Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Kelsey brought the pork to the public eye

Many people in the blogosphere on the Left side have criticized Rep. Brian Kelsey for his so-called stunt of putting bacon in an envelope in response to Democratic attempts to dole out $100,000 per House member and $300,000 per Senator in pure pork. Kleinheider apparently has the belief that Kelsey could better have voiced his opposition to this vote-buying scheme by giving a grand oration on the House floor.

Let us be realistic here: Jimmy Naifeh has near-absolute control over the place. If someone were to get up on the floor of the House and try to make what amounts to a real address-and not just have question time-there is every reason to believe that Naifeh would bring things to a quick halt. He has already done this when members attempt to ask real questions and not just feel-good fluff. Because the Tennessee House of Representatives functions in the way that it does, the press does not cover what happens there particularly well, either. Indeed, I find that coverage of the House by the mainstream press is extremely poor, and if you want to know what is really going on there, you have to watch sessions and committee hearings online and get to know some people on the Hill and keep in touch with those folks-otherwise, you will not know jack crap about what is really happening in our State government-and believe me, there are plenty at the Plaza who would love to keep it that way.

What some are calling "public investment" is really a desperation move, largely by the Democrats, to hang on to power. They want to spend away our surplus in vote-buying pork Robert Byrd style, and if Senate Republicans block this, they can then say "see, the Republicans don't want to improve your community." It is a raw political play designed to be used as an election issue. None of us were born yesterday and we see this for what it is.

In such a climate, Brian Kelsey's move to hand over the bacon in an envelope and refuse the pork in a very public way may have appeared juvenile to some, but it was the only way that he could draw any press attention to what was happening in our Capitol. After Kelsey's stunt, the press is starting to cover this appropriation and the pros and cons are all over the papers in a way that they were not before. Had Kelsey merely stuck to a speech on the House floor, it would likely have gotten little or no attention.

I agree with Dr. Martin Kennedy on this score. So-called "stunts" like that of Rep. Kelsey are often the only way to draw attention to these kinds of problems. The Democrats do not like it because it forces them to go on record and answer for their actions.



At Tuesday, May 22, 2007 5:31:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like Brian. I think Naifey is a dictator. I am exceptionally conservative.

However (here it comes), I think what Kelsey did demeaned the entire chamber.

I think if it is budgeted and it will be spent anyway, why not take it and use it for good causes that Bredesen would never fund?

If votes can be bought with $100K we have a bigger problem than just pork.

If any representative does not want to take part in the grants, fine. But real leaders do what Campfield was thinking about doing, which would allow return to taxpayers or fund real projects or groups that have genuine need.

At Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:59:00 PM, Anonymous DG said...

First off, nobody would have know about the pork if Rep. Kelsey had made a grand speech. Quiet simply. . . the capitol hill press corps covers very little of what happens and has a habit of easing along with those in power. It's only antics that make the news---like Rep. Kelsey's speech and Sen. Ford's tirades. There's very little of substance. Less week House Republicans presented a no-tax increase budget that could put over $386 million in new money into schools (funding the BEP 2.0 at the same rate as the governor), but the press ignored it. There was more blogger coverage than print or tv coverage.

At Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:40:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

When will a representative urinate on the opposition's desk. That will make headlines...

It is not what makes headlines, it is about doing what is right!

Again, Kelsey = excellent lawmaker...but this was childish.

Silly antics may generate attention, but to what end...

At Monday, May 28, 2007 1:37:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Any Represenative who does not want the "pork" money,that money should be devided among everyone who does decide to take it. Any money coming into our counties is better than NO money at all.

At Monday, May 28, 2007 1:07:00 PM, Blogger Dave Oatney said...

Anon 2;
What planet are you on here? Regardless of how we might feel about Kelsey's tactics, this scheme was not about getting money to counties-it is about getting money to Reps. to buy votes with.

It is a move by the Democrats to hang on by a thread. A friend of mine (who is a Democrat) involved in politics in another State called this "the most blatant vote-buying scheme I have ever heard of-and I thought our politics were corrupt!"

Whether Kelsey's way was right is a matter of debate, but what is crystal clear is that this scheme has little to do with so-called public investment.


Post a Comment

<< Home

Locations of visitors to this page
Profile Visitor Map - Click to view visits
Create your own visitor map