Is the Tennessee Plan Constitutional?

When listening this morning to Sen. Doug Overbey inveigh against comments from John Jay Hooker today in the Senate Finance, Ways & Means Committee (0:14:45 in the video), I was reminded of his simmering anger after comments by John Jay Hooker at a previous hearing before the Sen. Judiciary Committee (3:05:00 in the video) . . . apparently Overbey isn't a fan of John Jay Hooker, but it's also apparent that you dare not question the constitutionality of something Sen. Overbey thinks is a good idea.

There is a great deal of discussion on our website (www.judicialreformcoalition.org) about whether the TN Plan is consistent with our state constitution, and John Jay Hooker has extensively opined on this subject. But perhaps Hooker's best statement on the subject occurred several weeks ago in the House Judiciary Civil Practice and Procedure Subcommittee. I sincerely encourage you to listen to the entirety of his comments (beginning at 00:25:00 in the video), but I'd say the choicest sound bite of all is related to what our constitution "means" when it requires, "judges shall be elected by the qualified voters of the state." (Tenn. Const., Art. VI, Sec. 3). Mr. Hooker concluded his comments this way:

I asked my father one time what a constitutional provision meant, he said, "Ask your mother." I said, "Papa, have you forgotten, she's not a lawyer?" He said, "That's the point: the constitution was written by non-lawyers, to be read by non-lawyers, to govern non-lawyers."

Read it yourself.