National politics is not usually what this blog is about, but hey, it's the State of the Union for God's sake. And since we've been talking party politics recently, I'd like to start a new open thread and/or continue the old one and get some thoughts on the speech.
As a teaser, my impression (I'll admit that I only saw the last half or so) is that Bush said a lot of things that sound nice, but which he either has no intention to really do (make health insurance affordable), is in no position to talk credibly talk about (govt. ethics), or has no specific plan to do (energy reform). Then again, without those three things, what would politicians talk about?
Ok, Gov. Kaine is starting, so I'll be back.
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Coretta Scott King
Coretta Scott King died this morning in Mexico. She was 78.
Related: Atlanta Journal-Constitution: “Coretta Scott King dead at 78” 01/31/06
Washington Post (via AP): “Coretta Scott King dies at 78” 01/31/06
Related: Atlanta Journal-Constitution: “Coretta Scott King dead at 78” 01/31/06
Washington Post (via AP): “Coretta Scott King dies at 78” 01/31/06
Party Politics
There was some interesting discussion going on in the previous post about parties, straight-ticket voting, etc., that got me thinking. It’s good fodder for an open thread, which you’ll find below, and I hope you’ll enjoy. Of course, you’ll have to read through all of my crap first, so in defense of parties, let me just give everyone my take on things.
I'm a Democrat. What little money I donate goes to Democrats, I only volunteer for Democrats, and in a past life, I was paid decent sums of money by Democrats to help them lose elections. Most of the time, I vote Democratic. But notice I said most.
Parties are important for a couple of reasons. First of all, they're supposed to provide a pre-existing means of support for candidates. This usually works better for the R's than the D's.
Second, we have to face facts. Most voters know more (or at least think they know more) about where a party stands than an individual candidate, and most voters don't go to the trouble to determine for themselves where a candidate stands on the issues. Having the label next to a candidate's name does give a voter a clue about where that candidate is, ideologically. And until voters start doing more research and get more involved in the process, which is unlikely anytime soon, party labeling is a convenient way to make sure that a voter who believes in issue X votes for a candidate that, at least, on paper, also does. For what it’s worth, it’s usually a tool to help a voter who hasn’t done their homework make a reasonably informed choice.
Most importantly to me, party identification is important because it represents an encoded set of beliefs (you can think of it as the party's platform, although I think it goes deeper than that) to which you subscribe. It's interesting that in conversations I have with friends who are as dissatisfied as I am with the Democratic Party, one phrase as been coming up more and more often - "core Democratic principles."
Now, I'm not going to be egotistical enough to say that I, and I alone, should be able to define those core Democratic principles for everyone else in my party, but I'd imagine that most of the disagreement within the Democratic Party is about how we manifest those principles in campaigns and in government, rather than on what those principles actually are.
To return from digression land, here's my take. You choose to identify with a party because it represents a close approximation of beliefs that you already hold. That doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't work within the party to make it an even closer approximation. It doesn't mean that everyone out there should party identify or else. And it definitely doesn't mean that you should vote a straight ticket every two years.
Here's the central point of this whole rambling post. If you identify with a party, great. I certainly do, and I imagine the majority of our regular posters here do as well. But when I see a Democrat that doesn't represent what I think are those "core Democratic principles," then I don't vote for him or her.
By the way, in case anyone's interested, if I don't vote Democratic, I usually vote Libertarian, if there's a Libertarian candidate running against a Democrat I don't like.
Open thread time: Notice that I talked about core Democratic principles without enumerating them. Here's your open thread fodder. Take your party of choice and list a few of what you think are its core principles. This should spark some interesting debate.
I'm a Democrat. What little money I donate goes to Democrats, I only volunteer for Democrats, and in a past life, I was paid decent sums of money by Democrats to help them lose elections. Most of the time, I vote Democratic. But notice I said most.
Parties are important for a couple of reasons. First of all, they're supposed to provide a pre-existing means of support for candidates. This usually works better for the R's than the D's.
Second, we have to face facts. Most voters know more (or at least think they know more) about where a party stands than an individual candidate, and most voters don't go to the trouble to determine for themselves where a candidate stands on the issues. Having the label next to a candidate's name does give a voter a clue about where that candidate is, ideologically. And until voters start doing more research and get more involved in the process, which is unlikely anytime soon, party labeling is a convenient way to make sure that a voter who believes in issue X votes for a candidate that, at least, on paper, also does. For what it’s worth, it’s usually a tool to help a voter who hasn’t done their homework make a reasonably informed choice.
Most importantly to me, party identification is important because it represents an encoded set of beliefs (you can think of it as the party's platform, although I think it goes deeper than that) to which you subscribe. It's interesting that in conversations I have with friends who are as dissatisfied as I am with the Democratic Party, one phrase as been coming up more and more often - "core Democratic principles."
Now, I'm not going to be egotistical enough to say that I, and I alone, should be able to define those core Democratic principles for everyone else in my party, but I'd imagine that most of the disagreement within the Democratic Party is about how we manifest those principles in campaigns and in government, rather than on what those principles actually are.
To return from digression land, here's my take. You choose to identify with a party because it represents a close approximation of beliefs that you already hold. That doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't work within the party to make it an even closer approximation. It doesn't mean that everyone out there should party identify or else. And it definitely doesn't mean that you should vote a straight ticket every two years.
Here's the central point of this whole rambling post. If you identify with a party, great. I certainly do, and I imagine the majority of our regular posters here do as well. But when I see a Democrat that doesn't represent what I think are those "core Democratic principles," then I don't vote for him or her.
By the way, in case anyone's interested, if I don't vote Democratic, I usually vote Libertarian, if there's a Libertarian candidate running against a Democrat I don't like.
Open thread time: Notice that I talked about core Democratic principles without enumerating them. Here's your open thread fodder. Take your party of choice and list a few of what you think are its core principles. This should spark some interesting debate.
Sunday, January 29, 2006
Redistrictgate 2006: Is Cowsert Destined to be a One-termer?
Bill Cowsert may be the smartest politician we know. Throughout the entire redistricting hullabaloo, he’s kept his mouth shut, and as a result, the majority of the anti-redistricting attacks have been leveled at either the Athens Area Chamber of Commerce or their personal legislative gopher, Sen. Ralph Hudgens. While it’s a stretch to say that Cowsert is emerging unscathed, he certainly isn’t taking the same heat as Chamber President Larry McKinney, or Hudgens, or even ACC Commissioner Tom Chasteen.
The reason for Cowsert’s reticence is clear – he stands to benefit the most from the new Senate districts. While the current district, which encompasses all of Athens, has been pretty good to the GOP lately, his proposed new district eliminates just about any chance of a Democratic takeover of the seat.
Maybe, though, Cowsert is keeping quiet on this for another reason as well – because he knows that there’s a good chance that he might lose his Senate seat in two years. Don’t get us wrong here, we’re not predicting a massive Democratic victory in 2008; nothing we’ve seen or heard out of the local or state Democratic parties indicates that that will happen.
No, Bill Cowsert could lose his seat to a Republican in the 2008 GOP primary. Here’s how.
Given that the GOP tends to march in lockstep on just about every issue up in Atlanta, and there’s no dissent within the party, you can conveniently divide the Republican state legislators into two groups. You’ve got the folks who vote for every cockamamie piece of legislation the GOP leadership tells them to vote for (or else!), and you’ve got the few, the proud, the safely-districted, the wild-eyed zealots who actually conceive and write the aforementioned cockamamie pieces of legislation.
This is not to say that the first group doesn’t write bills, or that they don’t have an effect on the legislative process. But while senators from the first group are busy working out a budget compromise or trying to get real legislation out of committee, the senators in the second group are grabbing headlines by introducing feel-good (if you’re part of the GOP base), do-nothing bills that promote little more than controversy. Maybe the best example is the current bill that requires the Secretary of State’s office to provide every county with a copy of the Ten Commandments for exhibition in the local courthouse.
The problem with Bill Cowsert is that he is in the first group. While we don’t agree with his politics, we’ll be the first to tell you that Cowsert wants to go to Atlanta, and get his hands dirty working on the real issues. You won’t see Cowsert introducing legislation to ban homosexuals and illegal immigrants from listening to Tim McGraw, or whatever the next crazy bill is going to be. If he wins in 2006, Cowsert will roll into 2008 with a solid record of voting the right way on the right things (for the GOP, that is), but he’ll be vulnerable to any right-wing zealot with a war chest and an agenda.
Because of the way his district is drawn, Cowsert is going to be forced to go mano-a-mano with a string of right-wingers, and the name of the game will be, “Who’s More Conservative?”
“I voted to allow counties to display the Ten Commandments in their courthouses,” Senator Cowsert will say.
“Not good enough,” says his generic steely-eyed GOP challenger, “when I get to Atlanta, I’m going to introduce a law that forces all schoolchildren to recite the Ten Commandments every morning. In Aramaic. And I’m going to make sure it passes. And then I’m going to make sure that anyone who ever listened to Menudo will be cut off from being able to call the fire department, because immigration is bad.”
An exaggeration, maybe, but you get the point. Of course, Cowsert could surprise us. He could become a leader in churning out ill-conceived, useless legislation as well. But knowing Bill Cowsert, we wouldn’t say that’s likely. We don’t like his politics, but Cowsert understands that we’ve got serious problems that call for serious men and women to address them, and he’s going to devote his time to those, and he could care less about Menudo. And because of that, he could well lose.
Do you think that Bill Cowsert is Ralph Hudgens’ first choice to fill this brand new Senate seat that the Chamber of Commerce asked him to create? Absolutely not. As strange as it may seem to folks here in Athens, Bill Cowsert is too moderate for Hudgens and his ilk. We’d bet that Hudgens is already thinking about who he can groom to challenge Cowsert in the 2008 primary. But you redistrict with the candidates you have, not the candidates you wish you had.
Until 2008, that is.
Related: Athens Banner-Herald: “Opinion: State lawmakers are overreaching from Gold Dome,” 01/29/06
Athens Banner-Herald: “Winders: Duck, cover on redistricting question,” 01/29/06
The reason for Cowsert’s reticence is clear – he stands to benefit the most from the new Senate districts. While the current district, which encompasses all of Athens, has been pretty good to the GOP lately, his proposed new district eliminates just about any chance of a Democratic takeover of the seat.
Maybe, though, Cowsert is keeping quiet on this for another reason as well – because he knows that there’s a good chance that he might lose his Senate seat in two years. Don’t get us wrong here, we’re not predicting a massive Democratic victory in 2008; nothing we’ve seen or heard out of the local or state Democratic parties indicates that that will happen.
No, Bill Cowsert could lose his seat to a Republican in the 2008 GOP primary. Here’s how.
Given that the GOP tends to march in lockstep on just about every issue up in Atlanta, and there’s no dissent within the party, you can conveniently divide the Republican state legislators into two groups. You’ve got the folks who vote for every cockamamie piece of legislation the GOP leadership tells them to vote for (or else!), and you’ve got the few, the proud, the safely-districted, the wild-eyed zealots who actually conceive and write the aforementioned cockamamie pieces of legislation.
This is not to say that the first group doesn’t write bills, or that they don’t have an effect on the legislative process. But while senators from the first group are busy working out a budget compromise or trying to get real legislation out of committee, the senators in the second group are grabbing headlines by introducing feel-good (if you’re part of the GOP base), do-nothing bills that promote little more than controversy. Maybe the best example is the current bill that requires the Secretary of State’s office to provide every county with a copy of the Ten Commandments for exhibition in the local courthouse.
The problem with Bill Cowsert is that he is in the first group. While we don’t agree with his politics, we’ll be the first to tell you that Cowsert wants to go to Atlanta, and get his hands dirty working on the real issues. You won’t see Cowsert introducing legislation to ban homosexuals and illegal immigrants from listening to Tim McGraw, or whatever the next crazy bill is going to be. If he wins in 2006, Cowsert will roll into 2008 with a solid record of voting the right way on the right things (for the GOP, that is), but he’ll be vulnerable to any right-wing zealot with a war chest and an agenda.
Because of the way his district is drawn, Cowsert is going to be forced to go mano-a-mano with a string of right-wingers, and the name of the game will be, “Who’s More Conservative?”
“I voted to allow counties to display the Ten Commandments in their courthouses,” Senator Cowsert will say.
“Not good enough,” says his generic steely-eyed GOP challenger, “when I get to Atlanta, I’m going to introduce a law that forces all schoolchildren to recite the Ten Commandments every morning. In Aramaic. And I’m going to make sure it passes. And then I’m going to make sure that anyone who ever listened to Menudo will be cut off from being able to call the fire department, because immigration is bad.”
An exaggeration, maybe, but you get the point. Of course, Cowsert could surprise us. He could become a leader in churning out ill-conceived, useless legislation as well. But knowing Bill Cowsert, we wouldn’t say that’s likely. We don’t like his politics, but Cowsert understands that we’ve got serious problems that call for serious men and women to address them, and he’s going to devote his time to those, and he could care less about Menudo. And because of that, he could well lose.
Do you think that Bill Cowsert is Ralph Hudgens’ first choice to fill this brand new Senate seat that the Chamber of Commerce asked him to create? Absolutely not. As strange as it may seem to folks here in Athens, Bill Cowsert is too moderate for Hudgens and his ilk. We’d bet that Hudgens is already thinking about who he can groom to challenge Cowsert in the 2008 primary. But you redistrict with the candidates you have, not the candidates you wish you had.
Until 2008, that is.
Related: Athens Banner-Herald: “Opinion: State lawmakers are overreaching from Gold Dome,” 01/29/06
Athens Banner-Herald: “Winders: Duck, cover on redistricting question,” 01/29/06
Friday, January 27, 2006
Red and Black Reporter Connected to Chamber
A news story written by a reporter for The Red and Black may have been influenced by her connections to the Athens Area Chamber of Commerce. Sources within the Chamber of Commerce and the Athens Clarke-County government confirm that the reporter, Cristen Conger, is the daughter of the Chamber’s communications director, Dan Conger.
Ms. Conger’s story, published in Thursday’s edition of The Red and Black, covered the proposed redistricting of state senate districts in Athens Clarke-County. The proposed redistricting measure was introduced in the Georgia General Assembly by State Senator Ralph Hudgens (R-Comer). Hudgens has said publicly that he introduced the legislation based in part on requests from the Athens Area Chamber of Commerce.
Representatives from The Red and Black and the Athens Area Chamber of Commerce, as well as Ms. Conger herself, did not respond to requests seeking comment.
Related: The Red and Black: “Sen. wants to redraw lines,” 01/26/06
Ms. Conger’s story, published in Thursday’s edition of The Red and Black, covered the proposed redistricting of state senate districts in Athens Clarke-County. The proposed redistricting measure was introduced in the Georgia General Assembly by State Senator Ralph Hudgens (R-Comer). Hudgens has said publicly that he introduced the legislation based in part on requests from the Athens Area Chamber of Commerce.
Representatives from The Red and Black and the Athens Area Chamber of Commerce, as well as Ms. Conger herself, did not respond to requests seeking comment.
Related: The Red and Black: “Sen. wants to redraw lines,” 01/26/06
New Voter ID Law Signed
You know, in all the excitement over redistricting, we’ve kind of fallen down on the job with respect to another Republican attempt to monkey with where and how you vote – the Voter ID Law.
Since our last report on the Voter ID Law, the new version of the law has made it out of the General Assembly and was signed into law by Governor Sonny Perdue.
This is a big victory for the Democrats in Georgia. They took on the majority party, the General Assembly, and the Governor himself and they won a partial victory. Rather than endure another round of losses in federal court, the GOP blinked. They took their law into the woodshed, tuned it up, put a new coat of paint on it, and came out with a better law. We’re not happy that it’s still on the books, but it’s better.
Democrats should congratulate themselves on this one. For about five minutes, and then it’s time to get back to work.
Face it folks. Whether the law is well-intentioned or not (and we imagine you know how we feel about that), this thing has stank to high heaven from day one. Let’s review the stinkiness.
Related: The Washington Post: “Politics alleged in voting cases” 01/23/06
The Washington Post: “Criticism of voting law was overruled” 11/17/05
AthPo: “Voter ID Law – Political influence at the Department of Justice?” 01/23/06
AthPo: “More on the voter id bill” 11/17/05
Athens Banner-Herald: “Governor approves voter id legislation” 01/27/06
Since our last report on the Voter ID Law, the new version of the law has made it out of the General Assembly and was signed into law by Governor Sonny Perdue.
This is a big victory for the Democrats in Georgia. They took on the majority party, the General Assembly, and the Governor himself and they won a partial victory. Rather than endure another round of losses in federal court, the GOP blinked. They took their law into the woodshed, tuned it up, put a new coat of paint on it, and came out with a better law. We’re not happy that it’s still on the books, but it’s better.
Democrats should congratulate themselves on this one. For about five minutes, and then it’s time to get back to work.
Face it folks. Whether the law is well-intentioned or not (and we imagine you know how we feel about that), this thing has stank to high heaven from day one. Let’s review the stinkiness.
- When the law was introduced, one of its primary champions was Senator Bill Stephens, who himself has been fined for ethics violations.
- Another outspoken proponent of the bill, Rep. Sue Burmeister was quoted in a U.S. Department of Justice internal memo as saying that black people in her district only voted if you paid them.
- Legitimate concerns about the oversight of the U.S. Department of Justice have been raised, in this blog and elsewhere, following revelations in The Washington Post that the original Voter ID law was rejected by career civil rights lawyers at DOJ. Their recommendation was overruled by the Republican political appointees that have final approval.
Related: The Washington Post: “Politics alleged in voting cases” 01/23/06
The Washington Post: “Criticism of voting law was overruled” 11/17/05
AthPo: “Voter ID Law – Political influence at the Department of Justice?” 01/23/06
AthPo: “More on the voter id bill” 11/17/05
Athens Banner-Herald: “Governor approves voter id legislation” 01/27/06
Redistrictgate 2006: Inside the Commission
As promised, here are a few thoughts on Wednesday’s meeting of the Mayor and Commission. There’s not much to add on the opinion front; JMac’s got you covered there. (http://safeashouses.blogspot.com/2006/01/wishy-to-washy.html)
We exchanged few emails with sources close to the Mayor and Commissioners with respect to Wednesday’s meeting. First of all, the two Commissioners not in attendance at the meeting were District 5 Commissioner David Lynn, and District 6 Commissioner Carl Jordan, both for pretty good reasons. Jordan is currently in Idaho, as we mentioned previously, and Lynn had a death in the family.
Obviously, the big news coming out of the meeting was Tom Chasteen’s nay vote on the comdemnation measure. Sources close to the Commission tell us that Chasteen’s fellow local electeds were surprised that he wouldn’t join the “Magnificent Seven.” (Eight if you count the Mayor, who didn’t vote, but has made her position on the issue more than clear.) The conventional wisdom around the Commission, according to one of our sources, is that Chasteen made a massive miscalculation.
One source with close ties to the ACC government tells us that Chasteen’s move is less a vote on the issue, and much more of a way to pre-emptively differentiate himself from Heidi Davison, who is looking more and more like a candidate for re-election. In an email we received today, our source informs us that, in some Commissioners’ opinions, Chasteen’s brand of amoeba politics might have backfired on him among his colleagues. According to our source close to the Commission, words like “weak” and “lack of leadership” are coming up in private conversations among some Commissioners and their confidants in reference to Chasteen.
Chasteen is running for Mayor, and yet he chooses to vote against the condemnation because he’s afraid that it will piss off our state legislators? Well, if you’re looking at mayoral candidates, we reckon it’s good to know that without a single vote being counted, Tom Chasteen has already placed himself and Athens-Clarke County in a subservient role to Ralph Hudgens and Bob Smith.
Do what you want with us, Mayor Chasteen will say, we don’t want any trouble.
Will Chasteen’s dodge work for him this November? Probably not, in our opinion. Heidi Davison may or may not be a candidate again, but you can bet that she’s going to have an effect on the election either way. In or out, the Heidi effect will not be beneficial for Chasteen.
And let’s talk about the Mayor for just a moment. We’ve been critical of her in the past. There are a number of issues upon which we respectfully disagree with Heidi. But, we’ve got to give her an A+ for her behavior lately. Her work on the poverty initiative is one reason, and this whole redistricting imbroglio is another.
Whether you like her or not, if you’re opposed to redistricting, you should thank Heidi Davison. She’s been out there working her tuchas off and tilting at every windmill she can find to make sure that people know how absolutely opposed most of Athens is to this. We all know that the petition isn’t going to do any good, and we all know that condemnation from the Mayor and Commission isn’t going to change any minds in Atlanta. It would be easy for Heidi to make some sympathetic noises and write redistricting off as a hopeless cause.
But she didn’t. She sent emails to everyone and their brother with a link to the petition. She called a meeting and pushed the condemnation through. She’s been to Atlanta, and, knowing Heidi, we’re sure she rattled every cage she could get her hands on while she was up there. Why? Because dissent is important. Because open government is important. Because unlike Tom Chasteen, Heidi Davison knows that there is a time to stand up, and that people don’t want someone who acquiesces to bullying simply to make nice.
We’ve disagreed with the Mayor in the past, and we’re sure we’ll disagree with her in the future. But, on this issue, we’d much rather have her in our corner than Tom Chasteen.
Related: Athens Banner-Herald: “Commissioners condemning Clarke split” 01/26/06
Athens Banner-Herald Editorial: “Vote could hurt Chasteen’s run for mayor’s seat” 01/27/06
Athens Banner-Herald Letters: “Steve Wiktorski: Chasteen showed courage in stand on redistricting” 01/27/06
We exchanged few emails with sources close to the Mayor and Commissioners with respect to Wednesday’s meeting. First of all, the two Commissioners not in attendance at the meeting were District 5 Commissioner David Lynn, and District 6 Commissioner Carl Jordan, both for pretty good reasons. Jordan is currently in Idaho, as we mentioned previously, and Lynn had a death in the family.
Obviously, the big news coming out of the meeting was Tom Chasteen’s nay vote on the comdemnation measure. Sources close to the Commission tell us that Chasteen’s fellow local electeds were surprised that he wouldn’t join the “Magnificent Seven.” (Eight if you count the Mayor, who didn’t vote, but has made her position on the issue more than clear.) The conventional wisdom around the Commission, according to one of our sources, is that Chasteen made a massive miscalculation.
One source with close ties to the ACC government tells us that Chasteen’s move is less a vote on the issue, and much more of a way to pre-emptively differentiate himself from Heidi Davison, who is looking more and more like a candidate for re-election. In an email we received today, our source informs us that, in some Commissioners’ opinions, Chasteen’s brand of amoeba politics might have backfired on him among his colleagues. According to our source close to the Commission, words like “weak” and “lack of leadership” are coming up in private conversations among some Commissioners and their confidants in reference to Chasteen.
Chasteen is running for Mayor, and yet he chooses to vote against the condemnation because he’s afraid that it will piss off our state legislators? Well, if you’re looking at mayoral candidates, we reckon it’s good to know that without a single vote being counted, Tom Chasteen has already placed himself and Athens-Clarke County in a subservient role to Ralph Hudgens and Bob Smith.
Do what you want with us, Mayor Chasteen will say, we don’t want any trouble.
Will Chasteen’s dodge work for him this November? Probably not, in our opinion. Heidi Davison may or may not be a candidate again, but you can bet that she’s going to have an effect on the election either way. In or out, the Heidi effect will not be beneficial for Chasteen.
And let’s talk about the Mayor for just a moment. We’ve been critical of her in the past. There are a number of issues upon which we respectfully disagree with Heidi. But, we’ve got to give her an A+ for her behavior lately. Her work on the poverty initiative is one reason, and this whole redistricting imbroglio is another.
Whether you like her or not, if you’re opposed to redistricting, you should thank Heidi Davison. She’s been out there working her tuchas off and tilting at every windmill she can find to make sure that people know how absolutely opposed most of Athens is to this. We all know that the petition isn’t going to do any good, and we all know that condemnation from the Mayor and Commission isn’t going to change any minds in Atlanta. It would be easy for Heidi to make some sympathetic noises and write redistricting off as a hopeless cause.
But she didn’t. She sent emails to everyone and their brother with a link to the petition. She called a meeting and pushed the condemnation through. She’s been to Atlanta, and, knowing Heidi, we’re sure she rattled every cage she could get her hands on while she was up there. Why? Because dissent is important. Because open government is important. Because unlike Tom Chasteen, Heidi Davison knows that there is a time to stand up, and that people don’t want someone who acquiesces to bullying simply to make nice.
We’ve disagreed with the Mayor in the past, and we’re sure we’ll disagree with her in the future. But, on this issue, we’d much rather have her in our corner than Tom Chasteen.
Related: Athens Banner-Herald: “Commissioners condemning Clarke split” 01/26/06
Athens Banner-Herald Editorial: “Vote could hurt Chasteen’s run for mayor’s seat” 01/27/06
Athens Banner-Herald Letters: “Steve Wiktorski: Chasteen showed courage in stand on redistricting” 01/27/06
Thursday, January 26, 2006
I Don't Blog I Just Post A Lot
Well, blogger was acting like a little bitch yesterday, at least for me, and I couldn't even read comments, much less post.
And on top of that, the fun police at work (also known as the CIS dept.) have decided not to let us post on blogs from the work computers.
So I'm kinda jonesin' to post. Since my co-editor has promised a post on redistricting, I'll let that lie for now. Here goes:
GOTD - A profile of Athens on Budget Travel Online.
Cathy Cox goes on her Tour de Georgia.
UGA shows Richt the money (and the long-term contract).
The Clarke County split passes out of committee.
Query: How many people will Tom Chasteen piss off in the process of trying not to piss anybody off?
And on top of that, the fun police at work (also known as the CIS dept.) have decided not to let us post on blogs from the work computers.
So I'm kinda jonesin' to post. Since my co-editor has promised a post on redistricting, I'll let that lie for now. Here goes:
GOTD - A profile of Athens on Budget Travel Online.
Cathy Cox goes on her Tour de Georgia.
UGA shows Richt the money (and the long-term contract).
The Clarke County split passes out of committee.
Query: How many people will Tom Chasteen piss off in the process of trying not to piss anybody off?
Giving Ralph Hudgens the Business
Major redistricting post coming up later today with respect to the Mayor and Commission’s vote of condemnation last night. We’re still waiting on a couple of sources to check in. We would however, like to go ahead and express our strong support for the move and congratulate the Mayor and Commission for stepping up to the plate and taking a good swing on this one. (We’ll get to Tom Chasteen in our later post.)
But, we wanted to get a post down about redistricting and an interesting letter in the paper today. (Athens Banner-Herald: “Michael Williams: Hudgens not serving his constituents,” 01/26/06)
Mr. Williams, according to his letter, is a resident of Madison County. Like many of his neighbors here in Athens, he is less than pleased with his representation in the State Senate.
Although Ralph Hudgens would like for us to believe otherwise, the orphaned precinct in Madison County is hardly a big political issue. If it were, then the State House would be considering Keith Heard’s compromise plan, rather than voting it down 6-3 in committee yesterday. As everyone knows, this is politics, and it has nothing to do with the poor little orphaned Madisonians who are deprived of the benefits of Ralph Hudgens’ inspired legislative leadership. They’re just pawns in a Republican game of “Stomp on ACC.”
Maybe more interesting is Williams’ mention that Hudgens is going to be monkeying with changing Madison County’s government – at the behest of, guess who?
The Madison County Chamber of Commerce, of course.
Things like this raise some significant questions about exactly who Hudgens works for? Actually, it doesn’t so much ask the questions as answer them.
Ralph Hudgens is a tool of any local businessman with a campaign contribution and a political agenda. Don’t believe us? That’s cool – we’re Democrats, and we’re biased. But, before you dismiss us out of hand, take a look at Ralph’s contribution reports. They’re available to the public, and you can view them at the handy links we provide below. Here’s a few gems, though.
From Hudgens’ December 31, 2005 disclosure report, which covers the period from July 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005, we see that Hudgens received $37,250.00. Of that, $29,250.00 was from corporations.
We’re going to put that on a separate line, because you really need to see this.
Of the $37,250.00 that Ralph Hudgens received from July 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005, 78.5% came from corporations.
Oh but wait, it gets better. Of the leftover $8,000.00, another 4% ($1,500.00) came in direct donations from corporate officers. In fact, including those two personal donations, only three of Ralph Hudgens’ 54 donors are actual living, breathing people. The one personal contribution that wasn’t from a corporate officer was for $200.00
By the way, if you’re curious, the remaining $6,300.00 came from PACs, many of whom (like the Troutman-Sanders, LLP PAC) represent – say it with us now – business. (Troutman-Sanders is a posh Atlanta law firm that makes its bundle defending insurance companies and corporate polluters.)
So, who exactly is Ralph Hudgens in bed with these days?
Related: Campaign Disclosure Reports for Senator Ralph Hudgens (R-Comer), via the Georgia Secretary of State’s website.
12/31/05 06/30/05 03/31/04 06/30/04 09/30/04 10/25/04 12/31/04
But, we wanted to get a post down about redistricting and an interesting letter in the paper today. (Athens Banner-Herald: “Michael Williams: Hudgens not serving his constituents,” 01/26/06)
Mr. Williams, according to his letter, is a resident of Madison County. Like many of his neighbors here in Athens, he is less than pleased with his representation in the State Senate.
Although Ralph Hudgens would like for us to believe otherwise, the orphaned precinct in Madison County is hardly a big political issue. If it were, then the State House would be considering Keith Heard’s compromise plan, rather than voting it down 6-3 in committee yesterday. As everyone knows, this is politics, and it has nothing to do with the poor little orphaned Madisonians who are deprived of the benefits of Ralph Hudgens’ inspired legislative leadership. They’re just pawns in a Republican game of “Stomp on ACC.”
Maybe more interesting is Williams’ mention that Hudgens is going to be monkeying with changing Madison County’s government – at the behest of, guess who?
The Madison County Chamber of Commerce, of course.
Things like this raise some significant questions about exactly who Hudgens works for? Actually, it doesn’t so much ask the questions as answer them.
Ralph Hudgens is a tool of any local businessman with a campaign contribution and a political agenda. Don’t believe us? That’s cool – we’re Democrats, and we’re biased. But, before you dismiss us out of hand, take a look at Ralph’s contribution reports. They’re available to the public, and you can view them at the handy links we provide below. Here’s a few gems, though.
From Hudgens’ December 31, 2005 disclosure report, which covers the period from July 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005, we see that Hudgens received $37,250.00. Of that, $29,250.00 was from corporations.
We’re going to put that on a separate line, because you really need to see this.
Of the $37,250.00 that Ralph Hudgens received from July 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005, 78.5% came from corporations.
Oh but wait, it gets better. Of the leftover $8,000.00, another 4% ($1,500.00) came in direct donations from corporate officers. In fact, including those two personal donations, only three of Ralph Hudgens’ 54 donors are actual living, breathing people. The one personal contribution that wasn’t from a corporate officer was for $200.00
By the way, if you’re curious, the remaining $6,300.00 came from PACs, many of whom (like the Troutman-Sanders, LLP PAC) represent – say it with us now – business. (Troutman-Sanders is a posh Atlanta law firm that makes its bundle defending insurance companies and corporate polluters.)
So, who exactly is Ralph Hudgens in bed with these days?
Related: Campaign Disclosure Reports for Senator Ralph Hudgens (R-Comer), via the Georgia Secretary of State’s website.
12/31/05 06/30/05 03/31/04 06/30/04 09/30/04 10/25/04 12/31/04
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
YD's host Holcomb
FYI, the Young Democrats of Athens are hosting Scott Holcomb, candidate for Secretary of State at their meeting tomorrow. The shindig kicks off around 6:00 pm in room 350 of the UGA Student Learning Center. We understand that pizza might be provided as well.
Free Ralph Reed!
Ralph Reed has the best friends money can buy, and we’re not just talking about lobbyist (and indicted felon) Jack Abramoff. According to an article in Saturday’s Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC: “Times are tough, Reed has to pay for a crowd,” 01/21/06), Reed’s campaign offered to pay supporters’ entry fees to Saturday’s Christian Coalition event, to make sure that he had plenty of beaming faces in the crowd. Out-of-towners got an even sweeter deal – hotel rooms paid for by Reed’s campaign. What’s the matter, guys? Couldn’t get tickets to the Georgia Aquarium too?
Reed’s camp wants you to think that this is all routine, and to be fair, it is in some respects. Campaigns routinely hand out incentives to get folks to their events, usually free food, maybe some t-shirts or other campaign swag. Of course, $20 and a night at the local Super 8 ain’t exactly a handful of buttons and a bumper sticker.
One thing we know for sure, though. Bill Shipp must be sleeping well these days, as the mighty Reed juggernaut has thrown another rod on the highway to public office.
Even folks who in the past were strong Reed supporters are starting to smell something fishy about the whole Reed/Abramoff/Indian gambling thing, and Reed’s polling and fundraising numbers are starting to show it.
Reed should’ve just called up Larry McKinney at the Chamber of Commerce. Heaven knows the COC-squad would have been more than happy to drum up a crowd for Ralph. Chamber friend Ralph Hudgens, who is a firm believer in helping your fellow Ralph, could have introduced him. It would have been fantastic, and all it would have cost Reed would have been a few more State Senate seats.
Cheap at twice the price, we say.
Reed’s camp wants you to think that this is all routine, and to be fair, it is in some respects. Campaigns routinely hand out incentives to get folks to their events, usually free food, maybe some t-shirts or other campaign swag. Of course, $20 and a night at the local Super 8 ain’t exactly a handful of buttons and a bumper sticker.
One thing we know for sure, though. Bill Shipp must be sleeping well these days, as the mighty Reed juggernaut has thrown another rod on the highway to public office.
Even folks who in the past were strong Reed supporters are starting to smell something fishy about the whole Reed/Abramoff/Indian gambling thing, and Reed’s polling and fundraising numbers are starting to show it.
Reed should’ve just called up Larry McKinney at the Chamber of Commerce. Heaven knows the COC-squad would have been more than happy to drum up a crowd for Ralph. Chamber friend Ralph Hudgens, who is a firm believer in helping your fellow Ralph, could have introduced him. It would have been fantastic, and all it would have cost Reed would have been a few more State Senate seats.
Cheap at twice the price, we say.
Monday, January 23, 2006
Blog Shoutout to: Molly Ivins
We don’t normally do the national political discussion here. Heaven knows there are enough other places to get that stuff around the internets. But we did want to point you democrats out there to this article by Molly Ivins. (Molly Ivins, “Not. Backing. Hilary.” 01/20/06, Creator’s Syndicate)
We like it, and would humbly suggest that it has significant local implications as well.
If you’re scoring at home, we’re not sure, but we believe that Ivins got as least some of her numbers in the fifth graf from this poll. (Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, “Beyond Red and Blue,” 05/10//05)
We like it, and would humbly suggest that it has significant local implications as well.
If you’re scoring at home, we’re not sure, but we believe that Ivins got as least some of her numbers in the fifth graf from this poll. (Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, “Beyond Red and Blue,” 05/10//05)
Hello Nurse!
I'm gonna try to refrain from any juvenile jokes here, but wow, what a horrible picture. This is from an ABH article today about Athens Tech.
Oh, and by the way, just so this post is not totally devoid of political content, the article says that Sonny screwed us again on funding, this time denying funding for increased space for more students in the nursing program. This despite the unbelievable shortage of nurses and the hella-long queue of would-be nurses on waiting lists to get in nursing programs in this State.
Poverty Initiative in Final Planning Stages
The new community group that has dedicated itself to cutting down Athens’ 28% poverty rate is meeting today to get organized. Members of Partners for Prosperous Athens, including Mayor Heidi Davison, Chamber of Commerce President Larry McKinney, and Clarke County Superintendent of Schools Lewis Holloway will convene today to prepare for a February 11th meeting with all 33 members of the PPA steering committee.
After the February 11th meeting, we understand that PPA will be ready to being including other members of the community – meaning the average Joes like us – in the process, and thanks to our friends inside PPA, we look forward to giving you all the information and encouragement you need to get involved.
Related: ABH: “Anti-Poverty group getting organized” 01/23/06
After the February 11th meeting, we understand that PPA will be ready to being including other members of the community – meaning the average Joes like us – in the process, and thanks to our friends inside PPA, we look forward to giving you all the information and encouragement you need to get involved.
Related: ABH: “Anti-Poverty group getting organized” 01/23/06
Voter ID Law - Political Influence at the Department of Justice?
Speaking of the GOP monkeying with voting, as we did in the previous post, the Voter ID Law (New Slogan: “Brand New Amendments, Same Great Racism!”) is back before the Senate tomorrow.
Expect the same kind of fireworks we saw last year on this thing, and expect about the same result. Trust us, no one can dissuade the Georgia Republicans when it comes to suppressing black votes.
Of more note however, is an article in today’s Washington Post. (“Politics Alleged in Voting Cases”) WaPo staff writer Dan Eggen has done his homework, and put together a preponderance of evidence that something is rotten in the Department of Justice.
This is related to something that we mentioned some months ago, when the WaPo got a leaked copy of the staff memo to the higher-ups at Justice. (“More on the Voter ID Bill”) If you’re keeping score at home, you’ll know that there are essentially two strata of lawyers at the DOJ: the career attorneys, who work at DOJ from administration to administration, and are essentially non-partisan, and their politically-appointed superiors. According to the WaPo, that politically-appointed upper layer has been reversing opinions from the career civil rights lawyers, in order to help the Republican Parties in Texas and Georgia.
Related: Athens Banner-Herald: “Voter ID back before Georgia lawmakers” 01/23/06
Washington Post: “Criticism of Voting Law was Overruled” 11/17/05
DOJ Section 5 Recommendation Memorandum, via Washington Post,
pages 1-11, 12-19, 20-31, 32-38, 39-51
Expect the same kind of fireworks we saw last year on this thing, and expect about the same result. Trust us, no one can dissuade the Georgia Republicans when it comes to suppressing black votes.
Of more note however, is an article in today’s Washington Post. (“Politics Alleged in Voting Cases”) WaPo staff writer Dan Eggen has done his homework, and put together a preponderance of evidence that something is rotten in the Department of Justice.
This is related to something that we mentioned some months ago, when the WaPo got a leaked copy of the staff memo to the higher-ups at Justice. (“More on the Voter ID Bill”) If you’re keeping score at home, you’ll know that there are essentially two strata of lawyers at the DOJ: the career attorneys, who work at DOJ from administration to administration, and are essentially non-partisan, and their politically-appointed superiors. According to the WaPo, that politically-appointed upper layer has been reversing opinions from the career civil rights lawyers, in order to help the Republican Parties in Texas and Georgia.
Related: Athens Banner-Herald: “Voter ID back before Georgia lawmakers” 01/23/06
Washington Post: “Criticism of Voting Law was Overruled” 11/17/05
DOJ Section 5 Recommendation Memorandum, via Washington Post,
pages 1-11, 12-19, 20-31, 32-38, 39-51
Redistrictgate 2006: JMac gets it right, the ACC Dems kind of get it, the DPG doesn't get it at all
Two redistricting things we’d like to draw your attention to today. First off, Jmac has two pieces up at his blog. (“Is this the End” and “Roundup of the Absurd”) We’re not so sure that the Chamber is making itself totally irrelevant, but we’re open-minded on the issue. JMac makes good points.
In our continuing coverage of redistricting, we submit to you today’s opinion piece by John Jeffreys, chairman of the Athens-Clarke County Democratic Party. (ABH: “Democrats offer views on redistricting bill”)
Jeffreys makes a good point, and one that most of the opponents to the redistricting have missed. Ralph Hudgens and his gang did pretty much slip this one in under the radar, and decided to forego the common courtesy of letting the local government know, to say nothing of notifying the other members (who happen to be Democrats) of the Athens legislative delegation. Why all the secrecy?
However, we have to take issue with Jeffreys on another point. Sez Jeffreys:
“…it would weaken, not strengthen, the voices of the majority of citizens of Athens-Clarke County, if the most Democratic-leaning county in this area is ‘represented’ by two Republican state senators.”
Hold on. Last we checked, the bill was going to carve ACC in half, which is bad enough, but apparently the bill mandates that, regardless of how the actual vote turns out, the winner will always be a Republican? Hooboy, that’s some mighty fine bill-writing there.
Or maybe not. Obviously, the voters still get to decide, and clearly, Jeffreys is stating the obvious – the districts are drawn in such a way that a Democrat being elected in either is somewhat less than probable. So why are we making a big deal about this?
Well, Jeffreys’ comment kind of sums up a major problem we have with our local Democrats around Athens. They just give up too easily. If the ACC Dems owned a peach orchard, we would hope that none of their trees grew more that four feet high, because all they want to do is pick the low-hanging fruit.
When the going gets tough, the tough get going, and the ACC Democrats default back to the races that they were already going to win. That’s the kind of behavior that helped Brian Kemp beat Doug Haines by a handful of votes in 2002, and it’s the kind of behavior that helped Kemp beat Becky Vaughn by more than a handful in 2004, while the local Democrats ignored non-partisan elections and concentrated on “helping” Jane Kidd, who already had her House district sewn up anyway.
You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take, and you miss almost 100% of the shots you half-ass. Speaking as a local Democrat who has no connection to the local party (Those guys can’t stand me. Wonder why?), I would love to see them getting in Bill Cowsert’s face, and especially in Ralph Hudgens’ face. Look at the numbers in ACC. In 2004, we went 58% for John Kerry. The Democrats in ACC are the big dogs in the kennel, but instead, they’ve spent the last few years acting like a puppy who just got nipped on the rump. As John Jeffreys himself says today, we are, “the most Democratic-leaning county in this area.”
We think it’s high time our local party started acting like it. Just win, baby!
However, as annoyed as we are at the local Democrats, we’re equally annoyed at the Democratic Party of Georgia. Where’s Bobby Kahn on this one, and why doesn’t he have the local party’s back? The state party needs to come out and take a few swings at this one too. Unfortunately, they haven’t made it to the dugout yet. If this were a solid red county, we would understand the DPG’s diffidence, but then again, if this were a solid red county, Ralph Hudgens wouldn’t be trying to carve his own personal road to glory outside the Loop.
In our continuing coverage of redistricting, we submit to you today’s opinion piece by John Jeffreys, chairman of the Athens-Clarke County Democratic Party. (ABH: “Democrats offer views on redistricting bill”)
Jeffreys makes a good point, and one that most of the opponents to the redistricting have missed. Ralph Hudgens and his gang did pretty much slip this one in under the radar, and decided to forego the common courtesy of letting the local government know, to say nothing of notifying the other members (who happen to be Democrats) of the Athens legislative delegation. Why all the secrecy?
However, we have to take issue with Jeffreys on another point. Sez Jeffreys:
“…it would weaken, not strengthen, the voices of the majority of citizens of Athens-Clarke County, if the most Democratic-leaning county in this area is ‘represented’ by two Republican state senators.”
Hold on. Last we checked, the bill was going to carve ACC in half, which is bad enough, but apparently the bill mandates that, regardless of how the actual vote turns out, the winner will always be a Republican? Hooboy, that’s some mighty fine bill-writing there.
Or maybe not. Obviously, the voters still get to decide, and clearly, Jeffreys is stating the obvious – the districts are drawn in such a way that a Democrat being elected in either is somewhat less than probable. So why are we making a big deal about this?
Well, Jeffreys’ comment kind of sums up a major problem we have with our local Democrats around Athens. They just give up too easily. If the ACC Dems owned a peach orchard, we would hope that none of their trees grew more that four feet high, because all they want to do is pick the low-hanging fruit.
When the going gets tough, the tough get going, and the ACC Democrats default back to the races that they were already going to win. That’s the kind of behavior that helped Brian Kemp beat Doug Haines by a handful of votes in 2002, and it’s the kind of behavior that helped Kemp beat Becky Vaughn by more than a handful in 2004, while the local Democrats ignored non-partisan elections and concentrated on “helping” Jane Kidd, who already had her House district sewn up anyway.
You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take, and you miss almost 100% of the shots you half-ass. Speaking as a local Democrat who has no connection to the local party (Those guys can’t stand me. Wonder why?), I would love to see them getting in Bill Cowsert’s face, and especially in Ralph Hudgens’ face. Look at the numbers in ACC. In 2004, we went 58% for John Kerry. The Democrats in ACC are the big dogs in the kennel, but instead, they’ve spent the last few years acting like a puppy who just got nipped on the rump. As John Jeffreys himself says today, we are, “the most Democratic-leaning county in this area.”
We think it’s high time our local party started acting like it. Just win, baby!
However, as annoyed as we are at the local Democrats, we’re equally annoyed at the Democratic Party of Georgia. Where’s Bobby Kahn on this one, and why doesn’t he have the local party’s back? The state party needs to come out and take a few swings at this one too. Unfortunately, they haven’t made it to the dugout yet. If this were a solid red county, we would understand the DPG’s diffidence, but then again, if this were a solid red county, Ralph Hudgens wouldn’t be trying to carve his own personal road to glory outside the Loop.
Boobs and Stuff
Hey, never say we don't give the people what they want. Our friend Lefty takes note of a decision by a federal judge in Florida ruling anti-nudity laws unconstitutional, and analyzes the decision's impact on local establishments like Topper's and Chelsea's.
Read all about it here, and if Lefty's correct, we might just be moving AthPo Global HQ to that corner table at Chelsea's. Don't act like you don't know which one we're talking about.
Read all about it here, and if Lefty's correct, we might just be moving AthPo Global HQ to that corner table at Chelsea's. Don't act like you don't know which one we're talking about.
Sunday, January 22, 2006
The Redistricting Backlash
Redistricting continues to be the story of the day, and the “wee protest” outside the Chamber notwithstanding, we think the backlash on this has been impressive. Here are a couple of nuggets for you to mull over.
ABH Executive Editor Jason Winders thinks that Ralph Hudgens has bitten off more than he can chew, and that Eric Johnson and Chip Rogers should be embarrassed, if they aren’t already. More important, he gives us the inside skinny on what the gentlemen said in an editorial meeting with the ABH, where they apparently got just a little desperate to prove their case. Here’s what Ol’ Man Winders has to say:
“…Rogers claimed if you pulled aside University of Georgia administrators they would support this idea. For our friends inside the Ivory Tower, thought you might like to know.
He said if you asked our county commissioners off-the-record they would all voice support of this idea. For our friends behind the rail, a little FYI for you.
Rogers also said he wouldn't make a move unless the sitting senator gave his approval. Thought Sen. Brian Kemp, R-Athens, might like to know since he has said all along he had nothing to do with this plan.”
Read his whole column here, and yes, it’s worth the read.
Now, as to what the Senators said, UGA has yet to take a public position on the whole matter. We’d bet that they don’t really care that much either way, because they know the truth: UGA’s funding is not contingent on the representation of one Senator, or even two, if Hudgens and the Chamber get their way. UGA has more lobbyists in Atlanta than any other organization in the State – for instance the Governor, most of his staff, and a good number of your elected senators and state representatives. UGA has never put all of its legislative eggs in one senator’s basket, and they never will.
Similarly, the ACC Government itself has not taken a formal position, and it never will. But that hasn’t stopped individual members of the ACC Commission from taking a position. If you check out the petition located here, you’ll see that as of this writing (4:05 pm on January 23), two of our elected officials, Carl Jordan and Heidi Davison, have signed on. We encourage you to do the same, even though it will probably do no good. We imagine that Carl and Heidi would encourage you to do so as well.
Chamber of Commerce President Larry McKinney weighs in to give the party line on redistricting, while failing to prove that increased representation would actually give UGA a better chance to get its hands on even more of our tax dollars. He also addresses the same old wage argument. We’ll say it again. If you think that an increase in funding will cause UGA to raise wages for the workers that need it, then you probably also believe that an increase in state dollars will keep UGA from raising tuition every time they want a shiny new learning center, or a parking deck, or some new pictures for Michael Adams’ office. If so, we’ve got some lovely mixed use land on Cedar Shoals Drive that Stu Cofer would like to sell you. Read Larry McKinney’s drivel here.
Finally, Don Nelson addresses the issue in his column today as well. Don comes as close as we’ve seen yet to asking the question: What did the President (of the Chamber of Commerce) know, and when did he know it? We hope that this line of questioning will make its way from the editorial columns into the hard news pretty soon. Notice that, when asked how many of the Chamber’s members support the redistricting, Chamber President Larry McKinney refused to give a number. We would speculate that it’s probably far less than half, and that further, we doubt whether most of the Chamber’s members were even consulted about this particular legislative priority.
Read Don’s piece here.
ABH Executive Editor Jason Winders thinks that Ralph Hudgens has bitten off more than he can chew, and that Eric Johnson and Chip Rogers should be embarrassed, if they aren’t already. More important, he gives us the inside skinny on what the gentlemen said in an editorial meeting with the ABH, where they apparently got just a little desperate to prove their case. Here’s what Ol’ Man Winders has to say:
“…Rogers claimed if you pulled aside University of Georgia administrators they would support this idea. For our friends inside the Ivory Tower, thought you might like to know.
He said if you asked our county commissioners off-the-record they would all voice support of this idea. For our friends behind the rail, a little FYI for you.
Rogers also said he wouldn't make a move unless the sitting senator gave his approval. Thought Sen. Brian Kemp, R-Athens, might like to know since he has said all along he had nothing to do with this plan.”
Read his whole column here, and yes, it’s worth the read.
Now, as to what the Senators said, UGA has yet to take a public position on the whole matter. We’d bet that they don’t really care that much either way, because they know the truth: UGA’s funding is not contingent on the representation of one Senator, or even two, if Hudgens and the Chamber get their way. UGA has more lobbyists in Atlanta than any other organization in the State – for instance the Governor, most of his staff, and a good number of your elected senators and state representatives. UGA has never put all of its legislative eggs in one senator’s basket, and they never will.
Similarly, the ACC Government itself has not taken a formal position, and it never will. But that hasn’t stopped individual members of the ACC Commission from taking a position. If you check out the petition located here, you’ll see that as of this writing (4:05 pm on January 23), two of our elected officials, Carl Jordan and Heidi Davison, have signed on. We encourage you to do the same, even though it will probably do no good. We imagine that Carl and Heidi would encourage you to do so as well.
Chamber of Commerce President Larry McKinney weighs in to give the party line on redistricting, while failing to prove that increased representation would actually give UGA a better chance to get its hands on even more of our tax dollars. He also addresses the same old wage argument. We’ll say it again. If you think that an increase in funding will cause UGA to raise wages for the workers that need it, then you probably also believe that an increase in state dollars will keep UGA from raising tuition every time they want a shiny new learning center, or a parking deck, or some new pictures for Michael Adams’ office. If so, we’ve got some lovely mixed use land on Cedar Shoals Drive that Stu Cofer would like to sell you. Read Larry McKinney’s drivel here.
Finally, Don Nelson addresses the issue in his column today as well. Don comes as close as we’ve seen yet to asking the question: What did the President (of the Chamber of Commerce) know, and when did he know it? We hope that this line of questioning will make its way from the editorial columns into the hard news pretty soon. Notice that, when asked how many of the Chamber’s members support the redistricting, Chamber President Larry McKinney refused to give a number. We would speculate that it’s probably far less than half, and that further, we doubt whether most of the Chamber’s members were even consulted about this particular legislative priority.
Read Don’s piece here.
Steel Curtain, bitches!
Since Denver decided not to contest the AFC Championship today, I decided to take a time out to check in. I'll check the game a little later to see if they change their minds.
GOTD - Pic of the Cindy Sheehan vigil from last year on flickr.
Students want a seat at the table. Good luck.
There's a proposal to allow helper monkeys for disabled people in Georgia. Ok, wow. First of all, I didn't know it was currently illegal to keep monkeys as pets in Georgia. Second of all, it's a guy with an R beside his name that apparently gives a shit about disabled people enough to introduce the bill (Doug Holt from Social Circle; one of his constituents was gonna get a free monkey from a group that does that sort of thing until she found out about the ban). Query: if this thing passes, what kind of crazy ordinance will the Commission pass to deal with the presence of monkeys downtown?
GOTD - Pic of the Cindy Sheehan vigil from last year on flickr.
Students want a seat at the table. Good luck.
There's a proposal to allow helper monkeys for disabled people in Georgia. Ok, wow. First of all, I didn't know it was currently illegal to keep monkeys as pets in Georgia. Second of all, it's a guy with an R beside his name that apparently gives a shit about disabled people enough to introduce the bill (Doug Holt from Social Circle; one of his constituents was gonna get a free monkey from a group that does that sort of thing until she found out about the ban). Query: if this thing passes, what kind of crazy ordinance will the Commission pass to deal with the presence of monkeys downtown?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)