Amendment 2 I'm Voting "NO"

Amendment 2  Vote “NO”

The Notetaker

10/16/2014

Sometimes, I find myself in an opposing position from people I really like.  But, I can't allow personal feelings to alter what I believe is right.   I realize, like I did with the school surrender vote, that we may not support the same position, but we don't have to fall out. 

I am not an attorney, but I am a voter.  I have worked in Government Relations and served as a city government official. In developing a position, I’ve talked to attorneys and legislators about this amendment. But, in a democracy my vote has the same value as that of a 46 year practicing attorney.

Here are my concerns:

1.  Why it is necessary to make changes to the State Constitution when this could be accomplished by State Law?  Is there another motive that is not apparent to me?  That's a reason for me to vote, "No".

 

2.  There is no language in the amendment that requires a committee or commission to present names for the governor for consideration, a process we once used that has expired. This means the Governor will not be required to have attorneys submitting resumes to a committee, a review of those candidates and recommendations made to the Governor.  Without this, the process these appointments become a clique of who you know and patronage.  Citizens deserve to go to court with what appears to be an open and fair process.

That’s a reason for me to vote, “NO”.

3.  This legislation gives the Lt. Governor and State Legislature a role in the approval of the judges.  Currently, they do not have a role. This amendment designs a process to allow a legislator to make administrative decisions.  It is ironic that after a grand jury’s statement that the Lt. Governor and Speaker of the House should be indicted for disregarding the constitution, we now invite them in with this amendment.

4.  It is clear to me that Tennessee will be controlled by Republicans for many years to come, and as a Democrat you are asking me to trust your leadership in being fair with the appointment of judges that are selected by the Governor.

Trust Haslam: This is same Governor that is afraid of the Tea Party and refuses to expand Medicare. I don’t think I can do that.

Trust Haslam:  The same Governor that wants us to allow the legislators to have to power to make decision about a woman’s body in the Amendment #1 and Women’s Reproduction Issues is a target to reverse with his political party.  I don’t think I can do that.

Trust Haslam: Don’t you find it interesting that he appointed his first African American Judge to the Appellate Court right before this election of this amendment to send a subliminal that he can be fair.  Then Haslam does it, a few days after the election to prohibit the voters from electing a Chancellor in the vacancy the Chancellor Kenny Armstrong created after being promoted. I prefer a system that appears fair and would not ask me to trust a personality because, I don’t think I can do that.

Trust Haslam:  Appellate Judges are considered lifetime appointments.  We only vote to retain or not retain them so we could be married to these conservative judges who make it clear that are determined to overturn some gains made in civil rights, labor, public education, and a women’s rights. And for me diversity does not matter when they appoint carbon copies of Supreme Court Judge Clarence Thomas. Sorry, I don’t think I can do that.

I realize some argue that if we don’t settle for this we could get something worst from the General Assembly.  I heard that argument with the school debate and I still say, I would rather vote for something that is fair, consistent, and that I understand rather than something that is suggested will be figured out later.

And although, I just can’t do that, I believe this amendment will pass because the proponents are spreading money around the community like sunflower seeds. They have raised a half million dollars for the promotion of this amendment.  That’s a heavy push for an amendment. But, that’s now how my garden grows.

I’m voting “NO”.