John Cooper raised the most money in the Second Quarter. Briley has the most "on-hand" for the final stretch.

By Rod Williams - John Cooper raised the most money in the Second Quarter, which covers the period of April 1, 2019 through June 30, 2019, having total receipts of  $850,137, of which, $555,000 was a loan from himself to his campaign.

David Briley raised $443,116, but started the second quarter with over $400,000 on hand. Cooper had no money on hand at the start of the second quarter, entering the race late. Clemmons follows with less raised and less on hand and Carol Swain brings up the rear.

Entering the finale stretch of the campaign, Briley leads with $440,194 on hand, followed by Cooper with $142,312, Clemmons with $120,006, and Swain with only $49,669.  While candidates my continue to raise money, the "on-hand" amount is important because it tells you who can buy TV and radio ads, billboards, and print media advertising. Of course, a candidate may also contribute to his own campaign or make a loan to his own campaign.

To see who the contributors were to the candidates, you can follow this link and find the full copies of the candidates campaign financial disclosures.  Below is a summary of their reports. I have not bothered to review the campaign reports of the other candidates for mayor, but if interested you can find their financial reports at the same link.



David Briley

Balance on hand last report: $416,209
Total receipts this period: $443,116
Total Dismemberment this period: $419,113
Balance on hand: $440,194

No outstanding loans

John Ray Clemmons

Balance on hand last report: 109,227
Total receipts this period: $168,445
Total Dismemberment this period: $157,666
Balance on hand: $120,006

Outstanding loans:$150,000

John Cooper

Balance on hand last report: $0
Total receipts this period: $820,137
Total Dismemberment this period: $677,824
Balance on hand: $142,312

Outstanding loans: $555,000. 

Carol Swain

Balance on hand last report: $116,198
Total receipts this period: $111,779
Total Dismemberment this period: $178,309
Balance on hand: $49,669

No outstanding loans

Top Stories

Mayoral Candidates stake out positions on affordable housing

Last night candidates for mayor took part in a forum sponsored by NOAH, Nashville Organized for Action and Hope. This is a  progressive coalition of interfaith and labor groups. About 500 people attended the event but unfortunately I was not able to attend. One of the topics of this forum was  affordable housing. In addition to this event, the mayoral candidates shared their views on affordable housing at a televized event on June 25th and each talked about affordable housing when interviewd by the Tennessean editorial board. Below in a nutshell is the opinion of the candidates on affordable housing:

David Briley
David Briley says affordable housing  is a "human right."  I am bothered by categorizing the things to which society may determine people are entitled as "rights."  Liberals do not know the difference or do not recognize a difference between liberties and entitlements. Categorically, freedom of speech and a right to paid maternity leave are different things. Right off the bat, Briley is losing me by calling affordable housing a "human right."

Briley has outlined an affordable housing initiative called Under One Roof 2029, which would spend $750 million over 10 years, primarily towards the redevelopment of aging public housing into mixed-income communities. This plan has come under a lot of criticism. Critics says it takes pieces of what is on the drawing board anyway and puts it in a new package. Also it calls for increasing funding to the Barnes Fund, the money to come from the operating budgets.  Budgets are approved each year and there are competing needs. This intent to fund the Barnes Fund at a higher level is no more than a good intention. One mayor or council cannot obligate the next.

$350 million of the money Briley proposed would come from issuing new general obligation bonds. This is at a time when Nashville has the highest debt obligation per person of any city in America. We need to be lowering our debt, not adding to it.

$250 million would come from voluntary investments in affordable housing by the private sector.  This is pulling money out of thin air. He could have made his plan a billion dollar plan by saying the private sector would make $500 in voluntary investments.

Briley's plan is smoke and mirrors based on wishful thinking.

John Cooper
At the NOHA event, Cooper pandered and said he advocates putting a NOHA representative on MDHA's board. While I generally have a negative view of NOHA, and while I would not want to specify than any one political group be entitled to a representative on the MDHA board, I would not oppose that their be a low-income person  from a "pocket of poverty" or low-income census track be on the board.  In my view, MDHA is too focused on building luxury condo's and one advocate for poor people on the board, would not hurt. That is not much of a solution to the problem of the declining availability of affordable housing however.

Cooper has a modest, practical affordable housing plan on his website. He advocates small changes that can make a difference. It is not a bold creative vision; he is not reinventing the wheel, but I like that.  It includes better management of what resources we already have, a new revolving fund for affordable housing, and greater leverage of federal and state housing funds for affordable housing.  

Carol Swain
Carol Swain has a plan she says is based on parcels of land owned by the city. She would make those excess parcels available for development of homes costing about $200,000. While I like this, those parcels are already being made available for development under an existing program. I am not sure, this is anything new. One thing she does advocate is to "use modular technology, new creative ideas to get the price down even further."  It is a shame Nashville stands in the way of the development of affordable housing by the private sector by effectively prohibiting the use of factory build housing in Nashville. I am pleased to see the advocacy of modular construction.

John Ray Clemmons
He says affordable housing is a "real crisis."  He would commit at least $50 million a year to the Barnes Fund using a dedicated revenue stream, but he does not identify that revenue stream. There is nothing magic about a dedicated revenue stream.  If the city, for instance, should take $50 million that now is paid in codes fees and direct that money to the Barnes Fund, that is $50 million that now goes into the city coffers to pay for education, police protection and everything else the city does.  That is not free money. That means the city would have to make $50 million in cuts to other services or raise taxes.

He would also create "income-source protection" for people with Section 8 housing vouchers, and a land bank for surplus public property. I am not sure how "income-source protection" works. So, I would have to know more to know what he is talking about.  For a primer on Land Banks, follow this link.  I tend to favor letting property be developed to its highest and best use but am not opposed to land banks playing a limited role in helping low income people become homeowners but it is no magic bullet that will solve the housing "crisis."


Rod's thoughts
First of all I do not think we have a housing "crisis." We have an "issue" or "problem."  For the person making the median income in Nashville, the median priced house is still affordable. We are in much better shape than many other cities in America where the median income person cannot afford the median priced house.

In one sense, this is what we asked for. When you attract people to move from elsewhere to Nashville and those people make a much higher income than most Nashvillians, they are going to drive up housing prices. A lot of what we are experiencing is simply supply and demand. That is not to say that for lower income people that they are not priced out of the market. What we are experiencing is an issue to be addressed but not a crisis.

I am disappointed that none of the candidates took the position that Nashville should stop taking actions that make the problem worse. Much of the fault for loss of affordable housing, is directly due to government policy. As an example of this, there is a new plan to redevelop Dickerson Pike. The Dickerson Road area has long been one of the cheapest parts of the city to live.  In addition to affordable apartment buildings along Dickerson, the neighborhoods adjacent to the thoroughfare have lots of modest affordable homes.  On Dickerson Road there are several old-fashion junky trailer parks.  On Dickerson Road itself there are businesses that serve the people who live in the vicinity. There are businesses such as laundromats, payday lenders, convenience stores, and discount tobacco stores, and used car lots.  Dickerson Road has always had a problem with hookers walking the street and the area has a lot of drug dealers.

Metro has a plan to improve this bad part of town. The plan envisions a dense collection of modern offices, shops and multifamily housing, widened streets and added transit hubs, greenways, crosswalks, sidewalks and bike lanes.  The city is going to beautify and upgrade one of the worst parts of the city.  The Tennessean says, "But the increased investment is expected to send property values soaring in one of the few areas where relatively affordable housing can still be found near downtown."  I am pleased to see this recognition of the effect of improving parts of the city.

We are talking about hundreds of units of housing are going to be lost.  Thousands of people will no longer be able to afford to live there.  Some of the people living in trailer parks rent by the week. Where are they going to go?   No one likes to have a seedy part of town, but when you beautify and upgrade a seedy part of town you are destroying the only place poor people can afford to live.  Every community can't look like Brentwood and still have affordable housing.

Less ambitious than a master plan such as is planned for Dickerson Road are city policies that little by little destroy affordable communities and thereby affordable housing.  These are policies that make busy corridors look nice. These are rules which say used car lots must have an attractive decorative fence in front of them, that say one can not have in close proximity businesses of the same or similar type such as used tire stores and auto repair businesses, and rules that say all dumpsters must be placed on a reinforced concrete pad behind the building, and rules that require a certain distance between pay day lenders.  These rules drive out the kind of business that serve low-income people.  They make unattractive parts of town more attractive and change the character of the community and make it attractive for people who make more money.  They turn low-income parts of town into middle-income parts of town.

Another way in which Nashville destroys affordable housing is by the policy of making large parts of the county single-family only.  Almost every Council meeting, there is a bill to down-zone a neighborhood from a zoning which allows duplexes to a zoning which does not.  Such legislation may change a zoning from R20 to RS20. I understand people wanting to preserve the character of their neighborhood.  I understand people wanting things to stay the same. However, this has an impact on future home prices.  This makes future affordable housing less likely and it encourages urban sprawl.  With higher density, there are fewer places to build houses and this causes the available places to be more expensive.  Also, with less available building spaces close in, it causes people to move further out.

Another way the city causes a loss of affordable housing is by driving up the cost of development and stifling the development of more affordable housing. Take the policy that requires a sidewalk in front of every house.  Sidewalks can add thousands of dollars to a the price of a house. This means developers will build more expensive homes rather than less expensive homes to absorb in the home price the cost of the sidewalks.  Also, I have talked to developers who say they have tried to build communities of affordable housing and instead of getting assistance from planning, they got obstacle after obstacle thrown in their way.  It is simply easier to build pricey homes rather than affordable homes.

Another way government destroys affordable housing, is my stringent codes enforcement.  I own a little rental house in Woodbine.  I only own one rental property.  It is the house I lived in  myself until I moved to my current home.  It is a two-bedroom one-bath house.  A few months ago I got a codes complaint and I had to deal with it. It is not the first time.  It was a headache and an annoyance.  I have a tenant who has different taste than I do and likes "yard art."  He also keeps a lot of stuff that he might can sell to make a little money.  The stuff was stored neatly in covered storage.  He also was parking a car on an unpaved or graveled area.

I only charge the tenant a modest price for rent.  I could put central heat and air in the house and dress it up just a little and rent it for about half again what I am getting, or I could sell the house.  I get about two postcards a week from someone wanting to buy that house. If I sold it they would tear it down, and build an expensive house on the lot. There would go a unit of affordable housing.

Quite frankly, I don't need the money I could get from selling the house or from upgrading and raising the rent.  My tenant is a Cuban refugee who really did come to America by a raft made of intertubes.  He has been here about twenty years or so but has a heavy accent and little education. He makes a living by selling scrap metal.  He would have a difficult time paying more rent.  I rent to him at a modest rent more out of a sense of doing a good deed than anything else.  When I get a codes letter, however, I am tempted by the postcard offers to buy my house.  I have talked to other landlords who get harassed by codes.  I know we have to have codes enforcement, but there is an effect.  When codes officials harass property owners they destroy affordable housing.

The other way Metro government contributes to the loss of affordable housing is by refusing to zone property for greater density if what is planned to be build on the property is affordable housing.  Worse yet, is the taking away of ones property rights in order to stop them from building affordable housing. This was attempted in Antioch. Ultimately, the person's property rights were not taken but the threat hung over the owners head for two years and the affordable property was never build.

Nashville could have more affordable housing if would embrace manufactured housing. There is a certain snobbish elitism that doesn't want "trailer trash" in Nashville and Nashville has had a long-standing attitude that we would keep "mobile homes" or "trailers" out of Nashville. A lot of the prejudice against manufactured housing is irrational. Manufactured housing could play a major role in insuring there was housing available at various price points.

The best way to make housing affordable is to increase incomes for those at the bottom of the income scale.  Rather than subsidizing poverty, in my view, we should strive to lift people out of poverty. You can't lift all people out of poverty, but we should have as a goal to have fewer poor people.

The loss and increasing lack of affordable housing is of concern, but much of the blame can be laid at the doorstep of the same people who bemoan the fact that we are losing affordable housing.  You can't have affordable housing if you don't want affordable neighborhoods.  You can't have affordable housing and have every neighborhood look like Brentwood. You can't have affordable housing, if you are going to ban greater density or fight having affordable housing in your neighborhood.

For source material and more information, follow these links: link, link, link, link, link.

Top Stories

The Tennessean' profile of each of the four major candidates for mayor.

The Tennessean has done a profile of each of the four major candidates for mayor. Each piece tells the biography of the candidates and essential facts about the candidate and lets the candidate share his or her vision for Nashville.  With a word length of about 2600 words, the articles are long enough to do the candidates justice and let their personality shire through. None of the articles are a hatchet-job and none of the top four are slighted. Good reporting.

 David Briley, after an improbable political comeback, wants to finish what he started

Carol Swain is running for Nashville mayor after 'a life of beating the odds'

Cooper sees bipartisan path to win in election 

John Ray Clemmons: A mayoral candidate underdog who wants to change Nashville

Top Stories

Who is winning the race for mayor. What the polls show.

A recent Tennessee Star/ Triton poll shows the following in the mayor's race (link):

• David Briley 27.8 percent
• Carol Swain 22 percent
• John Cooper 19.8 percent
• John Ray Clemmons  10.8 percent
• Undecided 19.5 percent

For any candidate to win, he must receive more than 50% of the vote or there will be a runoff between the two top contenders. Carol Swain is performing well  but I do not see a path to victory for her.  There is no way she will reach the 50%+ threshold.  If she makes a runoff, she will be crushed.  I think she is probably near her peak. I would be surprised if any significant number of the "undecided" break her way.

We must face the fact that Davidson County is a Democratic enclave. Davidson County has been solidly Democrat ever since the Civil War.  While most of the state has flipped to Republican, if anything, Davidson County has become more solidly Democrat.  Also, the old conservative Democrat is a thing of the past.  Nashville is a city dominated by very progressive Democrats. 

While the mayoral race is non-partisan, the citizens of Nashville are just not going to elect a Republican.  The best a Republican can do is garner about 35% of the vote. If one looks at the last presidential race, or governor's race, or Senate race, Republicans did not do well in Davidson County.  If a moderate talented pro-business person like David Fox who was only loosely affiliated with the Republican Party could not win, Carol Swain cannot win.  I wish it was different, but it is not. 

Unfortunately, Carol Swain has a record.  She is a scholar, an author and a pundit who has expressed her views in books and network TV news and webcast. I agree with most of her opinions on the cause of the dysfunction in the Black Community, on the sanctity of life, on the danger from radical Islam, immigration, and other issues, but in progressive Nashville she will be smeared as homophobic, Islamophobic, misogynist, xenophobic, and racist if she becomes a threat to the liberal establishment.  At this point they can play nice, but let her become a threat and the gloves will come off.  There is no reason to go after her now.  In fact, I bet Briley is hoping she is his runoff opponent, if he cannot win outright.

I like Carol Swain.  I supported her last time she ran and this election before Cooper got in the race, I supported her.  I sent her a contribution. She is smart, has a compelling life story, and I share her values. However, once John Cooper was in, I switched my support to him.  Even when supporting Swain, I did not think she could win.  When the choice was only between Briley and Clemmons, I was glad to have Carol in the race.  Briley would not solve our city's problems and Clemmons would make them worst are a faster rate, I reasoned, so even if Swain couldn't win, I wanted an alternative to two progressives who would continue down the wrong path.

I support John Cooper because I believe he will fix what is wrong with Nashville. He will change course.  He  has the knowledge and the commitment to fixing Nashville's finances. Nashville is booming, yet we cannot give employees a decent raise, our police and fire are understaffed, our schools are failing and getting worse, we can't build sidewalks, traffic is snarled, and our infrastructure is crumbling and we Nashvillians have the highest debt per person of any city in America. But, we are not undertaxed, in my view; we are mismanaged. The way I see it those are our major issues and the social issues are irrelevant. John Cooper is the person we need for mayor at this time.  I am sure there are issues with which I will not agree with him, but on the important issues he is much better than Briley and much, much better than Clemmons and he is electable.

Top Stories

Just who are all of these people running for mayor

When you go to vote in the August 1st election, you will see a lot of candidates name's on the ballot of whom you have never heard.  Why do people put their name on the ballot who have zero chance of winning? I don't know. Maybe they are delusional and think they can win. Maybe they know they can't win but have a point of view that they want to express and running for office gives them a platform to be heard, at least by a few people. Maybe they have a big ego and get satisfaction by seeing their name on the ballot.

You will see some names that you have heard of but of whom you know very little.  It is a shame that so many people are elected by voters who just pull the lever for a person because he had a lot of yard signs.  It is a shame so many people are elected because they got the most votes from uninformed people.  If you have a strong political philosophy, and know you want to only vote for a Democrat or a Republican and there are only two choices, then party label can be a good guide for whom to vote. In the race for mayor and council, people do not run on party labels so a voter cannot be guided by party identity of the candidate. I tend to think that is a good thing. There are very few votes a member of the council cast where political affiliation would be an indication of how the council member would vote. There are no Democrat or Republican pot holes.

I am posting below the list of candidates for mayor. Next to each list I will provide links to the candidates website, Facebook page or blog or news stories about the candidate. For some of the candidates I will tell you what I know about them, or if I know nothing. If I have a favorite, I will let you know.  I plan to do the same for council races, but this may prove to take more effort than I want to give it. We'll see.

Candidates for Mayor

Jody Ball: He is a Republican and good sensible candidate but doesn't have a chance. The Republican vote will be split between Carol Swain and John Cooper and even if all Republican voted for one candidate that candidate could not win. Republicans are outnumbered about two to one in Davidson County.  Ball ran for the 5th Congressional District as a Republican and lost that November 6, 2018 election to incumbent Jim Cooper. Cooper beat Ball 67.8 percent to 32.2 percent but some of  the areas where Ball did best lay outside Davidson County. I like Ball but won't vote for him. I appreciate him carrying the banner and providing a token alternative to Cooper in the congressional election but why he thinks he can be elected mayor, I don't know. For more information see this link, Twitter feed, Jody Ball for Mayor.

Mayor David Briley

David Briley: He needs no introduction. As everyone knows he is the incumbent and is running for reelection. I am going to skip posting any links. You will hear his name a lot between now and the election and can learn more than you want to know about him without even trying. Just be aware that Nashville is a financial disaster and Briley has no plan to fix it. Metro is a mess and Briley needs to go.


Julia Marguerite Clark-Johnson: I never heard of her until now.  Here is the Tennessean profile piece from when she ran for mayor in 2018. In that election she got a total of only 168 votes.

John Ray Clemmons: He is a major candidate so I don't need to say much. He is currently a Democrat State Representative representing District 55.  There has been some speculation that he is not running to win but to increase name recognition in order to later challenge Steve Dickerson for his state senate seat. For more see, John Ray Clemmons for Mayor.

John Cooper

John Cooper:  I am supporting John Cooper.  He is a Democrat and the brother of Jim Cooper but in this case I am not going to hold that against him.  John Cooper may be the last sane Democrat left.  I watch almost every Council meeting and study the issues. I have been impressed with John Cooper ever since he began serving.  He has become an expert on Metro's finances. He knows Metro government like the back of his hand.  I don't know his views on building the wall or abortions or medicare for all or Agenda 21, and I don't much care.  Those are national issues. The most important issue facing us as voters for mayor is that we need to get our financial house in order and we need to select the person most qualified and committed to doing that. That is John Cooper.  Metro is the city in the nation with the highest debt per capita of any city.  Our police and fire are understaffed and Metro Schools are underfunded but we are not under taxed. Our local media would be focused on these issues if we had a mayor advocating a tax increase. There could be hysteria created if it served to advance an agenda. John Cooper knows what is wrong and has pledged to fix it. For more see John Cooper for Mayor.

Bernie Cox: He is a person with successes and recognition, apparently in the construction business and the entertainment business. He describes himself as conservative. This is apparently his first time running for office. Link.

Jimmy Lawrence: I can't find anything about him.

Jon Sewell: I can't find anything.

Nolan O.Starnes: He is African-American, has a criminal record but says he has turned his life around. He is a Hemp farmer. He is concerned about gentrification and says he will keep Nashville's New Transit Plan as a priority. His focus seems to be on the plight of low-income Nashvillians. For more see Nolan Starnes for Mayor.

Carol Swain: I like Carol Swain. I feel I know her. She has a compelling life story.  She courageously stood up to liberal intimidation as a professor at Vanderbuilt University.  However, I won't be voting for her. I did in 2018 when she was the only reasonable alternative to David Briley.  Before John Cooper got in the race, I thought she again was going to be the only real alternative. I contributed to her campaign.

She is a devout Christian, a scholar, an author, and a pundit advocating conservative policies. However, I think John Cooper is a better candidate. He has been in the trenches fighting for fiscal sanity in Nashville.  Despite Swain's conservatism, I am don't think she is the person we need for mayor at this time. Also, I just don't see how she can win. There is no path to victory.  As conservatives we must face the fact that Nashville is a very liberal city and more liberal by the day. Swain's position on issues such as homosexuality, immigration, the nature of Islam and her critique of the damaging effects of our welfare state, would make her unelectable by Nashville's progressives. There are, however, liberals who would vote for fiscal responsibility. To decide to support John Cooper over Carol Swain was not an easy decision, but I am firmly convince that it is the right decision.  See Carol Swain for Mayor and do a search engine search and you can find her commentaries and YouTube videos and much more.

Erica Gilmore

Candidates for Vice mayor

The vice mayor conducts council meeting and makes committee appointments and if the mayors office become vacant, the vice mayor become mayor. There are three candidates for vice mayor.

Erica Gilmore: She is an at-large member of the Metro Council.. She was elected to that seat in 2015. She previously represented District 19 from 2007 to 2015. Gilmore was a candidate for mayor of Nashville, Tennessee. Gilmore was defeated in the special election on May 24, 2018. See link.

Jim Shulman

Robert Sawyers, Sr.: I can't find anything about him. Sawyers was an independent candidate for Governor of Tennessee in 2018. He was a  candidate for State House, 54th District, in 2016. 
 
Jim Shulman: Shulman is the current Vice mayor. Prior to that he served as an at-large council member and prior to that he was a district council members. He conducts meetings fairly and has a long list of civic engagements. I will be voting for Jim Shulman.

Top Stories

The Race for Mayor: Who has the money, where it came from and how much they have on hand.

by Rod Williams - Below is information gathered from an examination of the campaign financial disclosures which were filed on April 10, 2019. This is the first quarter report and covers the period from when they first filed a treasure to March 31, 2019.  Please note that I have listed as contributors only those names that jumped out at me for some reason. I am not a walking encyclopedia of who's who in Nashville. I am sure there were some important contributors whose names I did not recognize. To view the reports for yourself, follow this link. 

David Briley 
He raised $189,348 and spent $117,703.  
He started with a balance on hand of $344,564 and ended with $416,403 on hand. 

Contributors:

• Briley's contributions of $100 or less came to only $4,090
• John Bridges of The Nashville Scene, $1500
• Father Breen of St Edwards, $100
• Dewey Branstetter Jr, attorney, $500
• Mark Deutshman, realtor, $100
• Charles Robert Bone, attorney, $100
• Charles Bone, Attorney $1600
• Elizabeth Seigenthaler Cortney, CEO of Seigenthaler Public Relations, $1600
• Martha Ingram, $1600
• Amy Adams Strunk, controlling owner of the Tennessee Titans, $1600 
• Shirley Zietland of Zietland and Company realtors, $500
• Amanda McClendon, Judge, $500 
• Waller Landen PAC, $8,100
• Piedmont Natural Gas PAC, $2500
• He received a lot of contributions from CEOs of various companies, lots of money from lots of attorneys, money from some metro employees, bankers, and  money from people associated with HCA,

John Clemmons 
He raised $41,803 (not counting his $100,00 loan) and spent $738
He started with a $135,565 balance on hand and ended with $141,065. 
He also loaned his campaign $100,000.

Contributors:

• Daniel Horawitz, a libertarian-oriented Democrat attorney who has been involved in several high profile law suits, writes Supreme Court of Tennessee blog,  $250, 
• Fred Detwiller of Det distributing, $1600 
• A couple people with Marathon Music Works 
• Chris Guthrie, Dean of Vanderbilt Law, $500 
• John Cawthon owner of Jack Calwthons Bar-B-Q, $500
• Economics professor Malcolm Getz, who was active in efforts to defeat the recent transit initiative, $200
• Dr. Matthew Walker, $500.
• Robert Lipman owner of Lipman Brothers, $1000.
• Chales Howell of C. A. Howell, $500

Carol Swain
She raised $118,158 and spent $8,506.
She began with a balance on hand of $6,546.32 and ended up with a balance on hand of $116,199.

Contributors of interest:

• She had unitemized contributions of almost $22,000 which is contributions of $100 or less.That is an impressive amount of money raised from small donors.
• Lee Beaman, of Beaman Motor Co, and a contributor to many conservative causes, $1600
• Ben Cunningham, TEA party activist, $500
• Dr. Ming Wang, $1000
• John Wang, owner of Music City Insurance, former candidate for Metro Council, $1000. 
• Rod Williams, blogger at A Disgruntled Republican $123
• She received several contributions from  people associated with the downtown honky tonks: Honky Tonk Central gave $1600, Tooties Entertainment $1600,  Harry O's Steakhouse $1600, Steve Smith owner of Tooties $1600 and  several others gave the $1600 maximum.

Top Stories

Carol Swain closer to becoming a candidate for mayor.

Carol Swain has taken a step closer to becoming a candidate for mayor. She has filed the "appointment of Treasurer" form. Below is her Facebook post announcing this move. I am sending her a donation and encourage readers to also do so. 

As I explained in a previous post, I was hopeful that John Cooper would run for mayor or some other sane Democrat or a closet Republican who was not closely identified as a conservative. I would prefer a candidate of this type simply because I think they would be more electable. Since no such person has emerged, I will be pleased to see Carol Swain run but suspect victory will be a steep uphill climb. To make a contribution, follow this link.

Top Stories

We should not be like Stockton California and we get the government we deserve

Jeff Hartline

If you do not subscribe to The Tennesseean you missed two good opinion pieces in last Sunday's newspaper from local conservative luminaries.

 Jeff Harline writes, Nashville is stuck with the government it deserves. He identifies four categories of voters from the engaged to the most apathetic and says that in the recent referendum on the transit proposal and mayoral race apathy was on full display, "when voters overwhelmingly defeated the tax increase, but voted for the major candidate who pushed the tax increase."  I share Jeff's opinion. I am constantly amassed how little people seem to care about local issues and how little they pay attention.


Unfortunately, The Tennesseean did not save this article online (which I find hard to believe) or they have such a  poor search engine (which they do) that I can't find it. Harline is a former Republican candidate for the District 5 congressional seat, is a political activist and publishes the online Tennessee Spotlight.

Carol Swain

Carol Swain, recent candidate for mayor, former Vanderbilt professor, author, activist and TV commentator writes, Why Nashville should not be like Stockton, California.  She writes, "Stockton, California and Nashville are mid-sized cities run by liberal Democrats. Local leaders in each city have championed high-dollar projects that ultimately work against the public interest. As a result of this extravagant spending, both cities have found themselves in fragile financial positions. Music City would be wise not to follow in the footsteps of Stockton, which declared bankruptcy in 2012." 

I share her concern that we are headed down that path.

Top Stories

Reception to support Dr. Carol Swain for mayor, Wednesday, May 16, 2018.

Top Stories

Carol Swain, Candidate for Mayor, Calls for Immediate Resignation of Metro COO Rich!Riebeling

Carol Swain

By Rod Williams - Candidate for mayor Carol Swain yesterday called for the immediate resignation of Metro Chief Operating Officer Rich Riebleling. She issued the following statement:

The voters of Davidson County are tired of broken promises, underfunded schools, and cronyism that rewards those at the top. For too long Metro government has been squandering the taxpayer funds of hard working Nashvillians. Today’s revelation of the misappropriation of federal HUD flood relief funds is just another example of the corruption that is plaguing City Hall and the rest of the Metropolitan government. As finance director of the city Riebeling was either complicit in this act or ignorant of it. He can delegate authority, but he cannot delegate responsibility.

Today, I am calling for the immediate resignation and investigation into the dealings of Metro Chief Operations Officer Rich Riebeling. Under Riebeling’s management the city has awarded no bid bond contracts to his son, misappropriated funds at the fairgrounds and given away free office space to his developer friend Larry Atema. Riebeling has said he’s “committed to doing what’s right for the city,” but it is clear that this is not the case. When asked about Riebeling’s place in his administration, Mayor Briley has said he is “committed to continuity.” This statement is a damning indictment of his ability to lead the city forward.

Rich Riebeling

The most recent Riebeling scandal involved the use $7.4 million of federal Disaster Recovery Fund money going towards riverfront development instead of being used to assist homeowners who were flooded out of their homes. Following the 2010 flood, Nashville got $33 million for flood recovery. The $7.4 million diverted from flood recovery went to build the Ascend Amphitheater, a downtown concert venue at Riverfront Park.

At the time of the flood, I was working as a HUD-approved housing counselor with a non-profit housing counseling agency and encountered numerous people who lost their home or had to declare bankruptcy or spend their life savings or went deeply in debt because of the flood. It ruined peoples lives and to think that money was diverted to other purposes other than the purpose for which it was intended especially angers me.  In a Channel 2 news report, members of the Metro Council say they were unaware of the redirection of Disaster Recovery Funds.

It is time for Rich Riebeling to be fired or forced to resign. I appreciate Carol Swain for calling for his resignation. This type of using public funds as your own slush fund needs to stop. Cronyism and misuse of public funds needs to stop.  Rich Riebeling is probably no worse than many others in similar positions elsewhere. Actually, Nashville is probably less corrupt and mismanaged than cities like Chicago and New Orleans but because we are not the worst does not mean our level of mismanagement and corruption is tolerable. I just assume a very large chuck of all tax money is wasted or misspend, but it should not be that way. We should not just accept that a large portion of public money is misspent. I think there needs to be an investigation of the $60 millions spend to build 3.5 miles of sidewalks, but no one seems to care. That should generate outrage. It is time to drain the Nashville swamp and Rich Riebeling would be a good place to start!

Below is the News Channel 4 report of this story:

WSMV News 4

For more on the unauthorized spending of money for the soccer stadium, see this Channel 4 story: Metro official apologizes for spending $135K on stadium without permission.

For more on the $511,000 sweetheart deal with Larry Atema for consulting services, see this story: Fairgrounds consultant paid $511,000 in management fees.

Top Stories

Police union (FOP) not endorcing anyone for mayor

The Metro police union has made no endorsement in the Mayor's race which will be decided in a special election on May 24th.  In FOP balloting to select the union's choice for mayor, 425 votes were cast.  Mayor Briley got more votes than any other candidate but failed to garner 50% of the votes which is necessary to secure the FOP endorsement. No doubt, a large number of members voted for Briley simply because they want continuity in the office of mayor for a while. Continuity is office is the primary reason I hear people giving for supporting David Briley.

In the 2015 mayoral election, the FOP endorsed David Fox.  In this years balloting, former Vanderbilt University professor, author, and  conservative commentator Carol Swain came in second, gaining 23.3% of the vote.  That is significant. It raises her profile and may make her the leading alternative to Briley. Erica Gilmore, who is perceived as a leading candidate did not seek the FOP endorsement and got no votes. Here is how the FOP voted:

David Briley, Mayor: 41.7%
Carol Swain, former Vanderbilt political science professor, conservative commentator: 23.3%
Ralph Bristol, former radio conservative talk show host: 17%
Harold Love, State Rep. (D-Nashville): 3%
Jeff Napier: 1%
Julia Clark-Johnson: 14%.

Top Stories

CAROL SWAIN LAUNCHES CAMPAIGN FOR MAYOR OF NASHVILLE

Press release, Nashville, TN - Former Vanderbilt University law professor and nationally

Carol Swain

recognized conservative political commentator Carol Swain announced on Monday that she is a candidate for Mayor of Nashville in the special election to fill the position vacated by former Mayor Megan Barry. She secured the necessary petition to become a candidate this morning, obtained more than the 25 signatures required to become an official candidate, and filed the petition this afternoon, which will qualify her to appear on the special election ballot.

The date for the special election is currently scheduled for August 2, but pending court cases could result in that date being moved to sometime in May.

“The reason I’m running is that Nashville needs a choice between two different visions for the city. I believe the city is headed in the wrong direction, like many large cities headed by Democratic mayors,” Swain said.

“Nashville is currently following the ‘tax-and-spend’ prescription that has resulted in so many of our cities becoming wastelands of poverty, crime, failing schools, and high taxes,” Swain noted in announcing her plans to run for Mayor. “We have a shrinking window of opportunity to avoid that future, but only if we act now to embrace new leadership committed to low taxes, common-sense regulations, and maximizing freedom and opportunity for all of our citizens.”

“This whole thing is about fixing potholes instead of building giant edifices while the city as a whole is not thriving. I’m concerned about the fact that if the transit plan passes, it’s not going to solve our problems and it will give Nashville the highest taxes in the country,” she noted.

“At a time when our school system mishandles $7 million, our city leadership promotes a $9 billion transit boondoggle that they admit won’t really relieve or reduce traffic congestion, seeks to embrace ‘sanctuary city status,’ and ignores the reality of crime and violence increasing across our city, we can’t afford to keep doing ‘business as usual’ with the ‘usual suspects’ running the show,” Swain said.

“I am delighted that Troy Brewer, an experienced and well respected C.P.A. who specializes in campaign finance and reporting, has agreed to serve as treasurer of my campaign,” Swain added.
Swain is making it clear that she opposes the proposed tax increase to fund the Megan Barry transit plan, a plan that has also been embraced by Mayor David Briley. “A bad idea didn’t get better simply due to Megan Barry resigning and Mayor Briley stepping in to replace her,” Swain pointed out. “I will be encouraging voters across the county to say ‘NO, to funding the transit plan in the May 1 Referendum. The first step to our retaking control of our city is to take control of our finances in the voter’s booth on May 1.”

Dr. Carol M. Swain is an award-winning political scientist, a former professor of political science and professor of law at Vanderbilt University, and a lifetime member of the James Madison Society, an international community of scholars affiliated with the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University. Before joining Vanderbilt in 1999, Dr. Swain was a tenured associate professor of politics and public policy at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Dr. Swain is passionate about empowering others to raise their voices in the public square. She is an author, public speaker, and political commentator.

Dr. Swain is the author or editor of nine books. Her first book, Black Faces, Black Interests: The Representation of African Americans in Congress (Harvard University Press, 1993, 1995), won the Woodrow Wilson prize for the best book published in the U. S. on government, politics or international affairs in 1994, and was cited by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy in Johnson v. DeGrandy, 512 U.S. 997 (1994) and by Justice Sandra Day O’ Connor in Georgia v. Ashcroft, 539 U.S. (2003). In addition, Cambridge University Press nominated her book, The New White Nationalism in America: Its Challenge to Integration, for a Pulitzer Prize. Her forthcoming book, Debating Immigration (2nd edition), is scheduled for a July 2018 release. Dr. Swain’s other books include Abduction: How Liberalism Steals the Hearts and Minds of Our Children (Christian Faith Publishing, 2016, co-author Steve Feazel), Be the People: A Call to Reclaim America’s Faith and Promise (Thomas Nelson Press, 2011), Debating Immigration (Cambridge University Press, 2007); Contemporary Voices of White Nationalism (Cambridge University Press, 2003, co-author Russ Nieli).

Dr. Swain’s opinion pieces have been published in CNN Online, The Financial Times, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, and USA Today. She has appeared on ABC Headline News, BBC Radio, NPR, INT News, CNN’s AC360, Fox News’ Hannity, Fox and Friends, Lou Dobbs Tonight, Judge Jeanine, The Story with Martha MacCallum, Michael Smerconish, The PBS News Hour, and The Washington Journal, and ABC’s Headline News. She had a major role in Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party and has had three Prager University videos go viral.

Her commentary on social and political issues can be heard nationally on Bott Radio and American Family Radio’s Two Minutes to Think About it. Dr. Swain received a B.A. from Roanoke College, M.A. from Virginia Polytechnic & State University, Ph.D. from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and M.S.L. from Yale. She lives in Nashville, Tennessee.

Top Stories

Carol Swain debates the selection of Jeff Sessions for AG, with Areva Martin on CNN

To view the video click this link.

Sen. Jeff Sessions was denied a federal judgeship in 1986 due to allegedly having made racist remarks.  He's now Donald Trump's choice for Attorney General. Areva Martin and Vanderbilt University professor Carol Swain debate his selection on CNN.

Top Stories

Heritage Foundation's Daily Signal reports on Carol Swain controversy

Reposted from Daily Signal:

Vanderbilt Professor Facing Protests Tells Students to ‘Grow Up’

by  Kelsey Harkness - A black conservative professor who found herself the latest target of student protests nationwide has one thing to say to those calling for her to be suspended from the university where she teachers: “Grow up.”

Among other allegations, students accused Carol Swain, a professor of law and political science at Vanderbilt University for nearly 27 years, of “unprofessional intimidation on social media” and “discriminatory practices in the classroom.”

Swain actively posts her Christian conservative view points on her public Facebook page and website called BeThePeopleTV. She has authored numerous award-winning books and has been cited by the Supreme Court, according to her résumé.

But recently, her conservative values left her at odds with students on campus who started a petition demanding she be removed from the university.

Swain told The Daily Signal in a phone interview on Friday the petition, posted on Change.org, originally demanded that she be fired but has since been amended to read in part:

We are petitioning that Carol Swain be temporarily suspended from her position as professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University pending an investigation into student allegations of unprofessional intimidation on social media, discriminatory practices in the classroom, and unclear representation as a Public Figure with invocations of the Vanderbilt name on her Facebook page.
…
Over the past few years, Professor Carol Swain has become synonymous with bigotry, intolerance, and unprofessionalism. While Swain first and foremost has a right to her personal beliefs and the right to freedom of speech within and outside of the classroom, it recently came to the attention of the Vanderbilt community that Carol Swain has let her hate-filled prejudices negatively impact her work, our student body, and Vanderbilt’s reputation.

Swain said the students behind the protests never took any of her classes, all of which are elective.

“My classes are elective, so no one has to take any of my classes, and no one has to go to my blog page or go to my Facebook,” she said. “I feel that I have been defamed by the students and the petition has been filled with lies, and they ought to be held accountable for what they’ve done.”
Those students, she said, “don’t get to decide whose speech is more valuable than someone else’s.”
Since its release, the petition garnered more than 1,500 signatures. A petition in support of Swain has gained more than 1,000 signatures.

In response to the protests, Nicholas S. Zeppos, the chancellor of Vanderbilt University, released a statement that in part read:

Professor Swain’s opinions are her own. They do not reflect the opinions of the university in any way. They are not my opinions, the opinions of the provost, or the opinions of university leadership.
…
Vanderbilt University is committed to diversity, inclusion, and freedom from discrimination.  Ensuring that our campus is a safe, welcoming, and supportive environment for every member of the Vanderbilt community has been, and will always be, our top priority.

Zeppos did not address whether or not the university planned to investigate allegations of discrimination made against Swain. According to the petition, those allegations include:

• Firstly, Professor Carol Swain has failed to clearly separate her role on her Facebook page as a “Public Figure” from the Vanderbilt name, creating a situation in which the public may misconstrue her as speaking on behalf of the University. We want to make it clear that Carol Swain in no way represents our alma mater, regardless of the fact that she teaches here.
• Secondly, there have been several instances in which students have contacted Professor Swain to hold an intellectual debate with her, and in return, she has resorted to name-calling and posting their personal contact information on her public page. In many cases, students claimed this led to public shaming, intimidation, and/or harassment by her followers.
• Additionally, several students who claim to have taken Professor Swain’s class(es) have expressed concerns that minority students enrolled in her class(es) – especially those who are LGBTQIA+ and/or non-Christians – expose themselves to unfair assessment in-class and may receive lower grades than their peers simply because of their identities. At a University that prides itself on fairness, diversity and inclusion, these allegations are entirely unacceptable if true.

Swain, who is currently on sabbatical, called those allegations “lies” and said she “earned the right” to call herself a professor on Facebook.

“They don’t own the word professor,” she said. “Professor is a word, and I’ve earned the right to call myself a professor.”

Swain did admit to paraphrasing a “threat” she received from a student via Facebook and said she shared a link to that student’s public Facebook on her own page. Swain has since deleted that post.

“Maybe I shouldn’t have done that, but the student contacted me,” Swain said. “My point in showing it was to show the level of disrespect and what I have to put up with at Vanderbilt University with this person saying I was a disgrace.”

“It’s something that has changed in the student body, that they think they can control what people do, not just inside the classroom, but outside the classroom,” Swain said.

While she’s strong in her views, Swain said the situation has taken a personal toll.

“It hurts more to be attacked because the students have been my life. That’s, to me, the sole reason why it’s been so distressing on a personal level.”

But if it causes people to look at the “attacks” on freedom of speech and freedom of religion, Swain says she’s “not sorry about it.”

“I’m very concerned about what’s happening across the nation, and I believe university administrators have lost control and that they’re making a serious mistake when they give into students using those 1960s, 1970s protest strategies,” she said.

After the University of Missouri president was forced to resign earlier this week over his handling of cases involving discrimination, protests have spread nationwide. Vanderbilt University is among a group of colleges and universities facing student protests over alleged incidents of racism and other types of discrimination.

Top Stories

Protect the Academic Freedom of Professor Carol Swain

Carol Swain

by James Lopez, reposted from Citizen Go - Professor Carol Swain has First Amendment rights like every other university student and professor. We support Professor Carol Swain's freedom of speech and expression rights and WE stand with her. What WE want is for university administators to not silence the voices of professors simply because the professors dare not subscribe to political correctness. We live in a pluralistic, and democratic society -- this means that as a free society, we need to welcome and entertain even unpopular ideas in the public discourse, rather than going bonkers whenever someone expresses them.

There is an online student petition demanding the suspension of Professor of Law and Political Science Carol Swain for being “hateful” toward minorities, "unprofessional intimidation on social media", and performing "discriminatory practices in the classroom." This petition has gathered over 1,500  signatures already. These hypersensitive liberals forget that Professor Swain has testified a number of times before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Nicholas S. Zeppos, the Chancellor of Vanderbilt University wrote on Nov. 11th, "Vanderbilt also has a deep and longstanding commitment to freedom of speech and academic freedom, which are the foundations of our university’s scholarly activities. Such freedoms necessarily allow for the expression of unpopular and offensive views."

Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt wrote in The Atlantic an article titled, “The Coddling of the American Mind.” In this article, Lukianoff and Haidt define vindictive protectiveness as the creation of a “Culture in which everyone must think twice before speaking up, lest they face charges of insensitivity, aggression, or worse.” In this new university climate, students not only refuse to engage uncomfortable ideas, and refuse that others get a platform to express them, but go further and demand that disciplinary actions follow suit to those who violate the safe space that a university is supposed to be as seen in what has been happening at Yale University and the University of Missouri.

Who would have ever thought that a university owed students a “safe place,” a place where students are shielded and coddled from positions, expressions, ideas, and/or actions that challenge them, present different perspectives, or from others who exercise their First Amendment rights? This new climate in the university replaces the importance of talking about issues with feelings. Emotional reasoning monopolizes the university’s debates and discussions. Lukianoff and Haidt define emotional reasoning in their article as “Assuming that your negative emotions necessarily reflect the way things really are: ‘I feel it, therefore it must be true.’” Emotional well-being is rapidly trumping the exercise of the First Amendment. We must stand up for the voices like the one of Professor Carol Swain. We cannot let hypersensitive students succeed in trumping her First Amendment rights. #StandWithSwain




To sign the petition showing your support of Professor Swain, click here. This will link you to the petition webpage.

Top Stories

Colleges (Including Vanderbilt) Are Reaping What They’ve Sown

by David Fowler, Reposted from FACT - What transpired at the University of Missouri earlier this week and what is now taking place at Vanderbilt University is a classic case of reaping what one has sown. Higher education has descended to a depth from which it cannot escape, because it has destroyed the very intellectual tools by which it could do so.

The first situation to which I referred is the utter breakdown in communication between competing factions at the University of Missouri—minority students and a university leadership those students deemed insufficiently responsive to their concerns. The breakdown led to those minority students dictating to those ostensibly in positions of authority over the administration of the university what employment decisions needed to be made.

The second situation is a Change.org petition circulating at Vanderbilt by which students are calling for the ouster of Dr. Carol Swain because she has espoused viewpoints that the students don’t like, that they deem intolerant, bigoted, and unwelcoming.

The response of Vanderbilt’s Chancellor Zeppos is reflective of the problem:

“Speech whose sole purpose or effect is to discriminate, stigmatize, retaliate, offend, foment hatred or violence, or cause harm has no place in this university.”

Nobody likes speech “whose sole purpose is to foment hatred, violence or harm,” but what is this “effect” test to which Zeppos refers? It is a test of “truth” that lets the hearer decide the outcome. In this case, it will prove to be students who have been steeped in relativism and subjectivism and the belief that feelings are the ultimate arbiter of “truth.”

Relativism, by definition, must question anything that purports to be authoritative, and, of course, nothing can be authoritative if there is no source of authority. Consequently, today’s public universities and “elite” private colleges must therefore implicitly, if not explicitly, call into question all sources of authority.

Thus, university leaders like those at Missouri and Zeppos at Vanderbilt can scarcely assert any legitimate authority over the administration of their universities, for they unwittingly disavow the very notion of authority—or at least when they do assert their authority over a situation, the authority they assert must be grounded only in power and will, not in any reasoned, rational, or philosophical or theological grounds.

But if power is the basis for authority, then who is to say that the students at Missouri were wrong to exert their own power, their own force, their own will? Who is to say that the Vanderbilt students should not start petitions and demand the ouster of Dr. Swain or any professor (or administrator) whose views offend them? When will the Vanderbilt students “wise up” and find a way to attack the true authoritative god at Vanderbilt?

And who might that god be? It’s money. Money has become the one true source of authority on university campuses—their god—which is why the students at the University of Missouri were ultimately effective. They were poised to affect the university’s financial bottom line, which meant that those “ostensibly” in authority, the president and system president, had to go. Having seen that power can win, those who think they are in power, university administrators, will eventually begin to lose their power.

College campuses are in intellectual and moral chaos, and they don’t even realize it. If they do, they don’t seem to know why. They are so awash in moral relativism and its implications that they can’t think straight anymore; they think in circles. Having taught tolerance as the one “true” value, they have raised a generation of the intolerant who turn upon their teachers and leaders.

There is no end in sight for this madness unless our universities recover that which the word “university” implies—the existence of universal truths. The one tool they need to dig out of their mess is the one tool they have destroyed.

---

David Fowler served in the Tennessee state Senate for 12 years before joining FACT as President in 2006.

Top Stories

Liberals out to get Carol Swain fired from Vandy

Carol Swain

The liberal movement to suppress speech and silence conservatives on college campuses has hit Vanderbilt University with a campaign by students to get Professor of Law and Political Science Carol Swain fired from her job.  Even one conservative is one too many for liberals who favor all kinds of  diversity except diversity of thought.

 I am posting the full petition below.  The charges are lame and weak. The best they can come of with to support the charge that she engages in name-calling is that on her Facebook page she said, "Only an idiot would think a 61-year-old black woman who has spent much of her life in academia would benefit from sensitivity training." That is it? Come on; they have no case.

They want to force her to attend diversity training and those signing the petition can say that with a straight face, they don't even see the irony.  Never mind that Dr. Swain is African-American and it is the petitioners who are petitioning against diversity of opinion; the little politically correct liberal Brown Shirts don't want their sensibilities offended by being exposed to ideas to which they do not already subscribe. The same attitude of group-think that once dominated China during the cultural revolution is alive and well on American college campuses.

The underlining in the below petition is mine. Look at what they claim: she has a Facebook page that identifies herself as a professor at Vanderbilt University, she is unkind to students who disagree with her and calls them names, and she is unfair in her grading of  queer students and non-Christians. Swan denies the allegations. Follow the links and you will see their own case is very weak.

Suspend Professor Carol Swain

We are petitioning that Carol Swain be temporarily suspended from her position as professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University pending an investigation into student allegations of unprofessional intimidation on social media, discriminatory practices in the classroom, and unclear representation as a Public Figure with invocations of the Vanderbilt name on her Facebook page.
Over the past few years, Professor Carol Swain has become synonymous with bigotry, intolerance, and unprofessionalism. While Swain first and foremost has a right to her personal beliefs and the right to freedom of speech within and outside of the classroom, it recently came to the attention of the Vanderbilt community that Carol Swain has let her hate-filled prejudices negatively impact her work, our student body, and Vanderbilt’s reputation. Since the initial release of this petition, we have gathered significant feedback from the community, and have decided to limit our grievances to the following three issues.

• Firstly, Professor Carol Swain has failed to clearly separate her role on her Facebook page as a “Public Figure” from the Vanderbilt name, creating a situation in which the public may misconstrue her as speaking on behalf of the University. We want to make it clear that Carol Swain in no way represents our alma mater, regardless of the fact that she teaches here.
• Secondly, there have been several instances in which students have contacted Professor Swain to hold an intellectual debate with her, and in return, she has resorted to name-calling and posting their personal contact information on her public page. In many cases, students claimed this led to public shaming, intimidation, and/or harassment by her followers.
• Additionally, several students who claim to have taken Professor Swain’s class(es) have expressed concerns that minority students enrolled in her class(es) – especially those who are LGBTQIA+ and/or non-Christians – expose themselves to unfair assessment in-class and may receive lower grades than their peers simply because of their identities. At a University that prides itself on fairness, diversity and inclusion, these allegations are entirely unacceptable if true.

In light of these grievances, we are petitioning the Vanderbilt Administration that Carol Swain be temporarily suspended from her tenured position as professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University pending the following resolutions:

• That Vanderbilt administrators will confer with the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) to create and mandate a diversity training program for all Vanderbilt faculty – including Professor Carol Swain – to increase their cultural awareness, foster inclusion of various identity groups, prevent discrimination in the classroom, and to protect the University against inadvertent civil rights violations


• That Vanderbilt conduct an investigation of student allegations that Prof. Swain has shared individual students’ personal information or private profiles on her public media page(s) in attempts to potentially shame, defame, and/or intimidate them – and to report their findings to the student body in a public statement after proper resolution.


• And that Vanderbilt will conduct a review of Professor Carol Swain’s public Facebook page to confirm that she is not violating Vanderbilt's Acceptable Use Policy by misrepresenting herself as a Public Figure of (and/or speaker for) Vanderbilt University, but instead, is representing herself clearly as a Public Figure in a space unaffiliated with the University. This is to ensure that the public does not misconstrue Professor Swain’s statements outside the classroom as being endorsed by the University.

Until these resolutions have been satisfied, we do not feel that Carol Swain’s allowance to teach here is consistent with Vanderbilt’s nondiscrimination policies or the Community Creed, and we will continue to push for administrative action. We appreciate Vanderbilt’s initial acknowledgement of our petition, but we are certainly hoping that their response will ultimately amount to more than what we have seen in the past. Historically, the Vanderbilt community has been entirely unserved by the administration's inability to educate, counsel, and/or suspend Professor Swain.  However, we remain hopeful that things will change. We are calling on the administration to please hear our voices and take action before Carol Swain causes more harm to herself, our community, and Vanderbilt's reputation.
For those who are unfamiliar with Carol Swain, the articles linked below are a brief sample of her work. (As a reminder though, the focus of this petition is on the allegations made against Prof. Swain.  It is not an attack on her beliefs or freedom of speech/press)
Carol Swain’s Op-Ed in The Tennessean: Charlie Hebdo Attacks Prove Critics Were Right About Islam
“Islam is a dangerous set of beliefs totally incompatible with Western beliefs concerning freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of association.”
Be The People TV: C.S. Lewis on Biblical Marriage and Swain Reflections on Gay Marriage
“If we must live side-by-side with gay couples in a culture with a strong crusading homosexual agenda, our only hope is to strengthen ourselves spiritually and intellectually for the battle that awaits us”

I am unsure how of those in the community can come to the aid of Dr. Swain. Perhaps it would be helpful if Vandy alumni let the Vanderbilt administration know they support Dr. Swain. I have already "liked" Dr. Swain on Facebook. If you have not done so, give her a Facebook "like" and let her know you are pulling for her and admire her courage.

Top Stories