They are afraid of smart women. Just like people were afraid of Joycelyn Elders when she was Surgeon General. And now they are afraid of Elizabeth Warren they've always been afraid of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Smart women make not so smart men squirm.

I'm part of the "eco-community" and want to know how to get this information out more broadly and support this nomination and appointment.

Thanks for the links. Why is the KNS silent on this?

From the second column, She has written hundreds of publications, including the 2010 paper "Energy Efficiency in the South," which charts a promising path for the South: $40 billion in energy savings and nearly 400,000 jobs created.

So is TVA worried that energy efficiency and savings will hurt their bottom line? I honestly think that's the case. They are still operating in the 1930's mode of promoting energy consumption and have no interest in conservation or efficiency other than programs like energy audits for appearances.

This is the kind of crap that happens when you try to run government like a business. Dissension and innovation are quashed and maintaining one's status quo while passing the buck and playing slight- of- hand are the daily orders of business.

I don't think this is running government like a business, I think it's running government like a good old boy's club with no girls allowed...Especially if they're really smart.

Hmmm. Scott Barker used to cover TVA for the KNS. Their TVA coverage used to be really good. Now they can't even cover a big story like Alexander & Corker blocking the appt of a smart, qualified woman who's already served 2 years on the board because (take her choice): a) she's too smart, b) she's female, 3) they don't like her politics and background.

I'm going with 3 myself, with a touch of 2. But I'd sure like to see the KNS go after this. It's embarrassing that the TFP does such a better job of covering TVA when its headquarters are in Knoxville.

One of my dearest friends is a corporate lawyer for TVA. She brought me a beautiful coffee cup from her last trip to Washington emblazoned with the logo, "Friends don't let friends vote Republican".

I seem to remember the TVA charter being revamped during the Bush remake to a new part time board. Anybody know?

Yeah, White's Creek. The TVA Board is part time now instead of full time.

The TVA board is much different now.

In the old days, a three-member board set policy and the board chairman basically managed TVA's day-to-day operations. Under the new structure, which mimics that of private-sector corporations, a part-time board sets policy and a hired CEO manages operations.

TVA was headed toward unchartered territory because the Senate had not confirmed President Barack Obama's nominees. The outgoing board gave the CEO unprecedented powers should a quorum not be possible because the confirmations did not go through. The Senate finally did confirm enough board members to constitute a quorum, though with the obvious and puzzling omission of board member Marilyn Brown. The KNS editorial board is glad they confirmed most of the nominees -- it keeps the new CEO from running operations with no oversight -- but is disappointed Brown's re-nomination was brushed aside. She is highly qualified and has experience on the TVA board. And we said so in this editorial that for some reason White's Creek thinks (as expressed in another thread) is spineless: (link...)

Rachel, thanks for the kind words but I never actually covered TVA as a whole. I was the lead reporter on the coal ash spill and did some other reporting that led to the resignation of a board member, but I wasn't the TVA beat reporter.

TVA wants to be a private-sector company when it's convenient (executive pay, bonuses, oversight, etc.) and a government agency at other times when that's more convenient (sovereign immunity, law enforcement/police powers, etc.).

P.S. Great moments in Barker TVA reporting from the SKB archives:

8/4/2004 by SKB: Same data, two interpretations

Environmental groups issued a press release yesterday reporting they had analyzed EPA data on mercury pollution and found that most fish in America's lakes are unsafe for women and children to eat due to high levels of mercury.

Here's the Washington Post headline:

Most Fish From Lakes Is Too High In Mercury

Here's the Knoxville News Sentinel headline (which incidentally appeared on the front page):

Claims that some lake fish unhealthy to eat disputed by EPA

The two articles follow the same general slant of their headlines. So, how did two different newspapers review the same report on the same EPA data and come to such different conclusions?

Here's a clue from the Knoxville News Sentinel article:

The Tennessee Valley Authority has endorsed the [Bush] administration's proposal, which is similar to the approach credited with reducing acid rain.

"Cap-and-trade is a proven approach," said Jack Brellenthin, TVA's manager of environmental policy and strategy. Brellenthin said utilities would have an incentive to reduce emissions below the cap so they could sell credits to other utilities.

There you have it. The KNS is so far up TVA's ass they are tasting Brylcreem (with apologies to Junior Soprano). Cap-and-trade nonsense aside, you'd think the KNS would be more concerned about their local environment and its habitants who buy their newspaper.

OK, then.

(Emphasis added.)

8/4/2004 by SKB: Public apology

I was just looking at today's paper again and noticed that the front page story about mercury and the EPA that I blogged about below was written by ace KNS reporter and environmental crusader Scott Barker.

If there is anybody at KNS who gives a shit about the environment it is Scott Barker. He is responsible for great in-depth coverage on a number of environmental stories, such as the South Knox sinkhole dumping/contamination and the mess over at Whitherspoon just to name a couple.

Because of my bias and irrational hatred of all things TVA and Bush, and my haste to seize upon any opportunity to slam them, I failed to notice Scott's byline, and after reading it again note that I failed to credit what is basically a pretty well balanced article overall.

I guess they have to get all sides of the story (unlike us bloggers) and Scott cites the usual suspects at TVA. But if you read the article you'll note that he also got the other side of the story, including reference to a report saying the "cap-and-trade" nonsense won't achieve even Bush's goals for mercury pollution reductions. And I especially like the sly reference to EPA's assertion that most people eat fish from fish farms anyway, so what's the big deal.

So anyway, I apologize to Scott Barker for the Brylcreem crack. It was not directed at him personally, and I hope he realizes that. Truth is, I have no idea about the preferred hair care or other personal grooming products of Scott or anyone else at the KNS.

OK, then.