"... straight up or down vote on a minimum wage increase"

This a laudable fantasy.

Because of corporate investment in the political process, a minimum wage hike is bitter political pill to swallow. It will never pass without some juicy cover and pork. And as no one wants to be held accountable for voting against a hike, "It needs more work in committee" is actually politically candid.

Not that I'm happy about it. This is an issue relating directly to our quality of life! Hold their feet to the fire for their dissembling and maneuvering this fall! Demand that up and down vote!

But recognize when you do that you have left the reality based politcal world. You have entered the realm of theatre, with its own weird through-the-looking-glass rules.

Spin is not going to go away. Its time we get good at it.

Frothy

I do not follow R. Neal's blog musings. Someone has shown me his August 14, 2006 entry, "Sen. Raymond Finney fudges report card." I ordinarily do not respond to public criticism. In this instance, though, I feel I should correct Mr. Neal's erroneous statements and conclusions. (1) He states I failed to mention a private act in my "legislative scorecard." I presume he refers to SB2860. More than 4,000 bills were introduced in the 104th General Assembly. Any "scorecard" to which he refers would only have summarized a handful of bills I felt would be of most interest to my constituents. Yes, I was the prime sponsor of SB2860-- a bill for a private act, requested by the City of Alcoa. Alcoa sought relief from height restrictions along that portion of the Pellissippi Parkway which extends through the Alcoa city limits. Scenic highway provisions-- which are applicable to much of the Parkway-- seemingly are of little value within a city's limits, with its existing buildings. With growth, we have two options-- we can grow outwardly (increasing urban sprawl and converting farms and forested land to commercial and residential use) or we can grow upwardly (by constructing taller buildings). Because of Mr. Neal's concern about the minimum wage (next point), I know he must favor creation of better-paying jobs for area residents-- including any "R&D park project" about which he seemingly has concerns. If not, his two complaints are contradictory. This bill passed unanimously in the Senate and the House of Representatives (30-0 and 95-0, respectively), and is now incorporated into Public Law Chapter 524. Part of my job is to be the liaison for county and municipal governments in the Tennessee Senate. This bill request seemed reasonable, and I supported it without difficulty. (2) I am not to blame for the "last minute death" of the minimum wage bill. The sponsors of the bill are to blame. SB3120, "The Tennessee Minimum Wage Act," was filed (introduced) on February 16, 2006. It was first brought for consideration before the Senate Commerce, Labor and Agriculture Committee on February 28, 2006, but the sponsors requested to refer it to "General Subcommittee." This parliamentary maneuver keeps a bill alive, with the ability to bring it forward for consideration at a later date. That later date happened to be in the final hour or so on May 26, 2006-- the day in which the 104th General Assembly adjourned. In the floor debate, it was pointed out by several senators that the bill should have come before the Senate Judiciary Committee for review and recommendation. The sponsors had failed to take this action. Therefore, the Senate acted properly to refer it to this committee. By this late date, however, there was no time for the bill to be afforded a committee hearing. It is a common ploy by some senators to save controversial bills to the last day, when debate must be curtailed. The sponsors had ample time to bring the bill before appropriate committees and receive full floor debate, without waiting until May 26. My practice is to put my bills "on notice" as soon as possible. I try to have all of my bills voted upon with weeks to spare. If a committee has a problem with the language of one of my bills, if I need to gather more information, or if I need to re-word the bill to avoid or reduce a costly fiscal note, I have weeks to work on the bill and enhance its probability of passage. SB3120 raised important and difficult issues. It should have been brought forward earlier. Then, an up or down vote would have occurred. Although I would need to study the language of any minimum wage bill introduced in 2007 before committing myself, I was prepared to vote against SB3120 in 2006. I agree that $5.15 per hour is a very low wage. If Mr. Neal had studied this issue as extensively as I have, rather than relying on emotional arguments, he would understand that this bill would help only a few people, many of whom are working in entry-level jobs (part-time student employees, for example); could eliminate some or many of these jobs (which may be offered in minimally profitable mom-and-pop businesses); and would be inflationary (everyone above minimum wage would also demand at least $1.00/hour wage increase). Mr. Neal must find it easy to spend someone else's money. I am not sure that mandating employers to pay their employees higher wages is an appropriate function of government. Market forces (the basic economic principle of supply and demand) should decide what employers pay employees. If government sets wages, the next logical step would be for government to establish price controls on products and services. I believe that government should not be involved to this extent in the marketplace. Mr. Neal takes me to task for not being "open" and "transparent" enough. No other state legislator is as open as I am. I have posted four Websites-- (link...), (link...), (link...), and (link...) . My votes are fully recorded on the Internet, and I am constantly seeking to communicate with constituents through town hall-type listening sessions (both in person and through the Internet), questionnaires, and other methods. Some of my communication efforts are recorded in Web page (link...) . I challenge Mr. Neal to find any other legislator who works as hard as I do to communicate with and represent all constituents. I work full-time at being the best state senator I can be. If I do not vote the way he likes or if I do not send an email message to him with the right words (I answer hundreds of emails and letters every week), Mr. Neal publicly takes me to task. More appropriately, he could have corresponded with me, asking clarification for any point that I did not answer to his satisfaction. Mr. Neal's bias against me is clearly shown by his name-calling, in which he calls me "a certifiable wingnut." I must admit that I did not know what a "wingnut" is, when applied to a person, and I looked up this term in a slang dictionary. No one who knows me and has watched me in Nashville would call me a "wingnut." I work extremely hard to make every vote serve in the best interest of my constituents and the State of Tennessee. I am a mature, thoughtful, reflective, and fair legislator, and I doubt any of my fellow senators would disagree with this assessment. It is easy for a person to sit hunched over a keyboard and spew out names for people with whom he disagrees. Such a person should try to find solutions to problems, not present a laundry list of complaints. A major problem with government at all levels is bitter in-fighting and name-calling. We must all work together as Tennesseans and Americans for the common good, realizing that not every viewpoint in such a pluralistic society as ours will prevail. While I may disagree with the minimum wage act because of its inflationary effect on the economy and other reasons, I had a number of other bills that I sponsored to improve the life of Tennesseans, which would help them at least as much as a small increase in the minimum wage. Mr. Neal failed to mention these bills as alternative approaches to helping Tennesseans live better. A very few examples include: ** I sponsored four bills (four different approaches) to reduce or eliminate the sales tax on food (grocery) purchases, as well as a bill to eliminate the Hall's income tax for senior citizens with modest incomes. These bills failed in committee, and many of the people championing a minimum wage increase are oppposed to reducing the tax burden on citizens. I also was a sponsor of the senior citizen property tax relief constitutional amendment proposal, which will be on the Nuvember 2006 ballot. ** I successfully passed a bill to enhance reporting and investigation of waste, mismanagement, abuse, and fraud in state government. ** I believe I have voted for every bill that would enhance educational opportunities for Tennesseans. (My votes in 2006 are recorded in (link...) .) ** I have supported every bill to make health care more affordable and accessible for Tennesseans, especially poorer Tennesseans. I could cite other examples, but my point is this: We can improve the lives of Tennesseans, without imposing inflationary employer mandates through a minimum wage increase act. Mr. Neal, start thinking of better solutions than trotting out this old dog and pony act. Help me think of better ways to accomplish your goals.

He does however forget to put on there the Education Bill which was left off through this month, which would show that he voted YES to giving $8 million that Sevier County should have received and $4 million that schools in Blount County should have received and sent to Nashville, Knoxville, and Memphis. Why not show us how you don't support funding the schools in the district that you represent, Ray Finney? Put that up on your "website."