KyKurmudgeon

Richards won, but looked bad doing so

House Speaker Jody Richards got the casino gambling amendment he wanted from his newly reconstituted Elections, Constitutional Amendments and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee Wednesday afternoon. The vote was 7-2 with three members absent. Two of them were Speaker Pro Tem Larry Clark and Majority Whip Rob Wilkey, who has supported an alternative amendment and who had thwarted approval of Richards preferred plan in a Tuesday committee meeting.

However, the methods Richards used to have his way made him look heavy-handed and tyrannical, words Democrats prefer to use when referring to Republican Senate President David Williams. Kicking Rep. Dottie Sims off the committee in such a quick fashion and adding two sure "yes" votes to the committee was an exhibition of very petty politics. And I suspect it will come back to haunt him in a couple of ways.

First, it will cost him Democratic votes for the amendment. Clark and Wilkey probably will walk and could take some of their supporters with them. Democrats whose district include racetracks or numerous horse now will have a hard time supporting it, because it leaves open the possibility that no track would get a casino license. The most optimistic count I've heard had 51 House Democrats either favoring casino gambling or being persuadable. With the defections the version of the amendment will cause, that number now can be no higher than the mid-40s. Getting nine Republicans to vote for casinos was going to be difficult. Getting 15 R votes will be impossible.

Second, humiliating one of his caucus members in such a public fashion for voting her conscience has to erode his standing with other members of the caucus who resent seeing one of their colleagues treated that way.

It's time for Beshear to exercise leadership

Today's column:

FRANKFORT — After meeting with Democratic House leaders Monday night, Gov. Steve Beshear displayed three facets of his gubernatorial personality.

First, there was Steve Beshear, the master of understatement.

“They’re having difficulty on this, obviously,” he said of those leaders. “They all want to pass expanded gaming and get it on the ballot. There are some disagreements about the form it should take.”

Gee, you think?

Everyone walking the hallways of the Capitol these days is ducking and dodging the daggers these guys are hurling at each other, trying desperately to avoid becoming collateral damage in this long-running street fight.

“Difficulty” and “disagreements” don’t begin to tell the story.

Next, there was Steve Beshear, the realist.

“If House leadership is not united in backing this constitutional amendment, then it will be in great jeopardy of passing the House. ...

“When you have an issue of this type, the only way you pass it in the House is to have a united front. You need to have the five members of the House leadership and the governor all on the same page on this.”

Gee, you think?

With everyone in sync on casino gambling, it’s still a tough sell in the House, where the most optimistic vote count I’ve heard falls five or six votes short of the 60 that are needed.

And conventional wisdom suggests it will be an even tougher sell in the Senate (although the more Republican leaders there go out of their way to dis a bill they claim will never reach their chamber, the more I begin to wonder if they doth protest too much).

Finally, there was Steve Beshear, the eternal optimist with the rosiest glasses ever known to humankind.

“They have told me that we would have (a united effort in the House), and I’m expecting it. ...

“I’m hopeful that all five of them will step up and be the leaders they were elected to be. And I feel sure they will be, and come together and support an amendment.”

Well, Tuesday morning, the governor’s rose-colored glasses got shattered.

House Democratic leaders, long the most dysfunctional element in Kentucky’s dysfunctional legislative process, once again proved themselves highly capable of screwing up a one-car funeral procession.

An ego-driven comedy of errors in the Elections, Constitutional Amendments and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee made it clear that unity is the furthest thing from the minds of some Democratic leaders.

It also made it clear that this fight is about more than just a difference of opinion over wording of the casino amendment — particularly since Beshear has said he could live with any of the current proposals.

So, not only were Beshear’s rosy glasses shattered, a hissing match among members of his own party now has his Plan A held hostage.

It’s the first defining moment of his term. At times like these, governors demonstrate what kind of leaders they can be. And Beshear’s rather tepid initial response to Tuesday’s committee fiasco was, to say the least, underwhelming in its promise of strong leadership to come from this governor.

House Democratic leaders do need to get their act together, as Beshear suggested. But if casino gambling is to have any chance of passing, so does he.

House feud snags Beshear's Plan A

Sunday's column:

FRANKFORT — Gov. Steve Beshear’s proposal for addressing the $26.6 billion unfunded liability in the pension plans covering Kentucky’s public employees includes the obvious changes that, over the long term, will bring more stability to the retirement systems.

The two major elements of the plan — requiring future hires to work longer before receiving full benefits and pick up more of the cost of their health insurance — qualify as “no brainers.”

What’s missing, though, is money.

Don’t take that as a criticism of Beshear’s opposition to giving the plans a one-time infusion of cash by issuing pension bonds. In the current economy, the risk of bonding may well exceed the reward.

The missing money in question is the difference between the state contribution to the systems proposed in Beshear’s budget and the actuarially recommended amount that would keep the unfunded liability from increasing during the next biennium.

Although the rising cost of health care is the major force that has driven this crisis of unfunded liability, governors and lawmakers have exacerbated the problem by underfunding the systems to the tune of $1.5 billion in recent years.

This governor and the current group of legislators are preparing to do it again.

Why? Because, as Beshear said in presenting his pension proposal, “there is no cash.”

Which brings us back to the dominant theme of this General Assembly: the quest for more state revenue.

Beshear’s Plan A is legalizing casino gambling in Kentucky, although he has lately softened the tone of his opposition to an increase in the cigarette tax.

That may be wise because his Plan A hit a snag when House Democratic leaders, who wanted to move the constitutional amendment and the heat it generates to the Senate as quickly as possible, instead started feuding among themselves over its wording.

In truth, this is just the latest manifestation of an ongoing spat that predates this session.

At issue this time is the question of whether the amendment should guarantee racetracks five of the nine casino licenses or say they get “no more than five.” The latter wording leaves open the possibility that the tracks wouldn’t get five licenses.

In the background of this open dispute, there is additional jockeying over the location of some of the casinos.

Beshear may be ready to step into the fray openly. On Friday, he sent a letter to the five Democratic leaders requesting a meeting at 7 p.m. Monday in the Governor’s Office “to discuss time-sensitive legislation.”

Speaker Pro Tem Larry Clark, who is aligned with Majority Whip Rob Wilkey in support of the tracks, said Friday that Beshear had favored the language of a proposed committee amendment that would guarantee tracks five licenses in an earlier meeting with leadership.

However this gets resolved, it was pointed out to me recently that there’s another wording issue in the proposed constitutional amendment.

All versions of it now read, “The General Assembly may enact laws” allowing casinos. Because it uses “may,” passage of the amendment does not guarantee enactment of casino laws.

So, voting for any enabling legislation in subsequent sessions could still be a tough vote for lawmakers because there would be pressure on them not to act.

Replace “may” with “shall,” and the tough vote gets cast by Kentuckians when they go to the polls. And lawmakers can explain voting to legalize casinos by saying the constitution leaves them no choice.

'Gift of life,' voter education and other quickies

First, a confession: I have been remiss in posting lately. My only excuse is that keeping up with the House Democratic leadership's in-fighting and blood-letting over the casino gambling amendment has been time-consuming. With that confession out of the way, we'll start today's list of topics with some good pieces of legislation:

1. Senate Bill 35 and House Bill 234 offer incentives for live organ donation. For the general public, the incentive would be a tax credit equal to the lesser of the actual amount organ donation expenses or $10,000. For state workers, the incentive would be extra paid leave up to 30 days while recuperating from the organ donation. Sen. Julian Carroll, D-Frankfort, introduced the Senate measure. The lead sponsor on the House bill is Rep. Dennis Keene, D-Wilder. Carroll has labeled his bill "The Gift of Life Act." The House measure would be known as "Beth's Bill." Whatever the name, this legislation is worthy of passage.

2. Another proposal that deserves legislative approval is House Bill 560, sponsored by Rep. Adam Koenig, R-Erlanger. It would require high schools to provide 12th-grade students instruction on registering to vote and voting. Such instruction might encourage civic involvement among our youth. And that would be a good thing.

3. I haven't done an actual comparison with previous years, but the number of resolutions honoring people by naming bridges or portions of roads after them appear to be down this year. Maybe we're running out of unnamed pavement in this state.

4. From the "Boo! Hiss! Department," the perennial proposal to clear-cut highway right of way so motorists have an unhindered view of Kentucky's wonderfully scenic billboards is back. It's House Bill 582. May it suffer the same fate its legislative ancestors suffered.

Silent budget victims, casino politics, etc.

Today's column:

FRANKFORT — This and that on the 2008 General Assembly’s Hump Day:

Halfway home in this 60-day session, and the discussion remains remarkably similar to what it was on Day One. It’s all about the money — or more accurately, the lack thereof.

here are some proposals for correcting that situation. Gov. Steve Beshear offers casinos as an answer. House Democratic leaders have even uttered the dreaded T-word in regard to cigarettes and assorted odds and ends.

(Tuesday, applause filled the Capitol Rotunda when the words tax and taxes were mentioned. Of course, that may have had something to do with the fact that the people applauding were rallying in opposition to the casino alternative.)

But neither of the two options appears to be generating a broad base of support.

Representatives of several chambers of commerce provided moral support for Beshear when he announced the details of his casino legislation on Valentine’s Day. His plan is also backed by the horse industry.

Advocates for health and social-service issues support a higher tax on cigarettes.

For the most part, though, everyone else remains seated on the sidelines, hoarding their political capital. And that includes some heavy hitters among those who will feel the pain of the current budget proposal the most.

They all want more money, but they don’t seem interested in rolling up their sleeves and using some of their political muscle to find it.

Kentucky’s universities provide a perfect example. Some among them say that even though additional revenue is needed, it is not the universities’ role to tell lawmakers where to get it.

But by sitting out this important public policy debate, the universities by default are making a different public policy statement: that they can always fall back on an increased tuition tax on students and their families.

Universities need to be in this discussion. And they should bring their alumni bases along with them.

But it’s not just the universities who are sitting on the sidelines. If the school boards, teachers, public employee groups, local officials dealing with escalating jail costs and assorted other parties who will feel the pain of an austere budget have been rushing to provide lawmakers cover for raising taxes or passing a gambling amendment, I’ve missed it.

                                     * * *

Beshear’s casino proposals have taken a lot of hits, even from some casino proponents such as myself. And most of it is deserved.

Lawmakers particularly talked of problems with the enabling legislation, which was described as complicated, divisive and unnecessary at this time. No doubt the enabling legislation is seriously flawed and needs considerable work.

But I suspect some of the complications and divisiveness have less to do with its flaws than with the fact that certain localities didn’t make the final cut for sites.

As to the lack of necessity at this time, well, this is a legislative election year. Holding the enabling legislation for a later time will give folks who have an interest in what it contains ample opportunity to make political contributions.

                                    * * *

It appears Beshear’s folks may have learned a lesson from their debacle in the 30th District Senate race.

Scott Alexander, the loser in that race, was chosen Tuesday as the Democratic candidate in a March 18 special election to fill Sen. Brandon Smith’s old House seat in the 84th District.

In essence, Alexander will be an interim representative, serving just a few weeks in the current session and in any special session that might be held this year. He is not one of the four Democrats who will vie for the seat in the May primary. (No Republican filed.)

If Beshear’s folks had tried to give one of those four the advantage of the incumbency by having him chosen for the special election, they risked another embarrassing butt-kicking at the polls.

So, maybe they’ve learned that the best time for a Democratic governor to get involved in legislative races is after the Democratic candidate has been chosen through the normal process.

Over the top on casinos

Sunday's column:

FRANKFORT — Kentucky’s horse industry played a significant role in electing Gov. Steve Beshear. So, Beshear no doubt felt an obligation to propose casino gambling legislation in keeping with the wishes of the industry.

OK. Fine. Beshear’s obligation has been met. The industry’s bill has been introduced. Now, let’s all prepare for the return trip to the real world.

As might be expected from an industry that has never been able to get its act together on expanded gambling — and please, let’s call it gambling, not gaming — the legislation Beshear unveiled Thursday is unrealistic, over the top, bizarre even.

Start with the number of proposed casino licenses: 12, seven for racetracks and five for free-standing facilities. That’s overkill for a state of 4 million people.

Move on to the designated locations. Two in Northern Kentucky competing against each other. Two more in the Owensboro-Henderson area competing against each other. And all four competing against boats just across the river.

Another one in Floyd County where even state Rep. Greg Stumbo, D-Prestonsburg, says it doesn’t belong because of the high rate of poverty in the area.

Some of the siting decisions just don’t make sense. But then, some of those areas may never see a casino anyway, given the 51-percent tax rate this legislation would impose on the free-standing casinos’ adjusted gambling receipts.

I understand the desire to keep them on a level playing field with the tracks, which would pay a 35-percent tax and commit another 16 percent of their profits to increased purses, breeders’ incentives and the like.

But does the level playing field have to be at such a high altitude it might actually serve as a deterrent to the development of free-standing casinos, perhaps leaving the tracks with a monopoly on casino gambling in Kentucky?

Silly old me. Surely, that can’t be the intent, can it?

But the number and location of the proposed casinos and the high tax on their profits are far from the most absurd features of this legislation.

Far more nonsensical is the wording of the amendment and the ballot question that would be put before voters. The amendment would set both the tax rate and percentage distribution of the revenues generated by it in constitutional stone.

If subsequent experience proves that the tax rate or allocation of revenues need to be tweaked, another constitutional amendment would be necessary.

I understand the horse industry thinks locking in these numbers will help sell the amendment to voters. But tying the legislature’s hands in that fashion is absurd.

Then, there is the ballot question, which starts out: “Are you in favor of increasing state financial support for elementary and secondary education, expanding health care for senior citizens, children and others, support for local government, and combating drug and alcohol abuse ...”

Gee, wasn’t there room to promise cures for cancer, AIDS, restless leg syndrome and “going” too often as well? Let’s solve all of our societal ills while we’re at it.

I suspect Beshear knows how flawed his proposal is. I suspect that having met his political obligation to the horse industry by submitting the kind of legislation it favors, he would be content now to sit back and let the legislature fix it.

Heck, he might even welcome revisions that reduce the number of casinos, lower the tax rate to a reasonable level (one that is attractive to developers of big-time destination resorts), take the tax rate and distribution percentages out of the amendment and simplify the ballot question to something along the lines of: “Hey, you all wanna be able to boogie on down to a casino in Kentucky?”

A simple amendment that poses a simple ballot question has a shot — a very long shot, but a shot — of succeeding in this General Assembly.

(The enabling legislation is far less likely to go anywhere. And that, too, may be OK with Beshear since getting an amendment on the ballot is his primary objective.)

But the over-the-top version introduced Thursday has no chance of even getting out of a House committee.

A pep rally and a Freudian slip - or was it?

A couple of quick notes:

1. Gov. Steve Beshear discussed his upcoming casino gambling legislation with the House Democratic caucus for about 15 minutes Wednesday afternoon, but it was more a pep rally than a briefing. By all accounts, he spoke in generalities rather than specifics. He did tell them a his proposal would include a maximum number and would address such issues as location and the distribution of casino-generated revenue. I'm hearing that the maximum number will 12 casino licenses - seven for race tracks and five free-standing ones. I also understand that the five free-standing ones will be subject to local option, while the track casinos may not. Beshear will give House leaders and the media the details during a couple of private morning briefings, before publicly disclosing his plans at a 1 p.m. press conference.

2. During a chat with Rep. Greg Stumbo, the former attorney general and House majority floor leader who won his old seat back in a Feb. 5 special election, the subject of his new committee assignments came up. The Prestonsburg Democrat was assigned to Judiciary, Natural Resources & Environment and Transportation committees, which prompted him to say to me, "Those are the same committees I was on before I was floor leader the first time." "The first time?" Was that a Freudian slip?

Stumbo returns, lessons and budget idiocy

Today's column:

FRANKFORT — This and that as the wait for Gov. Steve Beshear’s gambling legislation continues:

Greg Stumbo, the former attorney general and one-time majority floor leader who won re-election to his old House seat last week, was sworn in Monday.

He said all the right things about being happy just to be back in the House and wanting to get acquainted with all the new members who weren’t there when he left.

He got a hug from Speaker Jody Richards on the House floor. And Jonathan Hurst, the Democratic caucus director whose allegiance rests with Richards, made a point of getting some pictures with Stumbo and his buddy Jerry Lundergan (a former state party chairman) for the caucus’s Web page.

So, on the surface at least, all the hallway chatter about Stumbo coming back to challenge Richards would appear to be, well, just chatter.

But the thing is, I have as much trouble imagining Greg Stumbo accepting a role as just one out of 100 in the state House as I do with multimillionaire businessman Bruce Lunsford being happy as just one out of 100 in the U.S. Senate.

So, I suspect Stumbo has a plan. I don’t know what it is or whether it coincides with any of the Beshear administration’s plans.

But he has a plan. Stumbo always has a plan.

And based on my observations of his political career, I figure it’s more of a short-term plan than a long-term one.

                                       * * *

Here’s a litmus test for determining whether Beshear and his advisers learned from their fiasco in the special election in the Senate’s 30th District:

Do they get involved in the special election to fill the 84th District seat in the House, which was vacated when Republican Brandon Smith moved up to the Senate?

If the administration tries to play favorites among the four Democrats who previously filed for the May primary in that district, the Beshear folks didn’t learn one thing from their first butt-kicking.

If they stay out of this special election, maybe there is hope for them.

Maybe.

But the jury’s still out on it.

                                       * * *

Let me say this as politely as possible: Proposing a “supplemental” budget based on hundreds of millions of dollars from casino license fees that don’t exist yet and may never exist is politically dumb in the extreme.

Whether such a plan originates in the administration or with House Democrats, it would come across as a con job worthy of The Flim-Flam Man or The Sting.

Propose a budget full of pain based on current revenues. Then, dangle one full of joy, happiness and projects out the ying-yang — all financed by a hypothetical windfall — before the public as a come-on to get casino legislation passed.

Such transparent tactics would be an instant recipe for credibility destruction, particularly for a governor who has repeatedly said it would be financially irresponsible to count on any revenue from casinos in his first two-year spending plan.

Whatever budget comes out of this legislative session should rely on current revenue projections and the proceeds from any tax increases legislators may enact.

If and when casinos become a new source of revenue for Kentucky, lawmakers will have ample opportunity to spend it, even if Beshear has to call them into special session to do it.

For now, though, counting on casino revenue for the next budget is little better than trying to pay the state’s bills with Monopoly money.

Productivity (finally) and roll calls

Both houses of the Kentucky General Assembly met briefly in the Old State Capitol Tuesday afternoon. Although the sessions were ceremonial in nature, it still turned out to be the most productive day so far. They finally got a piece of legislation through both chambers. Of course, it was a House concurrent resolution honoring native son Abraham Lincoln on his birthday. But nothing else has made it that far, and 25 of the 60 legislative days are behind us.

One interesting sidelight to this afternoon sessions was that House, which normally takes roll calls on an electronic voting machine, had to do all roll calls verbally today. We're all used to the Senate's verbal roll calls, but that chamber has just 38 members. If the House had to poll its 100 members verbally on every roll call vote, I suspect a lot less legislation would get passed if for no other reason the consumed in doing so.

One misstep after another, right off the cliff

Sunday's column:

FRANKFORT — Gov. Steve Beshear and Lt. Gov. Daniel Mongiardo put their young administration’s political capital on the line backing a two-time loser in the 30th District senatorial race.

Now, Scott Alexander is a three-time loser, and the Beshear-Mongiardo team knows what it feels like to wake up the morning after being on the receiving end of an old-fashioned butt-kicking.

Oh, well, that can happen when a governor forgets why he got elected and starts to think he’s back in an era when strong governors dominated Kentucky politics.

Beshear forgot what his predecessor forgot. He forgot that he was elected not because of who he is or what he promised voters. He was elected solely because of the scandals that plagued the previous administration. The only mandate voters gave him was the mandate to be anyone but Ernie Fletcher.

So far, Beshear is failing to fulfill that mandate. One of the constant themes in the hallway discussions around the Capitol and Capitol Annex these days is that we’re experiencing Ernie Fletcher II.

Same dumb mistakes. Same inability to learn from them. And if it continues down that path, the same one-term failure as a governor.

Another firing controversy with evolving excuses is the most recent example.

Let’s say the latest excuse — that there was just cause to can Fletcher holdover Eric Landis after his return from Air National Guard training  because he failed to keep appointments or submit a résumé for the administration’s review — is 100 percent accurate.

It doesn’t matter.

Whether or not the Beshear folks are on the side of the angels, this is another no-win situation for them. There is no upside to digging in their heels.

This is one of those times when you fess up to a mistake (even if you didn’t make one) and do whatever it takes to put it behind you. Otherwise, you not only evoke comparisons to Fletcher, you also look unpatriotic.

During last week’s hallway discussions, I heard one explanation for the 30th District fiasco that went something like this:

You think you’ve got an election that can be won. You think Mongiardo’s popularity in the district and Beshear’s kick-butt victory last fall can make all the difference in a tight race.

You take the first step and the second and the third. By the time you realize you were wrong, by the time you realize one person’s popularity can’t be transferred to another person, you’ve gone so far that turning back would be meaningless.

So, you keep moving forward until you walk right off the cliff. But that’s OK. If you learn from your mistake, you can still recover and have success.

I see some wisdom in turning around and walking away before taking that last step into thin air. But even if you buy this explanation, the key element is learning a lesson from your free fall.

I’m waiting for evidence that the Beshear folks are learning from their mistakes. I didn’t find it in the way they handled the Landis affair last week.

But now that the special election is over, Beshear needs to forget politics for a while and focus his full attention on policy – specifically, the policy issues being debated in the General Assembly.

Good policy decisions can help make people forget about one bad political decision. Besides, if he gets the policy thing right, the politics may be more likely to break his way in the future.