Do We Really Need to Get Rid of the Forrest Day Law?

After, presumably, a weekend of soul-searching and reading critical tweets (including from Ted Cruz of all people), Gov. Bill Lee Monday said he would work to change the law that requires the governor to issue a proclamation declaring July 13 Nathan Bedford Forrest Day.

It's something every governor since Alf Taylor — also a Republican — has done since 1921. The proclamation Lee issued is fairly banal, with two "Whereases" and a "Now, Therefore" simply referring to Forrest — a slave trader infamous for selling women into sex slavery, an early Klan leader and, at the very least, a general complicit in the massacre at Fort Pillow — as a "recognized military figure in American history," which, yes, is technically true ... much as Charles Manson is a recognized figure in the 1960s counterculture.

It's the same language Lee's predecessor Bill Haslam used in the proclamations he issued during his tenure, according to the records available online from the Secretary of State. (Records of proclamations only go back to 2012, so we can't compare to earlier governors.)

When reporters asked him about signing the proclamation late last week, Lee admitted he hadn't actually looked at the law in question, but he was aware it required him to issue said proclamation.

But let's take a look at the law and see what it actually says. It's TCA 15-2-201, if you want to pull your own copy of the code down from the bookshelf.

Each year it is the duty of the governor of this state to proclaim the following as days of special observance: January 19, "Robert E. Lee Day"; February 12, "Abraham Lincoln Day"; March 15, "Andrew Jackson Day"; June 3, "Memorial Day" or "Confederate Decoration Day"; July 13, "Nathan Bedford Forrest Day"; and November 11, "Veterans' Day." The governor shall invite the people of this state to observe the days in schools, churches, and other suitable places with appropriate ceremonies expressive of the public sentiment befitting the anniversary of such dates.

First, notably, note it just says "it is the duty of the governor ..." but does not set a punishment of any kind, so the only recourse would be impeachment. Now, the Tennessee General Assembly does some wacky stuff, but the idea of a Republican-led legislature impeaching a Republican governor for not honoring, as Cruz referred to him, a delegate to the 1868 Democratic convention (slogan: "This Is a White Man's Country, Let White Men Rule"; no, seriously) is a little too far gone, even for them.

So why even bother? There are plenty of laws on the books that have succumbed to obsolescence and no one notices. Except the Crime A Day guy (who has a new book!).

But, OK, let's concede that Bill Lee is a rule-of-law Republican executive (refreshing!) and he feels the need to comply with the statute. Let's take another look at the last line of the statute in question.

"The governor shall invite the people of this state to observe the days in schools, churches, and other suitable places with appropriate ceremonies expressive of the public sentiment befitting the anniversary of such dates." (Emphasis mine.)

It doesn't say "gloss over the truth" or even "be nice." It says "expressive of the public sentiment." Issue a proclamation that calls Forrest what he was: a traitor, a sex trafficker, a slaver, a war criminal, a delegate to the 1868 Democratic convention. If you must placate the people who insist Forrest changed, sure go ahead, so long as it comes after the parade of horribles. Instead of nixing the law, use the law to educate (and make fun of losers). 

Do it for Lee ("Whereas, he sold out his country," "Whereas, he made the same strategic errors as every failed general with an outmanned army since Hannibal," "Whereas, his tactical blunder after First Manassas essentially sealed his fate as a loser") and do it for Davis ("Whereas, he was a traitor who kept picking his bros to lead armies instead of good generals," "Whereas, he was captured wearing his wife's shawl because poor baby was cold in mid-May in South Georgia").

There are those who'll want to extend this treatment to Jackson Day — and in a world where Charlottesville, Va., cancelled Thomas Jefferson Day, let's not rule it out. But my general rule on the complicated issue of who to honor from the past is that the bar to clear should be, "Did they make war against their own country?" Andrew Jackson was no saint, but the man abhorred secessionists, so he has that going for him.

Anyway, the legislature will probably (maybe?) follow Lee's lead and kill Forrest Day altogether, but in the event the legislature's leaders — smiley lacrosse enthusiast Randy McNally and whoever the poor bastard is that becomes House Speaker — say it's going to lead to embarrassing internecine squabbles (extremely possible!), Lee oughta say, "Fine, but here's what's going to be in next year's proclamation."