 |
| |
  |
|
|
|
|
ONE-ON-ONE
- December 2000 by Ed G. Lane "Louisville
Will Be One Community in Name Only Prominent Kentuckians discuss merger, annual sessions, and the electoral college With the presidential race still undetermined, Lane Report publisher Ed Lane undertook to query some prominent Kentuckians about what’s in store for citizens of the Commonwealth in the wake of Election Tuesday’s more clear-cut results. While not all the respondents addressed all the questions, their broad perspectives and experience nonetheless offer an incisive view of the challenges facing our cities, state and nation. Paul Patton Ed Lane: How will the merger of Louisville and Jefferson County benefit the Kentucky economy? Paul Patton: The Louisville economy is the engine that drives Kentucky’s economy. If you look at what merger has done for cities like Indianapolis and Nashville, you can expect that the Louisville-Jefferson County merger will expand economic development in Louisville, and therefore Kentucky. EL: What will be two major obstacles to overcome in implementing Greater Louisville’s merged government? PP: The same bipartisan unification of business and grassroots forces that brought about such a decisive victory for unity will carry right on through to the implementation. So, although any degree of change can present difficulties, I don’t expect there to be major obstacles to the merger. EL: Will minorities and residents of small cities be adequately represented in the merged government? PP: The merger plan itself, with the 26 districts, was designed to ensure that all neighborhoods are represented. EL: What benefits will annual sessions of the Kentucky legislature provide? PP: I have always supported the concept of the legislature meeting annually. However, due to the limited number of days the General Assembly would meet in this session, I advocated limiting the number of issues addressed to a few high-priority items. The amendment passed on Election Day allows for an unlimited number of bills to be filed for consideration during the brief session. Consequently, I am working with the legislative leaders as we prepare for the 2001 session, and I’m hopeful we will focus our energy and resources on those issues that will have the greatest positive impact on the welfare of our Commonwealth. EL: Would elimination of the electoral college in the presidential selection process be detrimental to Kentucky? PP: We now face many issues that the founding fathers did not when they established the electoral process, and perhaps the time has come to reevaluate the electoral college system of choosing a president. We’ve learned from this election that every vote counts, and I feel that the vote of every Kentuckian carries the same weight as a vote cast in any other state whether we continue to use the electoral college system or not. Dr. Thomas
Clark Ed Lane: How will the merger of Louisville and Jefferson County benefit the Kentucky economy? Thomas D. Clark: Unless it creates a unified government with unified plans and common political and economic plans, I doubt that it will have much fundamental effect on much of outlying Kentucky. EL: What will be two major obstacles to overcome in implementing Greater Louisville’s merged government? TC: Racial relations and internal provinciality. There might well be a third one – building up confidence in the joint county urban political system. EL: What benefits will annual sessions of the Kentucky legislature provide? TC: There are mixed views on this subject. I feel annual sessions will give more time for serious consideration of issues which modern Kentucky will face in the future. This should get the state out of the necessity for calling special sessions of the General Assembly and the narrow consideration of special interest legislation. In the negative area there is a distinct reservation as to how seriously governors and legislators get down to the business of the state rather than partisan political sniping and blockages. EL: Would elimination of the electoral college in the presidential selection process be detrimental to Kentucky? TC: Perhaps. Kentucky most likely would be at a disadvantage anyway because of the rising population rates in the more urban-industrial -commercial areas and states. This classic issue was not satisfactorily settled in the constitutional convention, and it is still a baffling issue. I think, reservedly, I personally favor doing away with the electoral college. Jane Norris Ed Lane: How will the merger of Louisville and Jefferson County benefit the Kentucky economy? Jane Norris: Greater Louisville has decided to grow. That momentum will be reflected in the leaders we elect to office. They will, in turn, extend the invitation to relocating businesses. EL: What will be two major obstacles to overcome in implementing Greater Louisville’s merged government? JN: First, resistance from those who voted against the merger, and second, keeping the promises made during the campaign. EL: Will minorities and residents of small cities be adequately represented in the merged government? JN: If they participate in the election process, yes – they will. Does a minority need to be represented by a minority to be fully represented? I think not. EL: What benefits will annual sessions of the Kentucky legislature provide? JN: Full discussion of complex issues. Sometimes, I think the Kentucky Senate-General Assembly votes along party lines because they don’t have the time to seek the advice of their constituents. EL: Would elimination of the electoral college in the presidential selection process be detrimental to Kentucky? JN: Yes!!! Look at this year’s map. The middle of the country elected Bush. The populous states voted for Gore. Kentucky’s decision-making power would disappear in a “straight vote” election. Jerry
Abramson Ed Lane: How will the merger of Louisville and Jefferson County benefit the Kentucky economy? Jerry Abramson: Louisville has long been an economic development hub for Kentucky and the region. With the merger of Louisville and Jefferson County governments, we will be in an even stronger position to attract good-quality jobs and businesses to the area. First, we will have a single government with a single chief executive who can speak clearly with economic development prospects. Second, Louisville will become one of America’s Top 25 cities, putting us on the radar of many business leaders and entrepreneurs who have overlooked us in the past. The success that Louisville achieves from this new economic strength will benefit the rest of Kentucky. Tax revenues from new and expanded companies will be shared, as they are now, with communities across the state. And with our interstate system, communities just down the road may well become prime candidates for supply and spin-off industries for major Louisville companies. EL: What will be two major obstacles to overcome in implementing Greater Louisville’s merged government? JA: The first challenge will be combining two governments with a combined budget of $700 million. It’s much like merging two well-established businesses. The new government’s leaders will face many basic decisions – for example, which departments to combine and how to consolidate conflicting ordinances. The key to success – and another major challenge – will be to ensure that we involve citizens in these important decisions from the start and to share information with everyone as we move forward. We must include voices from throughout our community – including those who spoke passionately against uniting our two governments. Louisville will be one community in name only unless we all work together. EL: Will minorities and residents of small cities be adequately represented in the merged government? JA: The merger plan was designed to provide more fair and equitable representation for everyone in our community – residents of the current city, unincorporated Jefferson County and small cities. The new government will have 26 neighborhood-based council districts, each including about 26,000 residents. Voters in those districts will decide who represents them. Because these districts are much smaller than current county commission districts, candidates will have to walk their neighborhoods and talk to people to win their votes. African-Americans will likely be well represented on the new council. In six of these 26 districts, African-Americans will make up the majority of residents. Under the current two-government structure, only four legislative districts have African-American majorities. Jody Richards Ed Lane: How will the merger of Louisville and Jefferson County benefit the Kentucky economy? Jody Richards: To create and retain jobs, it is very important for a community to speak with one voice, and a regional, broad-based approach to providing governmental services is essential. The Louisville-Jefferson County area already has so much to offer. With merger, companies will be assured that, for the most part, there will be one tax structure, one service provider, and one governing authority to ensure efficiency and accountability. I believe that merger will benefit the Louisville economy and, of course, this will be a tremendous benefit to the economy of Kentucky. EL: What will be two major obstacles to overcome in implementing Greater Louisville’s merged government? JR: Getting all sections of Jefferson County to see this new government as being in the best interest of everyone and resolving disputes over the provision of services across the new metro area will require hard work, cooperation, and understanding of block-by-block issues. I believe these obstacles can be overcome. EL: Will minorities and residents of small cities be adequately represented in the merged government? JR: My understanding of the merger is that small cities are not part of Greater Louisville unless they wish to be. The question of minority representation must be dealt with in a fair and even-handed manner. This should be possible to achieve with a 26-member council, but all sides must work together to ensure that the great diversity of the Louisville-Jefferson County area is well-represented. EL: What benefits will annual sessions of the Kentucky legislature provide? JR: More efficiency, more accountability, and a tighter reign on the bureaucracy. Kentucky is a $17 billion dollar a year enterprise, and if it were a company, would be 78th on the Fortune 500 list. The annual sessions amendment will make it possible to react in a timely manner to important developments, to ensure that administrative regulations fairly represent the intent of the enabling legislation, and to offer Kentucky’s citizens a continuing voice in the operation of their government. EL: Would elimination of the electoral college in the presidential selection process be detrimental to Kentucky? JR: At this time, of course, Kentucky has no say in whether the electoral college should be retained, and this issue would only come up if Congress passed and sent to the states a proposed constitutional amendment to abolish the electoral college. As a general principle, I believe that each presidential election will present vastly different circumstances, and that in some election cycles Kentucky’s potential influence might be diminished if the electoral college were abolished. In other elections, it might be enhanced. However, I am concerned about the notion that a vote of the states deserves more weight than a vote of the people. Mitch
McConnell Ed Lane: Would elimination of the electoral college in the presidential selection process be detrimental to Kentucky? Mitch McConnell: I oppose abolishing the electoral college. Without the electoral college, the current recount in Florida would be going on in every state in America, leading to chaos and instability for our country. Without the electoral college, candidates would rarely visit or give attention to small states in a never-ending quest to rack up big majorities in population centers of our country. Ed G. Lane (edlane@lanereport.com) is chief executive of Lane Consultants Inc. and publisher of The Lane Report. |
|
|
Copyright 1996-98, by Kentucky Business Online, LLC. All rights reserved. Editorial
content is copyright 1998, Lane Communications Group Buzzword and the Buzzword balloon are registered trademarks of Buzzword, Inc. The Lane Report is a trademark of Lane Communications Group. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. |
