Signals from Jenna

By Jennifer J. Foster

This just in: Jenna Bush has her own brain. And it’s functioning quite fine, thank you very much. 

First, she appeared on Larry King Live with her mother to promote the pair’s children’s book about reading. Sounds safe enough, right? And it was—until King posed a rhetorical question to Jenna about her presumed support for GOP nominee-to-be John McCain, and Jenna said she was “open to learning about the candidates.“

Next came The Wedding. You heard all about the gown, the ring, the shroud of secrecy, the way the guests were bussed to the ranch, even the limestone cross that was commissioned for the ceremony. But did you hear about the minister (slide 5)?

He was the Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, a noted “spiritual adviser” to President Bush and—surprisingly?—a supporter of Barack Obama.

You can read an interesting interview with Pastor Caldwell here.

The latest instance, and No. 3 in the series for those of you who are counting, came on Thursday when the new Mrs. Henry Hager appeared on the Ellen DeGeneres show. DeGeneres had announced the day before that she intends to marry her longtime partner, Portia de Rossi, in the wake of the California Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the state’s ban on gay marriage.

(Incidentally, I bet that decision is available online. For free. But I digress.)

Anyway, DeGeneres got to chatting with the Jenna

Bush

Hager as she showed off her wedding photos, and—again, with her mother at her side—Jenna reportedly engaged (sorry, couldn’t help it) in this exchange with Ellen: 

Ellen: “So, the ranch was a great place to get married – it looked like nobody could fly over and get pictures or bother you, really.“

Jenna: “Yeah, that was really nice.“

Ellen: “So, can we borrow it for our wedding,“ DeGeneres asked. “Can we get the ranch?“

Jenna: “Sure.“

Ellen: “Okay, great.“

It’s likely that this was just Ellen being Ellen, much as she did when she asked John McCain to walk her down the aisle when he appeared on her show last week. But this recent exchange was notable, nonetheless, because it was the third in a series of such signals Jenna is sending that she’s ready to think on her own.

Supreme Court update

By Jennifer J. Foster

By way of updating the I-would-like-to-get-a-copy-of-a-State-Supreme-Court-ruling-but-I-don’t-have-$200 saga, I called the Court this morning and spoke with a nice gentleman who told me that although the Court does not make rulings freely available online, he would be happy to look up the case and copy the records (for a fee, of course) so I could pick them up in Montgomery.

But I’m not in Montgomery, I said.

No problem, he said; he can mail or fax them (for an additional fee, of course). I just need to provide him with the “styling” of the case, he said.

(“Case styling” is just fancy lawyer-speak for who’s suing whom.)

Well, I don’t have the styling, but it’s the ruling that stayed the Board of Education’s double-dipping ban, I said.

He needs the styling to search for it, he said.

I don’t have the styling; I only know the subject matter of the case. And since I’m not an attorney, I don’t have access to Lexis-Nexis/Westlaw-type databases that would give me the styling from the subject matter.

But wait! I know when the ruling came down. Maybe that would help? It was released on Friday, I said.

No dice. Still need the styling to look it up, he said. Maybe the State Law Library could help.

I thanked him and hung up.

The bottom line is that while, apparently, laypeople can get copies of the rulings for a “nominal” fee, the system to access them is labyrinthine, at best. The nice guy at the Supreme Court, the folks at the State Law Library ... none of them would have to hold my hand through this process if the Court would just make the rulings available on the Internet, like everyone around us has already figured out how to do.

I would just like to point out that in the time it took me to make that single phone call this morning, I could have accessed and printed 15-20 rulings from state supreme courts of our neighbors.

Online.

For free.

Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on how you look at it), we have one Supreme Court seat up for election this year. It’s the one occupied by Associate Justice Harold See.

I feel a campaign issue coming on. How about you?

Quote of the Day

By Jennifer J. Foster

No, the chicken quote isn’t the quote of the day.

It’s a close second to this one from Alabama House Majority Leader Ken Guin (D-Carbon Hill) on prospects for success in this week’s special session:

“The problem is the Senate. The Senate is just out of control,“ Guin said. “You hope at some point that their sense of responsibility to the people who elected them starts weighing on them.“

Hahahahahahaha!!!!!

Ken Guin scolding senators for a lack of “sense of responsibility to the people” is like Pamela Anderson instructing young women on the virtues of purity: It’s just not credible.

You might remember that Guin was one of the (many) state lawmakers caught up in Brett Blackledge’s Pulitzer Prize-winning Double-Dipping Legislator Roundup:

Alabama House Majority Leader Ken Guin, who receives paychecks from two community colleges totaling $98,398 a year, often submitted the same work reports to both schools and made reference to his state legislative business in some work summaries, records show.

Many of Guin’s work reports - often two or three pages - included political commentary or discussions of his opinion on state and local issues. In some cases, Guin, a leader in the state Democratic Party, makes strong pitches for party candidates, including Don Siegelman, when he was seeking re-election as governor in 2002.

Guin, a state House of Representatives member from Carbon Hill, receives $49,677 a year from Shelton State Community College in Tuscaloosa and $48,721 from Bevill State Community College in Sumiton.

Officials at Shelton State recently said they are not sure what Guin did for his salary.

Brring! Brring!!

Hello?

Hello, Kettle? This is Pot. You’re black!!

P.S. Props to Birmingham News reporter David White; none of today’s material would be possible without his legislative reporting. Thanks, David!

Back to Montgomery

By Jennifer J. Foster

Good Tuesday morning, Alabamians! We’re waking up to a mixed bag today.

The bad news is, your state legislators are back in Montgomery for special session this afternoon.

The good news is, with any luck, they won’t be there long.

You’ll remember that this is all because half of Alabama’s state senators got into a “chicken” match (their words, not mine) with the other half of Alabama’s state senators regarding the education budget; the egomaniacal showdown continued until the regular session expired at midnight Tuesday.

The Birmingham News brings us this special session primer, which is one part history and one part prognostication. Some excerpts:

``My prediction is that we will pass a budget, and I believe we can do it in five days,“ said Sen. Hank Sanders, D-Selma, who chairs the Senate committee that drafts the education budget.

Sen. Jabo Waggoner, R-Vestavia Hills, agreed. ``I don’t think we’ll leave there this time without a budget,“ said Waggoner, leader of the 13 Senate Republicans.

Oh, good. My only question is, if they “believe” they can do it in five days, why couldn’t they do it in the 60 they’ve already had?

``I think there’s a greater sense of urgency among the members now to pass a budget,“ Waggoner said. ``I think you’ll see both sides a lot more willing to come to the table and compromise.“ Sanders said, ``We had folks who killed the budget, and of course, they took the whole Senate and Legislature off the cliff. But they went off the cliff too. I think those who killed it have had some public reaction.“

Those comments are just too hilarious to be serious. “A greater sense of urgency?” Than failing your constitutional duty during regular session? Let’s hope so!

“Those who killed it” have had public reaction? You’re the education budget chairman, Sen. Sanders. I think you all should be replaced. How’s that strike you for “reaction?”

And what was all this about, anyway? What could have possibly been so egregious a difference in policy that it caused the entire budget passage process to collapse?

The education budget … would have spent $6.36 billion from the Education Trust Fund, a drop of $369.5 million, or 5.5 percent, from this year’s record spending.

Trust fund spending would have been cut $118.6 million, or 2.9 percent, for K-12’s foundation program, its main source of money, and by $151.6 million, or 10.9 percent, for universities …

On Monday, Sanders and other senators allied with Paul Hubbert, executive secretary of the Alabama Education Association teachers’ lobby, faced off against Sen. Jim Preuitt, D-Talladega, and others allied with Malcolm Portera, chancellor of the University of Alabama System, and contract lobbyist Joe Fine, whose clients include foundations for the University of Alabama and Auburn University …

Senators couldn’t agree whether to give public universities an additional $25 million.

Oh, OK … $25 million out of $6.36 billion. With a B.

The last time I checked, “million” was a lot less than “billion.“ Does “million” mean something else in Montgomery?

Gov. Bob Riley said superintendents have fired some teachers because of uncertainty over next year’s spending levels. Riley wants a budget passed soon so superintendents can rehire people before they sign on to work in other states.

``Every senator should look at every teacher in the state of Alabama and every kid and apologize for what happened last week,“ Riley said.

Understatement of the year. How about apologizing to the taxpayers of Alabama, who are going to have to put up at least $110,000 for this nonsense?

``It’s kind of like a game of chicken, and neither side blinked,“ said Sen. Lowell Barron, D-Fyffe.

Chicken.

A $6.36 billion game of chicken, Barron says.

Unbelievable.