Category Archives: Elections

A husband first, and then a candidate

Frank Gilbert

Frank Gilbert

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Frank Gilbert looked kind of sheepish last Friday when I asked for his new phone number and instead he gave me his old one. I told him that when I had tried to call that one earlier, the recording had said it had been disconnected.

“The truth is, I let it lapse for a few days,” he said to the best of my recollection. “Teresa always took care of the bills.”

Frank is the jovial Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senate and the former mayor of Tull. Teresa, until Aug. 15, was his wife of 45 years.

The two were not exactly the classic political power couple. She registered to vote only once – in the 1990s in order to vote for him – and then de-registered after she was called for jury duty. As a Libertarian, Frank believes in as little government as possible. Teresa was socially conservative and not afraid of government enforcing traditional behavior. She called politics Frank’s “expensive hobby.”

Yeah, there were arguments in the early years, and then they put those aside. They were too busy raising three sons and later having four grandchildren, who called her “Moomaw,” to let politics get in the way.

“You know, it’s one of those things that you figure out it’s not going to change, and it’s so unimportant in the scope of what you’re doing as a family that it became a running joke,” he said.

One other thing about Teresa was she was kind of stubborn about going to the doctor, right up until June 5 when the pain in her stomach became so unbearable that she let Frank drive her to the hospital. A CT scan at 10 p.m. that night revealed she had a golf ball-sized mass at the base of her pancreas that had metastasized to 20-30 spots on her liver. The doctor didn’t offer a prognosis, but they understood.

“Of course we all Googled it, and when you Google pancreatic cancer, you know you’re praying for a miracle,” he said.

After further tests, Frank and Teresa were told she had six months to two years to live. She actually had 10 weeks. During that time, Frank dropped off the campaign trail. About a week after she died, he was back at work at the Bauxite School District, where he’s an in-school suspension officer, and he restarted his campaign.

“That week in between made me understand that I needed some normalcy. … I’ve heard people talk about compartmentalizing, and I can’t do it,” he said. “She’s on my mind all the time.”

He and the Democratic candidate for Senate, Conner Eldridge, have debated twice. On Tuesday, Frank will take off work to participate in a third debate that will be televised that night on AETN – the only one that will include the incumbent, Republican Sen. John Boozman.

At one time, Frank was actually a Republican himself – the party’s second vice chairman. But he does not fit into that party, and he’s not a Democrat.

“The difference I saw when Republicans started winning elections was that we ran those Democrat Hogs away from the public trough and ran those Republican Hogs up there to replace them,” he said.

At the AETN debate, he’ll argue positions from a Libertarian perspective that wouldn’t always be an easy sale with voters. Because he believes in limited government, he favors privatizing Social Security and Medicare some time in the long-term future. He’d fight no drug war and very few overseas ones. In a debate with Eldridge, he asked how Americans would feel if their child were killed in a drone strike and said the United States had engaged in imperialism, adding, “When you sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind.”

Running for governor in 2014, Frank won less than 2 percent of the vote. He knows the best he can hope for is 3-5 percent this year. He’s running because he believes in the cause and because he’s hopeful Libertarians may have an impact on state and national politics in his grandchildren’s day.

So he’s either Abraham Lincoln helping start a movement, or he’s Don Quixote tilting at windmills. Still, he doesn’t plan to quit running for office.

“I may grab my heart and go see Teresa, but until that happened it’s physically impossible,” he said. “I enjoy it enough that I’ll keep doing it and hopefully not spend quite as much money in the future.”

Related: Libertarians, Greens better choice than death.

When the governor crosses the line

Gov. Asa Hutchinson

Gov. Asa Hutchinson

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

If Asa Hutchinson is in Texarkana, Ark., he’s governor. If he crosses over into Texarkana, Tex., Tim Griffin, the lieutenant governor, becomes governor. If Griffin is also out of state, he isn’t the governor either, though he’s still lieutenant governor. In that case, Senate President Pro Tempore Jonathan Dismang, a legislator from Beebe, is governor – assuming he also hasn’t left the state.

Got it?

Under the Arkansas Constitution, the governor relinquishes his powers to the lieutenant governor whenever he’s out of state. But that could change. Issue 2 on the November ballot would allow governors to maintain their powers wherever they are.

Legislators placed the proposal on the ballot because this is the 21st century, and governors can maintain contact with home much more easily than in 1914, when voters created the position of lieutenant governor and assigned its duties.

Moreover, the governor has become, in addition to being chief executive, a traveling face-of-the-state and occasional globe-trotting salesman. For example, in the past 12 months Hutchinson has flown to China to help secure a $1 billion paper mill in Arkadelphia, and to Europe to attend an air show, meet with aerospace-related business prospects, and open the state’s European office. He’s going back to China in October. He was in Austin, Texas, for the Texas Tribune Festival Sept. 24.

The system works fine most of the time because Hutchinson and Griffin, like most governors and lieutenant governors, get along well, are members of the same party and know their roles.

But there have been times when things didn’t work so smoothly. When Gov. Mike Beebe, a Democrat, was at a National Governors Association meeting in 2013, his Republican lieutenant governor, Mark Darr, signed a gun bill Beebe did not intend to sign, though Beebe planned to let it become law unsigned. In 1993, when Gov. Jim Guy Tucker was out of state and the lieutenant governor’s office was vacant, Senate President Pro Tempore Jerry Jewell used his temporary powers to set free a convicted murderer and another convicted felon and pardon two men on parole. In 1987, Senate President Pro Tempore Nick Wilson fired Gov. Bill Clinton’s chief of staff, Betsey Wright, and vetoed some bills. Clinton rehired Wright when he returned. Wilson eventually went to prison, for other reasons.

This is the second time in 14 years Arkansas voters have had the chance to make this change. They rejected a similar proposal in 2002.

The arguments against? Even in the 21st century, there could be times when a governor might be out of state and inaccessible. On Sept. 11, 2001, Gov. Mike Huckabee was in Kentucky and could not return by air, and Lt. Gov. Win Rockefeller could act with authority on that terrible day because he legally was the governor. Plus, maybe it’s a good thing that the Constitution reminds the governor not to be too much of a globe-trotting salesman.

One other thing about Issue 2 is that it would add feminine pronouns to that part of the Constitution. Section 4 of Amendment 6, which would be amended, refers only to “his” and “he.” The assumption in 1914 was that the governor would be a male, which makes sense because women were six years away from having the right to vote.

I worked in the lieutenant governor’s office from 2003-06, and I can tell you that we don’t really need the position as it currently exists. Its only constitutional duties are to preside over the Senate and to serve as governor if the elected governor is out of state, dies or is incapacitated. No well-run business would have a “lieutenant CEO” with similar non-duties, a salary and staff.

So I will vote yes. The governor should still be fully governor when he or she leaves the state, just as when the president leaves the country, the vice president doesn’t take over the job.

But it’s not the reform that’s needed. What should happen is that the governor and lieutenant governor run together on the same party ticket, like the president and vice president, and work together as a team after elected. That way, Rockefeller could have managed the situation with plenty of authority as Huckabee’s lieutenant governor on Sept. 11, but Jewell wouldn’t have been able to let the convicted murderer out of prison.

At least Issue 2 will let the governor be governor whenever he crosses the line.

A better Electoral College

Elections aheadBy Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Voters across this country are being reminded once again this year that, if they live in 39 states including Arkansas, presidential candidates either take their votes for granted or write their votes off.

That’s because we don’t elect presidents by the popular vote but through the Electoral College. Arkansas gets six votes out of the 538 cast, and everyone knows who will win those six – the Republican, in this case Donald Trump. In a Talk Business & Politics-Hendrix College poll published Sept. 22, Trump was trouncing Hillary Clinton, 55-34 percent. But the outcome was obvious long before then.

On Election Night, the Associated Press and the TV networks will call Arkansas for Trump the instant the polls close and then move on to the swing states: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Virginia and Wisconsin.

If elections were decided by a national popular vote, Arkansans’ votes would go into one big pot to be counted with those from every other state. Instead, those votes go into the Arkansas pot, where the outcome is already known.

This means your individual vote in Arkansas effectively has zero influence on who becomes the next president. So if you cannot abide Trump or Clinton, you are free to join the seven percent of Arkansans who told Talk Business they are voting for someone else.

“Vote your conscience because your vote has no effect anyway” is not exactly a rallying cry for the status quo, and it’s not the only problem with the Electoral College. Because Arkansas is not a swing state, both the Trump and Clinton campaigns made early decisions to waste no resources courting it, and to make no promises that would benefit it.

The Electoral College has numerous other flaws. First, because 48 states are winner-take-all, the loser of the popular vote can be elected president, which has happened four times, most recently in 2000. In fact, it’s possible for a candidate to win the presidency by winning the largest 11 states, even if by narrow margins, while not even appearing on the ballot in the others. Second, because of the way electors are apportioned, Americans living in small states have greater influence than those living in large states. In a country that professes to believe in “one person, one vote,” a Wyoming resident’s vote has four times the weight of a Texan’s, according to the advocacy group FairVote. Third, the winner-take-all system creates a strong incentive for voters to choose the least objectionable major party candidate, making it very difficult for a qualified third party candidate with good ideas to make a dent. Finally, in 21 states, including Arkansas, electors do not have to follow the voters’ wishes. They can vote for whomever they want – and have done so 157 times in American history, according to FairVote.

The Electoral College was created by framers of the Constitution who were skeptical of giving the people too much power. If we were designing our democracy today, there’s no way we would do it this way.

One solution is a nationwide popular vote, but having to count 130 million votes one at a time could be messy and produce unintended consequences. Besides, a government that cannot produce a budget or fight the Zika virus is not going to make this big a change.

So instead of abolishing the Electoral College, why not just make it better? Multiple the number of electoral votes by 10 in each state, giving Arkansas 60 votes instead of six. That way, there would be enough to apportion them according to the results. In Arkansas, Trump would get the 55 percent he’s already getting without trying here, plus whatever else he could earn by actually campaigning, while Clinton would win electoral votes and so could the third party and independent candidates. Meanwhile, Clinton would no longer be assured of winning all of California’s 55 votes. Her total would match the percentage of 550 she earns there.

Also, either make it illegal for electors to vote against the people’s wishes, or, better yet, just get rid of electors entirely and assign electoral votes automatically.

We don’t have to repeal and replace the Electoral College. Let’s just fix it so presidential candidates can’t take anyone’s vote for granted or write anybody’s off. Let’s make every state matter, not just the swing states. All it takes is simple math: Multiply by 10 and divide according to the results.

No debate: Tough for Arkansas Democrats to win statewide races

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

You can’t blame a guy for trying, and that includes trying to be a U.S. senator.

I’m referring to Democratic candidate Conner Eldridge’s latest attempt to debate Republican Sen. John Boozman, or at least to remind whoever is listening that Boozman doesn’t want to debate him.

Which he doesn’t, and why would he? Debates are unpredictable, and Boozman might make a big mistake, although this campaign is showing that a candidate can say or do just about anything and still become a major party presidential nominee. Boozman has agreed to one debate, sponsored by AETN Oct. 12.

Boozman will continue doing what all front-running incumbents do: Avoid his opponent no matter how much the opponent gets under his skin, stay out of trouble, and use his huge fundraising advantage to run television ads, which Boozman has begun doing with a recent $300,000 ad buy. The ad shows him in a positive light and doesn’t mention Eldridge, who isn’t on TV yet.

Meanwhile, Eldridge will continue doing what all underdog opponents do: try to throw a kink in those plans. After months of calling out Boozman – even driving a truck around the state with two podiums – Eldridge finally held a debate without him in Fayetteville with the Libertarian candidate, Frank Gilbert. On the stage was an empty podium signifying Boozman’s absence.

The run-up to the debate was kind of messy. As reported by KUAR’s Jacob Kauffman, the debate was to be organized by the University of Arkansas Associated Student Government. Apparently the Boozman campaign was never issued an invitation, which of course it would have declined. Still, when the snafu became apparent, the debate’s moderator, Doug Thompson with the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, pulled out.

I should disclose that I was then approached by Gilbert to see if I would be willing to moderate and said I would do it, but then I removed myself from consideration when I learned about the empty podium prop. The night of the debate, television anchor Dillon Thomas also backed out.

Basically, everybody got what they wanted, though in a roundabout way. Boozman avoided the debate. Eldridge got a visual of an empty podium that he can use to remind voters that Boozman won’t debate him – which is more useful to him than an actual debate, which few would watch. Gilbert had a chance to discuss the issues, which is why he’s running as a Libertarian and not as a major party candidate.

The problem for Eldridge is that this election was over when he decided to put a “D” at the end of his name and Boozman already had an “R” at the end of his, and “Sen.” at the front.

Here are the percentages statewide Republican candidates have won in recent elections: 57 percent by Sen. Tom Cotton in 2014; 55 percent by Gov. Asa Hutchinson in 2014; 61 percent by Mitt Romney in 2012; and 58 percent by Boozman in 2010.

Here are the percentages won by Democrats in those races: 39, 41, 37, 37, by Sen. Mark Pryor in 2014, by Mike Ross in his race for governor in 2014, by President Obama in 2012, and by Sen. Blanche Lincoln in 2010.

See a pattern there? The Republican ceiling is somewhere in the high 50s to low 60s. The Democrats’ ceiling is somewhere in the high 30s to low 40s. It’s possible that the six people running for president as independents and third party candidates might mess up that equation in that race a little, but not much. Otherwise, Hillary Clinton, Arkansas’ former first lady, would be campaigning here.

Debates will not make Arkansas competitive. What will make Arkansas competitive is demographic change – when the voting population becomes more diverse, as has happened in other states, and when today’s young people become active voters. The rising millennial generation seems to be more liberal about some things, although some voters become more conservative as they grow older.

Eldridge can’t wait for all of that. He’s running this year, so you can’t blame him for trying to make this race competitive, even though he probably can’t.

So why run as a Democrat? For the same reason Gilbert ran as a Libertarian – because it’s the party that most closely fits his views. You can’t blame a guy for that, either.

Steve Brawner is an independent journalist in Arkansas. Email him at brawnersteve@mac.com. Follow him on Twitter at @stevebrawner.

Casino vote makes strange bedfellows

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

There’s a lot more to this debate over the proposed casino amendment than just whether or not Arkansas should have more slot machines than it already does – which is quite a lot between Oaklawn and Southland.

Issue 5 would create a constitutional amendment authorizing the building of one casino each in Washington County, Miller County and Boone County. The casinos would be required to pay the state 18% of their net and would pay 1.5% to the city where they are located and .5% to their local counties. An Arkansas Gaming Commission would regulate.

The amendment’s backers, Arkansas Wins in 2016, say Arkansas should have casinos here because they’re already just across the border elsewhere – in Mississippi, in western Oklahoma; in Caruthersville, Missouri; and in Shreveport, Louisiana. Adding three casinos in Arkansas would keep Arkansas gamblers at home and attract some out-of-staters. A lot of people think going to casinos is fun. If they’re going to gamble, eat at buffets and go to shows, they might as well do it in Arkansas, employing Arkansans, boosting tourism and paying state taxes.

Politics makes strange bedfellows, and that’s definitely true with this issue. Opposed to the effort are faith-based groups such as the Family Council along with the state’s existing gambling providers, Oaklawn and Southland, which race horses and greyhounds on a part-time basis and operate casino-like entities full-time. The Family Council doesn’t want the gambling; Oaklawn and Southland don’t want the competition.

They’ll be working in parallel but not really together. The Family Council will spread through its grassroots network of churches its message that gambling leads to social ills – addiction, divorce, etc. – without the promised economic benefits. Meanwhile, Oaklawn along with Southland’s parent corporation in August donated a total of $109,500 to the Committee to Protect Arkansas’ Values/Stop Casinos Now. In fact, they’re the only donors listed in the required campaign filing with the Arkansas Ethics Commission. That money is funding a lawsuit in the Arkansas Supreme Court to disqualify the amendment.

Four years ago, a group with a similar name and the same chairman, former Arkansas Sheriffs Association Executive Director Chuck Lange, raised more than $1 million from Southland, so that $109,500 is probably just seed money.

The Committee’s messaging so far has focused less on gambling’s ills and more on what the proposed amendment does and doesn’t do. The amendment defines gambling as whatever is legal in Arkansas’ surrounding states and in Nevada, meaning Arkansas policymakers would be handcuffed in defining terms and setting limits. It would allow sports betting and alcohol sales.

Like previous casino amendments that have either been tossed from the ballot or voted down by Arkansans, this one is backed by those who would make money off it. It would embed in the Arkansas Constitution a permanent monopoly granted to two Missouri businessmen, Bob Womack of Branson and Jim Thompson of Blue Eye, and their successors and assignees.

That means no one else could operate a casino anywhere in Arkansas except those two along with Oaklawn and Southland. Those two existing casinos are limited by law, for now, to “electronic games of skill,” such as blackjack tables with electronic “cards” rather than those dealt by humans.

So expect to hear opponents use the words “out of state” a lot, even though Arkansas’ two current gambling establishments also are owned by out-of-state entities – Oaklawn by the Cella family of St. Louis, and Southland by Buffalo-based Delaware North.

All of this very easily could become moot. The issue is now in the hands of the Arkansas Supreme Court, which is considering whether the ballot title is misleading and whether the signatures were collected improperly.

In fact, all four voter-led ballot initiatives – this, two that would legalize medical marijuana, and one that would limit judgments in medical lawsuits – are being sued for one reason or another.

Will at least one of them be disqualified? History shows that’s a pretty safe bet.