Safe as Houses

Safe to say, I wholeheartedly agree with the jist of this response to Charles Murray's speech to the American Enterprise Institute.

You know how you always hear people down here talking about how unsafe New York is?

Um, yeah, it's 24 places higher than Georgia in the crime safety rankings.

But, by all means, let's cram through more nonsensical tax cuts and levy more regulations on the ability of local governments to fund things like public safety and education.

Just when you think The Great Georgia Corporate Giveaway will finally die, they pull you right back in.

Last Friday, the Georgia Senate's Finance Committee re-inserted the language eliminating the corporate tax that was stripped from the original bill in the House of Representatives earlier this session. While it's not shocking at all that a blatant giveaway to the state's largest corporations would be masked as a jobs creation package, all the expense of real, substantive tax reform in this state or a more responsible, balanced approach to generating economic development in the state, it's important to note how absolutely misleading the proponents of this scheme are.

Rep. Tom Graves, the original author of the bill, claimed it would be a huge economic boon for the state, but offered no research or analysis to support that claim. And, in fact, as the Georgia Budget and Policy Institute has pointed out, the state's official fiscal note argues that the elimination of the corporate tax 'is not expected to significantly alter economic growth conditions in Georgia' and the state will suffer a dramatic loss of revenue, even after taking into consideration the marginal employment growth it could provide.

Likewise, while it sounds like a reasonable proposal, the tax credit to hire unemployed workers is poor policy. The state has pointed out that while the credit could potentially stimulate $12 million in new revenue, that's hardly enough justification to offset the loss of $600 million or more through this particular provision over the next two years.

The entire plan is expected to cause the budget deficit to balloon from a projected $1.7 billion in 2012 to $2.2 billion, which is hardly a recipe for fiscal success ... though such evidence hasn't deterred the Republicans in Atlanta in recent years.

Since I've already gotten emails along the lines of 'really!?!?' let me just point out that I was being hyperbolic for the purposes of, well, being hyperbolic when I suggested the new publisher was writing the editorials. It was designed to suggest that this type of commentary wasn't what I typically expect from J.T. and I have absolutely no evidence to believe the hyperbolic suggestion in the reality.

I was making a point, though could have used a more artful way.

In addition, emails have been traded with J.T. and, as always, they were constructive. Safe to say, that we've agreed to disagree.

This is absolute insanity.

Seriously, I want to know what the new publisher has on J.T. because it must be really good to result in one of my former trusted colleagues and valued mentors penning some of the most ridiculous, poorly articulated and factually inaccurate editorials that I've ever seen. Because since that guy showed up, we've seen praise of Rep. Paul Broun's faux stimulus giveaway and an obsession with Congressional procedures, often times at the expense of the usual constructive dialogue on local affairs that I've come to appreciate from J.T.

Listen, I've got little love for Rep. Keith Heard. I don't think he's a terribly effective legislator, isn't awfully responsive to his constituents and his support of The Georgia Power Ponzi Scheme is justification enough for a primary challenge. But, I'm also capable of enough rational thought to recognize that, at times, the guy is right.

The line of argument in the Athens Banner-Herald, it seems, isn't capable of it ....

However, the fact some in the House opted for a more obstructionist course doesn't absolve Heard of blame in this sad little episode. Heard either knew, or should have known, that his resolution possibly might provoke a reaction in the full House, particularly insofar as it presumed to ascribe the perfectly legitimate sentiments of the black caucus - and, very possibly, any number of other legislators - to the entire body.

In short, for Heard and like-minded House members to throw a political bomb, and then display outrage at its clearly foreseeable explosion, is the height of disingenuousness and pointless political opportunism.

I mean, what in the hell are you talking about? What planet have you arrived from? Do they have politics there?

Are you familiar with the concept of resolutions?

Somehow this editorial managed to label a resolution honoring the President of the United States a 'political stunt' ... which is a head-scratcher for me. Somehow the obstruction in the Georgia House of Representatives cooked up by a group of Republicans so desperate to avoid actual governance is Heard's fault. Somehow this opposition's deliberate delay and subsequent defeat of the resolution, something unprecedented in the Georgia House, is Heard's fault (remember that the same body, in 2005, with overwhelming support from the Legislative Black Caucus, passed a resolution honoring President George W. Bush for his response to Hurricane Katrina). Somehow introducing a resolution honoring a president with a 70 percent approval rating is politically dangerous because it might 'provoke a reaction.'

Obviously, then, since a resolution is a political stunt, the ABH must be furious over the 732 other resolutions that have passed this legislative session.

Where was the outrage over H.R. 113 that honoring the work of the Hall County Chamber of Commerce CEO? Why wasn't the ABH up in arms over H.R. 43 offered by Rep. Bob Smith that commended former Oconee County Commissioner Don Norris since, arguably, since he's a conservative and that should surely anger progressives?

Or, for that matter, why the silence on the Georgia Power Ponzi Scheme? As I noted earlier, if you're going to get all high and mighty over Heard offering one of the hundreds of resolutions that get approved with no discussion - because, as the editorial argues, he should be focused in like a laser beam on our state's challenges - then why no focused criticism on his support of that bill?

The only bomb-throwing going on these days is from the ABH's editorial pages, though, it seems, most of what they like to toss as of late are duds.

I have to agree with Paul Krugman on this one. 

As much as I respect the president, and as optimistic I am that he can deliver the needed result we need for health care, energy, the environment and the like, I'm less than enthused with his approach to the financial system.

It's fundamentally broken and needs to be completely overhauled, and Timothy Geithner's plan to address it assumes neither.

A resolution recognizing the President of United States causes a rare display of righteous indignation from the Republicans in the Georgia House of Representatives, despite the fact that literally hundreds of these pass each year.

A ponzi scheme which exempts big businesses and sticks consumers across the state with dramatically higher energy bills with said money going directly to the shareholders of Georgia Power elicits not a peep since it's 'good business.'

Likewise, raising property taxes on all property owners via the expiration of the Homeowner Grant Program isn't a priority worth pursuing in the middle of an economic crisis bearing down on the citizens of this state.

But, honoring the president ... it merits a call to arms.

Everyone should applaud Martin Matheny for taking the high road in his intellectual thrashing of Rush Limbaugh Jr., er, Erick Erickson, as I'm not so sure I would have been that cordial.

But my question regarding Erickson's sophomoric rant is this ...

Is the criticism of the use of a teleprompter the best you boys have?

Really?

UPDATE: Oh noes! Dissension in the ranks! Buzz might sleep with the fishes for this one!

Given that recent polling is showing Roy Barnes in a favorable position in some hypothetical matchups against various Republican opponents for the 2010 governor's race, I'd like make a humble request regarding strategy as the talk begins to heat up.

Now, there's no indication that David Poythress, the only declared candidate for governor on the Democratic side, would want to seek a different position - and, in fact, he's clearly stated that's he seeking the governor's seat no matter what - so we're going to assume that Poythress remains in the race, but would lose to Barnes in the primary.

There's been considerable rumors put forward that if Barnes seeks the office, he'd like to do so with a unified slate of candidates from top to bottom. The rationale being that there's strength in numbers, and this slate could adhere to a strict messaging program that would benefit all.

The wild card, of course, is Rep. DuBose Porter, and the question, then, would be what would he do? I'd like to make a strong argument that, should Barnes seek the Governor's Mansion in 2010, that Porter remain in the Georgia House of Representatives ... but openly run a statewide campaign for Speaker of the House, and use the political muscle of Barnes to help hammer that home.

Nothing would offer a more clear contrast than if Porter could recruit 20 candidates to challenge some targeted sitting Republicans and have them unite under one narrative, one platform and one vision. And Porter should campaign aggressively with them across the state, promising that if you send these candidates to Atlanta with him they'll work with Barnes to undo the damage done over the past eight years.

Because then you're not running against a singular Republican candidate, but rather you're running against a brand that has lost some elements of trust with not only independent voters in the state, but also disillusioned many in its base. And, more to the point, for Porter it enables him to run a statewide campaign against Rep. Glenn Richardson, who is easily one of the more unpopular Republicans in Georgia.

Porter's supposedly had his eye on the governor's race for some time - and make no mistake, I think he'd be a fine governor - but I also know that he's pretty good legislator too. And if there's anyway to win back the Georgia House, this would be one way to do it.