Judd Matheny Commentary: Phil Bredesen Put Partisan Politics over People in the Fight Against Meth

by State Rep. Judd Matheny (R-Tullahoma)


As Phil Bredesen runs for Senate this year, he’s asking you to look back on his time as governor. He is highlighting what he did but he is misleading voters about what that record actually is. He regularly claimed that he “cut meth production in half” while Governor of Tennessee until the Washington Post fact-checked the ad and gave it “Three Pinocchio’s” for being untrue.

While that’s bad enough, the real story is much worse.

I was elected to the legislature in 2002 and wanted to use my experience to solve problems. Having spent most of my adult life in law enforcement, I saw how the scourge of meth and meth labs were impacting rural communities: overdoses and death, children removed from their homes and toxic meth lab cleanup sites.

The problem was huge and required a non-partisan approach.  Throughout 2003 and 2004 I worked with both Democrats and Republicans to create the Tennessee Comprehensive Methamphetamine Prevention, Treatment and Control Act of 2004.  But when it came time to seek Governor Bredesen’s help to pass the bill into law, I was shocked at his response.

Ushered into a meeting with Bredesen’s Deputy Governor – who later resigned in a cronyism scandal involving the Tennessee Highway Patrol – I was told “Governor Bredesen is not interested in dealing with this issue right now.”  I asked why and was told “the Governor just has other priorities.”

To draw the Governor’s attention to the issue and demonstrate how easy it was to set up a meth lab, I worked with law enforcement to set up a lab in a committee hearing room at a press event.  The resulting press coverage forced Bredesen to weigh in on the issue.

Governor Bredesen appointed a task force that spent a year touring the state “studying” the issue and delaying action in the fight against meth.  When I offered to help this effort, Bredesen sent his Senior Policy Advisor – who was later forced out after a sexual harassment scandal – to tell me the governor preferred I not attend any public meetings of the task force.

For years, Phil Bredesen chose partisan politics over the lives of Tennesseans impacted by the meth crisis.  So when I hear him say he wants to go to Washington to find a non-partisan solution to the wave of opioid and heroin use destroying Tennessee’s rural communities, I don’t believe him.  And neither should you.

– – –

State Representative Judd Matheny (R-Tullahoma) has represented Coffee and Warren Counties in the Tennessee House of Representatives since 2002.  Rep. Matheny served in state and local law enforcement for many years and is a veteran of the Tennessee Army National Guard.









Related posts

3 Thoughts to “Judd Matheny Commentary: Phil Bredesen Put Partisan Politics over People in the Fight Against Meth”

  1. Nancy Perkins

    He gave illegals certificates and thousands poured into Tennessee. Donated to Democrat contenders to help flip Senate.

  2. Nancy Perkins

    Bredesen is a Liberal pretending to be a mocerate. He’s Schumer’s lap-dog. Trump says he won’t support anything I want. He’s even claiming wild things he did while Governor which are huge lies. And even claiming he’ll bring in FORD if he’s elected Semator. He’s so old he’ll be able to rubber stamp is all. He gave a driver’s certificates while Governor just so he wouldn’t have to say driver’s licenses. Same thing. He’s a flip flopper. He’s Pro-choice, even said he thought Down’s Syndrome babies should be aborted. Yuck. Heartless rich insurance empire owner. Says this and that about his stance on single pay – Medicare. You can bet it will fit his own personal gain.

  3. Let’s look at why “Bredesen fighting against opioids” is potentially a valid claim:

    1) He was (by your evidence) NOT keen on destroying meth production. Why? Because meth attacks the poor AND feeds the poor as a get-rich-quick-and-easy method that subordinates law and law enforcement. In other words, it empowers the criminal class.
    2) He is (by his own claim) AGAINST opioids *because* it is legal, and empowers the wealthy, who tend to support the rule of law (republicans / conservatives.)

    Ergo, I *can* believe Bredesen’s claim to be against opioids while also believing your claim he was neutral towards (if not against being against) the meth issue.