Guarino

Political Cowardice on Display at County Commissioners' Budget Meeting

I had reported yesterday about the budget meeting that took place Thursday night at the Old County Courthouse.  A group of county commissioners were in attendance as well as a fairly large contingent from C4GC, including myself.

C4GC has a particularly strong work group that has taken on the task of analyzing the county education budget, and developing possible economies.  They presented their comprehensive case in a manner that is very difficult to refute.

But in the discussion that followed, there was one revealing piece of information that shed light on the commissioners' motivations.

The commissioners said that they do not have the power to dictate to the school board how money is spent.  Under North Carolina law, they only have the authority to decide on a global county education budget; and the school board makes all the decisions with respect to how it is spent.

Furthermore, the commissioners expressed the concern that, if they reduced the county education budget, the school board would go after the county commissioners politically.  (In fact, years ago, the Guilford County school board even sued the county commissioners over funding issues.)  And of course in that event, the school system would find a sympathetic partner in the local media.

But what does this mean?  It means the county commissioners are concerned, above all else, about their own reelection.  They are concerned about their own political future.  This is a battle they do not want to fight.  It is easier to raise taxes.

Skip Alston told C4GC that, if the group wanted to influence county schools funding, it should elect candidates to the school board.

In fact, our school board is a pretty sorry group overall, excepting perhaps a couple of members.

But I don't think we should allow the county commissioners to pass the buck once again, and weasel out of doing the right thing for the taxpayers.

The city of Naples, Italy has produced a fairly prolific musical tradition.  One Neapolitan love song, Core' ngrato  (Ungrateful Heart), reflects the ruminations of a young man who had been spurned.  (Click for the English translation.) 

Here is the interpretation by the Three Tenors: 

Viability of State Pension System, and Suggested Adjustments

Here is some important information about moves that are taking place in Raleigh regarding the state pension system (which I believe also affects pensions of local government employees):

Local Democrat Gerrymandering, Continued

In the midst of the Greensboro City Council redistricting controversy, I had an interesting conversation with a long-term local political operative whom I shall not name.  This person had a wealth of information regarding the history of local Democrats' gerrymandering, and other manipulations they effected with the electoral process.  Here is some of the information this person shared with me: 

1. One key element of the gerrymandering that took place on the Board of County Commissioners was the creation and subsequent gerrymandering of so-called "majority minority" district seats.  These are the disticts that contain a fairly high percentage of black voters.  The federal Voting Rights Act requires that opportunities be afforded for minority representation with the formation of election districts.  But my source claimed that local Democrats went way beyond the requirements of the federal Voting Rights Act.  Apparently, the district lines for the three "majority-minority" seats were drawn so they all would be solidly in the Democratic column; and so that Republicans could not hope to be competitive in these districts. 

2. I had reported earlier this week about how two Democratic state legislators from Greensboro during the early '90's passed legislation to increase the size of the county board and to create district seats.  I am told that happened, at least in part, because local Democrats felt that Republicans had been winning too many county commissioners' seats until that time.

3. Interestingly, I am told that Jim Melvin was a part of some of these efforts.  The creation of district seats on the City Council and the gerrymandering of Greensboro City Council seats occurred in part to help Democrats win elections.

4. The effects of Democratic gerrymandering locally have even affected judicial districts and the election of judges.  This is probably one of the reasons why we have such a weak criminal justice system and bad crime conditions locally.

Similarly, Democratic manipulations of elections for the Board of County Commissioners have had one big impact.  That is the current fiscal crisis facing our county.  Many years of overspending and poor stewardship have taken their toll.

In any event, this information adds even further to the overall picture of Democratic gerrymandering and manipulations of the elections process in our county over the last quarter century to tilt the playing field in their favor.  Consider all this information in the context of the huge upwelling of outrage that materialized last week in response to Republicans attempting to redistrict the City Council.  Democratic activists attending the council meeting, and their accomplices in various local media, went berserk without even considering what they themselves had perpetrated and allowed in our area for many years.  It was the most brazen demonstration of political and journalistic hypocrisy I had ever seen.  These folks had benefited from all kinds of gerrymandering and electoral manipulations in the recent past.

That is why I called on these media voices to challenge the county commissioners to make the situation right.  Unfortunately, the response from the local media thus far has been fairly muted.  It seems they are not terribly interested in correcting Democratic transgressions, at least thus far.  But we will keep talking about it.

Skip Alston Unmasked at County Commissioners' Budget Session

Last night at the old County Courthouse, several county commissioners met with the public on the upcoming budget process.  I believe that this meeting was designated for Billy Yow and Kirk Perkins to gain input from citizens; although other commissioners were in attendance including Paul Gibson, John Parks, Bill Bencini and Skip Alston.

A fairly large contingent from Conservatives for Guilford County was in attendance and spoke. 

But there was also a large number of other citizens present, most of whom were advocating for funding of a given program.  A couple of them plainly asked the commissioners to raise our taxes if necessary.

But C4GC presented to the commissioners approximately $52,700,000 in potential cuts from the county budget.  This would easily be more than enough to obviate the need for a tax increase. 

After the citizens were through speaking, the commissioners opened it up for questions.  But then a fairly remarkable thing happened.  An interchange took place between commissioners and the people from C4GC. 

I should note that many of the folks within C4GC have ample experience-- financial, managerial, executive and/or professional.  It showed last night.  They came armed with data.  They presented their case respectfully and persuasively.

But toward the end of the meeting, after Jeremy Williams participated in the discussion that was taking place, Skip Alston became unhinged.  He launched a bitter diatribe, telling the people from C4GC that they were only one group among many that deserved a place at the table, including the NAACP and the Simkins PAC; and that most people simply did not agree with the people from C4GC.

Jeremy, who has announced he will be a candidate for an at-large seat on the Board of County Commissioners next year, resolutely told Alston that he did not feel this ugly reaction was justified. 

I do not recall all the exact words used, but it was fascinating to watch.

C4GC is engaged in this activity because they were challenged last year by Democratic commissioner Kirk Perkins to come up with cuts.  (Perkins is one of the beneficiaries of the gerrymandering process that took place on the board during 2001.) 

In any event, over the last couple of years we have been treated to an image of Skip Alston as a born-again fiscal conservative; or alternatively as a board chairman who was engaging in merciless cuts to avert a tax increase.

But last night Skip was unmasked, and revealed his true nature.  He showed the side that many of us knew years ago when he repeatedly engaged in hateful, ugly confrontations on the board before the television cameras.

Skip is back. 

But the reality is that C4GC has identified roughly $53,000,000 in potential cuts, at the very least.  Their work is still being compiled and refined.  If the county commissioners raise taxes this year, it will be in spite of all the professional citizen input they will have received from C4GC.

Why Is the Guilford County School System Sponsoring a Rotary Golf Tournament?

Someone forwarded to me the following photograph taken at a local golf tournament sponsored by the Rotary Club yesterday:

(Click to enlarge)

I am told the sponsorships for this tournament cost $500.

Why is the school system using the taxpayers' money to sponsor a Rotary golf tournament?  This tends to support the premise advanced by C4GC that there is plenty of fat in the school system budget available to cut.

Greensboro Keeping Up with New York re: Library Porn

We are now seeing reports that the city of New York is allowing patrons to view pornography in its public libraries.  It has taken the position that this is a First Amendment issue; and is apparently refusing to filter.  It is being reported that adult patrons are permitted to turn off any filter in place.

This solution is roughly comparable to that which the city of Greensboro enacted.  Recall that the city had already paid for filters, but the library staff and board refused to use them.  Then, when the issue was pressed by the City Council, a compromise was forced whereby minors would be filtered, but adults are not.  This required the installation of additional hardware at considerable cost.

In any case, it appears our library staff and board are operating on the same philosophical wavelength as the folks running the public libraries in New York City.  Congratulations.

City Manager Rashad Young's most recent report indicates we had 22,475 hits on the porn category during the month of March.  (See page 7, HT: Ed)

In any event, many folks have not seen the new hardware installed at the Greensboro public libraries.  It is depicted below: (HT: Fred)

 
(click to enlarge)

Redistricting Dimensions

John Hammer explores some previously unreported dimensions regarding the City Council redistricting controversy that erupted last week.  It appears some of the reporting on this matter was not entirely accurate.

Meanwhile, readers will recall the challenge I issued for various media voices to take up the issue of gerrymandering and political manipulation of the structure of our Board of County Commissioners.

Jordan Green of Yes!Weekly has responded.  He indicates he is inquiring with the county GIS to determine if redistricting will be necessary.  Recall that I had been told the county GIS had prevented Republicans from seeing proposed district lines ten years ago.  The potential for political bias or intimidation within the county GIS must be considered.

But here is what Jordan added:

Some might look at redistricting as an opportunity to right the wrongs of the past or to design districts that are more competitive. While those are both worth discussing, for me the primary consideration is whether it's necessary at all because redistricting disrupts existing relationships between constituents and their elected representatives.

This is pretty interesting.  Apparently, according to Jordan Green's standard of political ethics, it is acceptable to leave gerrymandered lines in place if fixing them would "disrupt existing relationships between constituents and their elected representatives".  Apparently all the fury we had seen about the possibility of gerrymandering at the municipal level will not be enough to coax Jordan to fix it at the county level.

I am really surprised at Jordan's position, because I think he might have been the first to focus on the issue of redistricting for the city.  In fact, I seem to recall he jumped all over it.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the interests of liberal Democrats would not be served well if the county's lines are made politically neutral.

Courtesy of Keith Brown, here are the current gerrymandered district lines for the Board of County Commissioners:

Guilford County Commissioner Map

Robbie Perkins Watch: Delaying Tactics on Landfill

Our favorite City Council member, Robbie Perkins, visited Ed Cone's blog Tuesday and left some comments regarding the process for considering the future of trash disposal in the city of Greensboro:

A fifteen year contract is too long--I have to think there will be other options that include technology in a 5 year period. It is very frustrating when the majority of Council does not want to look at self-performing the work. It has to be cheaper and would allow us much more flexibliity. I do not want to re-open the landfill but if it has to be done, the City forces would be the best option. Then at least we could control the amount of waste going into the landfill and not overburden the surrounding community. The road system upgrades discussed by Council today will take years and cost tens of millions of dollars to put in place.

Let's review the history.  The current RFP process to identify vendors and examine their proposals was initiated months ago.  But this process was at least the second that has been attempted.  Many months before that, another process was initiated to consider alternatives for trash disposal, dragged out, and ultimately aborted.  Mr. Perkins was among those whose efforts resulted in delays.  Whether it was failing to show up for critical meetings or throwing a monkey wrench in the works, Robbie has continued to throw bones to his east Greensboro constituency.

The prospect of the city of Greensboro operating the landfill was not a part of the initial process or the second RFP process in which we are now engaged.  Mr. Perkins had every opportunity at the appropriate time to insist that be part of the process.  Unfortunately, he is now raising it at the tail end.

His objections to a 15 year contract term also was not incorporated into the RFP at the appropriate time, even though he had every opportunity to insist on it back then.

Let's see what Robbie can do with a shorter contract term.  If there is a changing of the guard on the City Council at any point, Robbie can simply work to reverse any decision to step up use of White Street, and start shipping trash out of the area at considerable cost once again.

It is a bit difficult for some of us to conceive of the city of Greensboro handling the city's trash in a more cost-efficient manner than a private company.  Many jurisdictions privatize precisely for this reason.  Having the city handle the trash also would enable Robbie to reverse any decision this council makes during subsequent years.

Robbie is still playing games to interfere with the current process.  I hope he is not allowed to get away with it.

In fact, it appears he might have a conflict of interest in view of the fact that his firm does work for one of the vendors.  Let's see how the city attorney rules on that one.

How Local Democrats Manipulated Guilford County District Commissioner Seats, Part 2

Earlier, I provided half of the story with respect to how local Democrats had manipulated district seats on the Board of County Commissioners for their partisan benefit.  I related how they secretively gerrymandered the district seats on the Board of County Commissioners back during 2001; and how they excluded Republicans and the general public from the process.

But there is more to this sordid tale.  The history dates all the way back to the early 1990's.

My sources advise that there were two particular state legislators from Greensboro who served during this time frame.  One was state Senator Bill Martin; and the other was North Carolina House member Herman Gist.  Both were Democrats, and are now deceased.

Around 1991, both of these gentleman engineered the passage of legislation through the state legislature that would increase the number of seats on the Board of County Commissioners.  The number increased from seven to eleven.  In addition, according to my source, their legislation created at-large seats and single-member district seats.  Previously, individual districts had been served by two or three members, not one.  (Correct me if I am wrong about that.)

In any event, the number of seats on the Board increased to eleven.  But in fact, there was no compelling reason why this change had to be made.  Guilford County became the only county of its size in the state to have such a large board.  The only reason this change was made was to increase Democratic control of the Board.  By dividing the county into smaller districts served by one member each, it made it nearly impossible for Republicans to regain control because so many of the individual districts would be extremely difficult for Republicans to win.

In essence, this was a brilliant, but filthy, political strategy executed by Democrats who hailed from the Politically Virtuous City.  One impact of all the Democrats' manipulations was that the three "majority minority" districts-- i.e., heavily black districts-- would be even more safely placed in the Democratic column, and out of reach of Republicans.

The Democrats recognized that, by rigging the structure of the electoral landscape, they could attain virtually permanent control of the Board of County Commissioners.  And that is precisely what they achieved. 

There are many of us who were not paying attention much when these things happened; and some of us might not even have lived here at that time.  But certain of the media voices from whom we heard last week certainly were aware of at least some of this history.  And yet, they piled on Republicans on the City Council.

It is quite important that we reduce the size of the Board of County Commissioners to make it more compatible with the size of boards throughout the state; and to restore the competitive balance that was artfully legislated away by local Democrats.  That would apparently require legislation at the state level.  Making this change would help restore good government in Guilford County, which has been absent for many years.

In the meantime, there are various media voices who now have an obligation to assure that our esteemed Democratic commissioners remove any effects of gerrymandering.  Leaving the district lines as they are currently configured is not sufficient by any means-- although Skip Alston certainly would like to do so.  We need to fix the district lines.  

How Local Democrats Manipulated Guilford County District Commissioner Seats, Part 1

After having witnessed the massive outbreak of political and journalistic hypocrisy last week on the part of local Democrats and their accomplices in the media on the matter of redistricting, I decided to do some investigating on the matter of the Board of County Commissioners.

I had the opportunity to speak with three persons whom I shall not name.  These persons all were fairly close to the "process" of redistricting that took place during 2001.

What was the process?  Democrats on the Board of County Commissioners wrote the district lines; and they completely excluded Republicans and the general public.  The proposed map apparently was not made public until the time right before it was passed.

I am told that attempts were made by Republicans to obtain the proposed district lines from both George Gilbert, the county elections director, and also the GIS department within Guilford County government.  In both cases, I am told they were obstructed from getting the proposed map.  They were outright told they did not need to see it.  I am further told that Democrat Bob Landreth was the chairman of the Board of County Commissioners at that time; and apparently held ultimate leadership over that process. 

One commissioner pursuing the map was even threatened that his or her place of residence would essentially be written out of his or her own district.  This would mean he or she could not run again.

What were the results of the gerrymandering that took place?  From the information provided by my sources, it appears that as many as three district seats were solidified for the Democrats.  These included the following:

1. The District 6 seat, currently held by Kay Cashion, which was then held by Jeff Thigpen (now Register of Deeds);

2. The District 4 seat, now held by Kirk Perkins, which was then held by Landreth;

3. The District 9 seat, now held by Carolyn Coleman.  My sources disagreed with respect to the degree to which the Coleman seat was solidified.  Two said a lot; one said just a bit. 

The district map can be viewed here. 

Other Democrats who served on the board at that time were Skip Alston, Donnie Dunovant, Warren Dorsett and Mike Barber. Again, the Chairman was Bob Landreth.

In any case, it appears that local Democrats have established a precedent for how redistricting is supposed to be conducted in our county.  They have set the pace.

Again, for all those parties who mustered and transmitted outrage over the actions of the Republicans on the City Council last week, it is now their obligation to assure that the Democratic county commissioners correct what they did ten years ago, and remove all traces of gerrymandering.

More to follow.

Guilford County Redistricting: Will There Be A Media Push to Erase Previous Gerrymanders?

There was an interesting article on page 2 of the News and Record this morning.  Readers will recall the recent redistricting controversy on the Greensboro City Council.  Joe Killian now has an article discussing the possibility of redistricting for the Board of County Commissioners.  Unfortunately, the article is unposted.

Over the last five days, I had called upon Joe Killian and John Robinson of the News and Record; Jordan Green of Yes!Weekly; Ed Cone and Fox 8 to take up the matter of correcting previous gerrymandering on the Board of County Commissioners.  All these media voices had covered heavily the situation on the Greensboro City Council.

Several things are noteworthy about Killian's article.

First, the contention is made that commissioners and county staff will be very attentive to the matter of "process" in the event they undertake redistricting.  Of course, this once again misrepresents process as the chief political priority instead of the more fundamental objective of drawing district lines in an objective, politically neutral fashion. 

Second, Skip Alston is quoted in the article.  He indicates that redistricting should not be undertaken unless absolutely necessary.  Again, that bows before the various talking points that came to bear on the city council controversy.  But in fact, if the county commissioners refrain from redistricting, it will leave in place gerrymandered lines.

Third, Alston states that "right now, I think everyone is pretty happy with their districts".  And indeed, I bet they are.  But whether the commissioners are happy with their districts begs the question.  Gerrymandering protects incumbents.  Whether they are happy is not the primary political consideration.  Instead, we should be concerned that district lines should be drawn in a politically neutral fashion.

I have stated here previously that a technological solution is best; but the computer would have to be programmed in an unbiased manner.  The point is not to draw lines that make incumbent county commissioners happy.

Fourth, Alston admits that the last redistricting that took place 10 years ago was viewed as partisan.  He said "the feeling was we didn't work with the Republicans".  This provides additional confirmation of the premise gleaned from John Robinson's blog post that gerrymandering, indeed, had taken place.

In fact, if you look at the current district map, you will see that Alston's district (district 8) is one of those with the most irregular shapes.  Part of the reason for this might be that the Voting Rights Act requires racial gerrymandering in many cases.  That provides a built-in gerrymander for Democrats, required by law, because blacks overwhelmingly register Democratic.  But I suppose it might have been possible to comply with the Voting Rights Act without drawing the lines in precisely the manner Democrats on the Board of County Commissioners had during 2001.

In any event, Killian's article was helpful in some respects.  However, Skip Alston was able to make a number of statements that, unchallenged, would tend to leave the current gerrymandered district lines in place.  If we don't redistrict, or if we use a "process" that appears open, then everything will be wonderful even if gerrymandering continues, according to the premises advanced in the article.

In order for true journalistic objectivity to be demonstrated, the News and Record, Yes!Weekly, Ed Cone and Fox 8 will need to go after the Democratic county commissioners with the same zeal and fury with which they pursued City Council Republicans last week.  That did not happen with Killian's article, but perhaps it was a start.  Ed Cone posted about the article this morning.  Green and Fox 8 are still fairly silent.

Greensboro City Attorney Rita Danish: Echoes of Linda Miles

Many of us have read John Hammer's article that examines the actions of City Attorney Rita Danish at the last Greensboro City Council meeting.

I think citizens have reason to be concerned as to whether we are seeing a replay of the situation we saw several years ago with former City Attorney Linda Miles.  That is, the city attorney becomes reduced to the status of a political appendage to certain local political interests and the city manager.  Instead of the entire City Council feeling that they can rely on the city attorney for an objective interpretation of laws and rules as they apply to the council's activities, they now must fear whether the city attorney has been co-opted to serve a certain political agenda.

The brouhaha occurred when Danish ruled that City Councilman Danny Thompson could not rejoin the meeting after having initially participated by phone for one vote.  This prevented Thompson from voting on matters that were to be considered later that evening including early voting and redistricting.

It is my understanding that Danish is not even licensed to practice law in the state of North Carolina.

The problem, of course, is that Danish effectively disenfranchised Greensboro voters when she prevented their elected representative from participating in the meeting.  She disenfranchised the people who voted for Thompson; but in a larger sense, she also disenfranchised all of Greensboro's 260,000 citizens, because he is an at-large member.

Her boss is the city manager, Rashad Young.  Mr. Young was hired by the previous City Council led by former Mayor Yvonne Johnson.  Danish was a former associate of Young in Ohio.  It is unclear as to whether Young conducted a legitimate national search when he recruited his city attorney.  

Readers might ask why a majority Republican City Council should have difficulty being treated fairly by the city manager and his attorney.  But if these city staff fundamentally owe allegiances to other council members and to other political forces locally, even a Republican majority can be treated dismissively.

My recollection is that the City Council has voted twice to correct the structural problem that leads to this difficulty.  The city attorney should report to the entire council, not the city manager.  But that would require a change in state law.  I seem to recall this was voted upon earlier this year; but unfortunately the Guilford County delegation to the state legislature has not agreed to move this legislation.  The reader can take some guesses as to why that is the case.

As I watched the meeting last week, I could not help but feel I was noting an almost imperious manner demonstrated by our new city attorney.

In any event, Greensboro citizens, brace yourself.  If you feel some sense of foreboding emanating from the city's legal department, it might be that you are hearing the echoes of Linda Miles.

Economic Development Flowing from the Greensboro Aquatic Center

We learned yesterday that the city of Greensboro will be hiring approximately 100 part-time employees to work at the new Greensboro Aquatic Center.  In fact, it will be such a huge cluster of hiring that a job fair is being held.

I remember the heady days when we were told about all the positive economic impact that would occur because of the aquatic center.  I guess this must be it-- 100 part-time city jobs funded by taxpayers.

Some of us have a vague recollection as to how it was promised that the expenses associated with the aquatic center would be held down because it would draw from existing Coliseum staff.  But then a couple of weeks ago, we learned that the operating deficit for the aquatic center is going to be more than twice what was promised.  Let's remember that the aquatic center has not even opened as of yet.  Imagine what the deficits might become after it has actually opened!

In any case, take comfort, Greensboro taxpayers.  Jobs are, indeed, being created because of the aquatic center.  Lots of them.  City jobs.

An Opportunity To Remedy Gerrymandering Abuses (At Least in Part)

The folks over at Triad Watch provided a link to the current district map for the Guilford county commissioners and the Guilford County school board.  It is an amazing document to review.

Note the delightful curves, the fascinating protrusions and invaginations, the irregular shapes, the bites seemingly taken whole out of districts.  Of course, this map was the product of a Democratic gerrymandering process-- and the evidence is right there before our eyes.

Last week, we had an unruly, hypocritical mob descend on the Greensboro City Council chambers to protest a Republican redistricting effort.  We also saw various elements of Greensboro's media community drumbeat the issue.  These included Jordan Green of Yes!Weekly, Joe Killian of the News and Record, Ed Cone and Fox 8.  I subsequently called upon these parties (as well as John Robinson) to focus similarly on Democratic gerrymandering affecting the Guilford County commissioners' district lines. 

My reasoning was fairly simple.  They had shown their prowess locally by getting the Greensboro City Council to back off on its plans.  They could now take action to highlight a problem that has existed literally for years.

But there is a problem.  None of them has come forward yet to wave this particular banner.  Their zeal for pursuing repeated Democratic gerrymandering has not yet been nearly as robust as their enthusiasm for correcting a single instance of Republican redistricting.  In fact, it has been nonexistent thus far.

Let's look at the record of Democratic gerrymandering affecting election districts within Guilford County:

1. Guilford County commissioners' district seats

2. Guilford County school board district seats

3. Seats representing Guilford County in the North Carolina Senate. 

4. Seats representing Guilford County in the North Carolina House

5. Brad Miller's congressional seat

6. Mel Watt's seat, which was subject to racial gerrymandering under the Voting Rights Act

Don Vaughan, the husband of Nancy Vaughan, currently occupies one of those gerrymandered North Carolina Senate seats.  Ms. Vaughan was the first council member whose knees went wobbly after the agitated mob protested at the council meeting, and the media piled on.  One cannot help but wonder whether Nancy Vaughan backed down, in part, to protect her husband's political interests.

Brad Miller, of course, helped draw the gerrymandered lines for his own congressional district.  In spite of that, he has enjoyed the political support of such entities as the News and Record, Yes!Weekly (I think), and various voices in the local blogging community.  They have supported and endorsed him repeatedly in spite of the fact that he had gerrymandered his own seat.

They also have tended to support Senator Vaughan, Nancy's husband, even though he has apparently been the beneficiary of a gerrymandering process.

Yesterday in the Sunday paper, the News and Record ran three items regarding the City Council redistricting-- a news article, an editorial, and a republish of one of Ed Cone's blog posts.  But there was not a single word about the Board of County Commissioners' district lines.

In fact, the silence has been deafening since I issued my challenge Friday.  You can hear the crickets chirping.

The collective hypocrisy on the part of the disorderly mob and the media voices who magnified their message is nearly overwhelming.  It is more than clear this has all been undertaken because it was Republicans who were involved.  They are perfectly satisfied to see their own side benefit from previous gerrymanders.

The numerous instances of Democrat-inspired redistricting continue to get a pass.  These apparently do not warrant intervention because the right candidates-- and the right constituencies-- are the beneficiaries.  The media entities have supported various Democratic candidates even though they have have participated in gerrymandering, and even though they have been the beneficiaries of gerrymandering.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

Once again, let's see if they take on the Guilford County commissioners.

 

An Open Challenge to John Robinson, Ed Cone, Jordan Green, Joe Killian and Fox 8

I was reading News and Record Editor John Robinson's blog yesterday, as I do nearly every day.  He had posted an item that referred back to an episode of gerrymandering that occurred on the Guilford County Board of County Commissioners one decade ago.  The post demonstrated how Mary Rakestraw and Trudy Wade, then county commissioners, had felt victimized by what had occurred.  It was clear he was drawing a contrast with what had occurred this week on the Greensboro City Council.

But a thought occurred to me.  Mr. Robinson has helped us identify an egregious instance of gerrymandering within our local domain.  The fact is that the district seats on the Board of County Commissioners were manipulated for partisan reasons-- and they remain in that gerrymandered state to this very day.

This week we have seen a massive outbreak of Political Virtue on the matter of redistricting-- on the front pages of the News and Record, at Ed Cone's blog, over at Yes!Weekly, and even at Fox 8.  These entities have individually and collectively chosen to drumbeat the issue, and successfully shamed the Greensboro City Council to withdraw from its plan.  And they had the wherewithal to do so because Greensboro is a relatively small pond in the larger scheme of things.  These are all local media voices impacting local government.

But I have a great idea.  Given that these entities have exerted their newfound political virtue on the matter of gerrymandering, they can also do so with regard to the Board of County Commissioners.  They can elect to feature and highlight the gerrymandering that has taken place on the Board, and how it happened.  They can relentlessly drumbeat the story until the Democratic county commissioners succumb and draw district lines that are not designed to perpetuate Democratic incumbency.

Those media voices now have a moral obligation to do so since they have taken their crusade to the Greensboro City Council.  If they refrain from challenging the Democratic county commissioners, it will only confirm that they slammed the Greensboro City Council because it was Republicans who were doing the redistricting.

What happened at the Greensboro City Council provides a natural transition for all these media entities to begin talking about the gerrymandered Board of Commissioners district seats.  There is now a pregnant opportunity that has not existed in the past to address that situation.  I call on these media voices to do so, and to relentlessly pursue it until the Democratic commissioners do what is right.

Otherwise, if they do not, we can only presume their coverage this week was a partisan hit job on City Council Republicans.   Their political virtue on the matter of redistricting can now be applied to correct a wrong that has existed locally for many years.  And the events of this week demonstrate they have the power to correct it.

So John, Ed, Jordan, Joe, friends at Fox 8-- what do you say?  Is that which is good for the goose also good for the gander?  Are you going to take on the Democratic County Commissioners until they fix the problem?

Redistricting Hypocrisy and Other Warm Thoughts

The outbreak of hypocrisy locally has reached unprecedented levels with the recent spat regarding redistricting.

First, think about the liberal Democrats who attended the City Council meeting Tuesday night, many of whom behaved like barbarians.  They had been the willing, gleeful beneficiaries of many years of Democratic gerrymandering locally, but somehow mustered the passion to oppose the solitary instance of Republican gerrymandering we had ever seen in these parts.

Second, there was a confluence of liberal local media voices-- Joe Killian, Jordan Green and Ed Cone-- who highlighted the issue.  I asked Ed if he had written in strong opposition when all those instances of Democratic gerrymandering had taken place over the years; and he has yet to provide a reference to any of his columns that might have rebuked that practice as it was happening.  But I suppose he might.  In any case, these three liberal media voices certainly pounced on the Republican redistricting effort with a vigor we had never seen applied to instances of Democratic gerrymandering.

The only online media folks whose noses are entirely "clean" on this matter are Keith Brown and George Hartzman.  They have been consistent in opposition to the practice, regardless of political party.

Here is the problem.  If Republicans roll over and succumb on the matter of redistricting, they hand their opponents a competitive advantage.  Why?  Because the Democrats will have no scruples regarding gerrymandering, and will not get called on it by the media.  Remember, this is the party of election fraud, so engaging in a legal practice like gerrymandering will not be problematic for them.  It certainly has not been in the past.

How did we get to this point?

Let's remember that Zack Matheny was given the assignment of managing the issue of redistricting.  The only problem is that he dropped the ball, and did not follow through.

He has now missed the last two City Council meetings-- two in a row.  

So Amanda Lehmert asked the question: Where is Zack?  She relates rumors that he has been in a rehab or "12-step" program, but he denies it.

Nonetheless, his failure to follow through on his assignment is part of what led to this episode.

I have tried to read as much as I can about the controversy.  One interesting angle is the premise that somehow the new district lines would dilute minority districts.  However, I have not seen anyone publish a comparative analysis of the racial composition of Districts 1 and 2 currently, versus what the racial composition would be under the Rakestraw plan.  Everyone seems to have jumped to conclusions that the new numbers would not meet the Department of Justice test; yet we have not even seen the numbers.  I would not be surprised if there is no major change in the racial composition of those districts.

There were howls from various folks suggesting they or other citizens are entitled to be within a certain council district.  But there is no legal entitlement to have your voting precinct within any given council district.  No such entitlement exists.

One other point has become crystal clear over the last several days.  We saw what Rashad Young proposed for budget reductions.  We also saw the actions of his new city attorney at the council meeting Tuesday night.  It is fairly clear that the Republican "majority" on the Greensboro City Council is dealing with the staff leadership that was selected when Yvonne Johnson was mayor.  'Nuff said.   

 

More Hypocrisy on Redistricting

All kinds of news is coming from Yes!Weekly.

First, we learn that the Southern Coalition for Social Justice (note: all should stand and bow) plans to challenge the City Council redistricting change.  Interestingly, this is the same type of organization that would have argued in favor of the type of racial gerrymandering that produced Mel Watt's district.

Second, we learn that Nancy Vaughan plans to submit a motion to reconsider after having voted in favor of the plan.  I seem to recall this is the same Nancy Vaughan who, when she announced she would not be running for reelection, complained that the City Council kept revisiting and rehashing old issues.  It was considered a huge problem when the council did not make a decision, and instead deferred an item from one meeting to the next. 

So what are we doing?  Submitting a motion to reconsider, and rehashing the issue once again.

But the insolent mob that attended on Tuesday night will, no doubt, be satisfied.  They can have their cake, and eat it too.

A Challenge to Those Who Have Favored the Sexual Revolution

There is a great article by Anthony Esolen at Public Discourse.  He speaks of the parties who insist on freedom of sexual expression and who have favored the sexual revolution.  Here is what he says about them:

They began, in the hoary old days of Herbert Marcuse, by justifying the new “virtues” of freedom of sexual expression, on the grounds that we would be a looser, friendlier, sweeter, less violent, and more beautiful society. Well, that certainly didn’t happen. Aquarius had a cracked pot. Look at Baltimore, look at Detroit, look at the fatherless families, look at the plague of divorce, look at the snarling contempt of one sex for the other, look at the prisons, look at the sewage of mass entertainment, look at the “knowing” and jaded children, look at the venereal diseases, look at the sheer boredom evinced by the women’s magazines boasting the next hottest sex tip or five new and improved ways to get what you want out of your bedmate. The sexual revolutionaries have for too long simply begged the question. They say, “We should be allowed to do this, because every sexual desire short of rape and (sometimes) adultery should be tolerated—no, encouraged, even honored in law.” But that is to justify the sexual revolution by saying that the sexual revolution is justified. Let them do more. Let them argue that the sexual revolution—in its entirety—has conduced to the common good. Let them argue that a society, if it can be called one, wherein a ten-year-old boy knows all about sodomy is a better place than one in which he hasn’t the faintest notion of it, but is too busy collecting baseball cards. Let them argue that a society in which a ten-year-old girl must wait once a month to see her father, if his new bedmate doesn’t get in the way, is a better place than one in which it never occurs to her that her mother and father may ever part company.

In other words, let the sexual revolution be justified on grounds of the common good. I believe it fails that test miserably, with evidence that is weighty, obvious, manifold, logically and anthropologically deducible, and clearly predictable by wisdom both pagan and Christian. Let them make their case, rather than asserting a principle that, in reality, would destroy the very idea of the common good.

Perdue Part of the Problem

Congressman Paul Ryan in Washington recently made a proposal to convert the federal Medicaid program-- a huge, budget-busting behemoth-- to a block grant program so the states have a major incentive to economize.

What was the response of Governor Beverly Perdue?  She signed a letter to congressional leaders in conjunction with 16 other mostly Democratic governors in opposition to this change.  The letter is found here. 

For Democratic governors, Medicaid is a huge program that is used to pay off certain interest groups.  They like the fact that they can run up the bills while shifting many of the costs to the federal taxpayer.  It is pretty filthy.

Perdue also just vetoed more bills to contain budget expenses and to reduce costs with the State Employees Health Plan.  Again, she is catering to interest groups.

The Republicans in Washington are now seeing declining poll numbers because of Ryan's proposal.  And in Raleigh, the Republicans are also seeing declining poll numbers, apparently because of opposition to Republican budget cuts in the field of education.  They have walked out on the third rail on behalf of the general public, and now may be facing the consequences.

This is why I am fairly pessimistic with respect to the future of the state of North Carolina and our country.  The general public, even in spite of the Tea Party awakening, still has a schizoid political personality.  It wants lower taxes, but has trouble letting go of certain governmental expenses.  It is concerned at some level about the fiscal integrity of what our state and federal governments do, but yet continues to elect leaders like Perdue.  When leaders do what is necessary to contain expenses, the general public becomes fickle, and reneges.

This does not augur well for the country's ability to deal with its oncoming fiscal tsunami.  It also does not portend well for the competitiveness of our state or our nation.