Stacey Campfield wants to make it possible for a candidate to run as a multi-party candidate:

Campfield said his proposal is based on current practices in New York. "It just allows that if a third party wants to stay on the ballot, they can," he said.

Kyle said his proposal is aimed at giving a voice to people interested in smaller parties' platforms, and not forcing them to side with Democrats or Republicans.

"We shouldn't be pigeonholing people," Kyle said. "I think this is a fair and reasonable way."

Kyle said he won't try to stand in the way of Campfield's proposal.

"It seems rather complicated, but if the Senate adopts it, I'm fine with it," he said.

Fun, partially related fact: Charles Plympton Smith, uncle of Haslam flack Dave Smith, served in the Vermont House of Representatives having been nominated by Democrats and Republicans.

The Dean's column on how far is too far for Republican lawmakers presents this little dichotomy:

An example is Senate Republican Caucus Chairman Bill Ketron's resolution calling for a legislative study committee to meet this year and come back next year with recommendations on Tennessee setting up its own currency system, so as to be ready for the "likely" collapse of the Federal Reserve System.

Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey was asked about that one and replied he was not familiar with the proposal, but "I can't imagine we're anywhere close to that." Since the lieutenant governor has a pretty good sense of Republican mood, we may assume that one goes a bit too far.

On the other hand, Ramsey said he thinks a proposal by state Sen. Stacey Campfield to establish a legislative committee to recommend federal laws that should be nullified by Tennessee is "an excellent idea." So that one is not necessarily past the line of going too far in the conservative states' rights agenda.

Perhaps Sen. Campfield is anticipating a slate of drug legalization laws that would put us in conflict with the Federal Government, or maybe he's preparing for enforcement of some consumer protection laws, I'm not sure...

The second piece of dog-specific legislation Campfield has filed would make it illegal for a dog to be in the driver's seat of a vehicle while unrestrained (SB0621). No person shall operate a motor vehicle with an unrestrained animal in the front driver seat. For the purposes of this section, a restrained animal means an animal secured in a harness or vehicle seat, confined in a box, or hard or soft sided travel crate, or being held by a person in the front passenger seat or in a rear seat. Now, I'm not a lawyer, but this wording is confusing. Can I have my dog in the driver's seat as long as she's wearing a seatbelt? They don't appear to make car seats big enough for my dog, so is it okay if she just sits in the back seat? Or does someone have to be holding her? And it's still cool if she drives, right?

The British have a system that stops this. Loser pays winners legal fees. Guess what? Their courts are much less clogged with frivolous lawsuits and only those of merit move forward. When someone wins, they are not punished for being right.

Rep. Ryan Haynes, R-Knoxville, proposed House Bill 64, which would allow motorists to ease through a red light without stopping, as long as they yield the right of way to any cross traffic or pedestrians and do not otherwise "endanger other traffic." It would apply statewide. Sen. Stacey Campfield, R-Knoxville, has introduced a similar bill that would apply only in Knox County, though he says he would welcome amendments to Senate Bill 54 from other legislators who want to allow their counties in the roll-through red lights legislation. Rep. John Ragan, R-Oak Ridge, has taken another approach, filing House Bill 33, which requires that 95 percent of revenue produced by traffic camera tickets be earmarked "solely for educational needs." Currently, local governments can use ticket money for anything they want, notably including operation of the cameras.

The state's social conservatives are getting the message. But rather than temporarily swallowing their moral concerns, the Republican Party's right-wingers have adapted to the new political reality in an innovative way: They now tout their own agenda as critical to economic recovery. So Rep. Glen Casada says he's helping the economy by introducing state legislation to stop Metro Nashville from extending protections to gay, lesbian and transgendered employees of city contractors. Forbidding discrimination in the workplace is a burdensome business requirement, he says. And Sen. Stacey Campfield says he's trying to create jobs by backing an Arizona-style crackdown on illegal immigrants in Tennessee. "With the high unemployment we already have, how can we justify having illegal immigrants working rather than natural citizens?" he asks. But David Fowler, director of the Christian conservative Family Action Council, tops them all. Cleverly, he has found a way to place all social conservative demands under the umbrella of economic improvement. In his view, what the economy needs is new laws to strengthen families, by which he presumably means a ban on abortions and gay adoptions and who knows what else? Maybe the legislature will outlaw divorce. "[A]ny honest assessment of our situation and the statistics make plain that the disintegration of the family greatly contributes to our economic problems," Fowler said in a memo to supporters last week.

Not that there is any thing wrong with them. Many times local outsiders can bring in new perspectives and directions with a local feel. But in state government, one thing I have learned is there are lots of confusing and often conflicting regulations, issues, bureaucracies and federal ties to other programs that are not apparent on first glance. Not to say these people won't do a good job or be able to cut through some of that but it is becoming more and more clear that they will have to rely on the legislature and current bureaucracy for a year or so while they learn the ropes. Don't expect the new broom to sweep clean.

He said when offering advice to the incoming Governor... Do what I did. Look out the window for a minute at some of the statues on the grounds of the Capitol, and comfort yourself with the though that there are very few statues of critics. They only build them of doers. Well, I hate to let him down but as with many things, again Phil was wrong. They did build one for a critic. There is a statue to a critic in Tennessee. In fact, it is one of the few that IS on the grounds of the state capitol. It is quite prominent and not far from where Phil's own office window was. The state statue is for Edward W. Carmack.