Thursday, September 29, 2005


Matthew Hill & Another Unethical Buddy

Check out this interesting story from on September 23, 2005: Hobbs, who is quite conservative, calls out Hilly boy for ignoring the unethical nature of a bill by Rep. Shaw (it “benefits” him financially) that apparently benefits Hilly boy too. If Hilly boy was looking out for the best interest of the 7th District he would have nothing to do with Shaw’s bill. Instead, Hilly boy is embracing it whole heartedly. The following is from Hobbs’ post:

Oh, The Irony
"We still want to make sure the black community gets the representation it needs. But it's not just the black community. We represent people as a whole. When you start dividing people up into race, if you're not careful you can get yourself into a lot of trouble." - State Rep. Johnny Shaw, D-Jackson, Chairman of the Tennessee House of Representatives Black Caucus. Shaw said this to a reporter after discussing why he denied state Rep. Stacey Campfield, R-Knoxville, can't join the group. Campfield - who has a "substantial number" of African Americans in his House district - is white. If there was a "White Caucus" Shaw would be screaming racism.

UPDATE: has a round-up of links and commentary on this story. The Knoxville News Sentinel had the original story on it. And Campfield, who has a blog, says the story is actually something that happened months ago, and he wonders about the timing of the story coming out now. Campfield's version of events is much different than Shaw's, and he concludes by saying:

“The timing is quite interesting since about a week ago on this site I posted a story about how Johnny Shaw (who is serving on the ethics committee) was pushing a bill through the legislature that would personally and directly benefit him financially in his radio business. I guess Shaw didn't like the message, so he tried to shoot the messenger. In other words, he didn't like that I pointed out his questionable ethics regarding the radio bill.”

Campfield's post mentioning Shaw and the legislation Shaw pushed that would benefit Shaw's business, published Sept. 11, is here.

Shaw's broadcast bill, of course, has been reported elsewhere and earlier than the blog entry. (I have mentioned it in stories and, believe I recall the Tennessean touched up on it, too, in an ethics story.) Back in session, it was notable as a conversation topic as an odd lobbyist squabble - Tennessee Press Association lobbyists on one side, Tennessee Broadcast Association lobbyists on the other - but didn't rise to the public interest level (in my view) of writing about. As I recall, Rep. Matthew Hill, whose family is in the broadcast business, allied with Shaw on the bill despite the two being somewhat polar opposites in the political arena.

H.B.0056 --- "It is just business as usual."

The upshot of the Shaw House Bill that Rep. Matthew Hill voted to approve is that this legislation by Shaw seeks to amend an existing Tennessee state law requiring both local (municipal and county) and state government agencies to publish public notices as required by Tennessee Code within newspapers located within areas effected by the proposed governmental action.

Ethical Statesman ( ha! ) Matthew Hill voted for HB0056 by Shaw beacuse the language of this bill would allow both television and radio broadcasing stations (such as Rep. Matthew Hill's WPWT 870 AM "Tower of Truth") to get a big share of that taxpayer money pie by airing public notices as radio commercials.

HB0056 favored by Rep. Matthew Hill also requires broadcasters selling air time for public notices to also post these same Tennessee public notices at web sites maintained by these broadcasters....

My question to HB0056 is why even bother with paying any taxpayer money to Tennessee newspapers or any news media outlet for publishing or airing public notices?

It seems to me that it would be more ethical and more statesman-like to simply scrap the current public natice publishing law and save all Tennessee taxpayers a bundle of money by allowing local and state governments to post required public notices at their own governmental websites.

You know, I probably just have a higher ethical standard than Rep. Matthew Hill., but shouldn't Rep. Hill have simply not voted on H.B.0056 and thereby avoid any conflict of interest on this particular TNGA vote?

Ex-Rep Chris Newton summed it up very well: "It is just business as usual in Nashville...."
Thanks for the helpful info. I'll copy this comment as a seperate post. He should have not voted at all.
I thiink that it is also remarkable that our Most Ethical Rep. Matthew Hill's Appalachian Radio Group has managed to sell some post-primary election commercial air time on WPWT 870 AM to a lobbyist who donated PAC money into Hill's 2004 election campaign coffers and also sold some more post-primary election WPWT 870 AM commercial air time to the credit union that holds the mortgage to his Jonesborough house....

Which lobbyist do you speak of? Hill surrounds himself with quite a few, since it is his career goal.
I was checking and I didn't see that the bill HB0056 ever made it out of sub committee (hmm... publishing bad facts how ethical is that?) So how did they vote for it? You guys really need to get you facts straight before you publish. It's making you look very inept Mr. Ritchie.
You are correct that the bill did not make it out of the committee. However, this post refers to Bill Hobbs' comments about Hill being allied with Shaw on the bill, not voting for it. Another post did refer to Hill voting on it, but that has been corrected.
CORRECTING Comments? You mean changing items to agree with your spew...sounds even more 'ethical' than Rep. Hill.
I didn't correct a comment, I corrected a post in which I obviously had the wrong info. And it still does not change the fact that Hill allied with Shaw on the bill.
I suppose that this is somewhat similar to the ethical Matthew Hill using the word "sucks" during his WPWT 870 AM radio program...and then later apologizing for saying "sucks" again.
Robert "Bob" Anderson is on the TNSOS registered PAC /lobbyist list as (I best recall) the Life Underwriters-TN PAC and perhaps one other PAC. Anderson was also listed as an individual campaign contributor within Rep. Matthew Hill's 2004 campaign finance disclosure reports and WPWT 870 AM has been regularly airing commerical advertsiements for Anderson's Tennessee Financial Group following (as I best recall) the 2004 republican primary election.

I do not know if PAC lobbyist Bob Anderson and Kathy Anderson (Matthew Hill's 2004 campaign manager) are related to each would be informative to learn that Rep. Hill has at least one Jonesborough family supporting his campaign efforts.
Submitted before I was actually ready...Eastman Credit Union was also indirectly referenced in an earlier post.

In order not to seem unethical, inept, or of a otherwise possessing a "sucks" character trait, I do not mean to imply or infer that Rep. Matthew Hill is actually receiving any advertising sales commissions from Information Communications Corporation, Inc. for either the Eastman Credit Union or the Tennessee Finacial Group advertising that has aired on WPWT 870 AM since the 2004 republican primary elections --- I absolutely have no knowledge of sales commissions paid out to WPWT 870 employees .
No knowledge....why assume and sounded so good...but then you admit you don't about checkin' your facts before ya blog garbage?
These last few comments are rather confusing.
Salida confused???...just like this entire blog...confused...
I'm not confused about the fact that Hill allied with Shaw on HB0056. That can't be denied.
So when will Rep. Matthew Hill be making a statement about WPWT commercial air time to an insurance lobbyist who contributed to his campaign --- and besides, PAC Daddy Rev. Dr. Kenneth C. Hill owns 51% of Information Communications so he is profitting off off these commercials from the lobbyist and well as Appalachian Education Communications Corporation (remember that 501 (c)(3) non-profit that pays "key employee" Rep. Matthew Hill) own the other 49% of ICC, so Rep. Hill is at the very least indirectly benefitting from this business relationship with his friendly lobbyist.

So much for being nothing more than a "cup of coffee" is just business as usual in Nashville.
Mission accomplished in Morrison City, baby...not Nashville.
Morrison City? Where is that?
There is a Morrison City near Cookeville. That certainly is not close to here.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Technorati Ping