As mentioned in the comments, Jane Kidd has qualified for the Senate race, and now she is challenging the redistricting in a lawsuit filed Wednesday. Because of the emergency hearing in a U.S. District Court, the judge has extended the qualifying period for Senate 46 and 47 and 13 associated House districts until May 5. The hearing will be next Tuesday in Atlanta.
We've discussed our thoughts on the merits of a lawsuit previously, and so I won't go into that again, but I will say that Kidd certainly has a strong advocate for the suit: her lawyer is Emmet Bondurant, Georgia's #1 "Super Lawyer" for the past three years straight (yes, this is an actual list, compiled by Law and Politics magazine in conjunction with Atlanta magazine based on attorney suggestions). Go, Super Lawyer, go.
Friday, April 28, 2006
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Leaving Las Vegas
Been in Glitter Gulch for the past few days for a professional conference (if what "happens in Vegas" is your money, then yes, it stays there). Nice to see that in my absence we've been having an old-fashioned comment post-fest.
Yesterday was the beginning of qualifying for candidates. Still no Jane Kidd officially in the Senate or House race. We shall be monitoring the SOS website this week as time permits, and commenting on anything out of the ordinary. Let us know if you hear any skinny before that.
Yesterday was the beginning of qualifying for candidates. Still no Jane Kidd officially in the Senate or House race. We shall be monitoring the SOS website this week as time permits, and commenting on anything out of the ordinary. Let us know if you hear any skinny before that.
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Get a load of this guy
Just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in!
Despite all of the talk of reduced postings, I couldn't let this one go. Sonny is apparently being challenged in the Republican gubner primary by batshit-crazy "States Rights" candidate Ray McBerry, whose platform seems to be that he doesn't find the current state flag to be offensive enough. Never mind that Sonny won in part by campaigning against Roy Barnes' dinner mat blue version of the flag, or that the current "compromise" version of the flag is itself an homage to the one of the Confederate flags; McBerry is upset that Georgia didn't return to the 1956 Confederate battle flag version. The compromise version isn't hateful enough, I guess. He also doesn't think Sonny was tough enough on companies that hire illegal immigrants (the one thing I might, kinda, be inclined to agree with him on, although I'm sure that the remainder of our ideas on immigration are in stark conflict), and that Georgia needs to amend its constitution to give fetuses legal status.
What's the matter with Georgia?
Despite all of the talk of reduced postings, I couldn't let this one go. Sonny is apparently being challenged in the Republican gubner primary by batshit-crazy "States Rights" candidate Ray McBerry, whose platform seems to be that he doesn't find the current state flag to be offensive enough. Never mind that Sonny won in part by campaigning against Roy Barnes' dinner mat blue version of the flag, or that the current "compromise" version of the flag is itself an homage to the one of the Confederate flags; McBerry is upset that Georgia didn't return to the 1956 Confederate battle flag version. The compromise version isn't hateful enough, I guess. He also doesn't think Sonny was tough enough on companies that hire illegal immigrants (the one thing I might, kinda, be inclined to agree with him on, although I'm sure that the remainder of our ideas on immigration are in stark conflict), and that Georgia needs to amend its constitution to give fetuses legal status.
What's the matter with Georgia?
Ok Cupcake, you win
Ok, fine, you win. We’ll try to keep some interesting content up here. To be honest, we weren’t expecting the minor deluge of comments and personal emails we got about our hiatus. It’s nice to feel appreciated, and for once, we’re not being sarcastic. Apparently great minds think alike, because as I was banging out the massive post below, my co-editor was doing the same.
Overend Kickoff
Courtesy of our friends over at Bill Overend’s campaign for Solicitor, the candidate will be having his campaign kickoff party this Sunday over at Farm 255 from 4pm until 6pm. There’s going to be some food, some music, and some talking from the candidate. It’s free and open to the public, although the campaign does suggest a $10.00 donation at the door.
Overend faces C. R. Chisholm in the Democratic Primary, and the winner takes on incumbent Republican Mo Wiltshire in the November general.
New Maddox Website
WTF? I mean, WTF? This is an improvement? Y’all liked talking about this one a month ago or so, so let the Snark 2.0 begin. By the by, there was a version in between the first incarnation and this current abomination that featured a – shall we say – extreme usage of the tag. Miss Publius strongly considered a lawsuit against the designer for the seizure she almost had.
Will She or Won’t She? Also, will she or won’t she?
She number 1 = Heidi Davison. She number 2 = Jane Kidd. If we were cynical and misogynistic, we would say that they’d both made up their minds months ago, but are late because they’re up in the bedroom trying to find the right pair of earrings. Fortunately, some comedy is beneath even your crack editorial staff.
Seriously, the big political questions right now, on a local level, are whether Heidi runs again, and whether Jane gives up the safety of her House seat (which is, by our last count, approximately 8,329% democratic) to run for the State Senate against Cowsert. We’ll dispose of Heidi first by saying, how could she not run? We know, we know, only a few months ago, we went on record saying she wouldn’t run. But, whether she runs or not, we’ll have been right. Here’s our take. Heidi has an agenda. She’s got a vision of what she wants this city to be, and whether you agree with her vision or not, you’ve got to agree that she hasn’t done everything she wants to do. Plus, she reeeeeeeaaaaaallllllly likes to screw with people’s minds during the qualifying process. Remember four years ago?
As far as Jane Kidd goes, your guess is as good as ours. Rumors abound (meaning that we’ve heard this from multiple sources) that the fine folks at the Democratic Party of Georgia have encouraged her to stay in the House seat, and not risk a loss in the Senate race. (More on the DPG in a second.) For what it’s worth, if the DPG is pushing that on her, they’re wrong. Any Democrat with a pulse can win Jane Kidd’s House seat. To beat Cowsert in the new 46th (now with 10% more conservative base), you need at least one of two things in a candidate, preferably both. You either need a candidate who can be credible with conservative-leaning swing voters, or you need a name. We don’t know how Jane Kidd would fare in rural
Will all of that make a difference? Who knows? We will mention that both members of your crack editorial staff recently gave up safe, secure, stable gigs to pursue far less safe, but more rewarding career options – and it is a tough personal call to make. Jane Kidd is far more about governing than she is about campaigning, so she may stay in the House because she gets a more or less guaranteed chance to continue governing.
The Democratic Party of
Campaigns and Elections magazine, a trade publication in the politics industry, recently did a piece on the best and worst state parties. We were shocked to see that they’ve listed the Georgia Democratic Party as one of the best in the nation. Seriously kids, we thought it was a typo. Alas it wasn’t. Apparently seasoned political observers think Bobby Kahn and his posse are doing something right. Really?
As Samuel L.
You can’t blame the DPG completely. Smart candidates know that they have to raise the money they need, and a commitment is worth exactly $0 until the check comes in. Unfortunately, a lot of candidates are first-timers, and they don’t learn that nugget of wisdom until it’s too late. And we don’t mean to imply that the DPG is making promises that they know they can’t keep. When you’re involved in an enterprise that depends on the kindness of others to keep it financially afloat, you have to believe that eery year will be better than the last. But sometimes, fundraising falls short.
The other major shortfall in how the DPG does business is in its coordination with local parties. A lot of rural counties don’t even have a local Democratic party structure, and that’s a shame. Even in the smallest counties, you can find 5 or 10 hardcore Dems who would be willing to get together every month and figure out how to help some local folks win some races. Many hands make light work. For the counties, like
So whither now, DPG? Here’s our suggestion. Stop trying to be a vote machine and start being a support machine. Build the infrastructure to help your candidates out. Focus on providing the research and tools that campaigns need, and get your hands out of every race in the state. There are tons of good operatives in
One really good thing the DPG could do right now is to take a hint from states like Alabama and Iowa, where state Democratic parties laid out the cash to build a colossal voter file – better than the raw data available from the Secretaries of State in those states. The parties sent canvassers out to update, test issues, get demographic data, and generally make the voter file a very useful database for Democratic campaigns.
The fact is, the DPG is not very good right now. So, if you want to win some races, maybe it’s time for a new direction and a new purpose.
Not Dead Yet
Ok, you guys convinced me...well, maybe not permanently, but I'm at least gonna do some posts about these local races.
Solicitor's race - As alluded to in the comments, there's talk that Mo won't even run for reelection. Given the political makeup of Clarke County, it's unlikely that he'd defeat any of the potential challengers. (As an aside, why didn't Sonny respect this when appointing a replacement for Ralph? Sure, I guess the instinctive thing to do is to do a patronage appointment of someone in your own party in that situation. But he had to know that a Dem would win the election the very next year. Wouldn't some sort of continuity in the ACC Solicitor's Office be more important than whatever marginal political advantage Sonny might gain from appointing a R Solicitor in ACC? Then again, I guess that's the point; what happens here really doesn't matter to Sonny politically, so might as well reward an R. Ah, jeez, back to my post I guess).
As also mentioned, the confirmed candidates are C.R. Chisholm and Bill Overend, with Brian Patterson as a possible but as yet unannounced third. All are expected to run as Dems. CR has experience in the Solicitor's Office, and the other two have experience in the DA's Office (I believe BP is still there, although it's hard to keep up with the fast-food-esque turnover in that office). Those talking shop around the courthouse have CR pegged as the early favorite.
Rawson-Hudgens - I'm still learning about Rawson myself, but I wouldn't be so dismissive of his chances. He is a part of the local county party machinery, and we've certainly been critical of them in the past. However, Rawson also seems to be a serious-minded candidate who knows his stuff. Couple that with the right kind of campaign on the ground, and who knows what might happen. Rawson may be the guy to restore some credibility to the county party machinery.
More soon, although no guarantees on when exactly. Thanks for all the kind words everyone, and we'll try to keep at least some level of posting up with regard to these local elections.
Solicitor's race - As alluded to in the comments, there's talk that Mo won't even run for reelection. Given the political makeup of Clarke County, it's unlikely that he'd defeat any of the potential challengers. (As an aside, why didn't Sonny respect this when appointing a replacement for Ralph? Sure, I guess the instinctive thing to do is to do a patronage appointment of someone in your own party in that situation. But he had to know that a Dem would win the election the very next year. Wouldn't some sort of continuity in the ACC Solicitor's Office be more important than whatever marginal political advantage Sonny might gain from appointing a R Solicitor in ACC? Then again, I guess that's the point; what happens here really doesn't matter to Sonny politically, so might as well reward an R. Ah, jeez, back to my post I guess).
As also mentioned, the confirmed candidates are C.R. Chisholm and Bill Overend, with Brian Patterson as a possible but as yet unannounced third. All are expected to run as Dems. CR has experience in the Solicitor's Office, and the other two have experience in the DA's Office (I believe BP is still there, although it's hard to keep up with the fast-food-esque turnover in that office). Those talking shop around the courthouse have CR pegged as the early favorite.
Rawson-Hudgens - I'm still learning about Rawson myself, but I wouldn't be so dismissive of his chances. He is a part of the local county party machinery, and we've certainly been critical of them in the past. However, Rawson also seems to be a serious-minded candidate who knows his stuff. Couple that with the right kind of campaign on the ground, and who knows what might happen. Rawson may be the guy to restore some credibility to the county party machinery.
More soon, although no guarantees on when exactly. Thanks for all the kind words everyone, and we'll try to keep at least some level of posting up with regard to these local elections.
Thursday, April 13, 2006
Posting Slowdown (er..Standstill)
As you have undoubtedly noticed, if any of you are even still checking, we don't post so much around here these days. As was alluded to in previous posts, both AthPo eds. are in busy transitional phases in their lives/careers. It's not clear at this point where AthPo is headed. We are considering getting some editorial assistance; however elimination, or at least an extended hiatus, of the blog is also a possibility. If that ends up being the case, I want to extend a hearty thanks to all who have contributed from all ends of the political spectrum, and I encourage everyone to continue to read and contribute to our linked blogs (as will we as time permits). Here's a few tidbits to tide you over if you're still jonesin' for local politic news:
The Solicitor's race is heating up, with several former prosecutor's lining up as possible challengers, including my personal favorite Bill Overend;
The filing deadline approaches rapidly, with still no definite word on where Jane Kidd will run;
Mac Rawson will challengeRalph Hudgens for his State Senate seat.
The Solicitor's race is heating up, with several former prosecutor's lining up as possible challengers, including my personal favorite Bill Overend;
The filing deadline approaches rapidly, with still no definite word on where Jane Kidd will run;
Mac Rawson will challengeRalph Hudgens for his State Senate seat.
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Eminent Domain Bill
[Today’s post comes to us courtesy of GP over at the Daily Douchebag. Check out some of his other blogging here. Eds.]
Sonny and everyone else under the dome yesterday scrambled to take credit for HB1313 at the signing ceremony. Republicans proclaimed loudly their victory over those that would abuse eminent domain at the expense of private property rights. I’m tempted to think that the “abusers of eminent domain” are strawmen created by Republicans to exploit a sensitive nationwide issue, but that’s not true. The potential abusers of eminent domain in Georgia were the Republicans themselves.
Dan Moody proposed SB 5 in early January 2005 which would have allowed developers to use eminent domain to seize private land in partnership with almost any local government. Neal Boortz brought attention to the bill on his radio show resulting in a public outcry. Under pressure, Moody changed direction and co-sponsored SB86 in mid March 2005, which specified that eminent domain could not be used to seize property for the benefit of private developers. This was at best a modification of his previous stance if not an all out reversal. Somehow this has evolved into a campaign issue. Ralph Reed has been attacking Casey Cagle as being soft on private property rights through weekly email newsletters.
While I’m glad that HB1313 was signed yesterday, I’m rather annoyed that Republicans are taking credit for “solving” an issue that they themselves created, while simultaneously using it as an attack issue in their campaigns. Your opinions welcome.
Sonny and everyone else under the dome yesterday scrambled to take credit for HB1313 at the signing ceremony. Republicans proclaimed loudly their victory over those that would abuse eminent domain at the expense of private property rights. I’m tempted to think that the “abusers of eminent domain” are strawmen created by Republicans to exploit a sensitive nationwide issue, but that’s not true. The potential abusers of eminent domain in Georgia were the Republicans themselves.
Dan Moody proposed SB 5 in early January 2005 which would have allowed developers to use eminent domain to seize private land in partnership with almost any local government. Neal Boortz brought attention to the bill on his radio show resulting in a public outcry. Under pressure, Moody changed direction and co-sponsored SB86 in mid March 2005, which specified that eminent domain could not be used to seize property for the benefit of private developers. This was at best a modification of his previous stance if not an all out reversal. Somehow this has evolved into a campaign issue. Ralph Reed has been attacking Casey Cagle as being soft on private property rights through weekly email newsletters.
While I’m glad that HB1313 was signed yesterday, I’m rather annoyed that Republicans are taking credit for “solving” an issue that they themselves created, while simultaneously using it as an attack issue in their campaigns. Your opinions welcome.
Thursday, March 30, 2006
Registering Student Voters: The Myth
Chuck Jones brought up an interesting point yesterday when discussing his campaign, in between the levying of corruption charges and whatnot. Sez Chuckles:
“In this election, I am going to call for the largest student vote turnout in the history of Athens.”
Chuck’s statement kind of implies that he’s going to embark on a quest to register a massive number of UGA students and get them to vote for him. Well, good luck, pal. The streets of Athens are littered with the shells of campaigns that tried to tap into the “student vote” as a path to victory. To be perfectly fair, Chuck isn’t the first person to think of this – so please don’t think we’re picking on just him. Andy Rusk has brought it up, and Chuck and Andy are just the examples from this cycle. Every time we have an election, at least one candidate decides that the path to victory runs through Creswell Hall. Here’s why it doesn’t.
It’s seductive, it really is. You’ve got 30,000-plus students out there, many of whom have definite views, and most of whom would be attracted to a young, dynamic candidate, like a Blake Tillery or an Andy Rusk. For the more idealistically-minded, there’s also no question, given their presence here for at least nine months out of the year (not to mention their contributions to the local economy), that the students deserve a representative voice.
And registering them is super-easy. Go set up a table in any crowded area of campus, and you’ll get plenty of folks who are willing to register to vote or change their registration to Athens.
But what do you do with them once they’re registered? Ay, there’s the rub. Registration isn’t the hard part – activating your newly-registered voters is the hard part. Now that requires a field effort the likes of which has never been seen in Athens before.
We were told there would be no math, but let’s play with some numbers real fast. Best case scenario, let’s assume that a candidate registers 20,000 students to vote. Now, in order for your 20,000 new registrations to be able to vote, you’ve got to have them all in to the Board of Elections by October 10. The election is on November 7, giving these students almost a month to forget that they changed their voter registration. In fact, quite a few of them probably registered because it seemed like a good idea at the time, but forgot about it by the end of the day. By the way, unless you’re counting on registering those 20,000 new voters all in one day, then the time to forget about registering is even longer; state law says that the applications have to be in no more than 15 days after they’re filled out.
Anyway, you’ve got 20,000 new voters. You’ve got their names, addresses, maybe even their phone numbers and email addresses. How are you going to get them out to vote on November 7? More importantly, how are you going to get them out to vote for you on November 7? Remember, they’re swimming in the community pool now, and they’re fair game for any candidate with the wherewithal to get his or her hands on an updated voter file.
Well, the first step is persuasion. Again, just because you registered them doesn’t mean that they’re going to vote for you. So how do you reach them? Well, there’s direct mail. Assuming an average cost per piece of mail of $0.75 (and we are so lowballing you here – the good stuff costs upwards of a buck per piece), then you’ve just added another $15,000 to your campaign budget. But wait, one piece of direct mail isn’t going to do the trick. You’re going to need multiple hits – at least three or four pieces. (Preferably targeted pieces based on demographic info, but we’re sure that you already thought of that, right candidates?) So now that $15,000 has become $45,000 or $60,000 and that’s just persuasion, we haven’t even addressed GOTV yet.
Ok, so maybe direct mail isn’t our best tactic. TV and radio, anyone? Well, locally, that is going to cost you less than the mail for sure, but you’re also getting a lower ROI, because you can’t hold a TV ad in your hand and look at it carefully. (Some people actually do read direct mail.) In any event, expect to spend at least another $15,000 - $25,000 on TV and radio ads for them to do any good whatsoever.
Well, persuasion is expensive, but at least you can buy good persuasion. Good GOTV work is more a matter of sweat equity. You’re going to need volunteers, and lots of them, to dragoon those 20,000 college students into going to vote. Vans to get them there (because not everybody on campus has a car), are also a must. Even if all 20,000 of your new voters have brand-new SUVs, you still want to transport them yourself, because GOTV – really, really good GOTV – is a controlled process. You’ve got to move people in the most efficient manner possible, while knowing the status of every targeted voter, and making sure no one falls through the cracks? Sound complicated? That’s why the really good field consultants get the big bucks.
Of course there are more passive means of GOTV than a balls-to-the-wall grassroots effort. You can send emails reminding people to vote. You can send out a slew of robo-dial calls. But don’t ask me what your return on investment is going to be. These are before-the fact reminders, nothing more, and thus far less effective than a real election-day GOTV campaign. By the way, organizing something like this is, as Chuck says, difficult but not impossible, and there are ways to make the student GOTV somewhat less of a shitshow than it has the potential to be. Of course, if you want to shell out the big bucks for someone with the knowledge to do it, be our guest. We’ll even make some recommendations, if you ask nicely enough.
The worst problem any candidate is going to have to deal with in getting student turnout up is the dynamic itself. There’s a vicious cycle as far as UGA students and Athens politics (the concept, not the blog) are concerned. Students don’t vote because they feel like a separate entity from the local government. They feel like a separate entity because they often get screwed by the local government. They get screwed because they don’t vote. And the cycle continues. Can anyone break that cycle?
Probably not. And there’s another dynamic at work here too. Many students, as shocking as this might seem, do not consider Athens “home,” and that’s where you vote – home.
Bottom line on this one. The students who actually give a rat’s ass about voting in ACC are already, for the most part, registered. The rest don’t consider this to be their home – they may live in Athens, but they’re from Dublin, or Columbus, or Millen.
So is registering students and convincing them to take a more active role in their local government a bad thing? Not at all. Like we said way back at the top of this post, they live here most of the year, contribute gobs of money to the local economy, and are seriously underrepresented in local government. But for a campaign to put all of their eggs in the “we’re going to win on the student vote” basket is just silly. There’s a reason why it hasn’t worked in the past. Resources (time, energy, and most importantly, money) are too scarce and too valuable on a campaign to do the kind of work that a successful effort like this would require. And remember, while our hypothetical candidate is focusing on the 30,000-plus UGA students, his or her opponents may well be putting their energy where it belongs – on the 40,000-plus people who are already registered to vote.
Sure, the students need to get organized and start taking a role in local government, but the time to organize the students is in the off-years, not during campaign season, and the people to do it are the students themselves, not the folks who want their votes.
“In this election, I am going to call for the largest student vote turnout in the history of Athens.”
Chuck’s statement kind of implies that he’s going to embark on a quest to register a massive number of UGA students and get them to vote for him. Well, good luck, pal. The streets of Athens are littered with the shells of campaigns that tried to tap into the “student vote” as a path to victory. To be perfectly fair, Chuck isn’t the first person to think of this – so please don’t think we’re picking on just him. Andy Rusk has brought it up, and Chuck and Andy are just the examples from this cycle. Every time we have an election, at least one candidate decides that the path to victory runs through Creswell Hall. Here’s why it doesn’t.
It’s seductive, it really is. You’ve got 30,000-plus students out there, many of whom have definite views, and most of whom would be attracted to a young, dynamic candidate, like a Blake Tillery or an Andy Rusk. For the more idealistically-minded, there’s also no question, given their presence here for at least nine months out of the year (not to mention their contributions to the local economy), that the students deserve a representative voice.
And registering them is super-easy. Go set up a table in any crowded area of campus, and you’ll get plenty of folks who are willing to register to vote or change their registration to Athens.
But what do you do with them once they’re registered? Ay, there’s the rub. Registration isn’t the hard part – activating your newly-registered voters is the hard part. Now that requires a field effort the likes of which has never been seen in Athens before.
We were told there would be no math, but let’s play with some numbers real fast. Best case scenario, let’s assume that a candidate registers 20,000 students to vote. Now, in order for your 20,000 new registrations to be able to vote, you’ve got to have them all in to the Board of Elections by October 10. The election is on November 7, giving these students almost a month to forget that they changed their voter registration. In fact, quite a few of them probably registered because it seemed like a good idea at the time, but forgot about it by the end of the day. By the way, unless you’re counting on registering those 20,000 new voters all in one day, then the time to forget about registering is even longer; state law says that the applications have to be in no more than 15 days after they’re filled out.
Anyway, you’ve got 20,000 new voters. You’ve got their names, addresses, maybe even their phone numbers and email addresses. How are you going to get them out to vote on November 7? More importantly, how are you going to get them out to vote for you on November 7? Remember, they’re swimming in the community pool now, and they’re fair game for any candidate with the wherewithal to get his or her hands on an updated voter file.
Well, the first step is persuasion. Again, just because you registered them doesn’t mean that they’re going to vote for you. So how do you reach them? Well, there’s direct mail. Assuming an average cost per piece of mail of $0.75 (and we are so lowballing you here – the good stuff costs upwards of a buck per piece), then you’ve just added another $15,000 to your campaign budget. But wait, one piece of direct mail isn’t going to do the trick. You’re going to need multiple hits – at least three or four pieces. (Preferably targeted pieces based on demographic info, but we’re sure that you already thought of that, right candidates?) So now that $15,000 has become $45,000 or $60,000 and that’s just persuasion, we haven’t even addressed GOTV yet.
Ok, so maybe direct mail isn’t our best tactic. TV and radio, anyone? Well, locally, that is going to cost you less than the mail for sure, but you’re also getting a lower ROI, because you can’t hold a TV ad in your hand and look at it carefully. (Some people actually do read direct mail.) In any event, expect to spend at least another $15,000 - $25,000 on TV and radio ads for them to do any good whatsoever.
Well, persuasion is expensive, but at least you can buy good persuasion. Good GOTV work is more a matter of sweat equity. You’re going to need volunteers, and lots of them, to dragoon those 20,000 college students into going to vote. Vans to get them there (because not everybody on campus has a car), are also a must. Even if all 20,000 of your new voters have brand-new SUVs, you still want to transport them yourself, because GOTV – really, really good GOTV – is a controlled process. You’ve got to move people in the most efficient manner possible, while knowing the status of every targeted voter, and making sure no one falls through the cracks? Sound complicated? That’s why the really good field consultants get the big bucks.
Of course there are more passive means of GOTV than a balls-to-the-wall grassroots effort. You can send emails reminding people to vote. You can send out a slew of robo-dial calls. But don’t ask me what your return on investment is going to be. These are before-the fact reminders, nothing more, and thus far less effective than a real election-day GOTV campaign. By the way, organizing something like this is, as Chuck says, difficult but not impossible, and there are ways to make the student GOTV somewhat less of a shitshow than it has the potential to be. Of course, if you want to shell out the big bucks for someone with the knowledge to do it, be our guest. We’ll even make some recommendations, if you ask nicely enough.
The worst problem any candidate is going to have to deal with in getting student turnout up is the dynamic itself. There’s a vicious cycle as far as UGA students and Athens politics (the concept, not the blog) are concerned. Students don’t vote because they feel like a separate entity from the local government. They feel like a separate entity because they often get screwed by the local government. They get screwed because they don’t vote. And the cycle continues. Can anyone break that cycle?
Probably not. And there’s another dynamic at work here too. Many students, as shocking as this might seem, do not consider Athens “home,” and that’s where you vote – home.
Bottom line on this one. The students who actually give a rat’s ass about voting in ACC are already, for the most part, registered. The rest don’t consider this to be their home – they may live in Athens, but they’re from Dublin, or Columbus, or Millen.
So is registering students and convincing them to take a more active role in their local government a bad thing? Not at all. Like we said way back at the top of this post, they live here most of the year, contribute gobs of money to the local economy, and are seriously underrepresented in local government. But for a campaign to put all of their eggs in the “we’re going to win on the student vote” basket is just silly. There’s a reason why it hasn’t worked in the past. Resources (time, energy, and most importantly, money) are too scarce and too valuable on a campaign to do the kind of work that a successful effort like this would require. And remember, while our hypothetical candidate is focusing on the 30,000-plus UGA students, his or her opponents may well be putting their energy where it belongs – on the 40,000-plus people who are already registered to vote.
Sure, the students need to get organized and start taking a role in local government, but the time to organize the students is in the off-years, not during campaign season, and the people to do it are the students themselves, not the folks who want their votes.
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Bob After Dark
Forget about free speech! I wanna watch Matlock and go to bed early!
So Athens-Clarke County Commission meetings go too long, eh? Well, hell, tell us something we don’t know, Bob Smith.
As most of you already know from being the in-the-loop readers that you are, State Rep. Bob Smith has taken a page from Ralph Hudgins’ new book, “How to Meddle in Local Government Without even Being Elected!” For Smith, his meddling is in the form of H.B. 1587, a measure designed to limit the amount of time for which local governments can meet.
Now Smith says that the measure isn’t specifically targeted at Athens, but we think you all know that he’s fuller of crap than a Christmas turkey. Unless, of course, Bob Smith has suddenly taken it upon himself to represent the interests of Vidalia, or perhaps Powder Springs? Maybe Albany? If so, then perhaps he should run for office there.
Of course this thing is targeted at Athens, and it’s yet another attempt by the people who purport to represent us in Atlanta to usurp the power of the local government to, you know, govern locally.
Seriously, kids. We don’t care if you’re a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Green, or Socialist – you have to have some measure of respect for the system that gives us separate governments for separate jurisdictions. If you don’t respect that, then heck, let’s do it all the way and go in for central planning all around.
Do ACC Commission meetings last too long? You bet your sweet bippy they do. (As JMac puts it in the best quote we’ve seen all day, “Mayor Heidi Davison has said so, and everyone not named Carl Jordan has said so.”) Is it any of Bob Smith’s business how long the meetings of our local government take? Not in the least. (Aside: Does Bob even go to Commission meetings?)
The issue here is not that the Commission is occasionally a bunch of long-winded gasbags. (They are.) It’s whether the right of a free citizenry to question their duly elected leaders is within Bobbo’s purview to restrict. (It ain’t.) If it’s a legitimate local issue, and we’re not saying it isn’t, then let it be handled locally. We were kind of expecting this to come up as a minor campaign issue among some of the local candidates this year, anyway.
We suppose the big political question to come out of this is whether the ACC community is going to get as up in arms about this as they did about redistricting. In any event, much like redistricting, this is a good issue for someone to bring up when they run against Bobbo. Anyone thinking along those lines?
And here’s one final thing. So what if the meetings run long? Is that really so bad? No one ever said participatory democracy was supposed to be easy. It’s a job to be a citizen, and it should be a job. As a culture, we tend to expect the highest results from the least possible effort, and with democracy, that’s a prescription for disaster. Frankly kids, we can’t think of any better sign that the system is working than the fact that people stay up until 2 a.m. to make their voices heard about speed humps and bike lanes.
To sum up, we’re going to paraphrase the mayor. Qualifying for local races is in June, Bobarino. ‘Til then, keep your sticky fingers off our free political speech.
Related:
Athens Banner-Herald: “Burning midnight oil blasted in bill” 03/29/06
Safe as Houses: “Whither local control” 03/29/06
Daily Douchebag: “Bob Smith” 03/29/06
So Athens-Clarke County Commission meetings go too long, eh? Well, hell, tell us something we don’t know, Bob Smith.
As most of you already know from being the in-the-loop readers that you are, State Rep. Bob Smith has taken a page from Ralph Hudgins’ new book, “How to Meddle in Local Government Without even Being Elected!” For Smith, his meddling is in the form of H.B. 1587, a measure designed to limit the amount of time for which local governments can meet.
Now Smith says that the measure isn’t specifically targeted at Athens, but we think you all know that he’s fuller of crap than a Christmas turkey. Unless, of course, Bob Smith has suddenly taken it upon himself to represent the interests of Vidalia, or perhaps Powder Springs? Maybe Albany? If so, then perhaps he should run for office there.
Of course this thing is targeted at Athens, and it’s yet another attempt by the people who purport to represent us in Atlanta to usurp the power of the local government to, you know, govern locally.
Seriously, kids. We don’t care if you’re a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Green, or Socialist – you have to have some measure of respect for the system that gives us separate governments for separate jurisdictions. If you don’t respect that, then heck, let’s do it all the way and go in for central planning all around.
Do ACC Commission meetings last too long? You bet your sweet bippy they do. (As JMac puts it in the best quote we’ve seen all day, “Mayor Heidi Davison has said so, and everyone not named Carl Jordan has said so.”) Is it any of Bob Smith’s business how long the meetings of our local government take? Not in the least. (Aside: Does Bob even go to Commission meetings?)
The issue here is not that the Commission is occasionally a bunch of long-winded gasbags. (They are.) It’s whether the right of a free citizenry to question their duly elected leaders is within Bobbo’s purview to restrict. (It ain’t.) If it’s a legitimate local issue, and we’re not saying it isn’t, then let it be handled locally. We were kind of expecting this to come up as a minor campaign issue among some of the local candidates this year, anyway.
We suppose the big political question to come out of this is whether the ACC community is going to get as up in arms about this as they did about redistricting. In any event, much like redistricting, this is a good issue for someone to bring up when they run against Bobbo. Anyone thinking along those lines?
And here’s one final thing. So what if the meetings run long? Is that really so bad? No one ever said participatory democracy was supposed to be easy. It’s a job to be a citizen, and it should be a job. As a culture, we tend to expect the highest results from the least possible effort, and with democracy, that’s a prescription for disaster. Frankly kids, we can’t think of any better sign that the system is working than the fact that people stay up until 2 a.m. to make their voices heard about speed humps and bike lanes.
To sum up, we’re going to paraphrase the mayor. Qualifying for local races is in June, Bobarino. ‘Til then, keep your sticky fingers off our free political speech.
Related:
Athens Banner-Herald: “Burning midnight oil blasted in bill” 03/29/06
Safe as Houses: “Whither local control” 03/29/06
Daily Douchebag: “Bob Smith” 03/29/06
Updating the Blogroll
Hi kids,
More substantive posting coming later today, but please also note the wrap piece on the PPA meeting below.
Meanwhile, we've got to update our list of candidate websites, so if you are a candidate, or you know a candidate running for anything in or around Athens, drop us an email with the URL. Yeah, we could do all the research on our own, but many hands make light work.
'prec.
Eds.
More substantive posting coming later today, but please also note the wrap piece on the PPA meeting below.
Meanwhile, we've got to update our list of candidate websites, so if you are a candidate, or you know a candidate running for anything in or around Athens, drop us an email with the URL. Yeah, we could do all the research on our own, but many hands make light work.
'prec.
Eds.
PPA: Too much of a good thing
Sorry for the delay in the PPA post, but you know, life was calling, and we were on the phone for a little bit. Here goes.
First, as has been mentioned in the comments and in the ABH, the response from the community was overwhelming. with something around 750 people showing up. Just about anybody who is a candidate for anything showed up, but there were also plenty of ordinary folks.
The evening began with an intro from Judge Jones and Red Petrovs, and then there was an extensive presentation of the statistical profile of poverty in Athens-Clarke County by Matt Bishop from UGA, who did an in-depth analysis for this purpose. There was too much to summarize here, but the long and the short of it is that Athens has a problem that goes beyond "the poor will always be among us". It turns out that Athens essentially has no middle class, or at least not very much of one compared to the state and national stats. There are a handful of richie-riches and a lot of poor people.
Just a sampling of the stats:
The poverty rate is 28.3% including students, and 23.5 not including them.
39.3% of ACC lives below 150% of the poverty rate.
16.8% of ACC lives below 50% of the poverty rate, which is higher than the statewide poverty rate of 13.o%.
25.2% of the under 18 population in ACC lives in poverty (that's 1 in 4 kids, and that's by definition not influenced by the student population)
Poverty is relatively color-blind in ACC; 27.8 of whites, 28.5 of blacks, and 30 percent of the hispanic population.
65% of those in poverty in ACC are working.
Once the initial presentation was done, we broke into the sub-committee groups. Because there were six groups (Education, Physical & Mental Health, Housing & Transportation, Dependent Care, Economy, and Workforce) and over 750 people, each group was obviously large (in the case of my group, Economy, greater than 100). This made for a logistically difficult situation, especially since not quite this many people were expected. The first session, which lasted for about an hour, consisted mainly of random individuals in the groups standing up to offer suggestions of what we should do to address our specific part of the puzzle. We filled up several easels with the brainstorming ideas, and anybody who didn't want to or didn't get to say it out loud got to write what they wanted to say on a blue card for consideration by the steering committee.
The next meeting for my group, and I think all of the groups (although each group is going to meet at different places this time, I think) is April 24. If the groups are still large at that meeting, the plan is to break up into smaller groups for discussion, which should be more effective.
Obviously, no silver bullets were offered Monday night. This problem wasn't created in one night, and won't be solved that quickly (there is a problem that goes beyond normal poorness, though: the poverty rate in ACC 10 years ago was about 19%). Who knows if it will be solved at all. All we can hope for is that the collective efforts will have a substantial, noticeable, positive impact that will make this community more like what we want it to be.
I will be involved in this process for the duration and will give more updates in the future.
First, as has been mentioned in the comments and in the ABH, the response from the community was overwhelming. with something around 750 people showing up. Just about anybody who is a candidate for anything showed up, but there were also plenty of ordinary folks.
The evening began with an intro from Judge Jones and Red Petrovs, and then there was an extensive presentation of the statistical profile of poverty in Athens-Clarke County by Matt Bishop from UGA, who did an in-depth analysis for this purpose. There was too much to summarize here, but the long and the short of it is that Athens has a problem that goes beyond "the poor will always be among us". It turns out that Athens essentially has no middle class, or at least not very much of one compared to the state and national stats. There are a handful of richie-riches and a lot of poor people.
Just a sampling of the stats:
The poverty rate is 28.3% including students, and 23.5 not including them.
39.3% of ACC lives below 150% of the poverty rate.
16.8% of ACC lives below 50% of the poverty rate, which is higher than the statewide poverty rate of 13.o%.
25.2% of the under 18 population in ACC lives in poverty (that's 1 in 4 kids, and that's by definition not influenced by the student population)
Poverty is relatively color-blind in ACC; 27.8 of whites, 28.5 of blacks, and 30 percent of the hispanic population.
65% of those in poverty in ACC are working.
Once the initial presentation was done, we broke into the sub-committee groups. Because there were six groups (Education, Physical & Mental Health, Housing & Transportation, Dependent Care, Economy, and Workforce) and over 750 people, each group was obviously large (in the case of my group, Economy, greater than 100). This made for a logistically difficult situation, especially since not quite this many people were expected. The first session, which lasted for about an hour, consisted mainly of random individuals in the groups standing up to offer suggestions of what we should do to address our specific part of the puzzle. We filled up several easels with the brainstorming ideas, and anybody who didn't want to or didn't get to say it out loud got to write what they wanted to say on a blue card for consideration by the steering committee.
The next meeting for my group, and I think all of the groups (although each group is going to meet at different places this time, I think) is April 24. If the groups are still large at that meeting, the plan is to break up into smaller groups for discussion, which should be more effective.
Obviously, no silver bullets were offered Monday night. This problem wasn't created in one night, and won't be solved that quickly (there is a problem that goes beyond normal poorness, though: the poverty rate in ACC 10 years ago was about 19%). Who knows if it will be solved at all. All we can hope for is that the collective efforts will have a substantial, noticeable, positive impact that will make this community more like what we want it to be.
I will be involved in this process for the duration and will give more updates in the future.
Monday, March 27, 2006
PPA: First Public Meeting Tonight
Partnership for a Prosperous Athens
Tonight
7pm
Cedar Shoals
Be there.
Tonight
7pm
Cedar Shoals
Be there.
Anyone want to run against Ralph?
Wanted: Candidate to challenge entrenched Republican State Senator. Good fundraising network essential; centrist street cred preferable. Contact your local Democratic party.
The ABH talks a little about the struggle to find someone to run against Ralph Hudgens this year. With a little less than thirty days to go before filing, the crunch is on.
Right now, you’ve got a couple of gentlemen flirting with the race. As we mentioned some two weeks ago, some well-connected Democrats have been whispering sweet nothings in the ear of one Jim Ponsoldt, law professor. Ponsoldt is a good choice; his law school connections will make raising money somewhat less of an uphill battle, and he has both run for office (ACC District 9) and served in office (Clarke County School Board).
The other person dipping their toe in the electoral waters is the chairman-elect of the Clarke County Democratic Party, Mac Rawson. Again, the fundraising may be less of a struggle, if the local Democratic machine gets behind Rawson. JMac has an interesting take on Rawson and today’s ABH story – check it out. We’re not sure if it isn’t pretty accurate. Either way, it’s pretty amusing.
Please also note that the Democratic Party of Georgia is saying that this race is a high-level target for them. Gee guys, will you be as forthcoming with the help as you were for Becky Vaughn, when you targeted her race in 2004?
So what does it take to run a good race against a bad Republican? Well, for starters, we’re not 100% sure that an Athens candidate is the way to go. We know, outside Athens, the bench of qualified Democrats gets pretty shallow. But, we also take exception to the remarks of Athens’ self-professed political swami, Charles Bullock, when he avers that a successful candidate will be someone with previous political experience.
Not necessarily. In fact, if you find a Democrat who can appeal to the areas outside Athens while making sure that Athens trusts him or her as well, well, that candidate has a shot. If the candidate has never run for elective office before, that might even be a plus; it opens Hudgens up to the usual “career politician,” “sold out our interests to the big money lobbyists,” type of charges. As long as the potential candidate is willing to put in the sweat equity it takes to introduce himself or herself to the voters (and retail politics still works to a large extent in a race like this), then being a relative unknown isn’t a huge hindrance.
What is a hindrance is the numbers in the district. Suffice it to say that the numbers aren’t exactly friendly to Democrats – we can’t imagine that Hudgins and his gang of thugs had that development in mind. Any candidate who wants to run and win in this district as a Democrat is going to have to do the legwork, identify the opinion leaders, and convince the voters that electing a Democrat isn’t going to be the end of the world.
The bottom line is that this election is going to be a referendum on Ralph Hudgins and the “leadership” that he has provided. Nonetheless, anyone running against Ralph cannot expect to run successfully on a platform of all-Hudgins-all-the-time. They’ll have to frame this election as a referendum not just on the arrogance of one state senator, but on the arrogance of the GOP majority since they took control of Georgia’s government. That means that a smart candidate has alternatives on all of the major issues.
The biggest question of all is this: Is the race winnable? Absolutely it is. By all accounts, 2006 is shaping up to be a good year for Democrats; that dynamic will help, although how much help it will provide remains to be determined. In addition, there is a rising tide, even in areas that overwhelmingly supported Hudgins in years past, that ol’ Ralph is becoming more of an insider and less of a public servant. So yeah, the race is winnable by the right Democrat, but it’s going to take a lot of hard work and a near-perfect strategy.
Friday, March 24, 2006
Fox News Gets it (gasp!) Wrong?
Extra, extra, read all about it. Shocking news from the media: Faux News screws up; misinformation hurts Democrats.
Ok, so not so surprising after all. To close things out on Friday, a little bit of national politics. Seems that the whiz kids over at the Screamin' Eagle network have bollocked it up again, as far as you know, actual facts are concerned - inaccurately listing former Congressman Dick Gephardt and former Senator Tom Daschle as registered lobbyists in this story. Coincidentally, Gephardt and Daschle, in addition to being Democrats, were among Fox News' favorite targets when they were in Congress.
Good luck getting a retraction on this one, fellow Democrats. In any event, just to make sure there's no confusion among our readers, we've created another AthPo useless infographic. Enjoy.
Oh, and by the way, don't just take our word for it. Visit the Senate and see for yourself.
Think Progress has the scoopy scoop scoop.
(The AthPo Useless Infographic is a new feature which will appear to assist our
readers, whenever we get bored, or when we want to make fun of USA Today.)
Bumperstickers, hate crimes, and has the Chamber stepped in it again?
Not much happening in local politics lately. The Chamber did a candidate training session yesterday, featuring some local experts, and locals who are not-so-expert. JMac writes it up, but for what it’s worth, we think it was more of a nonpartisan affair than you might think, given the sponsoring body. We wonder if some of our commenters like James Garland and Andy Rusk were in attendance, and if they were there, what they thought.
Anyway, as we said, not much happening in local politics lately, so you’ll forgive us for addressing a couple of non-local issues.
Bushit?
The first thing is the case of the possibly obscene bumper sticker. The ABH writes it up today, and the woman involved had a letter in Flagpole on Wednesday. As all of you guys know, we are vociferous and sometimes strident in our defense of your First Amendment rights, and this is no different. However, the issue is not the officer, it’s the law. If you presume, as we do, that personal politics were involved to at least some extent in the stop, then the problem is much less with the officer who made the stop, and much more with the vaguely written law that allowed him to do so. No matter how you feel, we’re going to speculate that, at this point, both the officer concerned and his department wish that he had taken a pass on this particular motorist.
The other thing that we wanted to say is directed at our fellow liberals. Guys, please, please, puh-leeze do not get too worked up about this thing. It’s going to court, she’s got a lawyer, and we’re 99.9% convinced that this case is going to be resolved the correct way. Save the histrionics for the issues that really matter, like the policy that our government is pushing on our communities. And before you get all up in arms, we’ll say this. Widespread government censorship of political speech is a major problem. One cop with too much time on his hands, who may or may not have an agenda, and certainly does have an inadequate understanding of the law is not a problem. It’s why we have a Bill of Rights, and it’s why we have a court system. This is blogbait, designed to get the more histrionic folks on both sides of the ideological spectrum pissed off. Don’t take the bait, mmmkay? Also, it’s not even a particularly well-conceived or funny bumpersticker, not that creativity should count.
Having said all that, we do admit that there’s something about this whole situation that smacks of a slippery slope and the thought police slavering hungrily at the bottom.
Hate Crimes
And hey, speaking of the thought police, hate crime legislation passed the State Senate. Here’s another one of those things where the liberals are going to get pissed at us, or at least at me; I’m not sure how DiDDY feels about hate crimes legislation, but I’m sure he’ll weigh in.
Folks, hate crimes legislation is bad policy. You’ve got rights in this country; some, like your right to practice whatever religion you want to practice, are Consitutionally defined and absolute. Others, like your right to privacy, are there but vague.
Friends, you have the right to hate whoever you want to hate, and the government has no right to call you on it. Don’t expect me, as an individual to sanction your hatred, and don’t expect society to sanction your hatred. Hate is wrong, it’s the root of a lot of our problems – politically, economically, societally, and spiritually. But, you can hate whoever you want, for whatever reason you want. It’s wrong, it sucks, but it isn’t illegal – and if you make it illegal, you’re inviting the thought police into your living room and mine. I’m not cool with that, and I hope you aren’t either.
Hate crimes laws are a great example of what happens when good intent is bad practice. To prove a hate crime in court is difficult at best, because you can’t prove what a person was thinking when they committed a crime.
Another problem with hate crimes is that laws that impose a stricter penalty based on some vague concept of “hate” inevitably does some victims a disservice. Is the loss of a four-year-old to crossfire from a white-on-white murder attempt any less of a loss to society than a four-year-old who gets killed out of racial hatred? Will the child’s parents grieve any less because – gosh, at least it wasn’t a hate crime? Either way, civilized society has suffered another blow, and we’ve got another dead kid.
Finally, you’ve got to question the purpose of hate crimes legislation. Is it supposed to be a deterrent? Is the possibility of a few extra years in jail going to keep another incident like the Matthew Sheperd case from happening? Or are hate crimes laws supposed to be a way to keep the really bad sociopaths locked up for awhile longer? If that’s the case, and that’s what I’ve heard often as a justification, then aren’t we saying that some homicides are more justifiable than others? (Obviously there are mitigating circumstances, like self-defense, which do make some murders more justifiable than others. Race, religion, or sexual orientation should not be one of those mitigating factors.)
I would also mention that, as a sop to my liberal friends, if hate crimes laws are to be seriously enforced, then someone had best take a look at the government. The death penalty has been unfairly applied on a racial basis for decades, making the governments of Texas and Georgia among the country’s most egregious hate crimes offenders.
Hatred, bigotry, intolerance – it’s perhaps the worst aspect of human nature. But you have to change these things socially and culturally, not legislatively. Unjustified murder is unjustified murder, and if it’s proven in court, should be punished to the full extent of the law, regardless of race, creed, color, or sexual orientation.
Anyway, as we said, not much happening in local politics lately, so you’ll forgive us for addressing a couple of non-local issues.
Bushit?
The first thing is the case of the possibly obscene bumper sticker. The ABH writes it up today, and the woman involved had a letter in Flagpole on Wednesday. As all of you guys know, we are vociferous and sometimes strident in our defense of your First Amendment rights, and this is no different. However, the issue is not the officer, it’s the law. If you presume, as we do, that personal politics were involved to at least some extent in the stop, then the problem is much less with the officer who made the stop, and much more with the vaguely written law that allowed him to do so. No matter how you feel, we’re going to speculate that, at this point, both the officer concerned and his department wish that he had taken a pass on this particular motorist.
The other thing that we wanted to say is directed at our fellow liberals. Guys, please, please, puh-leeze do not get too worked up about this thing. It’s going to court, she’s got a lawyer, and we’re 99.9% convinced that this case is going to be resolved the correct way. Save the histrionics for the issues that really matter, like the policy that our government is pushing on our communities. And before you get all up in arms, we’ll say this. Widespread government censorship of political speech is a major problem. One cop with too much time on his hands, who may or may not have an agenda, and certainly does have an inadequate understanding of the law is not a problem. It’s why we have a Bill of Rights, and it’s why we have a court system. This is blogbait, designed to get the more histrionic folks on both sides of the ideological spectrum pissed off. Don’t take the bait, mmmkay? Also, it’s not even a particularly well-conceived or funny bumpersticker, not that creativity should count.
Having said all that, we do admit that there’s something about this whole situation that smacks of a slippery slope and the thought police slavering hungrily at the bottom.
Hate Crimes
And hey, speaking of the thought police, hate crime legislation passed the State Senate. Here’s another one of those things where the liberals are going to get pissed at us, or at least at me; I’m not sure how DiDDY feels about hate crimes legislation, but I’m sure he’ll weigh in.
Folks, hate crimes legislation is bad policy. You’ve got rights in this country; some, like your right to practice whatever religion you want to practice, are Consitutionally defined and absolute. Others, like your right to privacy, are there but vague.
Friends, you have the right to hate whoever you want to hate, and the government has no right to call you on it. Don’t expect me, as an individual to sanction your hatred, and don’t expect society to sanction your hatred. Hate is wrong, it’s the root of a lot of our problems – politically, economically, societally, and spiritually. But, you can hate whoever you want, for whatever reason you want. It’s wrong, it sucks, but it isn’t illegal – and if you make it illegal, you’re inviting the thought police into your living room and mine. I’m not cool with that, and I hope you aren’t either.
Hate crimes laws are a great example of what happens when good intent is bad practice. To prove a hate crime in court is difficult at best, because you can’t prove what a person was thinking when they committed a crime.
Another problem with hate crimes is that laws that impose a stricter penalty based on some vague concept of “hate” inevitably does some victims a disservice. Is the loss of a four-year-old to crossfire from a white-on-white murder attempt any less of a loss to society than a four-year-old who gets killed out of racial hatred? Will the child’s parents grieve any less because – gosh, at least it wasn’t a hate crime? Either way, civilized society has suffered another blow, and we’ve got another dead kid.
Finally, you’ve got to question the purpose of hate crimes legislation. Is it supposed to be a deterrent? Is the possibility of a few extra years in jail going to keep another incident like the Matthew Sheperd case from happening? Or are hate crimes laws supposed to be a way to keep the really bad sociopaths locked up for awhile longer? If that’s the case, and that’s what I’ve heard often as a justification, then aren’t we saying that some homicides are more justifiable than others? (Obviously there are mitigating circumstances, like self-defense, which do make some murders more justifiable than others. Race, religion, or sexual orientation should not be one of those mitigating factors.)
I would also mention that, as a sop to my liberal friends, if hate crimes laws are to be seriously enforced, then someone had best take a look at the government. The death penalty has been unfairly applied on a racial basis for decades, making the governments of Texas and Georgia among the country’s most egregious hate crimes offenders.
Hatred, bigotry, intolerance – it’s perhaps the worst aspect of human nature. But you have to change these things socially and culturally, not legislatively. Unjustified murder is unjustified murder, and if it’s proven in court, should be punished to the full extent of the law, regardless of race, creed, color, or sexual orientation.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
House 115
Not sure if this has been mentioned on here yet, but there is another candidate running in the House 115 race. His name is Chuck Jones, and the lawyer half of your editorial staff went to UGA Law one year ahead of him. Although he doesn't identify any party affiliation on his website, the issues profile contained therein, combined with prior knowledge of his issue profile from inane discussions on the law school listserv, pretty much assure us that Mr. Jones is running as either a Republican, Libertarian, or perhaps simply an independent leaning in that direction.
Mr. Jones promises to be a "Voice for the Voiceless", by which he evidently means Republicans, or at least non-Democrats. Quote from his site: "I am running in this mostly county-wide race because I want to send a message to the political machine that runs Athens, that its days of unchecked one-party rule are over."
All of this begs the question: Is Jane Kidd running here, or in the Senate race? And if it's the Senate race, who will be the Democrat to execute the slaughter of the sacrificial lamb that will surely be Chuck Jones (sorry Chuck; I'm all in favor of fellow Law Dawgs getting elected to office, but with all due respect, and with all histrionics aside, you don't have a f***ing chance).
There's about a month until the official filing period. Does anybody have any skinny on this? And has that pesky lawsuit been filed yet?
Mr. Jones promises to be a "Voice for the Voiceless", by which he evidently means Republicans, or at least non-Democrats. Quote from his site: "I am running in this mostly county-wide race because I want to send a message to the political machine that runs Athens, that its days of unchecked one-party rule are over."
All of this begs the question: Is Jane Kidd running here, or in the Senate race? And if it's the Senate race, who will be the Democrat to execute the slaughter of the sacrificial lamb that will surely be Chuck Jones (sorry Chuck; I'm all in favor of fellow Law Dawgs getting elected to office, but with all due respect, and with all histrionics aside, you don't have a f***ing chance).
There's about a month until the official filing period. Does anybody have any skinny on this? And has that pesky lawsuit been filed yet?
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Denise Majette: Political Comeback in Progress
Georgia Democrats can put another race in the potential win column. Denise Majette, former Congresswoman, and 2004 candidate for U.S. Senate announced that she is running for State Superintendent of Schools.
Now, the Democrats didn’t have a whole lot going for them in this race until today. We’re sure Carlotta Harrell is a nice lady and everything, but we weren’t sure that she had what it takes to run statewide. For what it’s worth, Denise Majette, we believe, does.
It takes experience. Majette knocked off Cynthia McKinney in the 2002 primary, no easy feat. In 2004, she took on Cliff Oxford, who while better funded, didn’t have the experience that Majette had, and beat him handily. In the general election, she held her own and did respectably against Johnny Isakson when Johnny was holding all the cards. What we’re saying, in a roundabout way is that Majette has been around the block a few times as far as elections go, and she’s a good campaigner who connects well with voters across the spectrum.
It also takes money. We’ll be the first to tell you that Majette’s fundraising for her Senate race was somewhat underwhelming, but we’d also tell you that it takes far less to run for State School Superintendent than it does to run for Senate. One advantage that Majette has over her primary opponent, and we believe over the incumbent as well, is an existing network of donors that can be persuaded to pony up again thanks to her previous runs for office. Granted that even with a tried and true donor, they’re usually going to shell out less dough for a State School Superintendent race than a Senate race, but the numbers are going to work out in Majette’s favor. Not to turn this into a big lecture on fundraising tactics, but the key concept is access. Majette has a bigger list of people who will take her call the first time than her opponent in the primary and, we would wager, her opponent in the general as well. So even if they donate less, we maintain that Majette has a better list.
So yes, we’re excited to see Majette in the race, but we can’t help but wonder about the politics side of it. You go from Judge to Congresswoman to candidate for US Senate to candidate for State School Superintendent. It seems like something of a demotion, and makes us wonder what’s going on. If you want our rampant speculation, here goes.
To use a sports analogy, this is a “rebuilding year” for Majette. It’s a winnable race for her, and one that proves that she can get elected statewide. If she wins here, especially by knocking off a Republican incumbent in a very red state, her political career is back on track. Perhaps she learned a lesson from another Georgia politician who gave up his State Senate seat to run for Governor and got trounced in the primary. Said politician could have given up and gone back to his lucrative law practice, but instead he ran again – this time for State Representative, a demotion, some folks said. A few years later, having been successfully elected and re-elected a few times, that politician became governor of Georgia. His name was Roy Barnes, and that’s where the parallel ends, unfortunately.
All we’re saying is there’s always room for a well-timed, well-planned comeback, and Denise Majette for State Superintendent of Schools has all the hallmarks of such a comeback.
Now, the Democrats didn’t have a whole lot going for them in this race until today. We’re sure Carlotta Harrell is a nice lady and everything, but we weren’t sure that she had what it takes to run statewide. For what it’s worth, Denise Majette, we believe, does.
It takes experience. Majette knocked off Cynthia McKinney in the 2002 primary, no easy feat. In 2004, she took on Cliff Oxford, who while better funded, didn’t have the experience that Majette had, and beat him handily. In the general election, she held her own and did respectably against Johnny Isakson when Johnny was holding all the cards. What we’re saying, in a roundabout way is that Majette has been around the block a few times as far as elections go, and she’s a good campaigner who connects well with voters across the spectrum.
It also takes money. We’ll be the first to tell you that Majette’s fundraising for her Senate race was somewhat underwhelming, but we’d also tell you that it takes far less to run for State School Superintendent than it does to run for Senate. One advantage that Majette has over her primary opponent, and we believe over the incumbent as well, is an existing network of donors that can be persuaded to pony up again thanks to her previous runs for office. Granted that even with a tried and true donor, they’re usually going to shell out less dough for a State School Superintendent race than a Senate race, but the numbers are going to work out in Majette’s favor. Not to turn this into a big lecture on fundraising tactics, but the key concept is access. Majette has a bigger list of people who will take her call the first time than her opponent in the primary and, we would wager, her opponent in the general as well. So even if they donate less, we maintain that Majette has a better list.
So yes, we’re excited to see Majette in the race, but we can’t help but wonder about the politics side of it. You go from Judge to Congresswoman to candidate for US Senate to candidate for State School Superintendent. It seems like something of a demotion, and makes us wonder what’s going on. If you want our rampant speculation, here goes.
To use a sports analogy, this is a “rebuilding year” for Majette. It’s a winnable race for her, and one that proves that she can get elected statewide. If she wins here, especially by knocking off a Republican incumbent in a very red state, her political career is back on track. Perhaps she learned a lesson from another Georgia politician who gave up his State Senate seat to run for Governor and got trounced in the primary. Said politician could have given up and gone back to his lucrative law practice, but instead he ran again – this time for State Representative, a demotion, some folks said. A few years later, having been successfully elected and re-elected a few times, that politician became governor of Georgia. His name was Roy Barnes, and that’s where the parallel ends, unfortunately.
All we’re saying is there’s always room for a well-timed, well-planned comeback, and Denise Majette for State Superintendent of Schools has all the hallmarks of such a comeback.
Inside Baseball: Reed goes after Cagle; parsing the polls
Man, we love it when campaign season starts to heat up. It gives us an opportunity to talk about some of the inside baseball that goes on with the different campaigns.
For instance, you’ve got this Republican primary for Lieutenant Governor between Casey Cagle and Ralph Reed. For all the apparent unity in the Republican Party, you’ve got to know that when Republicans fight, they don’t pull any punches. For instance, we’ve been getting at least one email per week from the folks over in Reed’s camp attacking Cagle on various things. While Cagle has launched a barb or two at Reed over the last few months, he’s got nothing like the well-oiled attack machine that Reed has.
For instance, this week, we got an email from Reed that accuses Cagle of taking a pass on a bill dealing with “eminent domain abuse,” lying about why he skipped the vote, and then raising a ton of money from developers.
The whys and wherefores of Reed’s continuing attacks on Cagle are less important than the fact that the two (or at least one of the two) are going negative four months before the primary. That’s the inside baseball aspect we wanted to address.
Is going after Cagle a smart political move for Reed? Maybe, maybe not. On the one hand, going negative this early, even in a limited way, kind of smacks of desperation. It implies to some observers – present company included – that Reed’s internal polling shows him so far behind Cagle that he’s got no choice but to try to take Cagle down early.
On the other hand, going after Cagle in March may be a bright idea for Reed. First of all, as James Carville has said, it’s hard for someone to hit you when you’ve got your fist in their face. We would also mention, given our presumption that these attacks are going to both the press (more on that in a second) and to folks who have subscribed to Reed’s email list on his website, that Reed’s supporters are getting the message, and they’re getting ginned up to hit the streets for Reed come July.
The best reason for Reed to come out swinging against Cagle, however, has to do with Reed’s own ethical baggage. While all of the facts about Reed’s involvement with Jack Abramoff and the barons of K Street haven’t come out yet, a lot of your registered and likely GOP primary voters know that something isn’t exactly above-board about good ol’ Ralph. By getting as much negative information out as possible about Cagle, Reed has a chance to level the playing field and show voters that both candidates are flawed in one way or another, while publicly proclaiming his innocence. It’s kind of a desperation move, but it’s about the only course open to Reed.
You might wonder why Reed’s attacks aren’t getting more play in the press. Simply put, most of what he’s putting out there about Cagle is a non-story. Take the email we cited earlier. Essentially, Reed is saying that Cagle skipped a vote, was less than upfront about why he skipped the vote, and has raised a lot of money from people who would approve of him skipping that vote. Well, skipping votes is hardly uncommon for legislators, especially when public opinion dictates a vote that is at odds with what your fundraising plan might require. It’s just not something that gets the press excited, and at best, things like this get folded into a larger story about the two campaigns.
Inside Baseball: Extra Innings
As we were wrapping this post up, we got another poll in the AthPo inbox. According to a recent Insider Advantage poll, Sonny Perdue leads Cathy Cox by 8 points, and he leads Mark Taylor by 16 points. In Democratic primary polling, Cox leads Taylor by 42% to 31%.
Looking at those numbers, it seems clear that if Democrats want to have a chance in November against Perdue, they’d better all jump on the Cathy Cox Express right now. In fact, it looks like about half of us already have. Still, we’ve talked about public polling before. Unlike our earlier post about polling, this is an independent poll, and not – as far as we know – affiliated with any particular candidate.
Nonetheless, we’re still going to pick on this poll, because that’s what we do. Quick question: what’s the most useless type of polling? Say it with us now: the horse race poll. A horse race test this early basically indicates what would happen if the election were held today. And, of course, we’re not holding an election today. (But don’t give the Clarke County School District any ideas.) In fact, this poll isn’t even a good indicator of what would happen if the election were held today, because in each of the three races tested, at least 12% of the respondents were undecided. In the head-to-head between Cox and Taylor, 27% of respondents were undecided.
Here at AthPo, we are big fans of polling; it’s a useful tool for campaigns to use to craft their message. But as we’ve said before, the actual horse race numbers don’t start mattering until a week out, and they don’t really matter until election day.
Bottom line is this. Any time that you see horse race numbers, especially this early, please know two things. First, they’re absolutely useless and in no way indicative of what might actually happen on election day. Second, and perhaps more important, please know that anyone who puts out horse race numbers this early has an agenda. In the case of a candidate releasing polling data, like Jim Martin did a few weeks ago, it’s an attempt to create the appearance of momentum. In the case of a polling firm releasing the data, the agenda is to call attention to the polling firm itself – a business move. If it’s a media outlet releasing the poll, they’re trying to create news and boost their share. Nothing wrong with any of that, and we’re not casting aspersions. Heck, if it weren’t for public polling, we’d have far less to write about sometimes. We’re just saying that these are things you need to consider, because Republican or Democrat, or in between, we want everyone out there to be more informed political consumers.
For instance, you’ve got this Republican primary for Lieutenant Governor between Casey Cagle and Ralph Reed. For all the apparent unity in the Republican Party, you’ve got to know that when Republicans fight, they don’t pull any punches. For instance, we’ve been getting at least one email per week from the folks over in Reed’s camp attacking Cagle on various things. While Cagle has launched a barb or two at Reed over the last few months, he’s got nothing like the well-oiled attack machine that Reed has.
For instance, this week, we got an email from Reed that accuses Cagle of taking a pass on a bill dealing with “eminent domain abuse,” lying about why he skipped the vote, and then raising a ton of money from developers.
The whys and wherefores of Reed’s continuing attacks on Cagle are less important than the fact that the two (or at least one of the two) are going negative four months before the primary. That’s the inside baseball aspect we wanted to address.
Is going after Cagle a smart political move for Reed? Maybe, maybe not. On the one hand, going negative this early, even in a limited way, kind of smacks of desperation. It implies to some observers – present company included – that Reed’s internal polling shows him so far behind Cagle that he’s got no choice but to try to take Cagle down early.
On the other hand, going after Cagle in March may be a bright idea for Reed. First of all, as James Carville has said, it’s hard for someone to hit you when you’ve got your fist in their face. We would also mention, given our presumption that these attacks are going to both the press (more on that in a second) and to folks who have subscribed to Reed’s email list on his website, that Reed’s supporters are getting the message, and they’re getting ginned up to hit the streets for Reed come July.
The best reason for Reed to come out swinging against Cagle, however, has to do with Reed’s own ethical baggage. While all of the facts about Reed’s involvement with Jack Abramoff and the barons of K Street haven’t come out yet, a lot of your registered and likely GOP primary voters know that something isn’t exactly above-board about good ol’ Ralph. By getting as much negative information out as possible about Cagle, Reed has a chance to level the playing field and show voters that both candidates are flawed in one way or another, while publicly proclaiming his innocence. It’s kind of a desperation move, but it’s about the only course open to Reed.
You might wonder why Reed’s attacks aren’t getting more play in the press. Simply put, most of what he’s putting out there about Cagle is a non-story. Take the email we cited earlier. Essentially, Reed is saying that Cagle skipped a vote, was less than upfront about why he skipped the vote, and has raised a lot of money from people who would approve of him skipping that vote. Well, skipping votes is hardly uncommon for legislators, especially when public opinion dictates a vote that is at odds with what your fundraising plan might require. It’s just not something that gets the press excited, and at best, things like this get folded into a larger story about the two campaigns.
Inside Baseball: Extra Innings
As we were wrapping this post up, we got another poll in the AthPo inbox. According to a recent Insider Advantage poll, Sonny Perdue leads Cathy Cox by 8 points, and he leads Mark Taylor by 16 points. In Democratic primary polling, Cox leads Taylor by 42% to 31%.
Looking at those numbers, it seems clear that if Democrats want to have a chance in November against Perdue, they’d better all jump on the Cathy Cox Express right now. In fact, it looks like about half of us already have. Still, we’ve talked about public polling before. Unlike our earlier post about polling, this is an independent poll, and not – as far as we know – affiliated with any particular candidate.
Nonetheless, we’re still going to pick on this poll, because that’s what we do. Quick question: what’s the most useless type of polling? Say it with us now: the horse race poll. A horse race test this early basically indicates what would happen if the election were held today. And, of course, we’re not holding an election today. (But don’t give the Clarke County School District any ideas.) In fact, this poll isn’t even a good indicator of what would happen if the election were held today, because in each of the three races tested, at least 12% of the respondents were undecided. In the head-to-head between Cox and Taylor, 27% of respondents were undecided.
Here at AthPo, we are big fans of polling; it’s a useful tool for campaigns to use to craft their message. But as we’ve said before, the actual horse race numbers don’t start mattering until a week out, and they don’t really matter until election day.
Bottom line is this. Any time that you see horse race numbers, especially this early, please know two things. First, they’re absolutely useless and in no way indicative of what might actually happen on election day. Second, and perhaps more important, please know that anyone who puts out horse race numbers this early has an agenda. In the case of a candidate releasing polling data, like Jim Martin did a few weeks ago, it’s an attempt to create the appearance of momentum. In the case of a polling firm releasing the data, the agenda is to call attention to the polling firm itself – a business move. If it’s a media outlet releasing the poll, they’re trying to create news and boost their share. Nothing wrong with any of that, and we’re not casting aspersions. Heck, if it weren’t for public polling, we’d have far less to write about sometimes. We’re just saying that these are things you need to consider, because Republican or Democrat, or in between, we want everyone out there to be more informed political consumers.
Monday, March 20, 2006
Our Legislature: Dedicated Public Servants or Dumbasses?
[Editor’s note: Guest blogging rules, which is why you’ll see a post below from GP of the Daily Douchebag, while half of your crack editorial staff gets to pick today’s d-bag. We’re not seeing another blog behind your back, cupcake, it’s just that, well…a blogger has needs.]
Our Legislature: Dedicated Public Servants or Dumbasses?
A few Dumbass moves by our legislature.
State Funded Bible Classes The house overwhelmingly passed a bill to allow state funded bible classes in public Schools. Despite, the ACLU cranking up their legal machine, the bill passed 151-7, with no opposition voiced. This is just what Georgia needs to attract new businesses and tourism.
SB 529 and Sponsor Chip Roberts
The only good thing about this bill is the tougher penalties that it specifies for human trafficking. The bill is not a solution to the illegal immigration issue in Georgia. It does little or nothing to prevent illegal immigration. It doesn't deal with the issue of the immigrants that are already here except to make it harder for them to assimilate into our society. The real feel-good portion of the bill aims to set tax penalties for those who employ illegals. The penalties are minor and only encourage further exploitation of illegals by paying them under the table (thereby reducing our tax revenue).
Jane Fonda
A great opportunity for posturing and self righteous outrage on both sides.
and my personal favorite....
The 65% SolutionIt's Sonny's imitation of Maude Flanders screaming "will someone please think of the children!" This won't help our kids and our school system, this will mean more mindless bureaucracy at the expense of local control. Sonny also proposed a bill that would set mandatory class size limits. These bills sound great to the casual listener. Hey, do you want your children to attend cramped classes with no individual attention? Do you want your tax money going to "wasteful" administrative expenses instead of your children. Well, do you? Of course you don't, but these bills only superficially address these issues while creating a host of other problems.
Our Legislature: Dedicated Public Servants or Dumbasses?
A few Dumbass moves by our legislature.
State Funded Bible Classes The house overwhelmingly passed a bill to allow state funded bible classes in public Schools. Despite, the ACLU cranking up their legal machine, the bill passed 151-7, with no opposition voiced. This is just what Georgia needs to attract new businesses and tourism.
SB 529 and Sponsor Chip Roberts
The only good thing about this bill is the tougher penalties that it specifies for human trafficking. The bill is not a solution to the illegal immigration issue in Georgia. It does little or nothing to prevent illegal immigration. It doesn't deal with the issue of the immigrants that are already here except to make it harder for them to assimilate into our society. The real feel-good portion of the bill aims to set tax penalties for those who employ illegals. The penalties are minor and only encourage further exploitation of illegals by paying them under the table (thereby reducing our tax revenue).
Jane Fonda
A great opportunity for posturing and self righteous outrage on both sides.
and my personal favorite....
The 65% SolutionIt's Sonny's imitation of Maude Flanders screaming "will someone please think of the children!" This won't help our kids and our school system, this will mean more mindless bureaucracy at the expense of local control. Sonny also proposed a bill that would set mandatory class size limits. These bills sound great to the casual listener. Hey, do you want your children to attend cramped classes with no individual attention? Do you want your tax money going to "wasteful" administrative expenses instead of your children. Well, do you? Of course you don't, but these bills only superficially address these issues while creating a host of other problems.
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Housekeeping, bitches
Unexplained absence:
Will remain unexplained. Poverty post continues to spark debate, as will, hopefully, the new post on immigration.
Writers Wanted:
Want to write for AthPo? Here’s the deal. Both members of your crack editorial staff will soon be undergoing some major life and career changes, which may hamper our ability to blog regularly. You might have noticed the aforementioned unexplained absence. So, if you’ve got something to say, let us know. We need some folks to fill space for us.
New Linky Linky:
To the right, bitches. Might as Well...Politics is new to us, but Russ gets it. Classic City Moonbat is new and liberal. Enjoy. Also, we hyped it up once already, but if you’re not reading the Daily Douchebag, then you’re out of the loop.
Iron Balls:
We love JMac. He’s one of the smartest, best-intentioned, most reasonable people we know, and we note with amusement that Hillary, on the same day, compares him to Barack Obama (we sort of agree), and bestows a fine nickname upon our friend.
Rumors Abound:
Jim Ponsoldt for State Senate? Sources tell us that he’s been approached a few times recently about running against Ralph Hudgens. Go Jim go! A new PAC may be forming up in Athens – democratic, natch. Word has it that money is being raised.
The Quiet Before the Storm:
Damn this suddenly quiet mayor’s race! Anyone hearing anything about this lately?
Will remain unexplained. Poverty post continues to spark debate, as will, hopefully, the new post on immigration.
Writers Wanted:
Want to write for AthPo? Here’s the deal. Both members of your crack editorial staff will soon be undergoing some major life and career changes, which may hamper our ability to blog regularly. You might have noticed the aforementioned unexplained absence. So, if you’ve got something to say, let us know. We need some folks to fill space for us.
New Linky Linky:
To the right, bitches. Might as Well...Politics is new to us, but Russ gets it. Classic City Moonbat is new and liberal. Enjoy. Also, we hyped it up once already, but if you’re not reading the Daily Douchebag, then you’re out of the loop.
Iron Balls:
We love JMac. He’s one of the smartest, best-intentioned, most reasonable people we know, and we note with amusement that Hillary, on the same day, compares him to Barack Obama (we sort of agree), and bestows a fine nickname upon our friend.
Rumors Abound:
Jim Ponsoldt for State Senate? Sources tell us that he’s been approached a few times recently about running against Ralph Hudgens. Go Jim go! A new PAC may be forming up in Athens – democratic, natch. Word has it that money is being raised.
The Quiet Before the Storm:
Damn this suddenly quiet mayor’s race! Anyone hearing anything about this lately?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)