Arkansas Dems on Income: Intentionally Misleading or Just Ignorant of the Facts? (PART 2: The Exciting Conclusion!)

Harmful truths

(Part One of this discussion, which you can read here, took place yesterday.  Part Two will be shorter, I promise)

So yesterday we had a too lengthy, too windy and too pedantic discussion of income statistics in Arkansas, sparked by a dispute between GOP Rep. Charlie Collins of Fayetteville and the Democratic Party of Arkansas (DPA).

Are you up to speed on the difference between per capita income and median income? Do you care? Of course you don’t, because you are a normal human being with healthy interests, and the only income stats you really care about are your own. I’m not sure I care that much, either. But if we’re going to discuss it, we should at least be clear on what we’re talking about, and don’t go about clouding up the issue, as the DPA did in their shoddy attack on Collins.

Anyway, Collins got the essential facts right:

  • Arkansas ranks low in income statistics, whether measured in per capita or median terms;
  • Household income in the state is stagnant (and has declined since 2007); and
  • A reasonable discussion of why that is, and how it might be changed, should occur.

He gets credit for raising the issue, and doing so in a measured and civil manner, which is more than we can say for DPA mouthpiece Candace Martin.

I don’t intend to make a habit of close readings of party news releases, because whether they come from Republicans or Democrats they all tend to be overwrought and hysterical and shot through with fallacious reasoning and are more or less immediately forgettable. I only focused in on this piece from the DPA because it was so terrible on so many levels.

And also because it reveals a tactic that we’re seeing more frequently from the defenders of the status quo in Arkansas, as well as one that you should be on watch for in the heated campaigny months that lie before us:

1) Defenders of the status quo in Arkansas politics and government will glom on to any ranking or study that ostensibly reflects well on the state, without taking a critical look at just what that ranking means. We saw it with the “income growth” measure; Gov. Mike Beebe’s office reported the ranking as a “historic high,” which is true, except the “historic high” is still pretty low, and median incomes in the state remain stagnant.

We saw it last month with education policy, when Beebe breathlessly trumpeted the state’s #5 ranking in “education policy” from Education Week, and ignored a (probably more accurate) study that ranked the state’s education system #45 in the nation.

A cynical type might think that all they’re trying to do is get you to remember the top line numbers (“Didn’t I see something about Arkansas being fifth in education?”) to obscure any lack of progress that has occurred under their long command (with a few brief interregna in the governor’s mansion) of the state’s government. Some might even call that “misleading.”

2) Arkansas Democrats are also keen to portray anyone who points out the facts about the state’s lack of progress as “out of touch” or “talking down” the state. Look back at Martin’s release attacking Collins from last week: She accuses Collins of “badmouthing” Arkansas and “deriding the state.” Goodness!

Then, boy howdy, she really works up a head of steam: “It is bad enough when people from other states talk down about Arkansas, but for an elected official to do so, and falsely, is inexcusable,” Martin writes. Say, isn’t Collins from another state? Expect more of this.

Martin believes that it’s “badmouthing” the state or “talking down” about Arkansas when someone points out verifiable facts about the state, as Collins did. That’s a nice appeal to sentimentality, but it doesn’t do much to advance the discussion of what will move the state forward.

By this light, it’s better to tell “useful lies” rather than “harmful truths” (see quote at top of post; you were just wondering how that would tie in!). The lies are more pleasant, whether they are about income stats or education or whatever, and they allow the usual suspects to maintain their positions of power and privilege, instead of taking careful stock of where we stand and figuring out how we might do better.

Nice little racket they got there. And one wonders why the state continues to lag in so many indices. But not really.

A Congressional Twitter Debate Is A Terrible Idea!

Cotton, Rankin & Richmond

The Hopefuls: Cotton, Rankin & Richmond

If you’re looking to check in on what the candidates in the Arkansas Fourth Congressional District Republican primary have to say on the issues, then you do not want to miss the Twitter debate to be hosted tomorrow (Wednesday, January 18), by the Arkansas College Republicans.

And by “do not want to miss,” I of course mean that you absolutely want to miss this, because a Twitter debate is just a terrible idea. Who needs this? This, this Twitter debate, I do not think anybody needs.

Here, to make things simpler for you, I have developed a short checklist to let you know if you should, uh, watch the Twitter debate. (watch? view? read? endure?):

  • You are a masochist.
  • You like to read boilerplate political statements in incoherent, decontextualized, non-sequential 140 character bursts.
  • You are Jason Tolbert.

If you suffer from one or more of the above conditions, please tune in to Twitter on Wednesday for the Arkansas Fourth Congressional District at 2 p.m. CST. The rest of you, please, for the love of god, just go about your business as previously planned.

I’m not 100 percent sure how it will work—presumably you’ll have to follow the @ARkCR feed and all the participants, if you’re not already? The College Republicans’ news release says that the two confirmed participants are Tom Cotton and Marcus Richmond, which I guess means Beth Ann Rankin won’t be participating, which I guess means we have a winner. Congratulations, Beth Ann, on your sound judgment and your decisive Twitter debate victory! 

In conclusion: Terrible.

College Republicans Plan Twitter Debate for Fourth District (Talk Business)

The Eternal Verities: Enduring Wisdom On Political Debates

Good God, you mean to tell me there’s ANOTHER Republican presidential debate tonight? Are people watching these things? Really?

I am pleased to report I’ve watched not a single one, nor do I intend to at any time in the future, hewing as I do to the words of wiser men than I:

Eternal verities: Bertie Wooster on political debatesIt is a course of action I can recommend, without reservation.

Much Obliged, Jeeves (P.G. Wodehouse)

Now Let’s Shed A Tear For The Arkansas Health Insurance Exchange! But Not Really (Update!)

In memoriamAnd it came to pass that there would be no state-run Obamacare health insurance exchange in Arkansas, and there was much gnashing of teeth and rending of garments.

State Insurance Commissioner Jay Bradford issued a tear-stained news release today (PDF) announcing the death of the (unlamented) state exchange, the demise of which he attributes to “legislative opposition” (read: opposition from minority Republican lawmakers).

Oh, but if only Arkansas had had a Democratic governor in the statehouse and Democratic majority in the legislature, who might have forestalled this sad development by selling voters on the urgent need for a state-level health insurance exchange!

Oh, wait…riiiiight.

Anyway, this is the end of an era and now the federal government is going to run the health insurance exchange, maybe? Except that’s how it was going to be all along anyway, for all practical purposes, because the feds would be writing all the regulations and calling the shots, really, and no one could actually explain just what the difference between a state-level exchange and a federal exchange might be. And Arkansas can probably take over the exchange later, right? There is no bad news, etc. 

Meanwhile, Arkansas Democrats are weeping crocodile tears, as they think this development gives them a bully club to use against GOP candidates in next year’s campaigns. That is something they seriously appear to believe, because apparently Arkansas voters care very deeply whether the Obamacare exchange is administered by the federal government or state government, yes? It is a known fact that the 2012 election will turn on this very question, and no other.

I have casually spoken to several GOP lawmakers, asking if they are worried about this devastating line of attack. I found that a small percentage are worried about that. I estimate it as somewhere in the neighborhood of zero percent are worried about that.

Cue inevitable lament from superannuated liberal newspaper columnist about how the politicization of this issue by Republican lawmakers is utterly unconscionable, while the politicization of this issue on the part of Gov. Mike Beebe is the very mark of a savvy master straddler. Normally John Brummett would write that piece, but a couple of months back he retreated behind the walls of Fort Hussman. No one’s heard from him since.

Oh, Max Brantley at the Arkansas Times is worked up over this, too, with his customary mix of subtlety and carefully considered insight. He attributes the Republican opposition to Obamacare to “racism,” because that is an explanation that makes sense. Go read his post and then call 911, because, seriously, I’m pretty sure he’s having an aneurysm.

UPDATE: More from The Tolbert Report, including responses from GOP Minority Leader Rep. John Burris and Lt. Gov. Mark Darr. Jason also gets a couple of rogue Democratic lawmakers, Rep. James McLean and Rep. Nate Steel, on the record talking trash about setting up the exchange.

So wait, does that mean opposing the health care exchange is the bipartisan position, and supporting it is now the rigid partisan position? Sounds about right, but don’t tell Democratic-lockstep blogger and noted ridiculous person Michael Cook.

State Health Insurance Exchange ‘Quashed’ (Talk Business)

Occupy Little Rock Makes ‘Tactical Retreat’

Occupy Little RockFor those who care about such things, the Occupy Little Rock group, which has been camped out outside the Clinton library for several days, will abandon their post today.

They’ll evacuate the Clinton Presidential park around 6 p.m.; shortly thereafter, they’ll begin occupying a lot that the city of Little Rock has offered them between I-630 and the Capitol Avenue post office.

I stopped by the camp today and spoke briefly to one of the Little Rock Occupiers (who stressed that he spoke only for himself, because Occupy Little Rock has no official spokesperson), who called the move a “tactical retreat.” He said the group’s General Assembly had debated yesterday for five hours whether to move to the lot that the city had recommended; finally, he said, the Occupiers had reached a “92% consensus” to move its location. (This brings to mind what Oscar Wilde once said was the problem with politics: too many meetings.)

When the Occupier asked what he thought about the acts of the Little Rock police, who announced the deadline for the move, he said that Chief Stuart Thomas was “simply enforcing the law as he interprets it” and that “he has been very reasonable.”

I suspect I am not the only observer to wonder exactly what progress is being made by a bunch of people camping out in a park or in a vacant lot. What is Occupy Little Rock trying to accomplish? How will Occupy Little Rock know it is making progress?

The Occupier had an answer ready: “We’ll know when we get there.” That was either a spot-on literary allusion, or totally my imagination.

Shortly after I talked to him, the Occupier called back and asked that I not use his name. I’ll respect that.

Ex-Dem Congressman: I ‘Should Have Supported Voter ID’

Former Rep. Artur Davis

Former Democratic Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama says voter ID laws are important to ensure integrity in elections

Here is your required reading for this Monday afternoon: an op-ed column by Artur Davis, a former Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Alabama, admitting that he now wishes he had supported voter identification laws when he was in office.

Critics of such laws argue that requiring voters to show ID is akin to “suppression” of voting. Davis, writing in the Montgomery Adviser, argues that the objections are overstated. He looks at a voter ID law passed in Alabama in 2011 to explain that “demanding integrity in voting is neither racist, nor raw party politics.”

He also suggests that vote fraud is more widespread and consequential than many are willing to admit:

The truth is that the most aggressive contemporary voter suppression in the African American community, at least in Alabama, is the wholesale manufacture of ballots, at the polls and absentee, in parts of the Black Belt.

Voting the names of the dead, and the nonexistent, and the too-mentally-impaired to function, cancels out the votes of citizens who are exercising their rights — that’s suppression by any light. If you doubt it exists, I don’t; I’ve heard the peddlers of these ballots brag about it, I’ve been asked to provide the funds for it, and I am confident it has changed at least a few close local election results.

Arkansas Project contributor Dan Greenberg has done a lot of work on voter ID laws, including developing this handy paper for the Advance Arkansas Institute. Critical point: Dan finds evidence suggesting that, in some cases, voter participation has actually increased following implementation of voter ID laws.

In this year’s legislative session, Arkansas Rep. Bryan King heroically shepherded a voter ID law (HB 1797) through the  state House of Representatives, only to have it crash upon the rocky shoals of some Senate committee, the name of which I cannot be bothered to look up.

Protest Pissing Match: Occupy Little Rock vs. Tea Party

Tea Party Vs. Occupy ArkansasOver at the increasingly mindless and unreliable Arkansas Times blog, editor Max Brantley celebrates Saturday’s Occupy Little Rock demonstration, in which some 400-500 protesters gathered downtown and marched to the Capitol to protest corporate power. Brantley, who’s desperately trying to hype the Occupy movement into the vehicle that will at last give birth to the Progressive Heaven he’s been awaiting since 1968, tauntingly asks: “Did the Tea Party ever gather 500 in Little Rock?”

Why, it turns out those are numbers we can check! And the answer is, “Yes, and then some.”

Let’s look back to the April 15, 2009, Tax Day protests that marked the florescence of the Tea Party movement in America: According to a contemporaneous account by the Arkansas News Bureau’s John Lyon, who also reported on Occupy Little Rock yesterday, “more than 500 attended” the April 2009 Tea Party event in Little Rock.

Like Lyon, I was at both the April 2009 Tea Party event and Saturday’s Occupy Little Rock event, and the Tea Party event was significantly larger. (The Occupy Little Rock event was probably better organized.)

And let’s look beyond Little Rock. Here’s an old Arkansas Project post I wrote rounding up Tea Party action around Arkansas on that day. According to published reports in local papers, more than 1,000 attended in both Jonesboro and Mountain Home (unfortunately, a lot of those local paper links have expired). The City Wire reported that more than 500 attended a Tea Party event in Fort Smith, and my post takes note of other Tea Party events in Bentonville, Fayetteville and Pine Bluff.

[Read more...]

Occupy Little Rock Is Taking It To The Streets

From each according to their ability...

Well, Little Rock, I have news for you…you are now officially an occupied territory.

The Occupy Little Rock demonstration, a localized offshoot of the Occupy Wall Street movement, hit the streets of downtown Little Rock Saturday morning to push their message of fighting corporate power.  John Lyon from  the Arkansas News Bureau was on scene and he contributes a fine write-up of the affair.

Yeah, there was some of the usual alienating leftist claptrap—perhaps too much for a movement that hopes to reach out to “the 99 percent” of mainstream Americans who aren’t billionaires. And so you had the goofy chants (“Humans first! Humans first!”) and declarations of “Solidarity!” You had the unfocused, catch-all list of grievances (one speaker listed the societal ills we can lay at the feet of “the 1 percent,” which includes not only the rotten economy but also “watered-down” health care reform and child obesity).

There was the odd dynamic whereby each speaker approached the microphone, introduced him or herself by first name, and the crowd greeted them by name, which gave the event the feel of a giant open-air 12-step recovery meeting. There was the punctilious campus organizer’s obsession with ensuring equality of form, since according to the rules, each male speaker had to be followed by a female speaker “to keep it fair.”

But on the plus side, all the participants were perfectly pleasant, organized, polite and well-behaved, with one speaker reminding everyone to pick up any trash they might see as they departed the Capitol. While there was plenty of sharp rhetoric directed at reining in overweening corporate power, the overall vibe was positive and even kind of cheerful. The turn-out of some 400-500 people was impressive (though the demonstration would have packed greater punch on a weekday).

[Read more...]

Michael Cook Has Arkansas Republicans On the Ropes! Or Maybe Not!

 

Democratic blogger Michael Cook at Talk Business/Talk Politics has pertinent questions for Arkansas Republican legislators who have endorsed Texas Gov. Rick Perry to be the next GOP candidate for president. These questions are pertinent, dammit, he insists!

Cook apparently read Perry’s book, for some reason. (No, I have not read it, because I am sure it is an absolute piece of sh*t. Rule: Books by living political figures are always total pieces of sh*t, and they get even sh*ttier when written as a prelude to a run for higher office.)

Having digested the volume, Cook judges Perry’s views on Social Security and other issues to be “out of the mainstream,” and pointedly asks if Arkansas GOP legislators would agree with the Texas governor on these hot-button issues. Take that, Arkansans for Rick Perry! Because it is a well-known fact that state legislators will play a vital role in deciding the future of Social Security, you see.

Of course, if that’s REALLY a game Cook wants to play, then that street runs two ways, doesn’t it? That is, if you insist that Arkansas Republicans be held to account for all positions advanced by their national standard-bearers….then it naturally follows that Arkansas Democrats must also be held to account for the positions of their national leaders, as well, yes?

Say, leaders like President Barack Obama, who continues to be abidingly and abysmally unpopular in Arkansas, and will no doubt remain so through 2012. (And who, it should be noted, hasn’t just written books about his proposals—but has had the opportunity to enact them on the national level, to largely disastrous result.) Is that a discussion that Arkansas Democrats are aching to take up? Not from what we’ve seen.

The astonishing part is that Cook seems to believe this clever tactic would box these Arkansas Republicans in, put them on the defensive. I think the phrase you’re looking for is “hoist with his own petard.”

Mike Ross: “It’s Been Fun, But I Gotta Go!”

Mike Ross: Gotta go! U.S. Rep. Mike Ross, who has ruled Arkansas’ mighty Fourth District with an iron fist since 2001, announced today he won’t run for re-election, to the surprise of all.

Ross was the last man standing among Arkansas Democrats in the state’s House delegation following the 2010 elections, and he was shaping up to be a top target for the GOP in 2012.

Just last week, the GOP group Crossroads GPS bought more than $127,000 in ads critical of Ross. If you’re not sure, that’s a hell of a lot of money to spend in July of a non-election year.

Were the Crossroads ads the determining factor in Ross’s decision? Since we have no idea, let’s just say “yes” and be done with it. But stand by, because he might just run for governor yet!

Meanwhile, the Tolbert Report indicates that Republicans Tom Cotton (who stepped aside from a planned challenge to U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln in 2010, a decision he probably rues to this day), Rep. Lane Jean and Beth Ann Rankin (who challenged Ross in 2010) are all exploring runs (or at least being mentioned as potential candidates) for what will now be an open seat.

UPDATE: Oh, Roby Brock, we know we can always look to you for a comprehensive listing of the names of every underqualified egomaniac credible candidate who’s rumored to be eyeing the seat. Let’s all go look!