Tuesday Morning Random Collection of Thoughts

Good morning, and happy Election Day. I've been tied up with work through the weekend, so I haven't been able to post. I'm slammed today as well, but thought it best to throw a couple of things out there as a sign of life.

First, I'm voting for Marshand, and mostly for the same reasons Jim expressed. Jim and I did not talk about the race prior to his post, and I'm glad we both wound up on the same side. First and foremost for me is Downtown development, and I feel more comfortable with Marshand leading that charge. Right behind that is Two Lakes. I'm an unabashed fan, and even though Harvey's past rhetoric on the subject indicates a willingness to support Two Lakes, his language at last week's debate indicates he's not quite made up his mind on which flood control project he supports. That, of course, means more studies, with which Harvey is well-acquainted.

That leads me to a brief Two Lakes rant: Yesterday evening, I was able to spend some time on the roof of my building downtown with a couple of friends. Looking out over the skyline of Jackson, my friend Tye pulled up pictures of the 1979 flood on his iPhone. The three of us on the roof last night are in our early 30's, so we're too young to have experienced the flood firsthand. But with our bird's eye view of Jackson and arial pictures of the disaster, the three of us came away with a new appreciation for how destructive the Pearl River can be. (Click here for a collection of arial photos of the '79 flood.) It also impressed upon me that the refusal to control and utilize the Pearl River has been one of Jackson's greatest failures.

We've known for 30 years how destructive the Pearl can be, and we've done little but build inadequate levees. We've also known for nearly 200 years that we have a river running through the middle of our capital city, and we've done nothing at all to harness the economic power of it. Economic power that would, in time, pave our streets, educate our children, and lower crime. Generation after generation of Jacksonians have proven unable to find the time and willpower to cultivate Jackson's greatest natural resource. It's time to move forward on development of the Pearl River and transform the future of Mississippi's most important city.

Also, there's a hearing tomorrow before Judge Yerger in the Sharrod Moore case. Here's what I've noticed as odd: First, Asst. DA Jamie McBride is making all of the comments to the press on this one. Previously, Robert Shuler Smith, the DA, uttered every word. Second, there will be a hearing tomorrow on the dismissal, so the State can put on the record its reasons for ditching the prosecution.

With respect to ADA McBride now doing all of the talking, well, there's an old maxim that fits this like a glove: Victory has a hundred fathers, but defeat is an orphan. DA Smith wants as far away from this as possible, as he is going to catch a great deal of bad press for indicting this case and not following through.

As for the hearing, the fact that there will be one at all is interesting to me. Cases are dismissed and orders of nolle prosequi are entered all the time without a hearing. I can't see any benefit for the DA's Office in having a hearing on the dismissal, as it simply puts the matter out there for another news cycle. My guess is Judge Yerger is requiring the hearing. That makes sense, as this is the case that led to a show cause hearing for Judge Yerger's court administrator, at which she was threatened with indictment and DA Smith sought recusal of Judge Yerger for what he perceived to be bias towards the defense. I think Judge Yerger essentially wants the State to step forward and put on the record that they're dismissing this case because they have serious problems with the evidence, not because Judge Yerger's being unfair to them. And, like getting read and delivery receipts on every email you send, that's a prudent move.

I'll discuss the timing of the dismissal in a later post.

Voting For Mayor

Like most of the people I have spoken or corresponded with on the issue, I have had a difficult time deciding how to cast my vote for Mayor of Jackson. I do not see either of the Democratic candidates as a disaster; nor do I see either one as a savior.

The two men have far more in common than their partisans will admit. The JFP's excellent analysis of the two candidates is worth your time; the Clarion-Ledger's Sunday piece is also helpful.

I detest the caricatures that have been cast like stones in this campaign (and plastered on my car): Marshand Crisler as the tool of business interests, who will favor the white community, and Harvey Johnson as overly race-conscious, who will favor the African-American community.

In my opinion, both men are Democrats in the national sense of the word -- they plan to govern as liberals (meaning they believe in the power of government to lead problem-solving in the community) but from a pro-economic development, pro-law enforcement perspective.

I previously posted my basic thoughts about the Johnson/Crisler runoff; I will not repeat myself here. I will simply state the two central reasons why my vote in the run-off is for Marshand Crisler (Of course, I don't speak for Matt or any other resident or visitor in my World).

First, Councilman Crisler seems more willing than Mayor Johnson to approach law enforcement from a consolidated, county/city model. He may not re-appoint Sheriff McMillin as police chief, but he will certainly require the JPD to work with the Hinds County Sheriff's Office to minimize turf conflict and duplicative efforts and secure the most efficient, effective crime prevention program for the City. Given Robert Johnson's endorsement, one wonders if the former Chief might be re-appointed to that post in a Crisler Administration; that would be a welcome move.

Second, Crisler is more likely to maintain the momentum for business and economic development in the City. Harvey Johnson can rightly take credit for the Convention Center complex. But government projects can only initiate economic development; to complete the job, the private sector must be engaged and motivated. That's the secret of every national Democrat's success, from Wilson through FDR, JFK, LBJ, and Clinton, and it's the model of the Obama Administration (Geithner-haters notwithstanding).

The small number of non-residential permits granted during the Johnson Administration, as compared to the Melton term (an eight-fold increase), is an objective indicator of Mr. Johnson's lack of appreciation of the role of the business community in building Jackson. And it's clear that the business community returns the favor.

One other point: some have said that Crisler will be "Frank, the Sequel." The question whether Deputy Crisler's "took a bullet" encounter actually happened during an invalid house raid is fodder for those concerns. See the posts on Jackson Jambalaya, which first brought these issues to light. But it's worth noting that Crisler was 25 years old then, a relatively new deputy, and unlike others in his unit, was not charged with wrongdoing at the time.

And unlike the late Mayor, Marshand Crisler has experience in local government, both as a Councilman and in the Sheriff's Office. Frank Melton, all too often, thought running government was like running a medium-sized business -- the top gun gives the orders and watches as the squad obeys. Crisler has been overseeing city government for eight years and knows better than that.

My vote is for Marshand Crisler. I hope he prevails in the runoff and in the general election. But I won't be upset if Harvey Johnson is the victor instead. Even if this is the "As Good As It Gets" election, Jackson will take great strides forward under either Democrat.

Memo to Northside Sun: The DOJ Did Not Cause Segregation

It's fascinating to live in the South during the Post-Civil Rights Era. There are lots of complicated issues about how to turn rhetoric into reality. But the process is delayed by self-serving "leaders" on both sides of the racial divide.

I posted previously about the Jackson Advocate piece written by Rep. Jim Evans, in which two of the late Mayor's opponents were characterized in a stereotyped, derogatory way to suggest that they weren't independent-minded African-Americans but rather "slaves" picked by "the Capitol Street gang."

Now we have Wyatt Emmerich at the Northside Sun, re-writing history on route to endorsing Councilman Crisler. The Sun's editorial says, in part:

One of the great tragedies of Jackson and the Delta is that integration has failed. Whites go to private schools and blacks go to public schools. Sadly, this was partially caused by an ideological federal justice department that shut down successfully integrated neighborhood schools.

Puh-lease. Would this have been the Nixon Administration Justice Department? Yes, it was, in 1970.

Would this have been after the State of Mississippi's lawyers filibustered for so long that the US Supreme Court, in Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, said that the time for "deliberate speed" was over and the schools had to be integrated that January? Yep.

Would this have been 94 years after the 1876 debacle that destroyed Reconstruction and delayed racial healing in this country? Yes.

There was no "ideological" Justice Department, Mr. Emmerich. Only one that had to do something because the responsible officials did nothing -- or worse.

But at least the Sun had this to say about hopes for the future:

Mississippi has one great ace in the hole - the common Christian belief of both races.

Earth to Sun: not all Mississippians -- white or black -- are Christian. We can boast of a vibrant Jewish, Muslim, and Hindu presence in our community, not to mention Buddhists and those who doubt the spiritual realm altogether.

Maybe the Sun's editor should go back to promoting Esperanto as the universal language.

Horhn, Crisler Agree: No Offer to Endorse in Exchange for Paying Debts

The Jackson Free Press is reporting the response of both Sen. John Horhn and Councilman Marshand Crisler to the flyer that was stuck on my (and many others, I presume) car yesterday:

"I was approached by both campaigns and actively approached by the Crisler campaign," Horhn told the Jackson Free Press. "A number of offers were made by the Crisler campaign, some of which were quite lucrative. ... The fact of the matter is that the Crisler campaign fell all over itself trying to recruit me to their campaign with promises of elimination of my campaign debt and a few other things. And for them to suggest otherwise is absolutely ludicrous. They put the money on the table. The Johnson campaign has no money."

Also according to the JFP story, Councilman Crisler says the flyer is false, and claims he did not approve the flyer:

At a press conference this morning, mayoral candidate Marshand Crisler denied allegations, made in two new fliers supporting his candidacy, that his opponent Harvey Johnson bought the endorsement of state Sen. John Horhn, a former mayoral candidate. When asked about the fliers, Crisler first responded, "I denounce any negative politics and that one in particular." When the JFP's Adam Lynch and Donna Ladd asked directly whether Horhn had ever offered to sell his endorsement, Crisler replied, "No."

I'm glad to hear it. Now I want to know who was behind the flyers.

Gee, Why Would They Do That?

From this morning's New York Times, a report on how prosecutors OPPOSE DNA testing:

"A recent analysis of 225 DNA exonerations by Brandon L. Garrett, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, found that prosecutors opposed DNA testing in almost one out of five cases. In many of the others, they initially opposed testing but ultimately agreed to it. In 98 of those 225 cases, the DNA test identified the real culprit."

The story is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/us/18dna.html?_r=1&hp

My two cents: the rule that "the ethical duty of the prosecutor is to seek, justice, not convictions" is honored more in the breach than the observance.  Why would a prosecutor oppose a DNA test?  If the defendant or prisoner is guilty, the test will prove that.  If he or she is innocent, justice demands their release.

I think the adversarial system of justice is fun.  But sometimes, it doesn't serve our society's interests or values very well.  When prosecutors give in to the human desire to "win" every case, we all end up as losers.


 

Horhn For Rent?

I was annoyed as hell to see two soaked pieces of paper leaking ink onto the Miata in the Fondren Presbyterian parking lot yesterday.  They were both from the Crisler campaign.  Having yet to decide whether to post a preference in the Mayoral race, I was seriously tempted to endorse Johnson.  That became more likely when I perused the comically adolescent "SS Harvey Johnson" hit piece.

But I became less upset when I read the second weather-beaten sheet.  It claimed that Sen John Horhn's campaign had initiated feelers to both of the run-off candidates, if they would assist him in raising sufficient funds to pay off his campaign debt.

Now, such deals are not uncommon.  Hillary Clinton did the same when she withdrew from the presidential race.  But given the active role Senator Horhn has taken in the runoff campaign, it is a fair question whether his assertions about Harvey Johnson are sincere.

But I'm still upset about the ink on my car.

State asks to dismiss case against Sharrod Moore

All I'll say right now is that this certainly is interesting timing. More to come...
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T