Mitch Reaches Across the Aisle

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was the only Republican (or at least the only nationally-known Republican) to attend Beau Biden's funeral yesterday in Delaware.

Also attending from Kentucky:   Democrats Jack Conway and Jerry Lundergan.

I am proud of McConnell for that gracious act of compassion he demonstrated by going to the funeral.  He and Vice President Joe Biden served in the Senate together for more than two decades; they are friends and colleagues, notwithstanding that they sat on opposite sides of the aisle.  It was therefore entirely appropriate for McConnell to pay his respects to the Vice President's late son.

What I do not understand, however, is why McConnell was the only Republican present.  The U.S. Senate is a small club. Many Republicans served with Biden for years. I wouldn't expect the entire Republican caucus to attend.  But no one else, other than McConnell?  That's shameful.

This was not about policy or politics. This was about a father losing a son, made sadder still by the fact that he has lost one before.  Moreover, because the Vice President presides over the Senate, he still has a connection to that institution.  He is still a colleague.

My suspicion is that Republicans wanted to avoid the risk of being photographed with any of the prominent Democrats who attended:  the Obamas, the Kennedys.  And then such photo surfacing in a primary.  Sure, there are politicians cynical and mean-spirited enough to take advantage of such a photograph, and to the extent they try that, voters should punish them resoundingly.

McConnell's thoughtfulness to Biden explains why he and Biden have been able to get real work done on behalf of the country when the president was intransigent. McConnell well knows that at the end of the day, successful governance requires functioning relationships.

ICYMI: C-J Column - Sell the Pill OTC

Here's my Courier-Journal column on why Republicans should support making birth control pills available.

Thanks to the C-J for giving me permission to reprint it here:

A group of Senate Republicans has introduced legislation on something all Republicans should support: a step toward making birth control pills available over the counter (OTC). This is good policy and good politics. It puts to rest the fake War on Women narrative that Republicans have a secret plan to bring back chastity belts.

Colorado Republican Sen. Corey Gardner beat Democrat Sen. Mark "Uterus" Udall last year partly due to Gardner's pledge to work to make birth control pills available OTC. Props to Gardner for keeping his word, and to Republican Senators Kelly Ayotte, Joni Ernst, Richard Burr, Ron Johnson and Thom Tillis for co-sponsoring.

Birth control pills have been around for 50 years. They are safe and effective. To be sure, oral contraceptives carry certain risks, such as the occurrence of a blood clot. But those risks are very rare — less common than blood clots during or after pregnancy.

Even aspirin poses risks, yet it is available OTC. So is "Plan B," the emergency contraceptive that is taken after sex. Chemically, it is a very strong version of the same hormones commonly found in birth control pills. It makes no sense for Plan B, but not birth control pills, to be sold over the counter.

Many doctors agree. The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists (ACOG) opined in 2012 that: "Weighing the risks versus the benefits based on currently available data [oral contraceptives] should be available over the counter."

Although the ACOG recommends that women continue to get routine screenings for cervical cancer and sexually transmitted diseases, it made clear that a pelvic exam is not necessary and should not be required to get oral contraceptives. Further, it found that women can competently and safely evaluate their own risk factors by using a checklist. (Imagine: treating women like grown ups.) Some women will prefer to discuss family planning with a doctor, and that's fine. Let it be their choice, not a requirement,

THE COURIER-JOURNAL

Medical review panels would help patients, health care

In addition to its safety, the pill works, but only if it's used. But women can't take what they can't get with reasonable convenience.

The ACOG noted that unintended pregnancy "remains a major public health issue" in this country; OTC birth control pills would "improve access and use, and possibly decrease unintended pregnancy rates."

The Center for Disease Control estimates that 50 percent of all pregnancies are unplanned. Studies suggest that OTC birth control pills could cut that number in half, which has huge public health implications: For a young girl trying to finish high school, the ability to buy the pill OTC could allow her to escape poverty.

Every abortion stems from an unwanted pregnancy. Pro-life Republicans therefore should support making birth control pills accessible. Those who have moral objections to contraception should consider that the prescriptive status of the pill has no bearing on the morality of using it.

Access to birth control pills is particularly important for states like Kentucky with large rural areas and a shortage of medical providers. Finding and getting in to see the doctor is difficult and time-consuming — even if the doctor's visit is "free" under Obamacare. Forcing women to see their doctor for a birth control pill prescription wastes the time of patient and doctor and makes it harder for everyone else to get seen.

It's important to note that the issue of paying for birth control pills is wholly separate from the issue of whether it is medically necessary to require a prescription. Insurance companies could still cover the cost.

Regardless of who pays, making the pill available OTC will drive the price down. There are approximately 100 versions of the pill. Making contraceptives available over the counter should cause prices to drop and products to improve. The allergy medicine Zyrtec, for example, cost $90 a month by prescription 20 years ago. Now a year's supply of the generic OTC costs $30. Deregulation and competition save consumers money.

THE COURIER-JOURNAL

Dems’ student loan ‘relief’ will make college cost more

The U.S is way behind the rest of the world on this issue. Most countries allow women to buy oral contraceptives without prescription. That makes the U.S. less free in this regard than, for example, Kuwait. How bizarre that it's easier to buy the pill in Kuwait than in America.

Under current federal law, the pill cannot become available OTC until the pharmaceutical manufacturers so request. Gardner's legislation encourages them to apply by waiving the filing fee and providing priority FDA review. Big Pharma needs to be encouraged, strongly, to apply now. After a half century of use, there is no need for expensive, time-consuming studies. If pharmaceutical companies don't apply, Congress should revise the relevant statutes to allow consumers to make the request.

Republicans don't want to outlaw birth control. To the contrary, let's make it cheaper and easier for women to obtain.

Another Take on the "Unity" Dinner

Fascinating how two people can attend the same event and perceive it so differently.  I blogged previously about one friend's take on the Lincoln Day "Unity" Dinner. (Scroll down.)  Today, I heard a different take from another friend.

This Republican described the crowd's reaction as "polite."  "People clapped and stood at the appropriate times."  He thought the Bevin video on McConnell was funny but too late. A year too late. At this point, he viewed it as useless.

The crowd struck him as subdued for a state-wide Lincoln Day dinner in an election year. He said many privately expressed angst about Bevin's nomination.

For the down-ticket races, however, he sensed considerable enthusiasm. My friend speculated that Alison Ball and Whitney Westerfield will be the beneficiaries of money and volunteer time that normally would be directed to the top of the ticket.  His sense was that although everyone or nearly everyone who attended the dinner will vote for Bevin in November, for many Republicans, that will not extend to giving Bevin time, talent and treasure.

Bevin Unifies Party

Matt Bevin apparently surpassed expectations at tonight's Republican Party Lincoln Day Dinner, unofficially billed as the unity dinner.

Although I did not attend, I am told by a long-time party activist -- who donated to a Bevin rival in the primary -- that Bevin's performance was so good, it made him green with envy.

Bevin began with a video that made the crowd roar with laughter. Importantly, however, the humor was tasteful and respectful of McConnell, while poking fun at Bevin's perceived lack of support for McConnell.

 The self-deprecating video began with Bevin in bed, waking up to his alarm . . . wearing his Team Mitch shirt.  When his wife asks him to take it off so she can wash it, he peels it off to reveal . . . another Team Mitch shirt in a different color. The video also included a vignette on Bevin, like a besotted teenager, talking to McConnell on the phone, saying "No, you hang up." I am told people were laughing so hard they were crying.

At the video's conclusion, the crowd gave a standing ovation.  More importantly, this crowd of Republicans, two thirds of whom voted for someone else, were surprised and delighted. Many had not expected to actually like Bevin or be enthusiastic about his candidacy to this extent

Bevin then followed up with a speech strong on conservative policy solutions for Kentucky's problems.. He underscored the consequences of Republicans failing to win the governor's mansion.  As Bevin put it, there is the Right Way, and there is the Con-way.  It's a little corny, but Bevin made people excited about his candidacy who had not contemplated that as a possibility. This was a crowd who would have shown up in the polls in November to vote for the Republican nominee, Bevin or not.  He had their vote, but now, he has their support, and that means manpower, expertise, connections and maybe donations.

You can view the video below:




"Happy Together" from Steven Reese on Vimeo.

Let's Support the Republican Nominees

Matt Bevin was not my first choice. But I have no doubt that he would be a much better governor than Jack Conway.  At last week's Jefferson County Lincoln Day Dinner, Bevin gave an outstanding speech.  Amidst a group of strong speeches, he stood out. Apparently he did that at Lincoln Day dinners across the state.

Bevin was a much-improved candidate this time, compared to his run against Mitch McConnell.  Whoever has been coaching him has added a polish and discipline that was not there previously.  He is telegenic and articulate. I like what he says on the issues.

 Many of us feel like we don't know Matt Bevin. And yet when I see his family, I can't help but smile. It takes a certain selflessness to adopt that many kid; I know at least that much about him, and it's a good start.

I am really excited about Bevin's running mate, Janeen Hampton, What a compelling life story. She  illustrates how conservative principals empower people to escape poverty. She gave a great speech last night and I look forward to hearing much more from her.  

Here's my unsolicited advice for Bevin. Having chosen to become the standard-bearer for the Kentucky Republican Party, Bevin would be well-served to show some respect to the man who made Kentucky a two-party state:  Mitch McConnell.  Bevin's willingness to do that will determine whether McConnell Republicans merely vote for him or go further -- write checks and walk precincts. It's time for a McConnell-Bevin Bourbon Summit.

The Benefits of Seniority

This illustrates why it was so important for Kentucky to reelect Mitch McConnell.  I have a client whose business is heavily dependent on Medicare reimbursement.  Recent federal legislation to fix the rates for physicians had the unintended effect of delaying reimbursement for my client. As the delay dragged on, the cash flow for his business dried up to the point that he could not meet payroll. He was going to have to close his business. Two hundred jobs in a very poor part of the state were jeopardized,

My client reached out to McConnell's office and within two days, a high-ranking official from CMS had called in response. The situation has now been resolved.

Any U.S. Senator would have tried to help a constituent in this manner.  The fact that Kentucky's U.S. Senator is Majority Leader, however, allowed my client to get the relief he needed in two days.  When was the last time you heard of anything getting done that fast in Washington?

McConnell's seniority saved two hundred Kentuckians from losing their jobs. We are so, so fortunate to have Mitch as our senator.

Allison Ball For Treasurer

Allison Ball has my enthusiastic support for the Republican nomination for State Treasurer -- and has since she announced last year.

I first met Allison at a Women For Team Mitch event during the Senate primary. She gave an outstanding speech. Allison is soft-spoken and petite, so it is startling to hear her speak in public: she is a firebrand, bare-knuckled conservative.

I have kept in touch with Allison at Federalist Society events. She is so committed to the ideals of the Federalist Society that she has traveled from Prestonsburg to Louisville just to make our luncheon events. (For any non-lawyers who aren't aware, the Federalist Society promotes limited government, rule of law and personal responsibility.)

Allison's hard work in the party is such that at the Jefferson County Lincoln Day dinner the other night, Allison got the biggest round of applause -- even though she's from the other end of the state. She is well-known and well-liked among active Republicans, which is why she should win the primary handily.

I am grateful for her willingness to serve and see State Treasurer as the first of many positions of  public service she will hold in the Commonwealth.

Heiner Has Edge at Jeff Co. Lincoln Day Dinner

Last night all four candidates for the Republican nomination for governor made their "closing arguments" at the Jefferson County Republican Party's Lincoln Day Dinner.

Each of these candidates gave good speeches.  Based on audience reaction, it appears that Heiner had the edge among this crowd, followed by Comer.

Bevin is a much more polished speaker this time around.  However, his refusal to unequivocally endorse Sen. McConnell caused many to react to his remarks with stony silence.

Will T. Scott went last.  He proved as colorful expected.  He coupled a great sense of humor with substance. It's unfortunate he doesn't have the resources to be more than a spoiler in this campaign. Frankly, I don't understand what he is doing.  He is not going to win.  Not gonna happen.  He's just creating a situation that subjects the party to the risk of nominating a candidate who is so badly damaged (Comer) or unpredictable (Bevin) as to ensure that we do not win the general election.

ICYMI: Medical Review Panels

The Courier-Journal has graciously given permission to me to reprint my C-J columns in full here.  I've had a request for this one on Medical Review Panels, so here it is.

As the current legislative session draws to a close, the Kentucky House, controlled by the Democrats, remains the place where good ideas go to die. The latest example (one of many) is Medical Review Panels (MRPs). Republicans passed legislation to create MRPs in the Senate, but if that bill even makes it to a vote on the House floor, its defeat is certain — just another consequence of Republicans failing to flip the House last November.

Here’s how the legislation would work.

Anyone who felt that he or she (or a deceased family member) was the victim of medical malpractice would file a claim to the MRP, before that claim could be filed in court. The patient and medical provider would each nominate a physician to serve on the panel, and those two would nominate a third. The MRP would have 6 months to review the claim and rule on whether the medical provider — doctor, nurse, nursing home or whoever — violated the standard of care. The MRP ruling would be admissible in court but non-binding.

The part that the trial lawyers gloss over: If the patient does not agree with the MRP ruling, he or she can still go to court and sue the provider. MRPs do not “close the courthouse door” on injured plaintiffs. Indeed, the statute of limitations would be tolled during the MRP process.

The point of MRPs is to quickly sort valid claims from frivolous ones. This is good for both plaintiff victims and defendant health care providers. Litigation is stressful and time-consuming for both sides of a suit. It is not uncommon for a case to take several years before it gets to a jury.

Victims should be compensated if a medical provider was negligent, that is, did not act the way a reasonable medical provider in the same circumstances would have acted, resulting in injury. MRPs provide a path for victims to be compensated in months, rather than years. And because of the streamlined process before a panel of three doctors — essentially experts — the victim should be able to keep a higher percentage than he would with the typical contingency fee case, where a trial lawyer has to hire expensive expert witnesses to testify at trial.

Most medical malpractice cases that go to a jury result in the plaintiff losing. If a plaintiff is going to lose eventually, far better to find out sooner rather than later. That allows the plaintiff to move on and saves the judicial waste of a needless jury trial.

On the other hand, if the MRP finds that a health care provider violated the standard of care, that reality check counsels the provider and insurance carrier to settle, quickly. The faster the settlement, the less money that is expended on needless defense costs. And the sooner the victim is compensated.

But parties to potential malpractice actions aren’t the only ones who could benefit from sorting valid from frivolous claims. Fear of being sued causes doctors to practice defensive medicine, running needless tests out of an overabundance of caution. High patient deductibles and co-pays have made patients more cost-conscious: unnecessary tests now come out of our pockets. All patients therefore have a stake in seeing MRPs enacted.

Without a mechanism like MRPs, the high cost of litigation leads insurers of health care providers to settle just to save the cost and uncertainty of going to trial; even frivolous claims are expensive to defend. That translates into higher insurance premiums for doctors, which in turn drives up health care costs for all of us.

Malpractice insurance premiums, moreover, are an important factor in recruiting and retaining doctors to practice in Kentucky. We already have a shortage of physicians here, exacerbated by Gov. Steve Beshear’s expansion of Medicaid. That means longer wait times for all of us to get in to see our doctors.

Kentucky has a physician shortage in 47 counties. Sadly, these counties tend to have the highest percentage of chronically ill citizens. Further, Kentucky’s doctors are retiring faster than they can be replaced by graduates from local medical schools; the shortage will get worse. Anything we can do to stabilize malpractice insurance gives us a competitive advantage in recruiting young doctors to relocate here from out of state.

This will become particularly important when the two Ohio River bridges are completed, because Indiana has enacted MRP legislation. It is about to become much more convenient for a health care provider who wants to live in Louisville but work in Indiana to save on malpractice premiums.

MRPs are just one more example of where Kentucky is falling behind neighboring states with which we compete. Those out-of-state lawyers advertising on buses and billboards cannot vote in Kentucky. But they can and do donate to Democrat candidates for state representative.

My C-J Column on Hal Heiner

I tweeted this on the EIBKY feed but it show up on the blog, so here's my Courier-Journal column in which I explain why I have chosen to support Hal Heiner.

Here's an excerpt:

Three of the four candidates seem pretty bright. However, Heiner’s intellect is tempered by a humility that will prevent him from governing reactively. He thinks before he speaks and acts — a rare trait in those seeking office. I admire the way he actually listens to people rather than looking over their head for someone more important to chat up.

I appreciate Heiner’s background as a successful businessman who has met a payroll. The notion that he did not truly “create” jobs but simply lured employers to Kentucky is beside the point. A job is a job. To the person cashing the paycheck, it makes no difference how the employer wound up here.

Likewise, the fact that Heiner has a business park in Indiana gives him precisely what our next governor needs: real world experience in understanding how the states surrounding Kentucky are competing with us and winning. I see Heiner as the candidate most likely to provide leadership on issues like tax reform and right to work that Kentucky needs to regain its competitive edge against neighboring states.

Then there is is the issue of school choice. Heiner doesn’t just support the concept of school choice, he has advocated for it relentlessly. We won’t see school choice until Republicans take control of the Kentucky House, but that day is coming. Heiner is best equipped to implement school choice when that occurs.

This will give poor children in failing schools an opportunity for a quality education. The impact that this would have on individuals and our Commonwealth would be transformative. Heiner understands this and will get it done. To that end, Governor Heiner could expand upon Sen. Rand Paul’s outreach to minorities, who are understandably frustrated with the lousy schools that do not equip their children to escape poverty. Eventually, this could lead to Republicans becoming the majority party in Kentucky. In any event, it is the right thing to do.

There is also the issue of temperament. Heiner comports himself with dignity. He demonstrates maturity of judgment. That’s why I trust him to not embarrass Kentucky. He doesn't frequent the cockfighting circuit. I want a governor who won’t elicit headlines that make us wince. And I want a governor who won’t use the office as a springboard to another office.

I appreciate Heiner’s loyalty to the Republican party; I have no doubt he supported Mitch McConnell in the last election. Note that no one asks him this.

Pam Platt Leaving C-J

Pam Platt will serve her last day as Editorial Director for the Courier-Journal next Friday.  Pam recruited me last year to write my column that has appeared every third Wednesday this past year.

I was dubious about writing for the C-J when Pam first called.  My politics, after all, are considerably to the right of Pam and the C-J.   I didn't think I'd last beyond the first column.

Pam and I met and she assured me that so long as I (1) disclosed conflicts of interest and (2) understood that I would not be the paper's ombudsmen -- that it was not my job to offer constructive criticism of the paper-- then I could write about whatever I wanted, taking any position I wanted.

She honored her word. Even though some of my columns drew progressive outrage, Pam never tried to tone me down. She never changed more than correct a typo.

She was always gracious and accommodating.  I am sad that she is leaving and wish her all the best.

Hal Heiner's Hard Work Paying Off

Hal Heiner has been driving around the state for more than a year. I thought he was nuts to start his campaign early, but it is paying off.  Not only in terms of the polls:  Heiner is a much-improved candidate compared to when he ran for Mayor of Louisville a few years back.

Heiner's speaking is more charismatic.  He has the proverbial fire in the belly, that was so lacking before.  I also notice a difference in him as a retail politician. He seems much more comfortable making small talk with strangers than before.

 He is the same smart, humble and creative man who almost became Mayor, just a much better politician.

I went to a fundraiser for Heiner recently; it was packed -- so crowded that a woman fainted, a la Obama.  I knew only one person, and he was not someone I usually run into at fundraisers. The rest of the crowd did even look familiar. Heiner's primary is drawing in people beyond the usual party activists.  That's good for him, and certainly good for the party.

Already Bored By Billary

Interesting that Hillary chose to move up her announcement rather than wait until this summer, as previously planned.  I think her botched handling of the Email-gate -- and the fact that she had no team in place to respond to that scandal -- made her feel the need to mobilize.

There is an odd juxtaposition at play.  On the one hand Hillary tries to gin up excitement for how historic it would be to have a woman president. On the other hand, she has been around for several decades now. There is no longer anything shiny or new about her or what she offers.  And this is not a slam on her age or appearance.

Most of us understand that politicians age and get wrinkles, just like the rest of us. Her physical appearance is not what is tiresome about Hillary.

What is tiresome is that Clintonesque secrecy and sense of entitlement.  None of her scandals happen in a vacuum.  The facts may change, but the pattern remains: the Clintons think and act as if the rules do not apply to them.  And having knowingly disregarded the rules, the need for secrecy becomes paramount.  In email-gate, we see the confluence of these two impulses:  they break rules to protect their secrets.

What is undermining Hillary's candidacy from the outset is the feeling, and the reality, that we have seen this show before.  It's like a re-run of I Love Lucy  We know that Lucy is going to get in some hair-brained escapade, and we know that at the end of the episode she will wriggle her way out of it and do something similar next time.    

Ted Cruz's "Captive"Audience

Sen. Ted Cruz chose to announce his candidacy for the Republican nomination for president at Liberty University, Virginia, founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell. Cruz undoubtedly chose this backdrop to tout his conservative bona fides.

However, those 10,000 students who attended the Cruz announcement were forced to attend:  convocation is mandatory at Liberty University. In fact, students who skip it are fined.

Certainly Liberty University's ties to Falwell were intended to appeal to evangelical voters, an important block in the conservative coalition.

However, the forced attendance of the students infringes upon the freedom of association of the students. At its most basic, conservatism is about expanding liberty. Mandates -- including mandates to listen to a speaker or face a fine -- are the antithesis of liberty.

Those students who wore the Stand With Rand t-shirts to the rally made the point that although they could be forced to attend Cruz's announcement, their vote is still their own.

#StandWithStudents Rally

The following is from Eric Bush, a junior at St. Xavier High School who attended the Prichard Committee's Stand With Students Rally in Frankfort this morning.

If you follow this blog, you are probably aware of the Prichard Committee Student Voice Team's efforts to pass HB-236, which would allow students a seat on superintendent hiring committees. Although I was not involved with the writing and lobbying of this bill, several of my friends were and I have been following it throughout its course in the legislature.

The bill passed the house 88-5, but has not yet been voted on in the Senate. Two controversial amendments were recently added in the Senate which put the bill's passage at risk. Students involved with the bill organized a rally to support passing a clean version of the bill which took place this morning on the Capitol steps. The energy level at the rally was high and students from across the state were excited with the chance of passing their bill.

More than 300 students attended the Stand With Students rally

Sen. Max Wise speaking about the importance of student voice

Unfortunately, the chances of HB-236 passing are slim, especially with the legislative session ending tomorrow. The best chance the bill has is through political maneuvering that would attach it to a last minute monster bill that encompasses a wide variety of topics. But if HB-263 doesn't pass tomorrow, you can bet we'll be back next year.

Kentucky High School Students Lobbying in Frankfort on Student Voice Bill

The six-thousand high school students in Kentucky who participate in the Y Club have been closely following the fate of the Student Voice Bill.  That's the bill to include a student on school superintendent search committees (school boards would retain the power to ultimately pick the superintendent).

As I have written previously, the Student Voice Bill enjoyed almost unanimous bi-partisan support.  Then two Republicans tarted it up with extraneous -- and controversial-- amendments.

Many high school students are in Frankfort today to demonstrate support for the bill.  Even students from private schools, who would not be directly affected by the bill, are in Frankfort calling for a vote on a clean bill minus the controversial amendments.

It now looks like Sen. Embry will drop his amendment, the so-called "Bathroom Bill" (requiring transgender students to use the restroom that reflects their biological status, not preference).  Good for Sen. Embry.  Regardless of one's opinion of the Bathroom Bill, it deserves to pass or fail on its own; attaching it to the Student Voice Bill was just tainting the Republican brand for the students who had worked so hard to get the Student Voice Bill as far as it came this session.

Unfortunately, it appears that Sen. Robinson is not prepared to withdraw his amendment regarding religious speech in schools.  Again, the issue is not Robinson's religious speech bill but rather his cynical use of the School Voice Bill to try to get it enacted.  Robinson needs to take the long view:  he is seriously angering students who, if not now eligible to vote, will be eligible shortly.  Robinson is making Republicans look like jerks in front of the next generation of voters.  Someone please talk some sense into him.

Jack Richardson's on the KY Caucus

Jack Richardson, who served for many years as the Jefferson County GOP Chair, agreed to provide a copy of the remarks he delivered the the Kentucky Republican Executive Committee on March 7, 2015, when it voted to hold a caucus in stead of a a primary.

Jack makes some important points that are relevant for the particular circumstances in 2016 due to Sen. Paul's presidential run. But as Jack notes, this is not just a one-time issue.  Unless and until Kentucky moves its primary up, to give us a real say in the presidential primaries, I think we should stick with a caucus in presidential election years.

Jack attended the planning meeting for the caucus this yesterday and reports that those charged with making it a reality are enthusiastic and committed to making this work.

Here are excerpts from Jack's remarks:

We have two issues here today and I want to address the first one and that is Kentucky’s Republican Party’s paralysis by analysis problem.  We desperately need change but we secure our second place status in a state that should have been Red long ago because of a status quo that is protected by either lethargy or over analysis, and sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference between the two. We need not look far for examples.  Last November Republicans had an historical electoral result across the nation. The Democrats had only two bright spots, Iowa and the Kentucky house. No change there. 

We have talked for decades about Kentucky’s irrelevance in the Presidential primaries. It’s amazing to me that anyone even bothers to turn out and vote because by the time Kentucky’s primary gets here the decision is essentially a fait au complet.  Oh, but we talk, and we talk, and talk and talk. But, God forbid that anyone actually propose to do anything about it. Never fear though, there is always that old faithful security blanket of talk, talk, talk.  If anything threatens to change the status quo, we just talk it or analyze it to death and we keep cozy in our old sameness. 

As usual, for things to change, it takes someone, a catalyst to bring about that change, but unfortunately, in Kentucky, that lone southern state that stubbornly refuses to turn red, they will be faced by that same affliction of paralysis by analysis. 

We need to become relevant and particularly so in the Presidential Primary and the caucus will do that.  We need to become a state worthy of its two world leaders, Sen. McConnell and Sen. Paul.  We as a party need to be a help to these two world leaders, not a hindrance. 

That brings me to my second point. The caucus is right and good for Kentucky, Kentucky Republicans and the Kentucky Republican party. Contrary to one remark I heard about this being just about Sen. Paul, this is not just about Sen. Rand Paul. But, arguendo, if so, so what?

I was Chairman of the Jefferson County Republican party for nearly 10 years. One of the first things I told my membership was:  know your job description.  I said, none of you are a US Senator and not likely to be. We are here to help not hinder.  The same goes for this committee. 99.9 % chance that no one here will ever be a US Senator. We are committee members. We are the Indians, not the chiefs. 

Six years ago there was a man, a little known doctor from Bowling Green, Kentucky.  Today that man, is listed in Time Magazine, is one of the top 100 most influential people in the world. He didn’t get there by committee. He has extra ordinary talents and political instincts. We didn’t give him permission to do what he has done. He didn’t need our permission to be great, he just was.  He didn’t talk and talk and talk about it………………he just did it. He’s in the top 100, we are not. We need to be worthy of our two world leaders.  

Sen. Rand Paul has earned the right to be the captain of the ship, or the chief as it may be. Just as Mitch has earned that right and deserved our cooperation last year, he got it.  Now he’s the leader of the US Senate. What a marvelous honor that is for our state. What great recognition that brings to Kentucky. 

Sen. Rand Paul is known from coast to coast and seen on all the nightly news shows. He has brought great distinction to our state.  Both of our US Senators are world class, and national leaders.  What other states can boast of such.  

This Caucus issue is not about Rand, but if so, so what?  Who cares? For years when Mitch needed or wanted something he got it and deserved it and we are all the better for it.  Now it’s Rand’s turn and he has done this state proud. And, this country desperately needs the kind of leadership he will provide.  I see our job description as a committee of being helpers, not hinderers. Let’s show the rest of the country the faith and confidence we have in our great senator. Let’s begin the needed change for the Republican Party of Kentucky by making Kentucky relevant in the Presidential nominee selection process. 

Sen. Paul has extraordinary political instincts and has parlayed them into being in the top 100 of the world’s most influential people in just six years.  He has earned the right to our help and I for one am not going to supplant my judgment for his proven success and political instincts. 

As I told Mr. Youngman at the Lexington Herald in a recent interview, you can take any idea and pick it to death. It’s easy to snipe. This is not the time or the place to do that. All of our leaders have endorsed this caucus measure.

It’s time to break from the past. It’s time to make a change. It’s time to stop talking and start doing.It’s time to stop saying can’t and start saying let’s do it.It’s time to stop navel gazing and wringing our hands and to start looking forward with courage, faith, boldness and action. It’s time to Nike up and “Just do it.”It’s time to be united lest we fall.It’s time to measure up to the greatness of our two US Senators.It’s time to support our Sen. Paul and to support the caucus initiative.Its time – now let’s just do this! 

GOP Legislators Teach KY Students Cynicism

This is not helpful publicity for Kentucky.  The Washington Post is covering the saga of the Prtichard Committee's Student Voice Project.  That initiative resulted in proposed legislation to allow a high school student representative to serve on superintendent search committees. (School boards would still make the final selection.)

It has strong bipartisan support in both chambers.  At the last minute, however, Republican legislators tacked on controversial and completely unrelated amendments that threaten to doom the bill.

Sen. C.E. Embry (R-Morgantown) added an amendment to ban transgender students from using school bathrooms other than what matches their anatomical gender.

Sen. Albert Robinson (R-London) added a bill to protect religious speech in schools.

The content of the amendments, and what one thinks about them, is beside the point.  They have absolutely nothing to do with the Student Voice bill.

The students who drafted and have been testifying for the Student Voice bill are Kentucky's brightest.  They are among the smartest, most articulate students in the state. These are kids we want to stay in the Commonwealth.

That two Republicans would destroy their hard work reflects very poorly on our party. This will have bad fall-out for the Republican Party's efforts to appeal to young people.  Again, the underlying bill has broad bipartisan support.  Pass it already.

High school students across the state are watching this. These are citizens who will be eligible to vote, in many instances, next year.

Embry and Robinson need to withdraw their amendments and fight those battles separately.

My C-J Column: Pro Medical Review Panels

My column will appear in tomorrow's Courier-Journal but is already up.  Here's the link.

Medical Review Panels, to my mind, make good sense as a ways to quickly compensate injured victims but also expose frivolous claims that would otherwise drag on for years.

The issue intrigued me when I learned that a medical provider I respect located his practice in Indiana, rather than Kentucky, because Indiana has Medical Review Panels.

Kentucky needs to look closely at what states like Indiana are doing.  We are falling behind these states for a reason.; let's cherry-pick those policies that give Indiana a competitive advantage.

The Caucus Was The Right Thing to Do

The Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Kentucky made the right decision to switch from a primary to a caucus this year. We need to look after our own, and if this allows Sen. Rand Paul to explore running for president while keeping his Senate seat, then that is a good thing.

I have mixed feelings about the caucus being for this year only.  It is ridiculous that Kentucky's primary is not until May. That makes us completely irrelevant with respect to having any say on who our presidential nominee will be. I would therefore like to see the primary moved to Super Tuesday in March, or switch to a caucus permanently.

Many in the party are concerned about the cost and logistics of a caucus.  I think it could draw in Republicans who regularly vote in primaries but have not taken the step of volunteering.  That could be a very good thing in Jefferson County, in particular.

We'll see how it plays out.  This year, the Paul campaign will pay the cost of the caucus. That gives the party the chance to experiment with this format without spending any resources.