March 7, 2005 

For more details on bills, visit the legislative website at http://www.legislature.state.tn.us. 

Tennessee Development District Association Chooses Norris as Legislator of the Year 

NASHVILLE --- State Senator Mark Norris (R-Collierville) has been recognized by the Tennessee Development District Association (TDDA) as a 2005 Legislator of the Year. The award was presented during the organization’s annual meeting held in Nashville last week.

Norris was nominated from the TDDA executive committee which is comprised of local government officials from Lauderdale, Dyer, Shelby and Tipton counties.  

“We were pleased to present this honor to Senator Norris,” said John Sicola, Executive Director of the Memphis Area Association of Governments.  “The award reflects his efforts and support for these four counties.” 

The Tennessee Development District Association was established to serve as a forum to promote intergovernmental cooperation on regional and statewide growth and development issues. 

“The TDDA bestows the benefit of bringing officials together from different areas who may be facing the same issues,” Norris said.  “Not only do we see an exchange of new ideas and approaches to problems, but the association provides a unique networking opportunity as well.” 

Norris serves on the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR) and is the prime sponsor of leading legislation governing economic development and land-use planning. 

Norris, elected to his second term last year, represents Shelby, Tipton, Lauderdale and Dyer counties. 

TennCare Cuts May Drive Off Rural Doctors, Task Force Warns   

  Rural doctors with heavy TennCare caseloads may have to close their practices and move to other areas after thousands of their patients are cut from the state-funded health insurance program. That was the conclusion voiced yesterday by health-care providers and others on a task force aimed at providing a medical safety net for those slated to be cut from TennCare. With their number of paying patients sliced by the TennCare cuts, the doctors' exodus from rural areas would leave health-care gaps in the communities the doctors serve, both for their insured and uninsured patients, said task force members — among them state lawmakers, health-care providers and hospital administrators. To keep the doctors practicing, the state could try to cut their operating costs, task force members said. One way suggested to do this is to admit doctors and their employees into the state employee group health insurance plan, cutting the doctors' medical insurance costs. Another way suggested is to find methods to relieve doctors of costly medical malpractice insurance for treating uninsured patients. These suggestions were among dozens presented at a meeting of the Task Force on the Healthcare Safety Net. The group was convened by Gov. Phil Bredesen to make recommendations on how to put measures into place quickly to deal with TennCare cuts. Those recommendations are due May 1. The governor has proposed cutting 323,000 adults from TennCare and imposing service caps.  

Republicans Propose Substantive Ethics Reform

Invite Democrats to Join Hands for Real Reform 

NASHVILLE—This week on Capitol Hill, Senate and House Republican Caucus members joined together to unveil a six-point proposal for substantive ethics reform affecting the relationships between legislators, campaigns, and lobbyists.  They invited Democrats to join in the effort to produce real reform. 

The six-point proposal would:

• Close the revolving door by preventing former legislators from lobbying the legislative or executive branch for one year after leaving office.  This is similar to federal law.

• Require more detailed disclosures of all sources of income over $200, including requiring the names and addresses of the sources of income.  This is similar to federal law.

• Prohibit lobbyists from accepting contingency fees for passing or defeating legislation.  This is done in 37 other states.

• Bar registered lobbyists from serving on any state boards and commissions.

• Narrow down what residency means for candidates for public office.  A law proposed in Georgia is being looked at as a model for the requirement that a candidate actually live in the district which is being represented.  A business address could not be used.

• Prohibit campaign contributions by political action committees, except political parties, 20 days prior to election day when early voting begins and require additional disclosure so early voters know who is funding the campaign.

Meaningful reform can only come about through a united effort of both parties to produce substantive ethics reform to clean up the perception of how government operates. 

Senate Approves Marriage Protection Amendment

Show of Broad Bipartisan Support in Senate 

Members of the Senate fought off a blatant attempt to derail passage of the Marriage Protection Amendment, Senate Joint Resolution 31, when an opponent of the measure tried to attach a hostile amendment on the Senate floor Monday.  After guiding the Senate to defeat the hostile amendment, the prime sponsor, Senate Republican Majority Caucus Chairman Jeff Miller (R-Cleveland), moved for approval of the measure on third and final reading.   The Marriage Protection Amendment passed overwhelmingly in a 29-3 vote.

The three no votes were all cast by Senate Democratic leaders – the Senate Democratic Caucus Chairman and two Democratic Senate Committee Chairmen.  The Senate Democratic Minority Leader was not recorded as voting on the bill.

“We are pleased with the progress of the Marriage Protection Amendment in the Senate and we look forward to the House passing it soon to give the people the right to vote on this very important issue,” stated Senator Miller.

All 17 members of the Senate Republican Majority Caucus voted in favor of the measure.  In a show of broad bipartisan support, three-fourths, 12 out of 16, of the Senate Democrats joined with their Republican colleagues and voted in favor of the measure.  Eight of those 12, or half of the Senate Democratic Caucus, signed on as co-sponsors of the legislation.

The Senate Republican Majority Caucus appreciates the majority of the Senate Democratic members who supported passage of the Marriage Protection Amendment.

“This clearly shows that both sides of the aisle can work in a bipartisan fashion in step with Tennessee values and with the will of the people when it comes to some important issues, such as constitutionally defining marriage as being a contract between one man and one woman,” stated Senator Mark Norris (R-Collierville).

Tennesseans did not ask for this fight over the definition of marriage.  This fight was forced upon Tennessee by those who are seeking to redefine marriage in court by cozying up to activist judges.  Activist judges liberally read their own thoughts and views into constitutions in order to ‘find’ rights which don’t exist.

The people have a right to be heard through a referendum on this issue.  A referendum gives the people the opportunity to speak their will clearly through their Constitution, not just to citizens, legislators, and governors, but also to judges.

The Marriage Protection Amendment will allow voters the right to decide in a referendum on whether or not to place explicit language in their state Constitution to define marriage in Tennessee as it is historically known in this country, as a contract between one man and one woman.

When some seek to redefine the meaning of marriage, the people, not activist judges in the courts, should decide the issue.  Many Tennesseans fear that activist judges might overturn Tennessee’s current Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996.

Four of the five judges now seated on the Tennessee Supreme Court ‘found’ some right in the state Constitution in its controversial 4-1 decision in 2000 which overturned abortion law in the landmark case of Planned Parenthood of Middle Tennessee vs. Don Sundquist.

Only one of the five, Justice Barker, dissented from that decision.

It only takes three of the five Supreme Court justices to throw out a state statute.  The Marriage Protection Act may be challenged by very aggressive same-sex agitators who are now trying in other states to turn marriage into something it is not.  It’s only a matter of time before someone enters into a same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, only to turn around and file a lawsuit in Tennessee in an attempt to force the state to recognize that same-sex marriage as valid.

The Senate has done its part.

The House Finance, Ways, and Means Committee recommended the Marriage Protection Amendment for passage Tuesday and the full House is expected to take up SJR 31 next week.

If two-thirds of the House approves the measure, the question would be placed before the voters in a referendum on the November 7, 2006, general election ballot.  If that referendum receives a yes vote from a majority of those voting in the governor’s election held on the same ballot, then it will be added to the Constitution. 

A copy of SJR 31, the Marriage Protection Amendment Resolution, may be found online at http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SJR0031.pdf .

* * * * * 

TennCare Troubles Continue 

A brewing TennCare feud between the executive and legislative branches seems to have dissipated, coming to a quick, if not quiet, end this week.  Prodded by the governor, the TennCare Bureau threw in the towel and said it would not charge for the production of public documents to the General Assembly.  This openness by the administration is appreciated.

The TennCare information may be necessary to make appropriate legislative decisions about the continuation or dramatic alteration of the multi-billion TennCare Program.  Before this year’s budget is finalized, TennCare costs may skyrocket, depending on the outcome of ongoing litigation in federal court, from $6 billion in the 2002-2003 fiscal year budget to $8.7 billion or more for the 2005-2006 budget.  If that occurs, the costs of the TennCare program would have increased almost 50% during this administration instead of the 33% increase as proposed.

This week, Gordon Bonnyman of the Tennessee Justice Center was the guest at the Senate Republican Majority Caucus meeting.  Mr. Bonnyman, an attorney by profession, represents the patient/enrollee advocate perspective in the ongoing TennCare feud between the Justice Center and Governor Bredesen.  The administration has repeatedly blamed his continuing failure to fix TennCare as promised on consent decrees agreed to by former Governor Don Sundquist.

Mr. Bonnyman explained his position to the caucus members.  The current governor made the consent decrees his in 2003 through renegotiations.  The administration has filed no motion to modify the consent decrees in court.  The administration has not costed out the proposed TennCare reforms.  Mr. Bonnyman is very concerned about the impact to the health care industry of losing $1.2 billion in federal money and the state’s share of $600 million and what effect that would have statewide.

Mr. Bonnyman stated he believed the governor was sincere, but that he was a dreamer who wanted to do something bold and innovative instead of fixing the problem.

Mr. Bonnyman stated that it is possible to get savings out of the program.  He stated that there is an enormous amount of waste in this program, particularly in pharmacy.  To stop the overuse of prescription drugs in Tennessee, he urged retrospective drug utilization review after the drugs have been prescribed and the prescriptions filled.

Members of the caucus challenged that.  Senator Tim Burchett (R-Knoxville) pushed for real-time drug review with newer technology, such as smart-card technology with patient information recorded on it.  Senator Raymond Finney (R-Maryville), a retired doctor, stated that retrospective drug review was 19th century technology and we’re now in the 21st century.

Mr. Bonnyman also urged a return to an at-risk basis for the management of TennCare benefits and suggested that Blue Cross should take over the whole program on an at-risk basis.

On a separate TennCare front this week, the administration again sought in federal court to have Mr. Bonnyman removed as the advocate attorney for the 323,000 TennCare enrollees who would be disenrolled from TennCare under the governor’s TennCare reform proposals.

Meanwhile, the governor remains under an increasingly bitter attack from his own Democratic base over his TennCare reform proposals.

Additionally, legislators are hearing a lot from their constituents.  "Tennesseans are growing impatient," Senator Miller told the Chattanooga Times Free Press. "The governor should have come out of the chute after the election and buckled down on this."

On yet another level, in Washington, U. S. Senator Lamar Alexander and U.S. Representative Jim Cooper introduced legislation which proposes to time-limit the impact of consent decrees at four years and also to bring up for review within six months of a new administration those consent decrees inherited from prior administrations.  The legislation is targeted at finding a solution to unelected judges trying to run government by decree, as has happened all too often with TennCare. 

* * * * * 

Senate Approves Marriage Protection Amendment

Show of Broad Bipartisan Support in Senate 

     Members of the Senate fought off a blatant attempt to derail passage of the Marriage Protection Amendment, Senate Joint Resolution 31, when an opponent of the measure tried to attach a hostile amendment on the Senate floor Monday.  After guiding the Senate to defeat the hostile amendment, the prime sponsor, Senate Republican Majority Caucus Chairman Jeff Miller (R-Cleveland), moved for approval of the measure on third and final reading.   The Marriage Protection Amendment passed overwhelmingly in a 29-3 vote. 

     The three no votes were all cast by Senate Democratic leaders – the Senate Democratic Caucus Chairman and two Democratic Senate Committee Chairmen.  The Senate Democratic Minority Leader was not recorded as voting on the bill.

“We are pleased with the progress of the Marriage Protection Amendment in the Senate and we look forward to the House passing it soon to give the people the right to vote on this very important issue,” stated Senator Miller. 

     All 17 members of the Senate Republican Majority Caucus voted in favor of the measure.  In a show of broad bipartisan support, three-fourths, 12 out of 16, of the Senate Democrats joined with their Republican colleagues and voted in favor of the measure.  Eight of those 12, or half of the Senate Democratic Caucus, signed on as co-sponsors of the legislation.

The Senate Republican Majority Caucus appreciates the majority of the Senate Democratic members who supported passage of the Marriage Protection Amendment. 

     “This clearly shows that both sides of the aisle can work in a bipartisan fashion in step with Tennessee values and with the will of the people when it comes to some important issues, such as constitutionally defining marriage as being a contract between one man and one woman,” stated Senator Mark Norris (R-Collierville). 

Tennesseans did not ask for this fight over the definition of marriage.  This fight was forced upon Tennessee by those who are seeking to redefine marriage in court by cozying up to activist judges.  Activist judges liberally read their own thoughts and views into constitutions in order to ‘find’ rights which don’t exist. 

The people have a right to be heard through a referendum on this issue.  A referendum gives the people the opportunity to speak their will clearly through their Constitution, not just to citizens, legislators, and governors, but also to judges. 

The Marriage Protection Amendment will allow voters the right to decide in a referendum on whether or not to place explicit language in their state Constitution to define marriage in Tennessee as it is historically known in this country, as a contract between one man and one woman. 

When some seek to redefine the meaning of marriage, the people, not activist judges in the courts, should decide the issue.  Many Tennesseans fear that activist judges might overturn Tennessee’s current Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996. 

Four of the five judges now seated on the Tennessee Supreme Court ‘found’ some right in the state Constitution in its controversial 4-1 decision in 2000 which overturned abortion law in the landmark case of Planned Parenthood of Middle Tennessee vs. Don Sundquist. 

Only one of the five, Justice Barker, dissented from that decision.

It only takes three of the five Supreme Court justices to throw out a state statute.   

The Marriage Protection Act may be challenged by very aggressive same-sex agitators who are now trying in other states to turn marriage into something it is not.  It’s only a matter of time before someone enters into a same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, only to turn around and file a lawsuit in Tennessee in an attempt to force the state to recognize that same-sex marriage as valid. 

The House Finance, Ways, and Means Committee recommended the Marriage Protection Amendment for passage Tuesday and the full House is expected to take up SJR 31 next week.  If two-thirds of the House approves the measure, the question would be placed before the voters in a referendum on the November 7, 2006, general election ballot.  If that referendum receives a yes vote from a majority of those voting in the governor’s election held on the same ballot, then it will be added to the Constitution. 

A copy of SJR 31, the Marriage Protection Amendment Resolution, may be found online at http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SJR0031.pdf . 

* * * * *

All things considered:  So far, the Senate has 2,350 Senate bills filed as of 11:30 a.m. Thursday (March 3), while the House has 2,372 bills.  Resolutions: Senate Joint Resolutions now number up to 101; HJRs 207; SRs 14; and HRs 45.  The Senate and House have used 14 legislative days.  Article II, Section 23 of the state Constitution provides for 90 paid regular legislative session days for every two-year-long General Assembly.  The Senate and House are scheduled to convene on Monday at 5 p.m.

* * * * *