAD should read LEED: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

Dean described bus rapid transit. The Federal Transit Administration has prepared a report about this concept.

Anne Davis spells her name with an "e." I got that wrong in Dean's opening statement about his deciding to stay in Nashville after law school.

Dozier endorsed the “Future of Neighborhoods” study by the Neighborhoods Resource Center.

The Strtegic Plan for Sidewalks featured in the first round of questions.

Bob Clement was president of Cumberland University.

Candidate Forum Reactions

2007-06-07T19:51:00.001-07:00

It was great to live blog during the forum. I did my best to write exactly what I heard, and I will spend some time in the next few days assessing some of the details. I will be happy to post any edits made necessary by my mishearing or the two technical glitches I experienced with the site. In general, though, the comments on the live blog posts are pretty thorough.

My first reaction is that I was glad to see so many of my former government students involved with campaigns. It is so important to be involved in local politics, especially this election cycle when we will choose a somewhat new direction for 4 or probably 8 years. I want to repeat my call to my former students. I would love for you to join me in writing for this blog. I have taught people all over the political spectrum but whose opinions are thoughful and important. I would love to have your contributions regularly recorded here. Let me know if you would like to be added as a contributer.

I also appreciated the work of the West Nashville Presidents Association in putting the forum together. The format was solid and things moved on time. The candidates addresed some important issues sparked by questions from neighborhood association members in attendance. Everything ran profesionally and well.

I was impresed with all of the candidates. Nashville will likely be well-served by any of them. Still, I drew some clear conclusions from my listening, and I will share those in the next post. As always, I invite responses whether you agree or disagree with my conclusions.

Weigh In

2007-06-07T18:36:00.001-07:00

Forum rebroadcast will air Friday, June 8 at 7:30; Saturday, June 10 at 2:30 pm, I believe these were the times announced for the 50+ airing of this debate if you want to see it.

I will slide in with my thoughts as soon as I finish a few other duties, but I would love to have a number of your reactions here first.

Another technical glitch - Last part of liveblog

2007-06-07T18:29:00.000-07:00

Dean continued with his priorities education, safety, and livability. I am fiscally sound in my proposals.

Liveblog Continued

2007-06-07T18:10:00.000-07:00

Looks like I ran out of comment space on the other one.

Mayoral Forum at MBA - Liveblog

2007-06-07T07:20:00.000-07:00

Tonight, five of the Mayoral candidates will participate in a forum sponsored by the West Nashville President's Association and hosted at Montgomery Bell Academy, 4001 Harding Road. I will attempt to run a live blog of the forum at this site, so check back this evening after 6:30 to see what's going on.

The Education Press?

2007-05-11T20:45:00.000-07:00

Today's City Paper has a good rundown of the major candidates' education positions so far (City Paper, May 11, 2007).

If a casual observer were to listen to the collective political pitches of the Metro mayoral field they might mistake this summer’s election as an old-fashioned school superintendent campaign (City Paper, May 11, 2007).

It is indeed a good thing for the Mayor's to be paying such attention, but as I noted yesterday, something is still missing. The Mayor should understand and have opinions regarding the specifics of the schools' daily operations, but the Mayor's real role is to hold accountable those people responsible for those decisions. Doing so is difficult because the 4 branches of the school system are so easily and almost naturally at odds with one another. An education Mayor will have to show that he/she is able to bring these groups together to pull in the same direction while still leading.

To that end, David Briley wins this round. His position is that the school district's strategic planning effort should be complete before he weighs in. While there is room to suggest where that effort should lead, I agree that getting too far in front on the specifics can complicate the real job I just described. The danger in Briley's approach is that waiting will leave him unable to lead once the strategic plan is in place. The danger that the others face is that they will have to compromise their strong positions or face permanent conflict over tangential issues.

I like the discussion, and I am pleased by the City Paper's coverage of it, although I find it curious that this article is found inside, while the results of the latest straw poll stream across the front page. The horse-race mentality sells papers and garners interest in campaigns, but it doesn't help a city improve its educational outcomes. But for more on those issues, visit Debate Scoop.

Mayoral Impressions So Far

2007-05-10T19:10:00.000-07:00

The mayor's race is heating up a little, and I'll be honest, I've yet to see the candidate that combines the leadership and inspirational qualities our schools need with the fiscal sense and experience that our city as a whole needs. Let's face it: the schools are funded by the Council, and those funds are administered by the School District's Administration. The School Board has important work to do in holding the Administration accountable, so the two bodies that should know and care the most about successful public education are also systemically at odds with each other. Their conflicts open the door for Council members to play shallow politics with the school budget, making the mayor's job (defending the money and overseeing its use) very difficult most of the time.

I have investigated the Mayoral candidates according to the standards I laid out in My Conversation with Bob Clement's Campaign. To remember, my hopes for an education mayor include:

1. Creativity, innovation, and ideas (specific ones) for helping the public schools meet the unique challenges of educating for the next century rather than the past.

2. A willingness and ability to work the legislative and bureaucratic process to secure significant and well-managed monetary increases to support those good ideas.

3. A charismatic personality and the passion to inspire the people of the city to support public education.

My thoughts are informed by a range of inputs: personal contacts, careful reading of position statements, and discussions with other voters, including those who attended the teen forum last week. My impressions are just impressions, and I welcome your feedback, but I have always maintained, that this blog will chronicle my decision-making process, so these impressions make up the latest step in that process.

Bob Clement - My impression of Mr. Clement is that he is surrounded by good people, has a good heart, and can generate good ideas. His 30 ideas in 30 days show his capacity for bold vision and creative thinking. His political prowess begins and ends with his contacts.. He can raise money, and that indicates that he is supported by a lot of powerful people and groups. Unfortunately, he has yet to convince me that he can connect with the people he needs to connect with to address the concerns I have in #'s 2 and 3 above. I have not spoken to too many inspired people who see Mr. Clement's ideas as inspirational. Has he displayed first-hand knowledge of our schools? Personal understanding of the concerns of parents? Has he formed a good working relationship with Dr. Garcia? the School Board? How will he relate to the brand new Council?

David Briley - While one has to acknowledge that Briley has Council experience on his side in that equation, many of the same questions linger. Mr. Briley does seem to do a better job of listening and reaching out, and for good or bad, his ideas show a vision for the future of Nashville. Some seem to think that vision is too far in the future, but I am more inclined to believe that moving forward the way he details might be worth it, given that sitting tight will not likely prevent changes and instead increasers the chances of botching the opportunities inherent in change. Regarding the schools, however, I am still waiting to determine my opinion about his ability to inspire and celebrate schools while also working effectively with the Council, Board, and District. He did seem to connect better with the students at last week's forum than the other candidates, but whether he can lead effectively remains to be seen. I am still looking for better indicators.

Karl Dean - Mr. Dean is interesting because he is fresh and new enough to inspire curiosity and hope, and there can be little doubt about his fiscal sense and government/management experience. I rate his pure abilities as a mayor ahead of Purcell's (whom I thought was good in those areas) and even Clements given the uncertainty I have about how his experience will translate to city/county government. I read with interest Mr. Dean's plan for education, however, and he still has some work to do in this area as far as I am concerned. Specifically, his plan, while displaying a broad grasp of many significant and necessary reforms or trends in education lacked the coherence of a plan that would satisfy the three criteria I am using to identify a successful education mayor. Either his priorities really lie elsewhere, or Mr. Dean will need to show how all of these detailed suggestions will actually be implemented. Without charisma, confidence, and strategy none of these ideas will become reality (ditto Clements'). The mayor who drops off this "wish list" will make quick enemies on Bransford Avenue. He may bring the administration and school board together, but they will join forces against the Mayor. What we need to hear in the next round is how Mr. Dean will build support for public education among the public at-large, cultivate confidence among parents, nudge the school administration and school board to move strategically and consistently in smart directions, and stand up to the Council for the money they need to do so when the time comes. That is a hard job, and Mr. Dean may be the best man for that job, but I haven't seen that side of him yet.

Howard Gentry - He is a good man with a good heart, but my early impression of him is that he is leaning too heavily on his experience as vice mayor without explaining how that experience will help him meet the challenge outlined above. As I composed this entry, I received an outline of Gentry’s Schools Initiative in my email. I will say that my quick initial read reveals it to capture a greater sense of the challenge of marshalling support and cooperation from a host of different quarters while simultaneously inspiring and celebrating the good yet identifying and fixing the bad that what I have seen from the other. I would love to see the debate move in that direction, and I would love to hear more from Gentry fans, and perhaps his experience there DOES qualify him to work with the stakeholders I mentioned above, but he has not made that case to me yet.

Buck Dozier - He has alot of signs up near me. I saw a bit of his TV commercial. I am not sure where he stands on education, and I haven't seen any ability to rally the stakeholders yet. More to come? I doubt it.

Those I may have left out have not met the inspirational test yet, so their policies on education seem unlikely to dominate or drive the improvement of public education over the next 8 years, but we'll see. Maybe one of these candidates or someone yet to become well known will give me what I am looking for and what we as a city need. For now, I will focus on continuing to investigate these options and see how they do.

Agree? Disagree? Let's get the discussion going. This person will likely lead our city into 2015. It really matters. If you are 18 now, you will be 26 then. If you are 35 now, you will be 43 then, and if you are 55 now, you will be 62 then. The public education system matters to us all. The mayor has an important job.

Oliver and Workman

2007-05-09T11:35:00.000-07:00

Phillip Workman was killed by the people of Tennessee last night. Lt. Oliver was killed either by Phillip Workman or a stray bullet in 1981. Unfortunately for the families and loved ones of these two men, the action taken in our name last night did nothing to reverse their pesonal tragedies. The arguments over he death penalty go on and on, and the state of Tennessee has not been incredibly aggressive in enforcing death. The death penalty has become unusual in Tennessee. As a state, we are clearly conflicted enough to render its use unusual, but we are simultaneously numb enough to allow it to happen in a case of ambigous and disputed proof like Workman's. And if risking the execution of innocents is not cruel, we have lost all sense of that word.

It is time to stop. Real justice must include certainty when the punishment is final. It was unjust for Lt. Oliver to die, but it is also unjust for Phillip Workman to die. Killing Phillip Workman will not save a single life. Because the action was undertaken in my name, as a citizen of Tennessee, I have a right and a duty to point out that all we did last night was add another name to the list of victims from that night in 1981.

Teen Forum

2007-05-01T06:38:00.000-07:00

Mayoral Candidates will gather for a teen forum at East Literature Magnet School this Thursday evening, May 3 from 6:00-8:00.

Here's to the candidates and forum organizers for making this event possible. Here's hoping Nashville's students will take full advantage of the opportunity.

If you are a student who attends the forum, I would love to see your take published here. The best way to make an impact on the future of this city is for young people to get involved. It is too easy to dismiss active political involvement because it seems complex, difficult, and inaccessible. The good news is that making a difference in your community, whether through politics or other forms of volunteerism, is much easier than you think. It usually just takes a desire to get involved and a willingness to act.

I hope that this forum will inspire many of our city's vibrant young people to see how easy and important it is to give time to our community goals.

Let us hear your feedback from the forum.

My Conversation with Bob Clement's Campaign

2006-12-02T06:35:00.000-08:00

The Bob Clement campaign contacted this blog and was kind enough to engage my questions regarding education policy. I will post my side of that conversation here. I invite the Clement campaign (or any other) to join this discussion of public education in Nashville. Send me comments.

Here are my thoughts for anyone who wants to be mayor of Nashville:

I have more thoughts than I can write with the time I have right now, but I will boil it down this way. I appreciated the money that Bill Purcell was able to bring to the MNPS, and his administrators (Garcia and Johnson) did a commendable job of focusing the District on standards and getting the schools ready to educate well (or at least evaluate how well they were doing accurately).

I, however, do not believe that money is enough. Money is very important, and the schools need more, but without creativity and innovation, money alone will be wasted. Education too easily misses the need to educate the next generation by clinging too long to practices well suited to the world of the previous generation. Creativity, innovation, and flexibility are required if a school system is to prepare students of today for the creative, innovative, and flexible job demands they will face when they graduate. School choice is not an option or a way to resegregate schools; today, school choice is an essential ingredient for successful education. And Nashville has school choice, but not for everyone. If we are not careful, the present school administration will misapply very good standards to undermine flexibility and choices for those who are unable or unwilling to choose private sector alternatives. We need good charters, public-private partnerships, innovative schools within schools (here the prospects look better), and a host of other good ideas to be successful. Those of us in education have to work together rather than at cross purposes whether we are in independent, zone, magnet, charter, or sectarian schools.

So, in short, I believe that an education mayor worthy of the name needs three things:
1. Creativity, innovation, and ideas (specific ones) for helping the public schools meet the unique challenges of educating for the next century rather than the past.
2. A willingness and ability to work the legislative and bureaucratic process to secure significant and well-managed monetary increases to support those good ideas.
3. A charismatic personality and the passion to inspire the people of the city to support public education.

So, although I love and trust Larry Woods, and I believe wholeheartedly that Bob Clement is a very good man, I will admit that I am torn. Does Bob Clement agree that these are the three things a Mayor needs regarding education, and does he believe he has these characteristics?

If so, I am interested in helping him be elected. If not, since education is the issue about which I am most concerned, I will have to continue to look for a Mayor who does. If none of the candidates has these three characteristics, I will still make a choice, but it will be a choice about which I will have far less actual passion. Education, to my thinking, is the most important thing our community does. I don't undervalue economic development, and I appreciate all the other aspects of the job, but education is my life's passion, and I am looking for a Mayor who shares that passion and has the tools to make serious progress.
Thank you for contacting me, and I hope you will receive this response in the spirit in which it is intended.

After a response from the campaign, I further wrote:

You are on to something if you acknowledge the significance of standards and the work the MNPS has done under Purcell and Garcia, but we are ready now to hear more about authentic instructional strategies with the flexibility to ensure that different students have an equal chance to meet the standards. One of the biggest problems in our school system are the ridiculous divides we spend so much time on (public-private; zone-magnet; public-charter, etc.) We need leadership that shifts the focus from these persistent debilitating conflicts to the common purpose we share as a community to see that every child has the instructional capacity and educational tools he/she needs to meet the standards we have set. Debate is a great example of a teaching tool that works wonders for many students, but there are many others. LEAD Academy, a charter school application currently being reviewed by MNPS (and on which I have worked significantly) is an example of a public charter that seeks not to reduce the public school's ability to educate but rather to enhance the system's success. We need to speak out against the thinking that views public education resources as a zero-sum struggle between magnets, charters, zone schools, special needs schools, reading specialists, and so on. If we really believe that every child can learn, we cannot seriously believe that every child learns equally well from the exact same instruction. Variety in instruction is needed within and outside the pure public system. When a charter school student succeeds, MNPS succeeds if the goal is to see Nashville's children succeed. Unfortunately, the potential synergy among different forms of instruction is lost when the scarcity of resources forces the MNPS into a continually defensive posture (see my Nashville Eye piece http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nashvilleptotalk/message/5753).

We need a mayor and a city council that can help the main parties as well as the citizens of Nashville understand this new focus. How can we work together to ensure the every student has the best chance to meet the standards even though different students learn differently? That, in my opinion, is the question we need to hear much more clearly.

I look forward to continuing to share these thoughts. If Bob Clement is committed to a debate team in every high school, then he must implicitly understand this point of view. I hope that the upcoming campaign can help to make this view more explicitly clear in the city's discourse.

English Only? In Nashville?

2006-11-24T06:33:00.000-08:00

OK. I am sure I will be disparaged by many of you for being a leftist, but can someone please explain to me the rationale for wanting the City Council to tell us what we have to say and how to say it? I understand (and disagree) with the jingoistic reasons behind requiring English for official business, but let's all take a deep breath before we beg the government to tell us how well we have to understand official business before we are allowed to participate in it. After all, new citizens are already required to understand more of our political and governmental language than the average "English-speaking" native citizen. Why allow the government to write official business in a language we know many people cannot understand? It is very easy to know what is an isn't English, right? I'm not so sure.

I think people ought not be allowed to use racist and bigoted language, yet when the supporters of English-only bills are confronted with anti-hate speech rules, they often hit the streets to protest the injustice of government oppression. So, I have an idea. Let's all join the movement for English-only and then ask the City Council to rule that hate speech is not English. It isn't, after all. It wasn't considered legitimate English in my house growing up, and it isn't in my house now. (Spanish, by the way, does find its way into English conversations. Let's hope the City Council is never in the position to regulate health conditions in a place that serves Tacos or Fajitas). In reality, of course, hate speech is violence, not English, so it won't be too big of a stretch for the City Council to take this step.

There you go. Bipartisanship. I will support the English-only bill if hateful violent speech is declared not to be English. Or, maybe, the English-only supporters would care to reevaluate their zeal for government speech codes?

Congratulations to the "NO" votes. These people seem to have actually thought the question through.

Briley
Dream
Forkum
Gilmore
Greer
Hauser
Jameson
Shulman
Toller
Williams

Briley

2006-11-13T05:23:00.000-08:00

The City Paper reports:

By Rex Noseworthy, rnoseworthy@nashvillecitypaper.comNovember 12, 2006

It’s almost official.Councilman At Large David Briley is expected to announce this week he will run for mayor in 2007. Word of the imminent Briley announcement rippled through Nashville political circles on Election Day last week.The fledgling mayoral contest got off to a semi official start on election night when both Briley and former Congressman Bob Clement were in WKRN News 2’s building at the same time to appear live on the air with Bob Mueller as part of the station’s election coverage.Clement was flanked by an extended entourage while Briley appeared to be traveling alone.One of the biggest surprises to the Nashville political establishment may be the level of young talent that surfaces behind the Briley campaign. Briley, in his early forties, will bring with him a decidedly younger set of players, fund-raisers and operatives to this countywide race that will serve as a departure from the old Democratic Party crowd in Nashville.

********************************************************************************
So, the race is heating up with some interesting dynamics. As noted here, the Clements groups is an established and dedicated political group with experience in politics and campaigns far beyond Briley's. Briley's group may bring more youth and energy to the campaign. That comparison sounds alot like the comparison between Kerry and Dean in 2004. The role of the blogosphere for fund-raising, organization, and general excitement in the Dean campaign cannot be overlooked. I am torn on these guys right now, but Briley definitely carries the possibility for a netroots expansion in the area (win or lose), and that effort may pay off in elections down the line.

What's your opinion? Which candidate should I back?

Ford as DNC Chair?

2006-11-11T16:49:00.000-08:00

Tennessee Politics blog (http://www.tnpoliticsblog.com/) is reporting that James Carville is leading a group of DNC insiders aiming to dethrone Howard Dean and replace him with Harold Ford. I like Harold Ford, and I think he has an incredible political future, but this news is not about Ford or Dean, it is about the struggle for control of the Democratic party. There is an on-going split between insiders associated with Carville and the Clintons who believe that the secret to winning national elections is the focused, polarizing get out the vote strategy that Karl Rove has championed to such success over the past three election cycles. Dean, on the other hand, publicly battles with insiders as he tries to create a national party (one that wins votes all over the nation).

I am interested in opinions about this question. The insider approach will take Ford from Tennessee. It will take every other new Democrat with ideas and leave Tennessee as a permanent Red state. I MIGHT be able to be persuaded by this strategy if it had any empirical success. The simple fact is that national elections have not been won by democrats since the collapse of the New Deal Coalition during the 1960's. The two apparent exceptions (and the ones that convince the insiders of the wisdom of the strategy) are Carter and the 2 Clinton elections. To read these as evidence that focusing on the blue state base and generating intensity and turnout through polarization works for Democrats is to seriously misread those elections.

Carter: Beat Ford 50% to 48% nationally and claimed electoral success on the strength of a total sweep of the South (including Texas, a solidly democratic state at that time). Carter won in large part because of Ford's pardon of Nixon, but he still did not win a single state west of the Mississippi (except Texas).

Clinton: Beat Bush when Ross Perot bled some of the economic conservatives out of Bush's camp and Clinton capitalized on an economic downturn that crippled Bush who was a victim of his own success. Winning the first Gulf War in 30 days, Bush also presided over the end of the Cold War, so the complete absence of any apparent security concerns left Bush with nothing in the face of the economic campaign. Clinton focused on "the economy, stupid." 1992 and 1996 did convince the Clintonites that simply picking off one or two southern states would be enough to win as long as the basic coalition of big states could be maintained.

The erosion of focus on Texas completed its transition to a Red state, and the razor-thin margins that the strategy was based on have failed democrats spectacularly in 2000 and 2004. With no margin for error, the GOP can easily gather its red state votes without serious challenge and fight hard in the battlegrounds of Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Iowa, and Wisconsin. Since the Democratic strategy requires winning most of those states to carry the electoral college, the GOP is at a tremendous advantage. The vaunted GOTV machine of Karl Rove focuses in those states, and the Democrats lose close one after close one.

Whether or not the "national party strategy" of Howard Dean's is the right one, only time will tell. I guess there is the risk that reaching out to the West and South will alienate the big state liberals, but that kind of deference to the New England liberals was the strategy that produced Mondale, Ferraro, and Dukakis, Bentsen. Those good candidates not electable nationally.

Sound familiar? That's the leading fear about a Hillary nomination. Let's give Dean's national strategy at least one national election cycle before with subvert it from within. Let's get Harold Ford elected in Tennessee (readers of this blog can start organizing to make that difference now), and let's nominate a presidential candidate who can restore the national appeal of the Democratic Party.

Political Rising Star Alert - Jason Powell

2006-11-10T18:32:00.000-08:00

Remember this name, Tennessee. Jason Powell. Jason was a first-time candidate in the Democratic primary for District 58. While he narrowly missed the nomination that Mary Pruitt has held, he did earn the Tennessean's endorsement and run a fine race with mostly amateur, grassroots support. He served as his own campaign manager most of the race, and his sense of political strategy is sophisticated well beyond his years. Couple these skills with a strong speaking presence and a huge heart, and Jason Powell is clearly a political star on the rise.

Nashville is lucky to have a man like Jason. Expect great things from him.

Check out his 2006 campaign website (http://www.powellfortennessee.com/)!

Two Cents on Iraq

2006-11-10T04:30:00.000-08:00

This blog concerns itself mostly with Tennessee Politics, but Iraq policy currently dominates politics nationally, so I offer the following observation:

The phased withdrawal plans that are beginning to float around offer the potential for bi-partisan consensus when one considers the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Welfare Reform). Democrats and Republicans were finally able to come together for that bill once Democrats embraced a portion of the conservative critique of welfare dependency. Welfare (government assistance), Republicans had argued, undermined the opportunity for recipients to work because they were shielded from assuming personal responsibility. The longer the government provided assistance, the worse the situation was said to be for those receiving welfare. A strict time limit on the lifetime receipt of welfare assistance was imposed in conjunction with specific requirements (once called workfare) that recipients also pursue job training or actual jobs to qualify for aid.

So, how about following that same logic in Iraq. If the problem is that Iraqi soldiers and government personnel have become overly dependent on US forces to provide security, then indefinite assistance or increases in US troop support may breed their dependency on US forces. If so, then according to the logic of welfare reform, continuing indefinite assistance must be damaging the Iraqi government's opportunity to provide their own security by shielding it from assuming personal responsibility. So, a phased withdrawal with strict time limits ought to reverse the situation by forcing the Iraqi government to provide its own security, especially if further US aid, even under the strict time limits, is conditioned on their successfully providing that security for themselves.

Why, then can't the Iraqi Security Opportunity and Governmental Responsibility Reconciliation Act of 2007 achieve support from the GOP?

Time to end the abortion wars

2006-11-08T18:07:00.000-08:00

Any honest assessment of the political polarization in this country during the past 33 years has to account for the role of abortion politics. With the election of several pro-life democrats in this year's midterm elections, the emergence of late-term abortion adjudication, and the defeat of a sweeping proposal to ban all abortions in South Dakota, I suggest that the time for a compromise on abortion is upon us.

Public opinion on abortion is far less volatile and demonstrates much more overlap that politicians eager to exploit a hot-button issue for political gain will often admit. The vast majority of people share widespread potential to agree on the following broad principles:

1. Abortion should not be outlawed completely. Life and health of the woman (to varying degrees) as well as conditions that absolve the woman from moral responsibility for pregnancy are widely recognized as justifications for abortions. If they are to be allowed in any cases, they should be safe, legal, and equitably available.

2. Abortion is less effective than other forms of available birth control technology. Widespread support for sex education, birth control information, and birth control technology should be able to reduce unwanted pregnancies considerably, reducing the significance of abortion except in the seriously justifiable cases listed above.

3. Unwanted pregnancy is a tragedy that can be reduced if we put aside our ideological and senseless fight over abortion. Jobs, health care, education, job training, housing, income support, education loans, adoption, and a host of other sensible and useful approaches (public and private) are KNOWN to reduce unwanted pregnancies by reducing the desperation that can sometimes confront a woman considering abortion.

Ultimately, the decision is not one that men can or should make for women, but there is merit and good public policy in striving to make abortion safe and legal while genuinely rare. However, this sensible approach requires compromise. Each side has a good opportunity right now to let the abortion issue go as a political football and fashion a meaningful compromise in which neither side realizes its absolute and uncompromising vision, but both sides are able to agree on their common goals and improve the lives of millions in the process.

Did we elect political leaders on Tuesday with the courage and the vision to make this dream come true? If you agree with me, help me put pressure on politicians from both sides of the Aisle to make this or a similarly reasonable compromise a reality. With the abortion issue off the table, there is almost no limit to the progress we can make as Americans.

Cause 2 - The "Good Ol' Boy" Factor

2006-11-08T17:37:00.000-08:00

Republican candidate Bob Corker fell into this trap more than many. He actually ran ads claiming that Harold Ford's U Penn education disqualified him to represent Tennessee, while Bob Corker's Tennessee education made him a better choice. This stereotypical dig at Tennesseans is often overlooked for its insulting character. It is Bob Corker (like the opposition that Gore faced from such organizations as "Gore Free Tennessee") who embraces a demeaning and debilitating stereotype of Tennesseans as strictly provincial, narrow-minded, and simple folk. Tennessee is a first-class educational institution, but U Penn is widely recognized as among the very best educational institutions of higher learning in the nation. The idea that leaders who would represent Tennessee should limit themselves only to Tennessee's home schools is ridiculous. Tennessee has many fine schools, and leaders should by all means be proud to display their educational credentials earned in-state. But, to disparage as unworthy of understanding this state, those whose educational degrees are earned outside of Tennessee is to portray the state and its people as completely out of touch with the rest of the nation.

Tennessee is a wonderful state, and one of its incredible strengths is its ability to attract highly capable leaders from all over America and the world. Not only do these ridiculous "outsider" attacks discourage very capable individuals from helping to expand the quality of life and opportunity for all Tennesseans, these offensive appeals seriously intimate that Tennesseans are unable to interact productively with the world outside our state.

The reality is exactly opposite. Tennessee is one of the finest states in the Union, and its people go on to productive careers all over the world. Likewise, the best and brightest from all over long to be part of Tennessee and contribute to our standard of living because of their attraction to our fine state. Candidate appeals that suggest that Tennesseans are and ought to be afraid of outsiders diminish us all. Everyone should enjoy "Rocky Top," but suggesting that it is the only tune a genuine Tennessean can sign is demeaning and rude to us all.

Bob Corker should apologize for stooping to that kind of harmful stereotyping in his campaign, and future candidates should eschew this approach. Leaders of Tennessee should be proud to bring high quality education and first-rate skills to our state, rather than demeaning the state's residents as unable to relate.

When Life Hands You Lemons...

2006-11-08T13:51:00.000-08:00

Make Lemonade!

OK, so all changes in property tax rates in Davidson County now must pass a county-wide referendum to take effect. Never mind that a tax referendum for public schools has not passed in Davidson County during my lifetime. Leave aside the strange quirk in metro policy that makes a tax increase for school alone virtually impossible. Let's not focus on the negatives in this news. Let's look at the reality we now face as an organizing opportunity.

We cannot wait. The public school system of Nashville needs a minimum of $12 million new dollars this budget cycle, just to keep the programs and teachers it has now. Without any innovation, upgrades, or improvements in a system with 60% dropout rates in some of its high schools, $12 million new dollars will have to be found. This reality posed a daunting challenge even before the tax referendum initiative passed. No one seriously expected the City Council to raise taxes in the next budget cycle anyway. It will be, after all an election year.

So, let's begin to develop a list of innovations and ideas that the school district can consider as it tries to make ends meet while still supporting the educational needs of our city's children. Any serious reform starts with some notion of site-based management by our school principals. Transportation costs ought to be contained by considering radical approaches to public transportation. Let's consider consolidation of the MTA and the School Buses, either in private or governmental control, as a way to capitalize on economies of scale, generate more useful mass transportation, and reduce unused capacity. The time has come to get serious about rezoning and school consolidation. The district should pursue and approve innovative charter schools to distribute the responsibility for education in Nashville to a wider and more sustainable base of support.

Join in the discussion. Twelve million dollars...probably more, just to break even. We must think and organize if we are to expect our elected (school board and city council) and appointed (school administration) leaders to pursue innovation and progress rather than simply reacting to narrow political pressure. Get on board. We need you. The future of Nashville lies in the education of its children. We are failing too many now. Let's use the budget crunch as motivation to act in advance of the problems, develop new ideas, and organize political support.

We have a responsibility to justify tax increases. That has always been true, but before the referendum passed, too many of the citizens of Davidson County were willing to pass responsibility for that justification to the school board and the city council. From now on, the burden falls squarely n us. Decisions about the future of schools was made less republican and more democratic last night. A democratic opportunity was opened. A democratic response is required.

Rumsfeld Out - The People Have Power After All

2006-11-08T10:19:00.000-08:00

Well, it's official. Rumsfeld will step down. Leaving aside whether Robert Gates will be an improvement or not, one lesson is perfectly clear. When the people of the country speak with the clarity and volume of this year's midterm election, even a go-it-alone president who had promised to stick with Rumsfeld until the end of his term can be encouraged to rethink.

Being the Democrat He Wants To See

2006-11-08T10:02:00.000-08:00

I want to take a minute to salute a man who has been a tremendous inspiration to me both personally and professionally. Ross K. Smith of North Carolina is the debate coach of the national champion Wake Forest University Debate Team.

Recently, he wrote a moving appeal for Democrats to stand up and "Be the Democrats You Want to See." He took this philosophy to the streets campaigning for the Forsythe County School Bord in District 2 (a heavily Republican district in an off-year election). Although he missed election to the board, he put together the strongest showing for a Democrat that the District has ever seen.

Let him inspire us in Tennessee. We need leaders. We need candidates. We need bloggers. We need workers. We need neighbors, and we need to pull together to create the Tennessee we want to see. We need Tennesseans from every walk of life to take time and make sacrifices to support those around them. Tennesseans make this sacrifice every day, but we cannot eschew politics if we are to make a real difference in our state.

Ross Smith (http://www.ross4schools.com/) is an inspiration to us all. What he accomplished by simply deciding to do it and building a strong coalition of supporters is just a hint of what we ought to be able to accomplish in Tennessee. Who's with me?

Nashville Mayor

2006-11-08T09:51:00.000-08:00

The time to get together on a grassroots effort to shape Davidson County politics is now. Weigh in on these candidates for Mayor. Suggest others...

Briley
Gentry
Clement
Dozier

2008

2006-11-08T09:46:00.000-08:00

GOP:
McCain
Frist
Giuliani
Allen (serious questions at best after yesterday)

Dems:
Clinton
Obama
Richardson
Bayh
Edwards
Gore

Get your punditry in here. Who does Tennessee support? Can Frist win the nomination? Can Obama carry Tennessee?

Netroots, anyone?

2006-11-08T09:42:00.000-08:00

It is time for Tennessee's bloggers to build the kind of grassroots relevance that national blogs and those in other states have developed in recent election cycles. The potential to make a difference in the outcome of Tennessee political contests is there, and I am sure I am a late-comer to the party, but I am putting out an APB. If you are a blogger concerned with Tennessee politics, share your suggestions for expanding our organization and coordination. The 2008 election is well underway.

Election 2006: What does it Mean?

2006-11-08T06:26:00.000-08:00

The pundits are already out in force to remind us that the 2006 election was just a diversion on the road to 2008. Maybe it was, but I hope we will hold our newly elected senator from Tennessee to a higher standard than that. It is time for Tennesseans to move beyond this biannual ritual of gauging the significance and purpose of our votes according to the national relevance of our state-wide races. We need to build a discussion based on the goals that Tennesseans share. We need to discuss our commitment to education for all students. We need to discuss the condition of our natural environment. We need to consider the economic conditions of ourselves and our neighbors. We need to discuss our shared hopes and dreams as citizens of Tennessee. We have far more that unites us in Tennessee than we have that divides us, and we need to spend the next two years discussing and defining those common features rather than allowing ourselves again to be divided in a national, pundit-driven, civil war over the next presidential election.

We have begin the discussion today.

Cause 1 - Democratic Timidity (Self-Loathing Rhetoric)

2006-11-08T05:44:00.000-08:00

I detect a simple difference in the way Republicans and Democrats describe their candidates. Democrats in Tennessee almost always seem to degrade their candidate by saying things like, "Neither of these candidates is any good, but at least (insert a random, hard to articulate reason to support a democrats majority here)." Republicans do not frequently make the same comments. Is that because the Democrats have no good candidates and are forced always to settle for the bottom of the barrel? Hardly. It is because it is simply harder to prepare to defend one's choice on the issues, and the transformation of liberal into a dirty word means that Democrats who would defend the experience, ideas, and records of their candidates must first withstand a barrage of negativity that is not easy or fun to deal with. Political discourse, however, will not be restored by simply complaining that the other side shuts us out. The time has long since come for citizen supporters of democrats in Tennessee (and over 850,000 voted for Harold Ford last night) to re-engage the discourse.

Democrats in Tennessee care just as fervently about their neighbors, their state, and their country as the Republicans who put their lives on the line for public service. Democrats in Tennessee need to engage political discourse in a positive and honorable manner. Just as we ought to be careful to disparage the motives and personality of Republicans who oppose us, we should begin to be more careful about disparaging the motives and characters of those candidates who ask for our votes and represent the ideals that Tennessee Democrats hold dear.

"The lesser of two evils" is incredibly discouraging talk. When people put their lives, families, and careers on the line to serve the citizens of Tennessee, we need to avoid dishonoring that incredible sacrifice by calling them "evils." We need to return the focus of our discussion to the issue that separate the candidates and the opportunities they offer for the good leadership the people of Tennessee so desperately need.

All Politics is Local

2006-11-08T05:30:00.000-08:00

I enter the blogosphere today with a bittersweet taste in my mouth. While I am thrilled by the national outcomes and fully expect both houses of the Congress to be controlled by Democrats in January, I am conscious that the races that mattered most to our daily lives in Tennessee went overwhelmingly against us last night. Leave aside Bob Corker, who is clearly a good man who will doubtless be a strong senator. He should be happy for GOP minority status because it will increase his flexibility to learn the job and follow his good judgment rather than following the national party's marching orders to the detriment of Tennessee voters.

My concern is that the state and local issues that exact the most direct impact on our daily lives, my fellow volunteers voted against their clear interests. In metropolitan Nashville, for instance, ballot initiatives that will seriously undermine the potential for wisdom and deliberation in establishing the county's budget passed overwhelmingly. Each of these will have direct and clear negative impacts on the provision of fire, police, and educational services in the county. Officials in Davidson County will continue to work hard within these new constraints, and public policy will proceed, but there is clear evidence that the people of the county have voted against their own best interests.

So, the question is, WHY? I, for one, do not believe that the people are incapable of evaluating their self-interests accurately. The people of Tennessee are intelligent, capable, and strong. They stand up aggressively to be counted against threats to their neighbors, and they can easily understand clear assessments and political/economic arguments.

So, this blog begins today. In the spirit of the book, What's The Matter With Kansas?, I will explore the causes of this seeming disconnect between election results and the demonstrable self-interests of the people of Tennessee. I invite your comments and ideas. Let's generate a strong discussion of the dynamics of the situation so that Tennessee voters will begin to protect their interests better in future elections.