Mere Politics

Dottie Sims sleeps with the fishes

Anyone who doubted whether casinos will distort Kentucky's political process have just been disabused of that notion.  Rather than live with the verdict of the committee that was appointed to determine such issues, House leadership has just thrown Dottie Sims off the Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee because she didn't vote the right way this morning.

Wow.

House members who vote against this measure beware: you might wake up to find a horse’s head under your sheets--a thoroughbred most likely. Apparently pro-casino forces believe the old Sicilian motto: women are more dangerous than shotguns.

Too much more of this, and the casino lobby is going to have to change its motto from ‘Let the people decide’ to ‘We’re going to make you an offer you can’t refuse

What are they going to do if they actually get this bill, and it the voters get a chance to ratify the decision of lawmakers? What happens if you vote the wrong way?  Will you end up at the bottom of the lake with cement overshoes?

Let's hope its Cumberland Lake, it's low right now.

"Let the people gloat"

For Immediate Release                                          Contact: Martin Cothran
February 26, 2008                                                  Phone: 859-329-1919

Casinos lose in committee

"How can we say, "let the people decide" on casino gambling when our state's elected leaders can't even make up their own minds?" asked a spokesman for The Family Foundation of Kentucky today after the proposed constitutional amendment that would allow casino gambling failed in a State House Committee. "We're now going to start our own campaign, called "Let the people gloat," said Cothran, "to point out that what a lot of us have been saying all along is now coming to pass: That casinos breed bad politics."

"Greed is not a basis for good public policy--or, apparently, good legislative strategy."

"What we saw today in the committee was mass confusion, said Martin Cothran, senior policy analyst with The Family Foundation of Kentucky. "This can't be heartening for Kentuckians who are now being told that they should press their representatives to vote to change the Constitution.  You can't, in good conscience, change a document that has stood for over a hundred years if the people who know the most about the issue can't even decide amongst themselves."

The House Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee voted 5-3, with 3 members passing, against the proposed amendment.

"This may not be dead yet," said Cothran, "but it's clearly on artificial life support."

Why would the FBI be in Frankfort?

Rumors are swirling around the State Capitol that the House of Representatives received a visit today from an FBI agent. Now why would the FBI be poking around the Capitol while a debate over casino legislation was in progress?

To quote Shakespeare's Antony: I pause for a response...

Debate on CATS test Monday night

I will appear on KET's "Kentucky Tonight" program next Monday night, February 25 at 8:00 p.m. to debate Senate Bill 1, which would scrap the state CATS tests in favor of a standardized norm-referenced system. Sharon Oxedine, president of the Kentucky Education Association (the state teacher's union) will be defending the tests.  Two other guests have yet to be determined.

UPDATE: Well, hmmm. I think they replaced me. According to Polwatchers today the guests are Fort Thomas Independent Schools Superintendent John Williamson, Senate Majority Leader Dan Kelly, R-Springfield, House budget chairman Harry Moberly Jr., D-Richmond, and state Education Secretary Helen Mountjoy. But that's okay. Kelly is the best man for the job anyway. He's about as articulate a spokesman for common sense in education as there is. It ought to be good.

Do Kentuckians have a "right" to vote on the gambling issue?

I normally do not agree with the opinions expressed over at the Rural Democrat blog, but one recent post descends from simply being disagreeable being downright ignorant.

The bold question; will Senate President David Williams (R) ignore Kentucky? Williams has already made his position on the possibility of allowing Kentuckians the right to vote on allowing casinos known to all, he will not entertain it. But as we move forward in this year's legislative session; will Williams be forced to entertain our right to vote on the casino issue? The data clearly indicates that the people want to vote on the issue and it also indicates that some of Kentucky's most populous regions want casino gaming. Regions that are represented by Republican members of the State Senate.

In what way is David Williams denying Kentuckians a "right" to vote on the gambling issue?  What "right" to vote are they talking about?  The argument is, apparently, that since the people have expressed through various polls, that they want to vote on the issue, therefore the General Assembly has some sort of obligation to vote to amend the Constitution so people can vote on it.

Huh?

There two big problems staring this argument in the face: The first is that there are a whole lot of issues, that, if you ask Kentuckians, they would like to vote on.  If you asked them if they would like to vote on the abortion issues, I bet you'd get a majority in favor.  If you asked them if they would like to vote on the domestic partner benefits issue, I'd bet they would say yes.  Just fill in the blank.  Everyone would love to vote on everything.

So the question becomes: Why should we amend the Constitution on this one issue and put it on the ballot and not all the others?

Is it because it has actually been proposed as a Constitutional amendment in the General Assembly?  Is that when it becomes the right of voters to vote on it?  So all we need to do is to propose it as a bill and it becomes an obligation of the General Assembly to pass it?

That doesn't seem right.

Secondly, the folks over at the Rural Democrat seem to have absolutely no clue about how the constitutional amendment process works in this state.  They seem, in fact, to be under the impression that we have a ballot referendum process, which we most definitely do not.  The only questions that get put on the ballot of this state are Constitutional amendments, and the only reason they are supposed to be put on the ballot is not to "let the people vote," a concept that appears nowhere in our Constitution, but because lawmakers think it is good policy.

So the only question before state lawmakers is not should they "let the people vote".  If that is the case, then everything should be put on the ballot.  The only question is whether lawmakers themselves think expanded gambling is good public policy: No more, no less.

Their vote to pass a Constitutional amendment allowing casinos is not a vote to "let the people decide" whether to do it; it is a vote to do it.  That's what the Constitution says.  The folks over at the Rural Democrat ought to read it sometime.

"Unbridled Greed" runs in today's CJ

My article on the consequences of casino gambling on the state's political culture ran in today's Louisville Courier-Journal.

The Dead Bill in the Attic: Beshear's gambling legislation in need of a decent burial

Watching Steve Beshear unveil his constitutional amendment to legalize casino gambling yesterday had all the plausibility of a coming out party for Norman Bate's grandmother: the bill has been dead for a while now, but the Governor seems to be completely unaware of it.

Beshear has taken so long to roll this piece of legislation out that he has exhausted the patience even of his allies in the legislature, and attempts to revive it now are looking pretty silly.

At least the last governor realized you couldn't revive a corpse this long after rigor mortis has set in.

Senate President David Williams, now more firmly in control of the Senate, thanks to a bungled attempt by the Governor to interfere in the recent 30th district Senate special election, has said his chamber isn't going to pass it, and now even the fully Democratic House is looking doubtful. 

Several reports indicated that House Speaker Jody Richards was noticeably absent from the press conference unveiling the bill.  In fact, sources inside the Democratic caucus report that, when the bill was being privately presented to Democratic legislators on Wednesday, Richards had the look of someone who had just bitten into a green persimmon.

Talk is he doesn't like some of the particulars of the bill.  That can remedied with changes in committee, but what can't be remedied for the Governor is that one of the House's newest--and possibly most influential--members is not on board.

Greg Stumbo, whose House district in Floyd County stands to get a casino under the bill, is against it.  One wonders whether this has something to do with Stumbo's efforts to return himself to power in the chamber, possibly at the expense of Richards, in what may well turn out to be the shower scene in this year's General Assembly. 

But regardless of why Stumbo has abandoned Beshear on this issue, it has to be another nail in the coffin for expanded gambling legislation this session.

The chief question now seems to be where to inter the thing.  Republicans had already dug a plot over on the North side of the Capitol Building, but now the South end is looking like a more likely resting place.

There are a lot of great slogans useful in promoting a bill, but requies in pacem is not one them.

Hoffman, Owens to sponsor Gambling Legislation

It looks like House Majority Caucus Chair Charlie Hoffman (D-Georgetown) and Rep. Darryl Owens (D-Louisville) will be sponsoring two pieces of gambling legislation in the State House, Hoffman the enabling legislation and Owens, chair of the Elections, Constitutional Amendments, and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee, the constitutional amendment bill.

The bill will include locations and number of casinos.

Fasten your seatbelts.

More gambling money to corrupt KY politics

As it turns out, there is not enough pro-casino money distorting the political culture of the Commonwealth, and so the Kentucky Equine Education Project (KEEP) is starting another organization to peddle influence among Kentucky's lawmakers.  It will be a 527 campaign fund, which means it can raise lots of money, which pro-casino outfits seem to have.

Wonder where they got it from?

And wasn't that a 527 group the William Yung III gave over $1,000,000 so he could build a casino in Northern Kentucky after Beshear was elected?

Steve Beshear and the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad first couple of weeks

Things can't be very happy in the Governor's office right at this very moment. Champagne bottles, which had been intended for purposes of celebration, have been put away and replaced by bottles of vintage bourbon and shot glasses to make easier the writing of press releases explaining why the loss in the 30th district doesn't really matter politically--when, in fact, it does.

The defeat of Scott Alexander by Brandon Smith in the eastern Kentucky Senate district was the first big test of the ability of the Beshear administration exert its influence.  It failed, and in a fairly spectacular fashion.

If you're going to lose, it is best to be seen as not having tried very hard, but it was pretty plain to everyone involved in the 30th district race that the Beshear administration tried very hard indeed, with frequent visits by both the Lieutenant Governor (who vacated the seat when he won his new post) and the Governor himself.

They tried hard because it was important to them, despite the fact that they are now saying it was not.  Dan Mongiardo, taking a short break from licking his wounds, explained that it was not a setback for the administration at all: “It was a close race,” Mongiardo said in an interview. “Two counties went one way, and two counties went another way.”

Someone please inform the number two man that counties do not get to vote: voters get to vote, and they voted against his candidate, and people in these parts call that a "loss": L-O-S-S.

Even Beshear's chief of staff, Jim Cauley, got in on the disingenuousness. The loss, according to the Courier-Journal, "wasn't a big setback for the administration."

And so why were they trying so hard again?

Beshear had to win two battles to show who was boss: the 30th district race, which was to be a measure of his influence with the electorate, and the gambling initiative, which would be a measure of his influence with the legislature.  The first was to be a measure of his popular appeal, the second a measure of his political abilities--and both were a test of his political power.

He has lost the first battle, and stands to lose the second as well.  Smith's addition to an already formidable Republican Senate caucus doesn't really make that much of a difference to the strength of the anti-gambling Maginot Line that is the Senate--but only because it was already so strong in the first place.

Ironically, the Beshear loss in the 30th district will probably have more influence in the House.  Even though the Democrats won the two House races yesterday, they have to be looking at the Senate and wondering what exactly is in it for them to stick their necks out when they know the bill is dead on arrival in the Senate. 

Their pro-casino resolve can't be helped by the fact that a lack of a gambling bill a third of the way through the session has resulted in absolutely no momentum for the cause. 

Does anyone remember the 2002 General Assembly session, when by this time of the session the voters had been softened up by several month's worth of pro-gambling television commercials?  But this time, the casino industry has for some reason decided against an air war, and is waiting for a ground assault that so far has not come.

The industry still has enough money to do some mischief.  Even the real Maginot Line was breached after all.  But every day the now politically crippled administration dawdles makes it more likely that it will be viewed as politically ineffective.

David Williams is the one popping the champagne corks now.