« "Retreat!" | Main | Hamilton County Election Updates »
October 29, 2005
DeBerry Idea
This edition of "Purging Down the House" is a seven-for-one special. Five Democrats and two Republicans deserve your consideration for a vote next year — against them, that is. Why? Because they refused to look facts in the face. They were asked to vote for an investigation into Rep. Lois DeBerry's trip to Tunica, and even though she has apologized for her actions, and thereby indicated at least the appearance of misbehavior, they chose not to vote the right way. I can't decide which were more cowardly: the Democrats who voted in a bloc to turn a blind eye, or the two Republicans who didn't even show up to vote.
(Before I forget: Hat tip to Bob Krumm.)
Joe, I wasn't paying attention. What committee was voting on this? That would be the House Ethics Committee, DR. It is composed of six Democrats and six Republicans, but Rep. DeBerry (Democrat), though she herself is a member of the committee, (fortunately) recused herself from voting on whether or not to investigate. According to committee rules, it would have taken a seven-vote count to decide to investigate. Instead, there was a de facto seven-vote count not to (five actual votes and two excuses for not being there). I will state the obvious and say that an investigation could just as readily exonerate Rep. DeBerry as it could indicate a need for censure. That's why I say that the vote was cowardly. They weren't voting on her guilt or innocence.
Who are these legislators, and why did they stall this simple fact-finding? For starters, I can only find eleven names on the General Assembly's website. (It's behind, too, as it still lists Tre' Hargett, instead of Bill Dunn, as Vice-Chair.) We know that Lois DeBerry didn't vote, so I'm missing a Democrat. Here are the Democrats who voted against investigation, as far as I know:
(Does anyone know the fifth? Are these names correct? And why are the Ethics and Rules committee sections missing the Reports and Calendars buttons that all the other committees have?)
Here are the two Republicans who couldn't make it. (I wouldn't consider this notable, except Matthew White points out that they supported DeBerry and Naifeh in their respective leadership bids, and those facts may play.)
This blog entry is directed toward the voters in Clarksville, Dresden, Maryville, Nashville, Parkers Crossroads, Savannah, and the affected surrounding areas (plus those represented by the person whose name I could not locate). Your responsibility is to examine the records of these House members and to make the right decision in 2006 as to whether they truly represent you. I'm not making a blanket statement to the effect that they don't; I'm simply adding my voice to those pointing out this apparent lapse in judgment on what is a particularly important subject.
State House Elections | By joe lance | 09:48 PM