I’ve just returned from the Pepsi Center where I took Casey’s place and heard Michelle Obama give the speech of her life! However, she was led by remarkable speeches from other impressive women, including: Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama’s half sister, Caroline Kennedy, and Claire McCaskill. I won’t repeat what many of you probably have heard on the television, but I will give you my impressions of seeing them live. As you know if you are reading the blog, the Mississippi delegation is sitting where you see the side of each speaker.
Obama’s half sister has a pointed chin that looks very much like the pictures of Obama’s mother. Sweetly, she told of a half-brother who took her to movies and was a nice guy and how as a history teacher she looks forward to what he’ll do for education. What you didn’t see was that the Hawaii delegation, seated next to Mississippi’s delegation, went wild; Hawaii is feeling very proud of their native son and his sister.
Caroline Kennedy looked beautiful and from the side was extremely thin. What intrigued me was that as she spoke, she curled her right foot around her left leg like a small child. As she told about how Barack Obama inspired her the way others say they were inspired by her father, I thought she nevertheless looked like the little girl that we all remember from the Sixties. She explained that Obama has no greater champion than her Uncle Teddy. The Mississippi delegation seemed moved by the appearance of Ted Kennedy, especially since this might be his last; Senator Kennedy promised to be at Obama’s inauguration in January.
Claire McCaskill was phenomenal. It took her a while to warm up to her attacks on McCain, but when she spoke, she leaned forward on the podium with her hands held together and showed that she will be a fighter for Obama in the fall. From the side she was a lot heavier than Caroline Kennedy, but she had on great shoes.
The woman of the evening arrived at about 9:00. We were all given pole signs to hold up and wave that said “Michelle.” When she came to the podium, you could tell how tall she was because the podium seemed small. She talked about her father and how he never gave up fighting and smiling. She talked about Barack and her children. However, when she said that our parents “poured everything they had into us,” I felt like everyone in the audience understood her family values at last. She made it perfectly clear that she understood the American dream, that she epitomized that dream, and that no one was going to take her story and make it less than it is. Many Mississippi delegates had tears in their eyes. Even among the other great speakers of the evening, she was by far the best. Michelle Obama will be an exceptional first lady.
Other interesting tidbits from tonight: John Grisham came by the delegation, shaking hands with several delegates. We saw Walter Mondale, Bill Richardson, John Kerry, Chris Dodd. They all had very nice, thick hair.
Overall, the Mississippi delegation was high spirited and a lot of fun. Curley Clark from Pascagoula proved to be a good dancer and was seen on the big screen more than once. Good music was interspersed between speakers, and when upbeat numbers like “Celebrate Good Times, Come On!” you can believe Mississippians did just that.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
Update on the Hillary Factor
Gloria Williams, Chair of the Mississippi Clinton Delegation, met with other Hillary state chairs this afternoon.
The message from Hillary was simple. She is supporting Obama completely and is releasing her delegates. She is not asking her delegates to vote for her - or for Obama. She says it is a matter of personal decision for each delegate.
Gloria will meet with the Mississippi Clinton delegates tomorrow morning after the Mississippi delegation caucus, and we'll see then how many Clinton delegates will vote for Obama on the first ballot.
Gloria said she planned to vote for Clinton on the first ballot, because that's what she was elected to do. After that, she will enthusiastically support Obama.
After picking up that tidbit, I'm now leaving the Pepsi Center so Dianne can come take my place.
The message from Hillary was simple. She is supporting Obama completely and is releasing her delegates. She is not asking her delegates to vote for her - or for Obama. She says it is a matter of personal decision for each delegate.
Gloria will meet with the Mississippi Clinton delegates tomorrow morning after the Mississippi delegation caucus, and we'll see then how many Clinton delegates will vote for Obama on the first ballot.
Gloria said she planned to vote for Clinton on the first ballot, because that's what she was elected to do. After that, she will enthusiastically support Obama.
After picking up that tidbit, I'm now leaving the Pepsi Center so Dianne can come take my place.
Off We Go to the Convention
After breakfast Dianne and I made our trek to downtown Denver, using our knowledge of public transportation learned the day before. Then came the next stage of our education – getting to the Pepsi Center, where the Convention is being held. We knew we had to walk, but no one knew how. We just kept asking for directions. The problem was there are many different ways to get there, but all but one had been blocked off. We kept walking down blocks only to be turned away. Finally, we came to a gate, where we showed our credentials and got in. We thought we were finally there. No!
From that gate, we were directed all the way around (a long way!) to the big security clearance. It was just like airport security, except we got to keep our shoes on, and the personnel seemed better trained. We were early so it moved quickly.
We had two credentials – one for the floor of the Convention and one for the Perimeter. The problem was that no one could tell us where the Perimeter was. We decided to keep going until someone kicked us out. That happened when we entered the media entrance of the building, where we ran into the only rude person in the whole place. So we split up. I went into the Convention, and Dianne went to enjoy downtown Denver.
When I first walked into the arena, it was awesome! I think the significance of what was happening really hit me. I was able to walk all around the floor and see how it was layed out. It’s a hockey arena in real life. The really important delegations are on the floor. What was interesting was that Delaware was moved from the nosebleed section down to the front next to Illinois. (Wonder why?) Mississippi is to the far left, looking at the stage, on the front row. Our delegation is seated right next to the Mississippi sign, because that’s where the electricity and internet is located. Kentucky, Puerto Rico, and Oregon are behind us. Hawaii, Wyoming and Alabama are beside us. Now you should be able to find us on TV.
Since nothing had started yet, I decided to sit in our official seat and post an update to our activites. However, I had no internet. So I went in search of help. I discovered that there seems to be a "need to know" mentality here. People, are very friendly, but only seem to know their particular areas of responsibility. But I ran into someone who seemed to be a "fixer". Her name is Bev, and her real responsibility is to maintain the cable wires in the Convention area. She disappeared and sure enough, came back with the name of the person who could help me. As I was wandering the arena, I found the Bloggers Lounge. That was exciting, as I could put a face on some names I've come to know.
So now I have internet access and electricity, and I'm ready to go!
From that gate, we were directed all the way around (a long way!) to the big security clearance. It was just like airport security, except we got to keep our shoes on, and the personnel seemed better trained. We were early so it moved quickly.
We had two credentials – one for the floor of the Convention and one for the Perimeter. The problem was that no one could tell us where the Perimeter was. We decided to keep going until someone kicked us out. That happened when we entered the media entrance of the building, where we ran into the only rude person in the whole place. So we split up. I went into the Convention, and Dianne went to enjoy downtown Denver.
When I first walked into the arena, it was awesome! I think the significance of what was happening really hit me. I was able to walk all around the floor and see how it was layed out. It’s a hockey arena in real life. The really important delegations are on the floor. What was interesting was that Delaware was moved from the nosebleed section down to the front next to Illinois. (Wonder why?) Mississippi is to the far left, looking at the stage, on the front row. Our delegation is seated right next to the Mississippi sign, because that’s where the electricity and internet is located. Kentucky, Puerto Rico, and Oregon are behind us. Hawaii, Wyoming and Alabama are beside us. Now you should be able to find us on TV.
Since nothing had started yet, I decided to sit in our official seat and post an update to our activites. However, I had no internet. So I went in search of help. I discovered that there seems to be a "need to know" mentality here. People, are very friendly, but only seem to know their particular areas of responsibility. But I ran into someone who seemed to be a "fixer". Her name is Bev, and her real responsibility is to maintain the cable wires in the Convention area. She disappeared and sure enough, came back with the name of the person who could help me. As I was wandering the arena, I found the Bloggers Lounge. That was exciting, as I could put a face on some names I've come to know.
So now I have internet access and electricity, and I'm ready to go!
Mississippi Delegation Caucus
After a great night’s sleep, we went to the delegation breakfast/caucus meeting. In addition to the delegates, there were many others, including guests, family members, and party officials. The meeting was run by the Chair of the delegation, Congressman Bennie Thompson. Our other two Congressmen, Travis Childers and Gene Taylor, chose not to attend, although they are eligible as superdelegates. Senate nominee Ronnie Musgrove is also not attending. Mississippi politicians with tough elections coming up probably don’t want to be too visibly associated with the national Democratic party.
A few realities were dealt with in the meeting. One was the distance to the Convention and difficulties getting there. There will be a shuttle bus from the hotel to the Convention in time for the sessions, which don’t start until 3 pm. Those who had meetings before either had to take public transportation or pay about $50 for a cab.
Another reality was the scarcity of credentials to get in the Convention itself. There were very few extras to pass out, and there appeared to be some unhappy guests. If they want to go anywhere, they have to take public transportation – with which we know Mississippians have little experience. I do think some of the guests will be able to go to the final night at Invesco field, and that will probably make up for the rest of it. Most were here to see history being made.
A few realities were dealt with in the meeting. One was the distance to the Convention and difficulties getting there. There will be a shuttle bus from the hotel to the Convention in time for the sessions, which don’t start until 3 pm. Those who had meetings before either had to take public transportation or pay about $50 for a cab.
Another reality was the scarcity of credentials to get in the Convention itself. There were very few extras to pass out, and there appeared to be some unhappy guests. If they want to go anywhere, they have to take public transportation – with which we know Mississippians have little experience. I do think some of the guests will be able to go to the final night at Invesco field, and that will probably make up for the rest of it. Most were here to see history being made.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
The Natchez Blog Arrives in Denver!
Up at 4 am - and I don't do mornings well. We arrived in Denver without any airplane mishaps. The day went downhill from there.
We got off the airport shuttle at the wrong hotel. But we had a great driver (more on him later). We called him, and he came back to get us.
We then discovered the significance of the Mississippi delegation, as the Democratic National Party assigns hotels to states. The closer you are to the Convention, the more important you are in their minds. Well, our hotel was in the boondocks - we actually think we may be in Wyoming. Our room was not ready, and we had to wait about an hour.
We didn't even unpack but needed to head back downtown to pick up our credentials. The Mississippi delegation gets theirs delivered to them every day at the hotel, but we have to pick ours up daily at the media credential center.
Denver is full of wonderful friendly local volunteers who are there to help you everywhere. However, we decided that the two working in our hotel had probably never ridden public transportation, because they gave us horrible directions. We did get a good view of Denver and now are well versed in the public transportation system. We also met many friendly law enforcement officers and transportation workers who helped these two lost southerners find their away around their city. They were the only ones to ask, since there was not a single local person to be found - they very smartly got the hell out of Dodge. It was a madhouse. Protesters all over, riot police in full gear, and thousands and thousands of lost souls.
We finally arrived at the Credentialing Center five minutes before they closed at 5 pm. Then we found out that one of our credentials was missing. Other people around us were acting pompous and important, and they did not get their credentials. We smiled sweetly, poured on the southern charm, and acted so helpless. We got ours.
We were supposed to go to a meeting with other State Bloggers at 3:30. Needless to say, we totally missed that. We discovered later that only 3 showed up - all the rest had various horror stories of delays.
We finally came back to the hotel bar (medicinal purposes only). We did get to talk to some of the Mississippi Delegation. We also took some little videos along the way today and posted them quickly just now. They still need some editing and some descriptions.
So we spent the whole day here and got a hotel room and a credential. I did not get to put fingers to the keyboard until just now. But we are definitely ready for tomorrow! Oh, one neat thing. Lots of people noticed the Natchez T shirts and said wonderful things. One good story that we'll post tomorrow when we hope to be slightly more coherent.
Right now, I'm going to take a long bath and crash. Night night!
PS I forgot to mention that a tornado went right by our hotel and no one seemed to notice - not even the media, who were all covering the Convention.
We got off the airport shuttle at the wrong hotel. But we had a great driver (more on him later). We called him, and he came back to get us.
We then discovered the significance of the Mississippi delegation, as the Democratic National Party assigns hotels to states. The closer you are to the Convention, the more important you are in their minds. Well, our hotel was in the boondocks - we actually think we may be in Wyoming. Our room was not ready, and we had to wait about an hour.
We didn't even unpack but needed to head back downtown to pick up our credentials. The Mississippi delegation gets theirs delivered to them every day at the hotel, but we have to pick ours up daily at the media credential center.
Denver is full of wonderful friendly local volunteers who are there to help you everywhere. However, we decided that the two working in our hotel had probably never ridden public transportation, because they gave us horrible directions. We did get a good view of Denver and now are well versed in the public transportation system. We also met many friendly law enforcement officers and transportation workers who helped these two lost southerners find their away around their city. They were the only ones to ask, since there was not a single local person to be found - they very smartly got the hell out of Dodge. It was a madhouse. Protesters all over, riot police in full gear, and thousands and thousands of lost souls.
We finally arrived at the Credentialing Center five minutes before they closed at 5 pm. Then we found out that one of our credentials was missing. Other people around us were acting pompous and important, and they did not get their credentials. We smiled sweetly, poured on the southern charm, and acted so helpless. We got ours.
We were supposed to go to a meeting with other State Bloggers at 3:30. Needless to say, we totally missed that. We discovered later that only 3 showed up - all the rest had various horror stories of delays.
We finally came back to the hotel bar (medicinal purposes only). We did get to talk to some of the Mississippi Delegation. We also took some little videos along the way today and posted them quickly just now. They still need some editing and some descriptions.
So we spent the whole day here and got a hotel room and a credential. I did not get to put fingers to the keyboard until just now. But we are definitely ready for tomorrow! Oh, one neat thing. Lots of people noticed the Natchez T shirts and said wonderful things. One good story that we'll post tomorrow when we hope to be slightly more coherent.
Right now, I'm going to take a long bath and crash. Night night!
PS I forgot to mention that a tornado went right by our hotel and no one seemed to notice - not even the media, who were all covering the Convention.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Meet Angela Cockerham: Obama Delegate to DNC08
The Democratic Convention starts Monday in Denver. I've put together a list of all the Mississippi Delegates with pictures and basic information. A link to this list is in the column to the right under Convention Links, along with other interesting sites - including where to see all the videos I'll be making.
A few days ago, I introduced you to Clinton Delegate Kelly Jacobs. Today I want you to meet an Obama delegate.
I first met Angela Cockerham when she ran for a seat in the Mississippi House of Representatives. Her district (96) includes portions of Adams, Amite, and Pike counties and all of Wilkinson county, so she was in our area campaigning. I was immediately impressed with this young lady and was thrilled when she won.
Most of you know that I work part time for our public library. We produce a series of posters featuring local celebrities encouraging children to read. I immediately asked her to be on one, because I knew she would make a good role model for children. She has a library card and visits the Library regularly. That says a lot to me. Later I found out that reading is her favorite hobby. She says, "While most people go fishing or to the spa to relax, I go to the library". She even writes poetry - although I haven't been able to get a sample yet. She is definitely my kind of person!
Her values undoubtedly came from her close knit family in Magnolia, Mississippi. Her parents, Oscar and Grace Cockerham, required their family to always eat dinner together. Her interest in politics started with the spirited and lively discussions around their dinner table. The topics were usually current events - national, state, and local. Everybody had different opinions and was encouraged to speak up. She said, "I truly understood that everyone’s not going to agree with you all the time, even family, but you love them regardless." That's a good lesson to learn for a future in politics.
In 2006, the Hotline, the National Journal's Briefing on Politics, picked their future political stars in Mississippi. Angela made that list, and here's what they said about her:
In addition to being a legislator, Angela is a partner in the law firm of Dowdy & Cockerham in Magnolia. Wayne Dowdy was the Chair of the State Democratic Party, so she's in good company.
Angela just returned from a very exciting trip to South Africa. Here's what she had to say:
She is thrilled to be going to the Convention. She's leaving Sunday, although she admits she hasn't yet packed a thing. She remembers watching Senator Obama speak at the last Convention, and she's been a fan ever since. This will be a very special experience for her.
I think I picked two very exceptional delegates to profile for you before the Convention. I'll be keeping you up to date on their activities - and those of all the other Mississippi Delegates. Stay tuned!
PS If you missed it, the Natchez Democrat did a story on our upcoming trip to Denver.
A few days ago, I introduced you to Clinton Delegate Kelly Jacobs. Today I want you to meet an Obama delegate.
I first met Angela Cockerham when she ran for a seat in the Mississippi House of Representatives. Her district (96) includes portions of Adams, Amite, and Pike counties and all of Wilkinson county, so she was in our area campaigning. I was immediately impressed with this young lady and was thrilled when she won.Most of you know that I work part time for our public library. We produce a series of posters featuring local celebrities encouraging children to read. I immediately asked her to be on one, because I knew she would make a good role model for children. She has a library card and visits the Library regularly. That says a lot to me. Later I found out that reading is her favorite hobby. She says, "While most people go fishing or to the spa to relax, I go to the library". She even writes poetry - although I haven't been able to get a sample yet. She is definitely my kind of person!
Her values undoubtedly came from her close knit family in Magnolia, Mississippi. Her parents, Oscar and Grace Cockerham, required their family to always eat dinner together. Her interest in politics started with the spirited and lively discussions around their dinner table. The topics were usually current events - national, state, and local. Everybody had different opinions and was encouraged to speak up. She said, "I truly understood that everyone’s not going to agree with you all the time, even family, but you love them regardless." That's a good lesson to learn for a future in politics.
In 2006, the Hotline, the National Journal's Briefing on Politics, picked their future political stars in Mississippi. Angela made that list, and here's what they said about her:
State Rep. Angela Cockerham (D): In her late 20s and "very articulate," she just won a special election. "You can look for a bright future for her." Cockerham is "a bright spot, and intellectually a step up over her predecessor."
In addition to being a legislator, Angela is a partner in the law firm of Dowdy & Cockerham in Magnolia. Wayne Dowdy was the Chair of the State Democratic Party, so she's in good company.
Angela just returned from a very exciting trip to South Africa. Here's what she had to say:
"Every place I visited, from Cape Town to Johannesburg, one of the hottest topics of discussion was our presidential elections. Imagine how proud I was to say that I would be attending the convention as a Mississippi delegate and that I was supporting Senator Obama. Needless to say, most people that I spoke with in South Africa were Senator Obama supporters also!"
She is thrilled to be going to the Convention. She's leaving Sunday, although she admits she hasn't yet packed a thing. She remembers watching Senator Obama speak at the last Convention, and she's been a fan ever since. This will be a very special experience for her.
I think I picked two very exceptional delegates to profile for you before the Convention. I'll be keeping you up to date on their activities - and those of all the other Mississippi Delegates. Stay tuned!
PS If you missed it, the Natchez Democrat did a story on our upcoming trip to Denver.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Meet Kelly Jacobs: Clinton Delegate to DNC08
The Democratic Convention starts Monday in Denver. I've put together a list of all the Mississippi Delegates with pictures and basic information. A link to this list is in the column to the right under Convention Links, along with other interesting sites.
Kelly Jacobs is a happily married mother of three college students, two sons at Ole Miss and one stepdaughter in California. Her husband Paul works at FedEx, and they live in Hernando.
So who are these people? I've already discussed how they got elected. There are some politicians, of course, but most of them are party activists, who've been working for Mississippi Democrats for quite a while. This is a profile of one Clinton Delegate, and next I'll do an Obama Delegate.
Kelly Jacobs is a happily married mother of three college students, two sons at Ole Miss and one stepdaughter in California. Her husband Paul works at FedEx, and they live in Hernando.A member of the Mississippi Wildlife Rehabilitation, Kelly volunteers her time fostering injured or orphaned wildlife. She's currently the foster mother of four baby raccoons, a yellow finch, three red headed woodpeckers, one mockingbird, one blue jay, and an American Robin named Batman.
In addition, she's also a peace activist and the State Coordinator for Code Pink Women for Peace. When Cheney was in Southaven recently, Kelly was there protesting all alone in the Free Speech Zone, even though a Sheriff wouldn't let her park anywhere nearby. She hadn't been there long when a SWAT team with unholstered machine guns told her she had to leave. As she said, you don't argue with guns - she left. Then she tried to walk across the street a few times with a peace sign and was stopped by a Sheriff again. He told her if she walked with her sign anywhere in Southaven, she'd be arrested. She said she had a deal with her husband, " I can protest all I want. I just can't get arrested." So she left. Poor Dick Chaney needed all this law enforcement to help protect him from one protester.
Kelly is an active member of the Desoto County and State Democratic Parties and was the recipient of the 2004 Fannie Lou Hamer Award. She went to the Democratic Convention in 2004 in Boston and will be going again this year as a Clinton Delegate. She and her husband are driving to Denver in their Prius - in fact she might be on her way as you read this.
Oh, I forgot to mention that in her spare time, she's a farmer of Japanese persimmons. Let me close with the saying that ends all Kelly's emails.
Voting is like driving. To go backwards, select R. To go forward, select D.
UPDATE: Kelly is already making news. See her quote in today's Memphis Commercial Appeal.
Happy Days Are Here Again!
After long negotiations, the Obama campaign has decided that Clinton's name will be formally placed in nomination and she'll get a roll call vote.
Why is this important? Clinton received almost half the votes during the Democratic primary, and her supporters were very passionate. Possibly having the first woman President was just as significant as having the first black one. Many of them have strong feelings about how their candidate was treated by the Obama campaign, the Democratic Party, and the media. Consequently, they weren't warming up to Obama, even though their candidate was urging them to.
Initially, Obama and the Party tended to ignore the Clinton supporters and were focused on having a unified Convention. They just assumed those voters had nowhere else to go. This strategy wasn't working very well. The national polls showed the general election as close, and it was getting closer as time went by.
One reason was that some of these Clinton supporters, mostly women, were really, really angry, and they were organizing. For an example, check out Just Say No Deal. At first, the Obama campaign thought this was just a fringe group or a front for Republicans, but they were dead wrong. Democrats just aren't used to women playing tough, but they sure are now.
Ignoring these voters was definitely the wrong move - that made them even madder. His campaign points out that Obama does well with women in recent polls, but that doesn't tell the whole story. Black women and young women do support Obama overwhelmingly, and a majority of Hispanic women, as well, but these groups historically have low voter turnout. But older white women do not support Obama, and senior women overwhelmingly do not - and they always vote. No Democrat is going to win without the white female vote, especially since they're not going to get the white male vote.
Several of Clinton's female big money supporters weren't ponying up for Obama. When they were approached, they said you'd better do something for Clinton's supporters or you'll lose.
A simple thing would have been for Obama to choose Clinton as his Vice President, but that wasn't going to happen for several reasons, the biggest of which was that they simply don't like each other.
The next best thing is to allow Clinton's nomination. If they do this legitimately, this will appease many of her supporters - enough to probably make a difference in the election results.
There are definitely risks to this strategy. Close to half the delegates at the Convention may vote for Clinton, and Obama will have to share much of his limelight with the Clintons.
But ultimately, it's a very wise move. Why?
For one thing, there was a strong possibility of an ugly Convention - especially outside the hall - and the Democrats definitely didn't want that.
But mainly, because it shows respect for Clinton's historic candidacy, and her supporters were really tired of being treated like dirt under someone's shoe.
For another, there was a lot of anger over the way the primary election was run. Winning the nomination fairly at the Convention gives more legitimacy to the Obama victory in the eyes of Clinton supporters.
It also makes Obama look gracious and magnanimous, when many have the opposite opinion.
Finally, Clinton and her husband are both speaking at the Convention, and with this show of respect, I think they'll be able to win over her delegates.
In my conversations with the Mississippi Clinton delegates, I know this will make most of them much happier. They were elected to vote for Clinton, and they want a chance to do it. Then they'll be on board the Obama wagon.
Why is this important? Clinton received almost half the votes during the Democratic primary, and her supporters were very passionate. Possibly having the first woman President was just as significant as having the first black one. Many of them have strong feelings about how their candidate was treated by the Obama campaign, the Democratic Party, and the media. Consequently, they weren't warming up to Obama, even though their candidate was urging them to.
Initially, Obama and the Party tended to ignore the Clinton supporters and were focused on having a unified Convention. They just assumed those voters had nowhere else to go. This strategy wasn't working very well. The national polls showed the general election as close, and it was getting closer as time went by.
One reason was that some of these Clinton supporters, mostly women, were really, really angry, and they were organizing. For an example, check out Just Say No Deal. At first, the Obama campaign thought this was just a fringe group or a front for Republicans, but they were dead wrong. Democrats just aren't used to women playing tough, but they sure are now.
Ignoring these voters was definitely the wrong move - that made them even madder. His campaign points out that Obama does well with women in recent polls, but that doesn't tell the whole story. Black women and young women do support Obama overwhelmingly, and a majority of Hispanic women, as well, but these groups historically have low voter turnout. But older white women do not support Obama, and senior women overwhelmingly do not - and they always vote. No Democrat is going to win without the white female vote, especially since they're not going to get the white male vote.
Several of Clinton's female big money supporters weren't ponying up for Obama. When they were approached, they said you'd better do something for Clinton's supporters or you'll lose.
A simple thing would have been for Obama to choose Clinton as his Vice President, but that wasn't going to happen for several reasons, the biggest of which was that they simply don't like each other.
The next best thing is to allow Clinton's nomination. If they do this legitimately, this will appease many of her supporters - enough to probably make a difference in the election results.
There are definitely risks to this strategy. Close to half the delegates at the Convention may vote for Clinton, and Obama will have to share much of his limelight with the Clintons.
But ultimately, it's a very wise move. Why?
For one thing, there was a strong possibility of an ugly Convention - especially outside the hall - and the Democrats definitely didn't want that.
But mainly, because it shows respect for Clinton's historic candidacy, and her supporters were really tired of being treated like dirt under someone's shoe.
For another, there was a lot of anger over the way the primary election was run. Winning the nomination fairly at the Convention gives more legitimacy to the Obama victory in the eyes of Clinton supporters.
It also makes Obama look gracious and magnanimous, when many have the opposite opinion.
Finally, Clinton and her husband are both speaking at the Convention, and with this show of respect, I think they'll be able to win over her delegates.
In my conversations with the Mississippi Clinton delegates, I know this will make most of them much happier. They were elected to vote for Clinton, and they want a chance to do it. Then they'll be on board the Obama wagon.
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
What Is It About Mississippi?
UPDATE: Looks Mississippi may gotten on this final list because of politics. Check out the article in the Clarion Ledger.
Mississippi is in a good position to be awarded the $450 million National Bio and Agro Defense Facility (NBAF). The competitors are sites in Georgia, North Carolina, Kansas, Texas, as well as possibly the current site on an island off New York state. So why do we have the edge?
The Department of Homeland Security has been holding public hearings at all these sites. The NBAF will be studying animal diseases. It is admittedly a high risk facility, but it also brings economic benefits. The debate is over the safety precautions - and the news this week of a scientist at a government lab possibly killing people with anthrax didn't help.
Butner NC. On July 28, there was a hearing where at least 600 people showed up - not a single person spoke in favor of the lab. Over two thirds of the residents have actually signed a petition against it. The Congressman from the area, who had previously supported the facility, today withdrew his support.
Manhattan KS. At the August 1 hearing, all the governmental, academic, and business types showed out in force to support the lab - but no regular people. However, there was a significant number speaking in opposition and making some legitimate arguments.
Athens GA. No hearing had been held yet, but the local media and blogs are going hot and heavy on the issue.
San Antonia TX. Hearing is tomorrow.
KS, GA, and TX are located in college towns and academics want that research money, but college towns are also full of environmental types concerned about the health risks.
Flora MS. The hearing was today. What was strange about this hearing was that there was not one peep of opposition from the hundreds who attended. We are the polar opposite of Butner NC. Why is that? Are Mississippians so desperate for jobs that potential environmental and health risks don't matter?
The good news is that because of our unequivocal support, Mississippi might be awarded this lab and its economic benefits.
The bad news is that because of our ignorance, Mississippi could be in for a serious biological disaster.
Mississippi is in a good position to be awarded the $450 million National Bio and Agro Defense Facility (NBAF). The competitors are sites in Georgia, North Carolina, Kansas, Texas, as well as possibly the current site on an island off New York state. So why do we have the edge?
The Department of Homeland Security has been holding public hearings at all these sites. The NBAF will be studying animal diseases. It is admittedly a high risk facility, but it also brings economic benefits. The debate is over the safety precautions - and the news this week of a scientist at a government lab possibly killing people with anthrax didn't help.
Butner NC. On July 28, there was a hearing where at least 600 people showed up - not a single person spoke in favor of the lab. Over two thirds of the residents have actually signed a petition against it. The Congressman from the area, who had previously supported the facility, today withdrew his support.
Manhattan KS. At the August 1 hearing, all the governmental, academic, and business types showed out in force to support the lab - but no regular people. However, there was a significant number speaking in opposition and making some legitimate arguments.
Athens GA. No hearing had been held yet, but the local media and blogs are going hot and heavy on the issue.
San Antonia TX. Hearing is tomorrow.
KS, GA, and TX are located in college towns and academics want that research money, but college towns are also full of environmental types concerned about the health risks.
Flora MS. The hearing was today. What was strange about this hearing was that there was not one peep of opposition from the hundreds who attended. We are the polar opposite of Butner NC. Why is that? Are Mississippians so desperate for jobs that potential environmental and health risks don't matter?
The good news is that because of our unequivocal support, Mississippi might be awarded this lab and its economic benefits.
The bad news is that because of our ignorance, Mississippi could be in for a serious biological disaster.
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Imperious Obama Messages
Mississippi Clinton delegates to the Democratic Convention have been receiving interesting messages from the Obama campaign, and they tell you quite a bit about the candidate and his campaign. One of them said:
Supported? Past tense? Sorry, Barack, but this is a little presumptious. I think they still support Senator Clinton - and they think they'll get a chance to vote for her. On the way to Denver? No, no, that's supposed to be on the home from Denver. If you really want a unified delegation, then you don't start by offending nearly half of the delegates in the room.
The Obama campaign may think they've got things under control. They may think there will be no roll call vote for Clinton. But those delegates who are committed to her don't think so. If Obama doesn't allow a vote for Clinton, there will be some mighty upset delegates. They would see it as a lack of respect for Hillary.
The message then goes on to tell them to fill out a Delegate survey at the Obama campaign website. Delegates have already filled out a survey for the Democratic National Committee and the Mississippi Democratic Party, but this is a different one. It's a pretty intrusive survey, asking what you do for a living, what your ethnicity is, how old you are, what union you belong to, whether you're gay, and what your religion is. What business does the Obama campaign have asking all this information about a Clinton delegate?
But it gets worse. Attached to the email was "Guidelines for Delegates Contacted by the Press." It's pretty draconian. If delegates are contacted by any member of the press, even their local press, delegates are not to say anything until they contact the Obama campaign. So if the Natchez Democrat wants to interview Everett Sanders (whom they talk to regularly) about his trip to Denver, he's supposed to ask permission first - and by email. And look at this:
Oh, and the delegates should never contact the press directly.
You can tell these dudes are from Chicago, where Democrats are used to taking orders from the machine. But I don't think this went over very well with the Clinton delegates in Mississippi who received this email.
A few days later, another similar email was sent to "Mississippi Senator Clinton Delegates". (Funny, I always thought she was New York Senator Clinton, but maybe I missed something.) But in the body of the email, it says "Dear Alabama Senator Clinton Delegates". Oops! Well, you know how Yankees are - they can't tell one southern state from another.
These imperious emails are just not good strategy. Obama is NOT the Democratic nominee for President. A nominee is not elected until the delegates vote at the Convention. Nearly half the delegates at that Convention are committed to Clinton. They know that barring some major miracle, Obama will win the nomination. However, they expect to get a chance to vote for her. That's what they were elected to do. If that opportunity is not given to them, there will be some very hard feelings - and this will not bode well for November.
Democrats just went through an emotional, hard fought, close primary campaign. As the presumptive winner, Obama should try to win over those supporters of his rival - not only the delegates at the Convention - but those across the country. There are several things he could have done, but he has done none of them. In fact, he is treating them with disdain, as these emails demonstrate. This demeaning attitude will affect, not only the Clinton delegates, but her supporters everywhere - and it will show at the Convention for the whole world to see.
Obama has either decided he doesn't need Clinton voters or he is taking them for granted - assuming they'll have no choice but to vote for him. But they do have choices. They can choose not to vote, to vote for a third party candidate, to write in Hillary Clinton, or even, God forbid, vote for the Republican.
This is a serious miscalculation on the part of the Obama campaign. The November election is probably going to be quite close, and he is giving away a large segment of voters, most of which he could have had. All that was required was a little humility and graciousness. Maybe that's too much to ask.
"We welcome delegates who supported Senator Clinton, and hope to create a unified delegation on the way to Denver."
Supported? Past tense? Sorry, Barack, but this is a little presumptious. I think they still support Senator Clinton - and they think they'll get a chance to vote for her. On the way to Denver? No, no, that's supposed to be on the home from Denver. If you really want a unified delegation, then you don't start by offending nearly half of the delegates in the room.
The Obama campaign may think they've got things under control. They may think there will be no roll call vote for Clinton. But those delegates who are committed to her don't think so. If Obama doesn't allow a vote for Clinton, there will be some mighty upset delegates. They would see it as a lack of respect for Hillary.
The message then goes on to tell them to fill out a Delegate survey at the Obama campaign website. Delegates have already filled out a survey for the Democratic National Committee and the Mississippi Democratic Party, but this is a different one. It's a pretty intrusive survey, asking what you do for a living, what your ethnicity is, how old you are, what union you belong to, whether you're gay, and what your religion is. What business does the Obama campaign have asking all this information about a Clinton delegate?
But it gets worse. Attached to the email was "Guidelines for Delegates Contacted by the Press." It's pretty draconian. If delegates are contacted by any member of the press, even their local press, delegates are not to say anything until they contact the Obama campaign. So if the Natchez Democrat wants to interview Everett Sanders (whom they talk to regularly) about his trip to Denver, he's supposed to ask permission first - and by email. And look at this:
"On a case by case basis, depending on the story and its goal, we may approve these interviews."
Oh, and the delegates should never contact the press directly.
You can tell these dudes are from Chicago, where Democrats are used to taking orders from the machine. But I don't think this went over very well with the Clinton delegates in Mississippi who received this email.
A few days later, another similar email was sent to "Mississippi Senator Clinton Delegates". (Funny, I always thought she was New York Senator Clinton, but maybe I missed something.) But in the body of the email, it says "Dear Alabama Senator Clinton Delegates". Oops! Well, you know how Yankees are - they can't tell one southern state from another.
These imperious emails are just not good strategy. Obama is NOT the Democratic nominee for President. A nominee is not elected until the delegates vote at the Convention. Nearly half the delegates at that Convention are committed to Clinton. They know that barring some major miracle, Obama will win the nomination. However, they expect to get a chance to vote for her. That's what they were elected to do. If that opportunity is not given to them, there will be some very hard feelings - and this will not bode well for November.
Democrats just went through an emotional, hard fought, close primary campaign. As the presumptive winner, Obama should try to win over those supporters of his rival - not only the delegates at the Convention - but those across the country. There are several things he could have done, but he has done none of them. In fact, he is treating them with disdain, as these emails demonstrate. This demeaning attitude will affect, not only the Clinton delegates, but her supporters everywhere - and it will show at the Convention for the whole world to see.
Obama has either decided he doesn't need Clinton voters or he is taking them for granted - assuming they'll have no choice but to vote for him. But they do have choices. They can choose not to vote, to vote for a third party candidate, to write in Hillary Clinton, or even, God forbid, vote for the Republican.
This is a serious miscalculation on the part of the Obama campaign. The November election is probably going to be quite close, and he is giving away a large segment of voters, most of which he could have had. All that was required was a little humility and graciousness. Maybe that's too much to ask.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Open Letter to the Public Service Commission
UPDATE: The PSC just told Entergy to lower the fuel rate adjustment!
I just sent the following to Leonard Bentz, Southern District Commissioner for the Mississippi Public Service Commission.
If I get an answer, which I doubt, I'll be sure to let you know. If you're as angry about your electric bill as I am, I suggest you let your supposed representative on the PSC know what you think. I think it is unconscionable for elected officials to do the bidding of utility companies instead of their own citizens. They think we're lazy and stupid. Maybe they're right.
I just sent the following to Leonard Bentz, Southern District Commissioner for the Mississippi Public Service Commission.
It says on your website that the Mississippi Public Service Commission “is charged with assuring that rates and charges for services are just and reasonable”. If that is your charge, then why did you allow Entergy to charge such an outrageous amount for the “fuel adjustment” on our most recent bill. There is no way you can describe that charge as “just and reasonable.”
Yes, the price of fuel has increased drastically. The price that citizens pay for gasoline has gone up about 27% in a year. The price that businesses (like Entergy) pay for natural gas (which they use) has gone up about 15% in a year. However, the fuel adjustment has gone from .004249 kWh to .036807. That’s a whole lot more than 15%. For say, 1000 kWh, that’s going from $4.25 to $36.81.
But for the sake of argument, just assume the percent increase was the same for consumers and Entergy. They should not be allowed to pass on the entire increase to their consumers. We don’t have anyone to pass our increases onto – we just have to pay them. And every business is trying to pass these costs onto us, although some businesses are more responsible than others. What are we citizens supposed to do?
This is a time of crisis in our country, with everyone paying these increased costs for fuel. However, not everyone is suffering. Apparently, Entergy is allowed to continue to make the same profits that it always has. In fact, its profits and its stock prices are increasing.
You have failed at your job. You and the PSC should have made Entergy suffer losses just like the rest of us. You were elected to represent us, the citizens, and not the utility companies. Or have you forgotten that? I assure you we will not forget.
If I get an answer, which I doubt, I'll be sure to let you know. If you're as angry about your electric bill as I am, I suggest you let your supposed representative on the PSC know what you think. I think it is unconscionable for elected officials to do the bidding of utility companies instead of their own citizens. They think we're lazy and stupid. Maybe they're right.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
CO2 Dumping in Natchez
Please help send the Natchez Blog to Denver by making a donation!
In November, I wrote articles about potential CO2 dumping in Natchez. Well, it's here in reality. I recently received an email from Susan Hovorka from the University of Texas, the researcher for the project.
Personally, I am opposed to this project, because I see it as potentially dangerous and unnecessary. However, given the political climate in Mississippi, there is probably little we can do about it.
We are all suffering from our country's addiction to oil - when we fill our gas tanks, pay our electric bill, pay more for food, etc. The Bush administration, the Barbour administration, and Republicans in general think the solution is to drill for more oil. That's like a drug addict saying all they need is a easier source of drugs. Like other addicts, Republicans are deep into denial.
Fortunately for Americans, we do have one leader with the vision to present a real solution. Recently, Al Gore gave an inspiring speech challenging America to commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and other clean sources within 10 years. Think where we would be now if the Supreme Court had not elected Bush. It certainly couldn't be any worse than we are now.
Letter from the Gulf Coast Carbon Center
I received this letter from Susan Hovarka of the Gulf Coast Carbon Center at the University of Texas, which is reproduced in its entirety.
Our University of Texas monitoring experiment that you blogged about last year has started collecting data at Cranfield oil field 10 miles east of Natchez on highway 84. Let me update you on what is happening as it is important that local people know before press releases go out. I will tell you first about what Denbury is doing, then the reason for our experiment, then what we found out so far, and then what you can do about it, if you want to become more involved.
What Denbury is doing
Cranfield oilfield was developed by The California Company (now Chevron) in 1945, and production of oil and gas from the deep zones (Tuscaloosa Formation) stopped in 1965 when the field “watered out” meaning too much water, not enough oil was being produced. Some production of gas from shallower zones (Wilcox Formation) continues today, as well as aggregate mining, farming, and timber cutting. Denbury Resources International has been working for about 10 years to bring this field back to production, as they have done with other Mississippi oil fields ( for example Brookhaven, Little Creek, Mallalieu, Soso). The technique that they use is to produce naturally occurring CO2 from Jackson Dome, Mississippi and ship it as a compressed liquid by pipeline to new or retrofit injection wells in oilfields. The CO2 goes down tubing in wells and is pushed into the oil-bearing formation. There it mixes with the oil, causing it to swell and become less viscous, and pushes the CO2-oil mixture toward retrofit production wells, where the oil+CO2+water will be lifted to the surface. The fluids are then separated: the oil to market, the salt water back underground, and the CO2 recycled to injectors to move more oil. The process is called CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and it works; fields in west Texas have been sustained for 35 years. Because of CO2 EOR, Mississippi is the only state in the US where oil production has recently increased. The limit on CO2 EOR is availability of CO2, only a few places (Colorado, Wyoming, Arizona, New Mexico, Mississippi) have had the geologic history to have significant natural CO2 deposits.
The reason for our test
We now know that emission of large volumes of CO2 produced by combustion of fossil fuels is perturbing climate. All the options are hotly debated right now – costs and environment, economics inside the US and globally. How fast and at what cost can we bring on alternatives to fossil fuel, and how do we get from here to there? One of the many ways to reduce climate impact is to capture the CO2 at point emitters (power plants and other large heater and refiners), and inject it back underground, a process called carbon capture and storage or sequestration (CCS). CCS is usually described as a bridging technology, something at could be started quickly at large volumes, it would lets us continue to use fossil fuel power plants as part of the US energy mix but with decreased environmental damage. Environmentalists are divided on the value of CCS. Environmental Defense and Natural Resources Defense Council support CCS as one of the technologies to be considered because it could be started relatively quickly (5 years) and at large scale, they favor market-drive for changes, and they see evidence that makes them think that CCS should be effective and safe. Some environmental organizations, for example Green Peace, are opposed to further consideration of CCS; they prefer to get off fossil fuels as fast as possible, making up the energy losses with conservation and efficiency and more aggressive deployment of wind and solar, and are concerned about the safety of CCS.
Our project is to provide one small but important data set to inform this debate – is large volume injection of CO2 effective in reducing emissions and safe? Large amounts of CO2 has been safely injected in Scurry County TX for 35 years, as well as at about 80 other EOR fields, so we feel quite confident that the Cranfield injection will be safe for people living nearby, and Mississippi State agencies charged with oversight evidently agree because they have permitted the activities. However, before anyone commits to even larger scale more widespread injection, we have an opportunity to make highly precise measurements – is this quality of the storage not only safe but high enough quality to benefit the environment? If this process was used very widely, what would be the risk to water? How do we best select, monitor and test these sites to see they are performing correctly? This test is one of about 10 underway world wide – Frio test in Dayton Texas was our last test, also underway or complete are in Gaylord Michigan, Wabash County, Illinois, Simon/Pump Canyon New Mexico, SACROC in Scurry County TX, Zama in Alberta Canada, Weyburn Saskatchewan, Canada, Nagaoka, Japan, Siepner, in the North Sea, InSalah, Algeria. Ketzin, Germany, Otway, Australia; more are planned. *
This weeks discoveries
Our first experiment at Cranfield is to determine if any CO2 leaks upward. The possible leakage pathways would be flaws in the engineering of any of the many old wells. To study this, we designed a research well, a retrofit of an old well that that been plugged and abandoned. We put one pressure gage at 10226 feet below surface, in the injection zone, and packed off the well above this. As the CO2 flood started about 10 days ago, we saw expected changes in pressure right away, which have now increased by about 100psi (bike tire inflation pressure). We also perforated the well at 9860 feet, and hung a gage to sample pressure in thin sheet of sandstone at this depth. If pressure increases at this 9860 “monitoring sandstone” layer, it suggests that water or CO2 are starting to leak upward, sort of a trip-wire to monitoring system. We sample the read-out and ship out the data to the operator and us in Austin every 10 minutes.. We can measure pressure changes to hundredths of a psi. So far, no pressure increase on the upper gage, so CO2 is staying where it should in this part of the field It looks like those guys who built those wells in 1945 did OK. I know some of them are retired in the Natchez area, so congratulations to them on a job well done. We will keep observing as long as our monitoring system works. If we see changes, we have several tools to test what is going on, which would give an opportunity to repair any wells that are not tight. We are also testing this data working with researchers at Stanford to see how reliable this system is, and if it could help assure the safety of a big injection. This is a world’s first test of this system.
Our collaborators at Ol’ Miss and Mississippi State have started a program to monitor water quality. As long as no fluids cross our “trip wire” we do not expect to see any change in ground water or surface gases caused by CO2 injection. So part of the research will be to assess what leakage could do to groundwater, if it should happen. Water from many areas with naturally high CO2 is sold as drinking water (Perrier) , but is possible that damage such as mineralization or salinization could occur at some site. Our research program will help determine the realistic risk of damage over 100’s of years, as well as test to make sure that damage is not occurring at Cranfield while we are monitoring.
Public Involvement
The decisions on the choices to reduce greenhouse emissions in the US lie with voters and energy consumers. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was charged by Congress in 1974 to oversee all injection by the Safe Drinking Water Act, Underground Injection Control program. EPA hass just released for 120 day public comment draft rules for CO2 injection for storage, so this in an opportunity for individuals and organizations to be involved in water protection and by connection to CCS. Details are at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/pdfs/prefr_uic_co2rule.pdf Both our states (Texas and Mississippi) have primacy in enforcing these federal laws; we develop state rules that are at least as strict as the federal ones. So we will get a second review of these rules during state processes.
Our project has an obligation to provide education; if you or your readers would like more information, we would be pleased to provide it. In our last experiment in Dayton, TX I was invited by the Rotary Club to speak at their lunch meeting. If you our your readers know of a church group, civic club, school or other setting that would be interested in hosting a forum for more information, questions, and debate related to these topics, please let me know, we could work to set something up.
* you may note that nearly all these first tests are somehow related to oil and gas, which seems suspect. Let me explain that they this is because of relatively low budgets, it has been necessary to save money by piggy-backing tests on other subsurface operations, so that researchers do not have to drill many new wells, put in roads etc and have money for research. Also, the possibility of increased availability of CO2 is of very significant interest to oil producers, it is their best hope of increasing domestic oil production, so they are in favor, as are parts of the coal lobby e.g .“clean coal”. However, the people who need to make the big decisions are energy consumers, these special interests should not drive the show.. The first test I can think of with no oil connection at all will be in Southern Company’s Plant Daniel, in Jackson County Mississippi. A big one is also planned at Decatur, Illinois, at ADM’s new ethanol plant.
I myself am a water quality researcher, I am concerned that climate change is a big risk to water and would like to make sure that any mitigations for climate change protect water. (Please consider me a possible environmental ally although a an adopted Texan and a consider-all-options pragmatist).
Susan D Hovorka, Gulf Coast Carbon Center
Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geoscience
The University of Texas at Austin
susan.hovorka@beg.utexas.edu http://www.gulfcoastcarbon.org/
Office 512.471.4863
Our University of Texas monitoring experiment that you blogged about last year has started collecting data at Cranfield oil field 10 miles east of Natchez on highway 84. Let me update you on what is happening as it is important that local people know before press releases go out. I will tell you first about what Denbury is doing, then the reason for our experiment, then what we found out so far, and then what you can do about it, if you want to become more involved.
What Denbury is doing
Cranfield oilfield was developed by The California Company (now Chevron) in 1945, and production of oil and gas from the deep zones (Tuscaloosa Formation) stopped in 1965 when the field “watered out” meaning too much water, not enough oil was being produced. Some production of gas from shallower zones (Wilcox Formation) continues today, as well as aggregate mining, farming, and timber cutting. Denbury Resources International has been working for about 10 years to bring this field back to production, as they have done with other Mississippi oil fields ( for example Brookhaven, Little Creek, Mallalieu, Soso). The technique that they use is to produce naturally occurring CO2 from Jackson Dome, Mississippi and ship it as a compressed liquid by pipeline to new or retrofit injection wells in oilfields. The CO2 goes down tubing in wells and is pushed into the oil-bearing formation. There it mixes with the oil, causing it to swell and become less viscous, and pushes the CO2-oil mixture toward retrofit production wells, where the oil+CO2+water will be lifted to the surface. The fluids are then separated: the oil to market, the salt water back underground, and the CO2 recycled to injectors to move more oil. The process is called CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and it works; fields in west Texas have been sustained for 35 years. Because of CO2 EOR, Mississippi is the only state in the US where oil production has recently increased. The limit on CO2 EOR is availability of CO2, only a few places (Colorado, Wyoming, Arizona, New Mexico, Mississippi) have had the geologic history to have significant natural CO2 deposits.
The reason for our test
We now know that emission of large volumes of CO2 produced by combustion of fossil fuels is perturbing climate. All the options are hotly debated right now – costs and environment, economics inside the US and globally. How fast and at what cost can we bring on alternatives to fossil fuel, and how do we get from here to there? One of the many ways to reduce climate impact is to capture the CO2 at point emitters (power plants and other large heater and refiners), and inject it back underground, a process called carbon capture and storage or sequestration (CCS). CCS is usually described as a bridging technology, something at could be started quickly at large volumes, it would lets us continue to use fossil fuel power plants as part of the US energy mix but with decreased environmental damage. Environmentalists are divided on the value of CCS. Environmental Defense and Natural Resources Defense Council support CCS as one of the technologies to be considered because it could be started relatively quickly (5 years) and at large scale, they favor market-drive for changes, and they see evidence that makes them think that CCS should be effective and safe. Some environmental organizations, for example Green Peace, are opposed to further consideration of CCS; they prefer to get off fossil fuels as fast as possible, making up the energy losses with conservation and efficiency and more aggressive deployment of wind and solar, and are concerned about the safety of CCS.
Our project is to provide one small but important data set to inform this debate – is large volume injection of CO2 effective in reducing emissions and safe? Large amounts of CO2 has been safely injected in Scurry County TX for 35 years, as well as at about 80 other EOR fields, so we feel quite confident that the Cranfield injection will be safe for people living nearby, and Mississippi State agencies charged with oversight evidently agree because they have permitted the activities. However, before anyone commits to even larger scale more widespread injection, we have an opportunity to make highly precise measurements – is this quality of the storage not only safe but high enough quality to benefit the environment? If this process was used very widely, what would be the risk to water? How do we best select, monitor and test these sites to see they are performing correctly? This test is one of about 10 underway world wide – Frio test in Dayton Texas was our last test, also underway or complete are in Gaylord Michigan, Wabash County, Illinois, Simon/Pump Canyon New Mexico, SACROC in Scurry County TX, Zama in Alberta Canada, Weyburn Saskatchewan, Canada, Nagaoka, Japan, Siepner, in the North Sea, InSalah, Algeria. Ketzin, Germany, Otway, Australia; more are planned. *
This weeks discoveries
Our first experiment at Cranfield is to determine if any CO2 leaks upward. The possible leakage pathways would be flaws in the engineering of any of the many old wells. To study this, we designed a research well, a retrofit of an old well that that been plugged and abandoned. We put one pressure gage at 10226 feet below surface, in the injection zone, and packed off the well above this. As the CO2 flood started about 10 days ago, we saw expected changes in pressure right away, which have now increased by about 100psi (bike tire inflation pressure). We also perforated the well at 9860 feet, and hung a gage to sample pressure in thin sheet of sandstone at this depth. If pressure increases at this 9860 “monitoring sandstone” layer, it suggests that water or CO2 are starting to leak upward, sort of a trip-wire to monitoring system. We sample the read-out and ship out the data to the operator and us in Austin every 10 minutes.. We can measure pressure changes to hundredths of a psi. So far, no pressure increase on the upper gage, so CO2 is staying where it should in this part of the field It looks like those guys who built those wells in 1945 did OK. I know some of them are retired in the Natchez area, so congratulations to them on a job well done. We will keep observing as long as our monitoring system works. If we see changes, we have several tools to test what is going on, which would give an opportunity to repair any wells that are not tight. We are also testing this data working with researchers at Stanford to see how reliable this system is, and if it could help assure the safety of a big injection. This is a world’s first test of this system.
Our collaborators at Ol’ Miss and Mississippi State have started a program to monitor water quality. As long as no fluids cross our “trip wire” we do not expect to see any change in ground water or surface gases caused by CO2 injection. So part of the research will be to assess what leakage could do to groundwater, if it should happen. Water from many areas with naturally high CO2 is sold as drinking water (Perrier) , but is possible that damage such as mineralization or salinization could occur at some site. Our research program will help determine the realistic risk of damage over 100’s of years, as well as test to make sure that damage is not occurring at Cranfield while we are monitoring.
Public Involvement
The decisions on the choices to reduce greenhouse emissions in the US lie with voters and energy consumers. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was charged by Congress in 1974 to oversee all injection by the Safe Drinking Water Act, Underground Injection Control program. EPA hass just released for 120 day public comment draft rules for CO2 injection for storage, so this in an opportunity for individuals and organizations to be involved in water protection and by connection to CCS. Details are at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/pdfs/prefr_uic_co2rule.pdf Both our states (Texas and Mississippi) have primacy in enforcing these federal laws; we develop state rules that are at least as strict as the federal ones. So we will get a second review of these rules during state processes.
Our project has an obligation to provide education; if you or your readers would like more information, we would be pleased to provide it. In our last experiment in Dayton, TX I was invited by the Rotary Club to speak at their lunch meeting. If you our your readers know of a church group, civic club, school or other setting that would be interested in hosting a forum for more information, questions, and debate related to these topics, please let me know, we could work to set something up.
* you may note that nearly all these first tests are somehow related to oil and gas, which seems suspect. Let me explain that they this is because of relatively low budgets, it has been necessary to save money by piggy-backing tests on other subsurface operations, so that researchers do not have to drill many new wells, put in roads etc and have money for research. Also, the possibility of increased availability of CO2 is of very significant interest to oil producers, it is their best hope of increasing domestic oil production, so they are in favor, as are parts of the coal lobby e.g .“clean coal”. However, the people who need to make the big decisions are energy consumers, these special interests should not drive the show.. The first test I can think of with no oil connection at all will be in Southern Company’s Plant Daniel, in Jackson County Mississippi. A big one is also planned at Decatur, Illinois, at ADM’s new ethanol plant.
I myself am a water quality researcher, I am concerned that climate change is a big risk to water and would like to make sure that any mitigations for climate change protect water. (Please consider me a possible environmental ally although a an adopted Texan and a consider-all-options pragmatist).
Susan D Hovorka, Gulf Coast Carbon Center
Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geoscience
The University of Texas at Austin
susan.hovorka@beg.utexas.edu http://www.gulfcoastcarbon.org/
Office 512.471.4863
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Will the Democratic Convention Be Boring?
Please help send the Natchez Blog to Denver by making a donation!
In recent memory, political conventions have been sort of like one long commercial for their candidate - not exactly fascinating for the run of the mill voter. However, this year might be different at the Democratic Convention in Denver next month. (To understand the following, you might want read Convention 101.)
Why? Well, there's this little issue of what to do about Hillary.
This was the closest, longest, and most expensive primary in Democratic Party history. After the primaries were over, Obama had the most delegates but not enough to win, until all the superdelegates piled on at the end. (Superdelegates are not known for their political bravery, so many waited until they knew who the winner would be.)
So you might assume both Obama and Clinton would be nominated at the Convention, there would be a lot of speeches and cheering crowds, and then Obama would win. After all, that's what the rules say is supposed to happen. But you would be wrong.
It seems that the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) have a problem with that scenario. First of all, there is the outside possibility that some of the fickle superdelegates might change their minds - especially since Obama has been making some folks mad with his sudden right turn on many policy issues - and Clinton might win. OMG! That would be a disaster!
But there are more likely scenarios that cause the Obama camp anxiety. Clinton's nomination could create tension and disrupt Party Unity, and Obama would be deprived of his TV images of cheering Democrats all united behind him.
The impassioned response by the Hillary supporters (who are still enthusiastic) might rival that of the response to Obama, since many of his supporters have lost their enthusiasm after his flip flops. That would certainly be embarrassing!
The roll call, with its divergent state speeches, would take away from the Obama unity message. At the very least, it would be time consuming and possibly deprive the Democrats of their scripted prime time program.
The DNC totally controls the convention, and the Obama campaign totally controls the DNC, which packed up and moved into Obama headquarters in Chicago. So you would think they could just tell Hillary to go shove it.
One small problem with that plan. Almost half the delegates in that Convention belong to Hillary, and they are not going to take kindly to their candidate being snubbed. This could conceivably be the worst outcome. (You know: "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned!" - Shakespeare)
You've got to feel sorry for poor Obama - he's between a rock and a hard place. Of course, he could solve the whole dilemma by picking Hillary as his Vice President. Then the Democrats would have their unity, and everyone would live happily ever after - and go on to a landslide win in November.
But all the talking heads say that won't happen.
So Obama's only solution is to sweet talk Clinton into voluntarily taking her name out of nomination in return for something. In 1988, the Democrats devoted a whole night of the Convention to Jesse Jackson, in return for keeping him off the ballot - and he didn't even come close in his delegate count. Jackson totally outshone mild mannered Michael Dukakis, who went on to ignominious defeat.
The negotiations between the Obama and Clinton camps are ongoing, with no solution so far.
To test the lay of the land, I polled the Mississippi Delegation to the Democratic Convention and asked them: "Do you think Hillary Clinton should be nominated at the Convention with speeches and a roll call vote? " Although the response was not overwhelming, it was predictable and consistent. Clinton delegates said yes and Obama said no. Here are two typical responses:
Lavaree Jones, Obama delegate from Jackson: "NO!!!! Absolutely not. It is over for Hillary for this round. She should bow out gracefully. There is something sick about hanging on like this and it does not sit well for someone seeking leadership at this high level."
Kelly Jacobs, Clinton delegate from Hernando: "Obama has not won the NOMINATION until all of the Superdelegates cast their votes, and they can change their minds. Hillary won the popular vote and as her delegate I want to vote for her!"
So, yes the Democratic Convention could get very interesting. And we'll be bringing it to you live.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Can Obama Carry Mississippi?
The answer is a definite maybe.
Obama is certainly counting on taking some southern states. Last August in New Hampshire, Obama said:
To make up for some Democratic states Obama may lose, his campaign manager says they're targeting Virginia and Georgia, and keeping an eye on Mississippi and Louisiana, not to mention North Carolina. Most of the nonpartisan experts say he has a legitimate shot at Virginia (which has really become a mid Atlantic state and not a Southern state) but don't give him much of a shot at the rest.
But we know Mississippi. Does Obama have a shot? We do have the highest percentage of African Americans of any state - although Obama exaggerated slightly. It's 37%, according to the US Census Bureau. What does Obama mean when he says we vote 25% African American? Does he mean only 25% of the voters are African American? If so, that is not the case. In Presidential Elections, percentage turn out of black and white voters is about equal, according to a Newsweek interview with Dr David Bositis, one of the nation's leading scholars of black electoral politics, who says Mississippi has quite good black turnout. Another scholar of black voting patterns, Dr Thomas Schaller, in a column in the New York Times, also talked about the myth of low black turnout.
But Obama claims he's going to increase black turnout by 30%. Not going to happen. Black turnout in 2004 was 57%. Increasing that by 30% would be 74%. The only place with that kind of turnout is in all white states way up north. Most blacks are in the South, which has the most restrictive voting laws in the country, and therefore the lowest turnouts. It'll go up some, but not by 30%.
Not only that, but Dr Bositis, Dr Schaller, and others point out that any efforts to increase black turnout will also likely result in equal increases in white turnout. A good example is when the 1965 Voting Rights Act passed. Blacks registered to vote and actually voted in record numbers. But so did whites. Plus, don't forget there will be a corresponding effort to suppress black turnout.
So turnout is not the answer.
Voting in Mississippi is very racially polarized. In 2004, 85-90% of the black vote (37%) was Democratic and 80-85% of the white vote (63%) was Republican. If this pattern holds for white voters, not even 100% of the black vote will be enough for Obama to win. It seems to me, if Obama is going to win Mississippi, he's got to go after that white vote. So how is he doing with that?
Not too bad. Right now, polls show Obama trailing McCain by only 6 percentage points. But compare those results with those of Democrat Ronnie Musgrove versus Republican Roger Wicker for the US Senate, which show a statistical dead heat. Musgrove is getting about the same black vote as Obama, but he's doing much better with the white vote. So should Obama take lessons from Musgrove?
Obviously not. If Obama were to suddenly start taking the same conservative positions as Musgrove, Democratic voters in other parts of the country would desert him in droves - and Hillary Clinton would be the upset nominee at the Democratic Convention. (: Of course, Obama is not going to do that.
Obama is definitely smart and runs an extremely good campaign, so there is no way he is going to waste much time or effort in Mississippi. He has more money than he knows what to do with, so he'll probably throw some our way just to keep McCain on his toes, but don't hold your breath waiting for Mississippi to become a battleground state.
That little Obama speech I quoted at the beginning? Well, it worked pretty good in the primaries up north where no one has a clue about Mississippi.
Obama is certainly counting on taking some southern states. Last August in New Hampshire, Obama said:
"I'm probably the only candidate who, having won the nomination, can actually redraw the political map. I'll give you one specific example: Mississippi is 40% African American, but it votes 25% African American. If we just got the African Americans in Mississippi to vote their percentage, Mississippi is suddenly a Democratic state . . . And I guarantee you African-American turnout, if I'm the nominee, goes up 30% around the country, minimum."
To make up for some Democratic states Obama may lose, his campaign manager says they're targeting Virginia and Georgia, and keeping an eye on Mississippi and Louisiana, not to mention North Carolina. Most of the nonpartisan experts say he has a legitimate shot at Virginia (which has really become a mid Atlantic state and not a Southern state) but don't give him much of a shot at the rest.
But we know Mississippi. Does Obama have a shot? We do have the highest percentage of African Americans of any state - although Obama exaggerated slightly. It's 37%, according to the US Census Bureau. What does Obama mean when he says we vote 25% African American? Does he mean only 25% of the voters are African American? If so, that is not the case. In Presidential Elections, percentage turn out of black and white voters is about equal, according to a Newsweek interview with Dr David Bositis, one of the nation's leading scholars of black electoral politics, who says Mississippi has quite good black turnout. Another scholar of black voting patterns, Dr Thomas Schaller, in a column in the New York Times, also talked about the myth of low black turnout.
But Obama claims he's going to increase black turnout by 30%. Not going to happen. Black turnout in 2004 was 57%. Increasing that by 30% would be 74%. The only place with that kind of turnout is in all white states way up north. Most blacks are in the South, which has the most restrictive voting laws in the country, and therefore the lowest turnouts. It'll go up some, but not by 30%.
Not only that, but Dr Bositis, Dr Schaller, and others point out that any efforts to increase black turnout will also likely result in equal increases in white turnout. A good example is when the 1965 Voting Rights Act passed. Blacks registered to vote and actually voted in record numbers. But so did whites. Plus, don't forget there will be a corresponding effort to suppress black turnout.
So turnout is not the answer.
Voting in Mississippi is very racially polarized. In 2004, 85-90% of the black vote (37%) was Democratic and 80-85% of the white vote (63%) was Republican. If this pattern holds for white voters, not even 100% of the black vote will be enough for Obama to win. It seems to me, if Obama is going to win Mississippi, he's got to go after that white vote. So how is he doing with that?
Not too bad. Right now, polls show Obama trailing McCain by only 6 percentage points. But compare those results with those of Democrat Ronnie Musgrove versus Republican Roger Wicker for the US Senate, which show a statistical dead heat. Musgrove is getting about the same black vote as Obama, but he's doing much better with the white vote. So should Obama take lessons from Musgrove?
Obviously not. If Obama were to suddenly start taking the same conservative positions as Musgrove, Democratic voters in other parts of the country would desert him in droves - and Hillary Clinton would be the upset nominee at the Democratic Convention. (: Of course, Obama is not going to do that.
Obama is definitely smart and runs an extremely good campaign, so there is no way he is going to waste much time or effort in Mississippi. He has more money than he knows what to do with, so he'll probably throw some our way just to keep McCain on his toes, but don't hold your breath waiting for Mississippi to become a battleground state.
That little Obama speech I quoted at the beginning? Well, it worked pretty good in the primaries up north where no one has a clue about Mississippi.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Convention 101
In preparation for Denver, I have been learning about the Convention itself. Between now and August, I will be sharing with you some of what I've learned.
The 45th National Democratic Convention will be in Denver August 25 - 28. Over 4000 delegates will attend the Convention from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and Democrats Abroad.
Until 1824, our Presidential nominees were determined by party caucuses of the US Congress. Then state legislatures and conventions were tried for a while. The first Democratic national nominating convention, the brainchild of President Andrew Jackson, was held in 1832 in Baltimore, and it required a 2/3 vote of those present. This rule resulted in many endless Conventions as all sorts of deals were made in order to get that magic two thirds. Over a hundred years later, it was finally replaced with an absolute majority in 1936, and only one convention (1952) has gone beyond one ballot since then.
The delegations to these conventions were primarily decided at state caucuses dominated by the powers that be. The sixties brought much turbulence to the Democratic Convention. In 1964, there was the famous challenge by the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (which included black voters) to replace the all white delegation selected by the Mississippi Democratic Party. They were unsuccessful, but they cast a national spotlight on discriminatory voting laws, and their actions led to the passage of the 1965 National Voting Rights Act.
Then in 1968, the nominee (Hubert Humphrey) that was selected by the Party establishment had not participated in a single primary. The resulting riots and protests by voters who felt disenfranchised by the Convention led eventually to major reforms in delegate selection. These reforms increased the use of primaries in the delegate selection to allow for a more democratic process and led to the bizarre 1972 Convention which selected a nominee (George McGovern) who only won one state in the General Election.
The Democratic Party has been working ever since to be sure that something like 1972 never happened again. One result of the 1972 reforms was that the Democratic political leaders of each state were rarely at the Convention, partially because they were reluctant to subject themselves to an election that gained them nothing and could cost them their political career. So in 1984, the Democratic Party created the Superdelegates to bring elected officials and Party leaders back to the convention. In addition, these delegates were not required to be pledged to any presidential candidate. Since they constituted almost 20% of the entire convention, they could play a significant role in preventing a fringe candidate from getting the nomination.
The 45th National Democratic Convention will be in Denver August 25 - 28. Over 4000 delegates will attend the Convention from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and Democrats Abroad.
Some History
Until 1824, our Presidential nominees were determined by party caucuses of the US Congress. Then state legislatures and conventions were tried for a while. The first Democratic national nominating convention, the brainchild of President Andrew Jackson, was held in 1832 in Baltimore, and it required a 2/3 vote of those present. This rule resulted in many endless Conventions as all sorts of deals were made in order to get that magic two thirds. Over a hundred years later, it was finally replaced with an absolute majority in 1936, and only one convention (1952) has gone beyond one ballot since then.
The delegations to these conventions were primarily decided at state caucuses dominated by the powers that be. The sixties brought much turbulence to the Democratic Convention. In 1964, there was the famous challenge by the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (which included black voters) to replace the all white delegation selected by the Mississippi Democratic Party. They were unsuccessful, but they cast a national spotlight on discriminatory voting laws, and their actions led to the passage of the 1965 National Voting Rights Act.
Then in 1968, the nominee (Hubert Humphrey) that was selected by the Party establishment had not participated in a single primary. The resulting riots and protests by voters who felt disenfranchised by the Convention led eventually to major reforms in delegate selection. These reforms increased the use of primaries in the delegate selection to allow for a more democratic process and led to the bizarre 1972 Convention which selected a nominee (George McGovern) who only won one state in the General Election.
The Democratic Party has been working ever since to be sure that something like 1972 never happened again. One result of the 1972 reforms was that the Democratic political leaders of each state were rarely at the Convention, partially because they were reluctant to subject themselves to an election that gained them nothing and could cost them their political career. So in 1984, the Democratic Party created the Superdelegates to bring elected officials and Party leaders back to the convention. In addition, these delegates were not required to be pledged to any presidential candidate. Since they constituted almost 20% of the entire convention, they could play a significant role in preventing a fringe candidate from getting the nomination.
Mississippi Delegation
This brings us to the 2008 Convention. In Mississippi, we have eight unpledged Superdelegates, but some have announced their support for a candidate.
- Four qualify for Superdelegates because they serve on the National Democratic Executive Committee: Carnelia Fondren of Oxford, Johnnie Patton of Jackson, Wayne Dowdy of McComb, and Everett Sanders of Natchez. All have announced support for Obama.
- Three qualify because they're members of Congress: Travis Childers (First Congressional District), Bennie Thompson (Second Congressional District and Obama supporter), and Gene Taylor (Fourth Congressional District).
- We do not have a Democratic Governor or US Senator or what are called Distinguished Party Leaders (basically former Presidents, Vice Presidents, Minority or Majority leaders, or Party Chairs) any of whom would qualify for Superdelegates.
- We are also allocated one Add On Delegate, Attorney General Jim Hood, who was chosen at the State Convention because he is the only Democrat elected statewide.
We have thirty six pledged delegates (22 Obama and 14 Clinton). Twenty two were elected at the Congressional District Conventions and the rest were elected at the State Convention. We also have six alternates (4 Obama and 2 Clinton) who serve if something happens to a delegate. The proportion of Obama to Clinton delegates was determined by the results of the March Primary.
The Convention has three standing committees: Credentials, Rules, and Platform, and Mississippi has one person on each.
The Mississippi Delegation has an equal number of males and females, as required by party rules. About two thirds of the delegation are black, and one third is white. This is probably a good reflection of the makeup of the State Party.
Class is dismissed for now!
Saturday, June 07, 2008
Live From the MS State Convention II
Attorney General Hood was elected as the unpledged delegate to the National Convention. Now they're electing the 4 Pledged Party Leader and Elected Official (PLEO) delegates - 3 for Obama and 1 for Clinton. Senator David Jordan, Representative Angela Cockerham, and former Governor Ray Mabus were elected as Obama PLEO delegates. Former Senator and former party chair Gloria Robinson was elected as the Clinton PLEO delegate.
The state delegates then adopted a party platform without discussion. One major plank was increasing the cigarette tax (one of the lowest in the country) and decreasing the tax on food (one of the highest in the country) - and is in stark contrast to the Republican policy.
In the Democratic party, rules require equal numbers of male and female delegates, but all other goals for diversity are recommended not required. At this point, there are more male delegates than female. So the election of delegates today has to correct the inbalance. There was some delay in figuring the numbers, partly because Mississippi increased their allocated number of delegates when Travis Childers was elected.
Everyone divided into the Obama caucus and the Clinton caucus to vote for their delegates. Unfortunately, both caucuses met in different ends of the same large room. The Obama caucus got the microphone, and Clinton caucus was reduced to shouting to make themselves heard. Just another example of the discrimination the Clinton campaign has suffered. People in the Clinton caucus were not happy, but the Obama caucus didn't seem to care.
Next were the Congressional District caucuses, where delegates elected members of the State Executive Committee, including Audrey Seale from Adams County. Presidential electors were also elected, including Phillip West of Natchez.
Everyone reconvened and voted for Natchez attorney Everett Sanders for the National Committeeman for Mississippi overwhelmingly. There were several candidates for National Committeewoman, but the incumbent Johnnie Patton was reelected in a close vote. Finally, two at large Presidential electors were elected.
The Mississippi delegation met and electged Congressman Bennie Thompson as Chair and Committee appointments were announced. Then the Convention was adjourned.
It was an interesting and long day - and good practice for Denver. All the Mississippi Delegates have now been elected, and I should be receiving a complete list shortly.
Click here for the Clarion Ledger's take on the Convention.
The state delegates then adopted a party platform without discussion. One major plank was increasing the cigarette tax (one of the lowest in the country) and decreasing the tax on food (one of the highest in the country) - and is in stark contrast to the Republican policy.
In the Democratic party, rules require equal numbers of male and female delegates, but all other goals for diversity are recommended not required. At this point, there are more male delegates than female. So the election of delegates today has to correct the inbalance. There was some delay in figuring the numbers, partly because Mississippi increased their allocated number of delegates when Travis Childers was elected.
Everyone divided into the Obama caucus and the Clinton caucus to vote for their delegates. Unfortunately, both caucuses met in different ends of the same large room. The Obama caucus got the microphone, and Clinton caucus was reduced to shouting to make themselves heard. Just another example of the discrimination the Clinton campaign has suffered. People in the Clinton caucus were not happy, but the Obama caucus didn't seem to care.
Next were the Congressional District caucuses, where delegates elected members of the State Executive Committee, including Audrey Seale from Adams County. Presidential electors were also elected, including Phillip West of Natchez.
Everyone reconvened and voted for Natchez attorney Everett Sanders for the National Committeeman for Mississippi overwhelmingly. There were several candidates for National Committeewoman, but the incumbent Johnnie Patton was reelected in a close vote. Finally, two at large Presidential electors were elected.
The Mississippi delegation met and electged Congressman Bennie Thompson as Chair and Committee appointments were announced. Then the Convention was adjourned.
It was an interesting and long day - and good practice for Denver. All the Mississippi Delegates have now been elected, and I should be receiving a complete list shortly.
Click here for the Clarion Ledger's take on the Convention.
Live From the MS State Convention
Here we are at the Williams Athletic Center at Jackson State University attending the Mississippi State Democratic Convention. There are a lot of people here - looking to be a cross section of the population of the state.
Adams county (because it starts with an A) has a front row seat. We're represented by Everett Sanders, an Obama superdelegate, Dr Bennie Wright, who's running as an at large Obama delegate, Mayor Phillip West who's running as an elector, and several others, like me, who aren't running for anything.
We were just treated to a presentation of colors by a contingent of the Mississippi National Guard and a spine tingling rendition of the Star Spangled Banner - bet the Republicans can't find a singer like that!
Now we're listening to the obligatory speeches from those running for office, but they are keeping them brief. Speaking now is Ronnie Musgrove, who is running for US Senate. He's not one of my favorites, but he's far better than his Republican opponent, and he might get elected this year with Obama on the ticket.
Next up is Bennie Thompson, Second District Congressman and Chair of the Homeland Security in the US Congress. Having already been elected, he spoke for Obama - and this crowd loves Obama. The people here are the grassroots activists,and they are excited - they smell a Democratic victory in Mississippi for the first time in years and years.
Here comes the hero of this party - Travis Childers, who was just elected to the US Congress in a vastly Republican district. He got a rousing reception. He motivated the crowd to be proud to be Mississippi Democrats and urged them to "rise again." As he did in his election, he deftly combined Bible verses with economic populism.
The next speaker is undoubtedly the best orator - Erik Fleming has the uneviable job of running against US Thad Cochran. He had the crowd chanting "This is our moment - this is our time".
Attorney General Jim Hood, the only statewide Democrat, has been coming to these conventions since he was kid and his father brought him. He was followed by Joel Gill, who is the Democratic nominee for the Third Congressional District, which includes Natchez - not much to write home about.
That's about it for political speeches.
Adams county (because it starts with an A) has a front row seat. We're represented by Everett Sanders, an Obama superdelegate, Dr Bennie Wright, who's running as an at large Obama delegate, Mayor Phillip West who's running as an elector, and several others, like me, who aren't running for anything.
We were just treated to a presentation of colors by a contingent of the Mississippi National Guard and a spine tingling rendition of the Star Spangled Banner - bet the Republicans can't find a singer like that!
Now we're listening to the obligatory speeches from those running for office, but they are keeping them brief. Speaking now is Ronnie Musgrove, who is running for US Senate. He's not one of my favorites, but he's far better than his Republican opponent, and he might get elected this year with Obama on the ticket.
Next up is Bennie Thompson, Second District Congressman and Chair of the Homeland Security in the US Congress. Having already been elected, he spoke for Obama - and this crowd loves Obama. The people here are the grassroots activists,and they are excited - they smell a Democratic victory in Mississippi for the first time in years and years.
Here comes the hero of this party - Travis Childers, who was just elected to the US Congress in a vastly Republican district. He got a rousing reception. He motivated the crowd to be proud to be Mississippi Democrats and urged them to "rise again." As he did in his election, he deftly combined Bible verses with economic populism.
The next speaker is undoubtedly the best orator - Erik Fleming has the uneviable job of running against US Thad Cochran. He had the crowd chanting "This is our moment - this is our time".
Attorney General Jim Hood, the only statewide Democrat, has been coming to these conventions since he was kid and his father brought him. He was followed by Joel Gill, who is the Democratic nominee for the Third Congressional District, which includes Natchez - not much to write home about.
That's about it for political speeches.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Natchez Opts for the Status Quo
Yesterday the voters of Natchez had an opportunity for fresh, exciting, new government, but it may have been too scary. Instead voters chose the same ol' same ol'.
I still think City government will be better than it was. We do have three new aldermen, and maybe this election will teach those that were reelected a lesson or two. Although many of my friends think I was too easy on Middleton in my article, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for now.
There are several interesting pieces of information that have come out after the election. However, I'm tired of this election, and I'll leave that to the commenters to discuss.
I want to conclude this election with a positive note by telling you how proud I was to support Gwen Ball for Alderwoman Ward 3. She was an even better candidate that I imagined.
First of all, she worked incredibly hard and was motivated totally by her deep caring for the citizens of Natchez. In order to be totally free from any special interests, she funded her campaign herself, except for unsolicited donations. As she went door to door to talk to voters, it was amazing how many people connected with her. Regardless of where they lived, what their economic status was, their age, race, or gender, they trusted her to take care of them, their concerns, and their city.
In fact, I think the only mistake her campaign made was she started too late. Although she knocked on practically every door in her ward, many were not home. She did try to call those she missed, but it's not the same as a personal visit, and it's hard to get people on the phone. If she had started earlier, she could have met with more voters, and I'm convinced she would have won.
I'm very sad that Natchez will not have the benefit of her caring, courage, and wisdom. She truly would have made a difference.
I still think City government will be better than it was. We do have three new aldermen, and maybe this election will teach those that were reelected a lesson or two. Although many of my friends think I was too easy on Middleton in my article, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for now.
There are several interesting pieces of information that have come out after the election. However, I'm tired of this election, and I'll leave that to the commenters to discuss.
I want to conclude this election with a positive note by telling you how proud I was to support Gwen Ball for Alderwoman Ward 3. She was an even better candidate that I imagined.
First of all, she worked incredibly hard and was motivated totally by her deep caring for the citizens of Natchez. In order to be totally free from any special interests, she funded her campaign herself, except for unsolicited donations. As she went door to door to talk to voters, it was amazing how many people connected with her. Regardless of where they lived, what their economic status was, their age, race, or gender, they trusted her to take care of them, their concerns, and their city.
In fact, I think the only mistake her campaign made was she started too late. Although she knocked on practically every door in her ward, many were not home. She did try to call those she missed, but it's not the same as a personal visit, and it's hard to get people on the phone. If she had started earlier, she could have met with more voters, and I'm convinced she would have won.
I'm very sad that Natchez will not have the benefit of her caring, courage, and wisdom. She truly would have made a difference.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Gwen Ball Is the Obvious Choice in Ward 3
On Tuesday, June 3, the voters in Ward 3 will choose whether to keep the incumbent Bob Pollard or replace him with the challenger Gwen Ball. To me, the choice is obvious.
Bob Pollard's big claim to fame is that he attended all the meetings of the Board of Aldermen. Well, big whoopy doo! So he's like a bump on the log that never moves? I hate to break it to you, Bob, but voters expect you to DO something while you're there. So what has he actually done?
Bob Pollard's big claim to fame is that he attended all the meetings of the Board of Aldermen. Well, big whoopy doo! So he's like a bump on the log that never moves? I hate to break it to you, Bob, but voters expect you to DO something while you're there. So what has he actually done?
- Served as Phillip West's lapdog by doing everything he asked.
- Sat in on those closed door meetings and took his voting orders like a loyal soldier.
- Sounded like a redneck with his poor grammar while representing the City to outside interests.
- Allowed an illegal pay raise for Aldermen before considering one for police and firefighters.
- Smirked while his constituents were ignored and abused at Board meetings.
- Wined and dined with all the developers and casino operators looking for business in the city.
- Voted for a corrupt condo deal over a fair one far better for the City.
- Supported the illegal destruction of City property.
Does this sound like someone we want representing Ward 3 and the City of Natchez? Not to me.
Now, look at Gwen Ball, his opponent in this race. It's like night and day.
If Gwen is elected, I guarantee you there will be no closed door meetings that do not clearly abide by the law. All we need is one honest Alderperson who is willing to blow the whistle on illegal activity, and it will no longer happen. On that point alone, Gwen should earn your vote and support.
How will Gwen make decisions? Well, unlike her opponent, it won’t be based on who spent the most money entertaining her. She will first and foremost solicit citizen input. And, as she demonstrated countless times in her appearances before the Board, she will do her research to gather FACTS – something totally lacking during the prior administration.
Someone once said to me, “Gwen will be a great public official, because she cares about the ‘little’ people.” Although I might disagree with the term “little people”, the idea expressed is right on target. Pollard will pay attention to you if you’re important or rich, but Gwen will give everyone equal attention.
Gwen is not afraid to tackle tough issues. She demonstrated her courage when, against all odds, she took on the condo developers. You would not believe the abuse she has suffered, but she has never waivered – because she knew she was right. She showed courage again when she agreed to run for Alderwoman, when everyone said she didn’t have a chance.
Even if she doesn’t win, Gwen has already performed a service for Natchez. She was the first candidate to campaign for open government, and now almost all candidates endorse that position (except Pollard, of course). The next Mayor and Board, whoever they are, will operate in a much more open manner and involve the public in their decisions, and you can thank Gwen for that.
However, I think she’ll win. Why? She has worked very hard, knocking on practically every door in her ward and talking to voters. If she missed them at home, she has tried to call them. And do you know what? When voters meet her, they really like her. Her genuineness comes across, and they trust her to represent them fairly.
Please vote for Gwen Ball on Tuesday, June 3.
A vote for Gwen is a vote for Natchez.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Chick Graning's Response
I have given both candidates the opportunity to write a response, and here is Chick's. Comments will not be permitted to this article. Post comments on the Mayoral race to my previous article.In reply to your write up regarding the Mayoral race interviews, I would like to make several comments:
1) Thanks for the kind words about my wife. She is special and loves people--- she would indeed be a full time ambassador for Natchez. Jake's wife, Mitzie, is an outstanding Neonatologist in Jackson. I seriously doubt if she will retire, as he says, if he becomes mayor. Therefore, his time will continue to be divided between Natchez and Jackson as before. Add to that his current business interest here and being a full time mayor will be difficult, if not impossible.
2) If my opponent's experience at dealing with the city's finances for 16 years is seen as a positive in the race, then why are the city's finances in such abysmal shape? Where was my opponent's leadership for all those years? During those same 16 years, I started a commission-only insurance business and built it from zero to retirement. In addition, during this time, I recruited a number of agents, trained them, and made a very successful sales force with them.
3) Apparently I came across in the interview as a " bull in a china shop". I am aggressive, but only where challenges are concerned. This is a good thing! I am a team builder, and my real strengths are communication, compromise, and cooperation. These methods of management are the best and most thoroughly proven way to make progress.
4) My opponent or his campaign manager have begun to "sling a little mud". I refuse to join in that sort of thing, but I WILL answer statements I consider to be unfair or untrue. I will continue to run my campaign just as I will run the city--in an honest, above board, and open manner. The voters of Natchez truly do have two clearly different choices in this mayoral race. I offer a mayor who brings a brand new outlook to the duties and responsibilities of city government, and a work ethic to make good things happen. My opponent brings 16 years of experience in three administrations which have left our budget and our finances in a shambles, our streets un-paved (until the state came to our aid), and large portions of our city, particularly Holiday Apts., Cambridge Heights, and Maryland Heights, are without recreational facilities altogether. My opponent has been in charge of recreation for most, if not all of his 16 years in office. If so, then why are those children still playing in the dirt? Was there no money or no management, or both? Also, I disagree with your assumption that I will be the "historical" mayor and Jake the "growth" mayor. My opponent appears determined to thwart my drive to improve our public school system, most recently in his flyer stating public education is not the mayors job. In ANY community, the road to economic developement (growth!), and the road out of poverty lead directly through the school house! My opponent seems unwilling, or afraid to tackle such a daunting challenge.
5) My opponent is attempting to demean me via innuendo and assumptions,i.e. "lack of experience", "politicical neophyte","--he doesn't understand--", and other politispeak. My answers are based on fact and are a matter of public record.
Once again, please consider that the voters of Natchez will get exactly what they ask for. Vote your concience, but VOTE.
NOTE: No comments allowed to this article. Make comments on the Mayoral Race to the previous article.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Who Should Be Our Mayor?
On Tuesday, June 3, voters will choose between Democrat Jake Middleton and Independent Chick Graning to serve as Mayor of Natchez for the next four years.
I was fortunate to have long, involved conversations with both candidates, and I appreciate their giving me their time. It's too bad that every voter cannot have that opportunity. However, for the first time, voters will have the chance to ask their own questions of the candidates. The Natchez Democrat is giving us the opportunity to question them online on Friday, at 2:30 pm for Graning and 3:30 pm for Middleton. I this is a wonderful service being offered, and I will be curious to see how it goes.
I learned a lot during my conversations. One thing I can predict for sure. Whoever wins the election, Natchez will have a much better administration than in the past four years. Although not obvious at first, voters have a choice between two very different candidates.
Chick will bring a fresh and different point of view to the job. His enthusiasm is obvious, and you feel he will really love his job. He would make meetings of the Mayor and Board of Aldermen more interesting and lively, for which I'd be eternally grateful. You'll be more likely to get a straight answer from Chick, because he hasn't learned "politicospeak" yet. He'll be more courageous in making difficult decisions, because he won't be focused on the effect on his next election. However, Chick's knowledge of how government works is limited, and I worry this might restrict his effectiveness. Contrary to public opinion, government cannot be run like a business - they operate based on very different principles.
Jake is definitely an experienced politician. As such, he is knowledgeable about how the city works, and that is valuable information for a Mayor. This is not knowledge you can gain by reading a book, and it is painful to learn on the job. He will definitely have the edge on effectiveness and efficiency. On the other hand, this knowledge brings a certain cynicism and may restrain creativity.
Chick and Jake have totally different personalities that will effect their leadership style. Just look at their signs: Jake's are quiet and dignified, while Chick's demand your attention. Chick is obviously a better speaker, more charismatic, and he will lead by inspiration. Jake is more methodical, less confrontational, and will lead by developing consensus.
Jake's biggest negative is that he was a part of the previous administration and can be held responsible for its actions. When asked about it, he said he saw no need to fight losing battles, and he picked his fights. This is reflective of his personality traits of avoiding controversy and trying to make everybody happy. I see Chick as a little like a bull in a china shop. He will have no hesitation to charge right into a fight - even if he has to break some dishes. He may plan less and be less careful, but you'll know he tried.
During the past four years, the Board of Aldermen has run amok. The Mayor just let them do whatever they wanted at meetings, rarely intervening. I asked both candidates about this, and they agreed things would be different, although the changes they'll make will reflect their styles. For example, Jake will depend more on rules, and Chick will be more personally involved.
There is a perceived conflict in this town between historic preservation and economic development. This is a false dichotomy, since with proper leadership, these efforts can complement each other, and both candidates see this. However, in a tough choice, I think Jake would side with economic development and Chick with historic preservation. Both candidates have ideas and visions for moving Natchez forward - some creative and some less so. But the public will know about these ideas and will be involved in their implementation. I think they both understand the importance of the community in any project's success.
I admire Chick for focusing on education, because this is a long term priority, with visible results likely to come after he leaves office. I feel more comfortable with Jake when it comes to managing the City's finances. Not only has he managed the finances of a successful business, but he's been dealing with the City's finances for years.
They both have a serious shortcoming - neither is very technologically inclined. This is too bad, since technology could be the future for Natchez, with some leadership. We can only hope they will delegate this responsibility to a competent and creative employee or advisor.
Finally, there's my personal criteria for evaluating male candidates - their wives. Both candidates have married strong, intelligent, professional women, which says a lot to me on their behalf. I don't know Mitzi Middleton well, but I can say that I love Lil Graning - she'll keep City Hall lively and entertaining.
I was fortunate to have long, involved conversations with both candidates, and I appreciate their giving me their time. It's too bad that every voter cannot have that opportunity. However, for the first time, voters will have the chance to ask their own questions of the candidates. The Natchez Democrat is giving us the opportunity to question them online on Friday, at 2:30 pm for Graning and 3:30 pm for Middleton. I this is a wonderful service being offered, and I will be curious to see how it goes.
I learned a lot during my conversations. One thing I can predict for sure. Whoever wins the election, Natchez will have a much better administration than in the past four years. Although not obvious at first, voters have a choice between two very different candidates.
I queried them both about the principles of effective government, about which I wrote a previous article:
- Involve the public
- Act in public
- Obey the law
- Handle our money responsibly
- Manage our government
They both support these principles and agreed to abide by them. One reason for the defeat of our current Mayor is that voters did not see any of these principles at work. Both candidates see the desire for an open, honest, law abiding, efficient, and effective city government.
Each candidate's greatest strength is also his greatest weakness. Chick Graning is not a politician, and Jake Middleton is experienced with city government and politics. Most voters believe not being a politician is an advantage, although I don't always agree - especially in an administrative position.Chick will bring a fresh and different point of view to the job. His enthusiasm is obvious, and you feel he will really love his job. He would make meetings of the Mayor and Board of Aldermen more interesting and lively, for which I'd be eternally grateful. You'll be more likely to get a straight answer from Chick, because he hasn't learned "politicospeak" yet. He'll be more courageous in making difficult decisions, because he won't be focused on the effect on his next election. However, Chick's knowledge of how government works is limited, and I worry this might restrict his effectiveness. Contrary to public opinion, government cannot be run like a business - they operate based on very different principles.
Jake is definitely an experienced politician. As such, he is knowledgeable about how the city works, and that is valuable information for a Mayor. This is not knowledge you can gain by reading a book, and it is painful to learn on the job. He will definitely have the edge on effectiveness and efficiency. On the other hand, this knowledge brings a certain cynicism and may restrain creativity.
Chick and Jake have totally different personalities that will effect their leadership style. Just look at their signs: Jake's are quiet and dignified, while Chick's demand your attention. Chick is obviously a better speaker, more charismatic, and he will lead by inspiration. Jake is more methodical, less confrontational, and will lead by developing consensus.
Jake's biggest negative is that he was a part of the previous administration and can be held responsible for its actions. When asked about it, he said he saw no need to fight losing battles, and he picked his fights. This is reflective of his personality traits of avoiding controversy and trying to make everybody happy. I see Chick as a little like a bull in a china shop. He will have no hesitation to charge right into a fight - even if he has to break some dishes. He may plan less and be less careful, but you'll know he tried.
During the past four years, the Board of Aldermen has run amok. The Mayor just let them do whatever they wanted at meetings, rarely intervening. I asked both candidates about this, and they agreed things would be different, although the changes they'll make will reflect their styles. For example, Jake will depend more on rules, and Chick will be more personally involved.
There is a perceived conflict in this town between historic preservation and economic development. This is a false dichotomy, since with proper leadership, these efforts can complement each other, and both candidates see this. However, in a tough choice, I think Jake would side with economic development and Chick with historic preservation. Both candidates have ideas and visions for moving Natchez forward - some creative and some less so. But the public will know about these ideas and will be involved in their implementation. I think they both understand the importance of the community in any project's success.
I admire Chick for focusing on education, because this is a long term priority, with visible results likely to come after he leaves office. I feel more comfortable with Jake when it comes to managing the City's finances. Not only has he managed the finances of a successful business, but he's been dealing with the City's finances for years.
They both have a serious shortcoming - neither is very technologically inclined. This is too bad, since technology could be the future for Natchez, with some leadership. We can only hope they will delegate this responsibility to a competent and creative employee or advisor.
Finally, there's my personal criteria for evaluating male candidates - their wives. Both candidates have married strong, intelligent, professional women, which says a lot to me on their behalf. I don't know Mitzi Middleton well, but I can say that I love Lil Graning - she'll keep City Hall lively and entertaining.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
The Natchez Blog Makes the Big Time!
Today the Natchez Blog receive an amazing email. We have been selected by the Democratic National Committee to be the Official State Blog for the State of Mississippi at the Democratic National Convention in Denver in August. The Natchez Blog will be given official floor credentials and will be seated with the Mississippi Delegation.
This is an awesome honor. As I looked through the list of chosen blogs, I realized we will be with some incredible company - famous blogs that I've been reading forever. I don't know this for a fact, but I imagine we might be the smallest blog there.
In an announcement today, DNC Chairman Howard Dean said
WOW! This is going to be exciting! More information to come later once we get over our shock.
This is an awesome honor. As I looked through the list of chosen blogs, I realized we will be with some incredible company - famous blogs that I've been reading forever. I don't know this for a fact, but I imagine we might be the smallest blog there.
In an announcement today, DNC Chairman Howard Dean said
"The Internet has played a critical role in connecting Americans to elected officials and candidates seeking office. The DemConvention State Blogger Corps will continue to foster this dialogue - in all 50 of our states and our territories too - as we head towards this year's historic election and elect a Democrat to the White House."
WOW! This is going to be exciting! More information to come later once we get over our shock.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Why Saving Church Street is Important to Natchez
The Mississippi Department of Transportation’s plan to widen Port Gibson’s Church Street and make it the permanent route of US 61 is disastrous for all Mississippians. It’s not just a tragedy for a handful of homeowners who live on Church Street and whose property will be destroyed along with their peace and quiet; it’s a tragedy for anyone who cares about the beautiful historic churches that give Church Street its name. Large trucks moving along this highway at any speed is damaging to these historic churches and homes and dangerous for the citizens who want to attend church.
Why should Port Gibson’s Church Street be of any concern to Natchezians?
If MDOT can do this to Church Street, they can do it to our streets. Destroying what makes Port Gibson unique and replacing it with what everyone else has, generic gas stations and fast food restaurants, is economic suicide. It’s true for Natchez as well. I hope that Natchez citizens will continue to reject short-sighted business plans by ignorant developers that threaten our historic buildings and neighborhoods. Currently, my friends in Port Gibson (black and white) want new businesses to build up around a bypass, like the ones in Natchez and Brookhaven and the countless historic towns throughout the South. They want to encourage tourism on Church Street and downtown. Fortunately, they have a new mayor who is pro-preservation. New citizens are now moving to Port Gibson because of affordable historic homes and buildings. This is similar to Natchez. Without the charm of our historic downtown and renovated buildings, Natchez loses its strongest asset as a unique place that brings tourism and, more importantly, new citizens with the money and time to help the city maintain its historic architecture. We should be proud of being a destination city that attracts new citizens who want to invest their assets in Natchez, pay taxes on the property they renovate, and become active in our community.
If you are as outraged as I am about the destruction of Church Street and concerned about the future of historic buildings in Mississippi, log on to http://www.thepetitionsite.com/ and go to Port Gibson’s Church Street site to sign the petition and state your opposition. If Natchez is assaulted by a plan this stupid, we would hope that the citizens of Port Gibson would support us. Therefore, let’s support them!
One more thing. My friends in Port Gibson tell me that Natchez’s former mayor and head of MDOT Butch Brown is fully supporting this disastrous decision and indeed pushing for it. Letters to the Clarion Ledger support this belief. I find this hard to believe since Butch Brown has the reputation of supporting preservation in Natchez. The Natchez Garden Club’s Party for Preservation was held at his historic home Mount Repose last month! Can anyone explain to me why Natchez’s native son is pushing for the destruction of Port Gibson’s Church Street ?
Why should Port Gibson’s Church Street be of any concern to Natchezians?
If MDOT can do this to Church Street, they can do it to our streets. Destroying what makes Port Gibson unique and replacing it with what everyone else has, generic gas stations and fast food restaurants, is economic suicide. It’s true for Natchez as well. I hope that Natchez citizens will continue to reject short-sighted business plans by ignorant developers that threaten our historic buildings and neighborhoods. Currently, my friends in Port Gibson (black and white) want new businesses to build up around a bypass, like the ones in Natchez and Brookhaven and the countless historic towns throughout the South. They want to encourage tourism on Church Street and downtown. Fortunately, they have a new mayor who is pro-preservation. New citizens are now moving to Port Gibson because of affordable historic homes and buildings. This is similar to Natchez. Without the charm of our historic downtown and renovated buildings, Natchez loses its strongest asset as a unique place that brings tourism and, more importantly, new citizens with the money and time to help the city maintain its historic architecture. We should be proud of being a destination city that attracts new citizens who want to invest their assets in Natchez, pay taxes on the property they renovate, and become active in our community.
If you are as outraged as I am about the destruction of Church Street and concerned about the future of historic buildings in Mississippi, log on to http://www.thepetitionsite.com/ and go to Port Gibson’s Church Street site to sign the petition and state your opposition. If Natchez is assaulted by a plan this stupid, we would hope that the citizens of Port Gibson would support us. Therefore, let’s support them!
One more thing. My friends in Port Gibson tell me that Natchez’s former mayor and head of MDOT Butch Brown is fully supporting this disastrous decision and indeed pushing for it. Letters to the Clarion Ledger support this belief. I find this hard to believe since Butch Brown has the reputation of supporting preservation in Natchez. The Natchez Garden Club’s Party for Preservation was held at his historic home Mount Repose last month! Can anyone explain to me why Natchez’s native son is pushing for the destruction of Port Gibson’s Church Street ?
Thursday, May 08, 2008
The Fat Mama's Saga
Part One
Fat Mama's, now located on Canal Street, bought property on the corner of Canal and Washington. They then went to the Planning Commission to request a rezoning of the property to B-2. The residents and property owners in the adjoining residential area were opposed. The Planning Commission, in what I thought was a brilliant move, proposed a compromise: rezone the property to B-1, which is for businesses in residential areas. Fat Mama's would have been able to open a business very similar to what they have now. The neighbors would not have been happy, but if Fat Mama's had worked with the neighborhood, I think a workable solution could have been reached.
However, Fat Mama's got greedy. They wanted a drive through window and a warehouse, which are not allowed under B-1. Mind you, they don't have them now, but they wanted to expand and improve their business. So they had a choice. They could have built at another location in a B-2 district. Or they could have accepted their limitations, designed the facility to allow for future expansion, showed themselves to be good neighbors, worked with the residents, and convinced them the expansion would be a good thing. If Fat Mama's had taken either of these choices, that would have been the end of the story - and with a happy ending.
Instead, Fat Mama's said "screw you" to the residents. We're political bigwigs, and we'll just go to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen and tell them to override the Planning Commission. There was a public hearing on the issue. One hundred percent of the residents in the area signed a petition against the B-2 zoning. Immediately after the hearing, without discussion (so you know it was all decided ahead of time), the Board voted to overrule their own Planning Commission and granted a B-2 zoning. When was the last time you heard of an elected body going against all residents? They were so incredibly arrogant that they thought they could do anything they wanted.
Some residents filed suit, and it was finally resolved in favor of Fat Mama's, because the Court was reluctant to rule against elected officials. In the meantime, Fat Mama's received preliminary approval for site plans by the city's Preservation and Planning Commissions. It was on the basis of these plans that the Court ruled.
Part Two
Fat Mama's began construction, but they discovered some sort of underground drainage structure right where their building was to be, and they couldn't build above it. So, they just moved the building. One minor problem - they neglected to get approval for the new site plan. Can you believe that? The rest of us have to get approval for a stair railing or a new color for our shutters, but these yahoos think they can move a building without approval. Incredible!
The City (maybe because it was an election year) issued a stop work order on May 1. Did they stop? No, they continued to do work. I guess some people think they are above the law, and rules don't apply to them.
The Preservation Commission had a specially called meeting tonight. The meeting began with the new City Planner, John Lewis, presenting a summary of the situation and listing the problems that needed to be addressed. Right away, you knew something was different. For the first time in years, we had a professional planner, and it showed. As he listed all the problems, I was appalled. There was a long list of requirements in the original site plan that had been totally ignored. And these weren't small things either: moving a building 50 feet, using concrete instead of grass, missing shrubbery and landscaping, having exits that weren't there before, etc.
That professional presentation was followed up by a masterful presentation by the Commission Chair, Marty Seibert. She said the Commissioners had visited the site and had agreed on what their major concerns and recommendations were, which she then went over. She bent over backward to tell Fat Mama's that the Commission's goal was to work with them to help the construction continue as quickly as possible. However, her message to them was very clear though polite: they must follow the rules and procedures.
Neither Fat Mama's nor the public had much to say. Fat Mama's did say they thought they could comply with the requirements. They will submit a revised site plan for approval at the Commission's regular meeting next Wednesday, May 14, at 5:15.
I smell a breath of fresh air in Natchez. Wonder if Tuesday's election had anything to do with it?
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly in the Election
The voters spoke for the first time in this year's City Elections, and there's good, bad, and ugly in the results.
The bad, in my opinion, was that my Alderwoman, Joyce Arceneaux Mathis, got the most votes in Ward 1, and depending on the absentee ballots, may even avoid a runoff. She is without a doubt the most disruptive influence on the Board of Aldermen. Ricky Gray was also reelected, but he's not all bad. UPDATE: She has avoided a runoff. YUCK! Well, maybe the new mayor will keep her in check.
There is lots of good to see in the election results. My favorite result is the election of Tony Fields in Ward 4. He was such an exciting candidate, and I hope he fulfills his promise. In addition to Tony, there will be at least two new Aldermen. One is Dan Dillard in Ward 6, and I think he will bring a great deal of much needed professionalism to the Board. Ward 5 will have a runoff between Frances Thompson Bailey and Mark Fortenberry, and either will be a welcome addition.
The ugly was the voter's dissatisfaction with the way the City has been run, and they took it out on the Mayor, as he was soundly defeated. This should send a message to the Board that things had better change around here.
Jake Middleton did several things I disagreed with when he was Alderman. However, he ran one of the best campaigns I've seen around here, and it paid off for him. If he were to become Mayor, I do believe the City will be far better off that it was. My heartfelt congratulations to Jake for a job well done.
But it's not over yet. In only two weeks on May 20, there will be a Runoff Election in Ward 5, and if I'm lucky, in Ward 1. Then two weeks later on June 3, there will be a General Election for Mayor and for Alderperson for Wards 3 & 5.
Do you want an opportunity to help fight some of the craziness that was foisted on Natchez during this City Administration?
Ron and Mimi Miller have probably done more for Natchez than any other couple. Now it’s time that Natchez returns the favor, and they really need our help.
It’s Fat Mama’s again. It was bad enough that the Mayor and Board of Aldermen overrode the ruling of their Planning Commission and allowed it to be built. But now Fat Mama's doesn't even want to abide by the plan submitted to the Preservation and Planning Commissions. Take a drive down Washington Street, turn left on Wall, then right on Wensel and just look at what Ron and Mimi (and their neighbors) are going to have next to their house. It is an outrage!
What can you do? Attend a meeting of the Preservation Commission which has been called for this Thursday, May 8 at 5:15 pm at the City Council Chambers. Tell everyone you know. Don’t let them get away with violating the law again. Please come and show your support for Ron and Mimi.
The bad, in my opinion, was that my Alderwoman, Joyce Arceneaux Mathis, got the most votes in Ward 1, and depending on the absentee ballots, may even avoid a runoff. She is without a doubt the most disruptive influence on the Board of Aldermen. Ricky Gray was also reelected, but he's not all bad. UPDATE: She has avoided a runoff. YUCK! Well, maybe the new mayor will keep her in check.
There is lots of good to see in the election results. My favorite result is the election of Tony Fields in Ward 4. He was such an exciting candidate, and I hope he fulfills his promise. In addition to Tony, there will be at least two new Aldermen. One is Dan Dillard in Ward 6, and I think he will bring a great deal of much needed professionalism to the Board. Ward 5 will have a runoff between Frances Thompson Bailey and Mark Fortenberry, and either will be a welcome addition.
The ugly was the voter's dissatisfaction with the way the City has been run, and they took it out on the Mayor, as he was soundly defeated. This should send a message to the Board that things had better change around here.
Jake Middleton did several things I disagreed with when he was Alderman. However, he ran one of the best campaigns I've seen around here, and it paid off for him. If he were to become Mayor, I do believe the City will be far better off that it was. My heartfelt congratulations to Jake for a job well done.
But it's not over yet. In only two weeks on May 20, there will be a Runoff Election in Ward 5, and if I'm lucky, in Ward 1. Then two weeks later on June 3, there will be a General Election for Mayor and for Alderperson for Wards 3 & 5.
Do you want an opportunity to help fight some of the craziness that was foisted on Natchez during this City Administration?
Ron and Mimi Miller have probably done more for Natchez than any other couple. Now it’s time that Natchez returns the favor, and they really need our help.
It’s Fat Mama’s again. It was bad enough that the Mayor and Board of Aldermen overrode the ruling of their Planning Commission and allowed it to be built. But now Fat Mama's doesn't even want to abide by the plan submitted to the Preservation and Planning Commissions. Take a drive down Washington Street, turn left on Wall, then right on Wensel and just look at what Ron and Mimi (and their neighbors) are going to have next to their house. It is an outrage!
What can you do? Attend a meeting of the Preservation Commission which has been called for this Thursday, May 8 at 5:15 pm at the City Council Chambers. Tell everyone you know. Don’t let them get away with violating the law again. Please come and show your support for Ron and Mimi.
Saturday, May 03, 2008
If You Care About Natchez, Please Vote Tuesday
On Tuesday, May 6, Natchez residents will have an opportunity to express their opinions about the future of our City. In contrast to many other elections, the outcome of this one really will make a difference.
There are no Republican primaries. There are Democratic primaries for Mayor and 5 of the 6 Wards. The Ward 3 Alderperson will not be decided until the General Election on June 3, when voters will choose between the Democrat Gwen Ball and the Republican Bob Pollard.
I bet almost everybody knows who's running for Mayor: the incumbent Democrat Phillip West, Democrat Jake Middleton, and Independent Chick Graning. However, not everyone may know that the only choice on Tuesday is between West and Middleton. The winner will run against Graning in the General Election. I have no idea who will win this race on Tuesday, but I bet the turnout is high. It will be no secret to readers of this blog that I am no fan of West, and I intend to vote for Middleton.
Ward 1 votes at the City Council Chambers across from City Hall on South Pearl Street. There are four Democrats running: Incumbent Joyce Arceneaux Mathis, Paul Johnson, Jim Sanders, and Sonya Anderson Mars (whom I've never seen and she may have dropped out). If you read what I wrote about this race, you know I'm a member of the ABA Club - Anyone But Arceneaux. This is my Ward, and I haven't had an Alderperson for years. I beg you to please vote for Johnson or Sanders.
Ward 2 votes at Frazier Primary School on G F West Boulevard. There are three Democrats running: Incumbent Ricky Gray, Larry Hooper, and Johnny Franklin. I also wrote about this race. Although I've never seen him, Hooper looks like a good choice, mainly because I would like to see a whole new Board.
Ward 3 votes at the Elks Lodge on Lower Woodville Road, but only for Mayor, since there are no primaries.
Ward 4 votes at United Rubber Workers Union Hall on Gayosa Avenue. There are three Democrats running: Incumbent Bubber West, Tony Fields, and Donnell Newsome. Although all have their strengths, my definite favorite is Tony Fields, as you can tell from my article about this race.
Ward 5 votes at National Guard Armory on Liberty Road. Incumbent David Massey is retiring, and there are three Democrats running in the Primary: Frances Bailey, Mark Fortenberry, and Tim Session. They all look good to me. The winner will face Republican Charles Zuccaro in the General Election.
Ward 6 votes at the Duncan Park Canteen. Incumbent Jake Middleton is running for Mayor, so there is a vacancy. This is the only race that will definitely be decided on Tuesday, since there is no Republican and only two Democrats running. I prefer Dan Dillard over Forest Foster, because his professional experience would bring much needed knowledge to the Board.
If you don't know what Ward you are in, this map might help.
Keep your voting shoes on, because there may be runoffs in Wards 1, 2, 4, and 5 - and in only two weeks on Tuesday, May 20.
There are no Republican primaries. There are Democratic primaries for Mayor and 5 of the 6 Wards. The Ward 3 Alderperson will not be decided until the General Election on June 3, when voters will choose between the Democrat Gwen Ball and the Republican Bob Pollard.
I bet almost everybody knows who's running for Mayor: the incumbent Democrat Phillip West, Democrat Jake Middleton, and Independent Chick Graning. However, not everyone may know that the only choice on Tuesday is between West and Middleton. The winner will run against Graning in the General Election. I have no idea who will win this race on Tuesday, but I bet the turnout is high. It will be no secret to readers of this blog that I am no fan of West, and I intend to vote for Middleton.
Ward 1 votes at the City Council Chambers across from City Hall on South Pearl Street. There are four Democrats running: Incumbent Joyce Arceneaux Mathis, Paul Johnson, Jim Sanders, and Sonya Anderson Mars (whom I've never seen and she may have dropped out). If you read what I wrote about this race, you know I'm a member of the ABA Club - Anyone But Arceneaux. This is my Ward, and I haven't had an Alderperson for years. I beg you to please vote for Johnson or Sanders.
Ward 2 votes at Frazier Primary School on G F West Boulevard. There are three Democrats running: Incumbent Ricky Gray, Larry Hooper, and Johnny Franklin. I also wrote about this race. Although I've never seen him, Hooper looks like a good choice, mainly because I would like to see a whole new Board.
Ward 3 votes at the Elks Lodge on Lower Woodville Road, but only for Mayor, since there are no primaries.
Ward 4 votes at United Rubber Workers Union Hall on Gayosa Avenue. There are three Democrats running: Incumbent Bubber West, Tony Fields, and Donnell Newsome. Although all have their strengths, my definite favorite is Tony Fields, as you can tell from my article about this race.
Ward 5 votes at National Guard Armory on Liberty Road. Incumbent David Massey is retiring, and there are three Democrats running in the Primary: Frances Bailey, Mark Fortenberry, and Tim Session. They all look good to me. The winner will face Republican Charles Zuccaro in the General Election.
Ward 6 votes at the Duncan Park Canteen. Incumbent Jake Middleton is running for Mayor, so there is a vacancy. This is the only race that will definitely be decided on Tuesday, since there is no Republican and only two Democrats running. I prefer Dan Dillard over Forest Foster, because his professional experience would bring much needed knowledge to the Board.
If you don't know what Ward you are in, this map might help.
Keep your voting shoes on, because there may be runoffs in Wards 1, 2, 4, and 5 - and in only two weeks on Tuesday, May 20.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
