A few choice words on the subject from around the state:
"Of course, since Bredesen is basically a Republican in Democratic clothing, it's not surprising that Republicans give him money.
Tennessee Republicans often complain that they would never be able to get away with the cuts Gov. Bredesen is proposing to TennCare. . . Republicans have a reputation for being grossly out of touch with the health care concerns of low-income people." --Roger Abramson, Nashville Scene
---
"Yes, if Hilleary had presented this "reform" to save TennCare, he would have been crucified. But that's beside the point. TennCare goes beyond politics. There will be no credible Republican candidate running against Bredesen in 2006. Whatever he presents, Republicans will vote for it.
[W]hen he [Bredesen] was elected I don't think anyone thought he would be presenting an obituary for TennCare.
Gordon Bonnyman killed TennCare? Well, as the most powerful man in Tennessee, he ought to be running for governor. More powerful than Blue Cross? More powerful that HCA? More powerful than the doctors? More powerful than the hospitals? More powerful than the health care lobbyists? More powerful than the governor?" --Conservative Frank Cagel, Metro Pulse
---
"The TennCare debate has seen many legal twists, but the state's insistence that its fiercest adversary be restricted from the legal process comes off as vindictive.
The growing personal animus of the Bredesen administration toward Bonnyman and the TJC has been painfully obvious for months. The governor has personally and repeatedly blamed Bonnyman for the out-of-control TennCare costs. The attempt to limit Bonnyman's role at this juncture appears to be as much a personal strike as a legal tactic.
Yet the fact remains that Bonnyman and his colleagues have an ethical and professional duty to represent the constitutional rights of their clients. And those clients — particularly those scheduled to be cut from the program — need the best legal champion they can get. On TennCare, that's Bonnyman."
--Tennessean editorial --
---
"The constitutional amendment to forbid gay marriage, sponsored by Rep. Bill Dunn, R-Knoxville, won initial approval in the last legislative session. If approved again this session by a two-thirds majority, it will go before voters in a statewide referendum in November 2006.
The governor said he believes the constitutional amendment unnecessary since state law already prohibits same-sex weddings, but 'I won't actively urge defeat' of the proposal. He said gay marriage is 'a vastly different issue from tolerance for gays.
I certainly have said frequently over the years that I would happily promote hire or discharge of people in state government without regard to sexual orientation or anything like that,' he said. 'But it seems to me that's a long way from putting official imprimatur of the state on a union where, you know, there's many thousands of years of history to the contrary. It strikes me as unnecessary and contrary to the values of most Americans.'"
--Tom Humphrey
Knoxville News Sentinel
via link to Nashville Files
to be continued
