poli

A Ponzi scheme to balance the budget?

2010-03-19T15:26:00Z

Here's how desperate Georgia's financial situation has become: Legislative leaders have introduced a bill that would enable the state's pension systems to buy what is known as "dead peasants insurance" to shore up the funding of the their plans. It sounds suspiciously like a Ponzi scheme could be in the works here.

]]> Rep. Ben Harbin (R-Evans) and Rep. Mark Burkhalter (R-Johns Creek) have quietly introduced HB 1380, which would provide for the state's retirement systems to buy mass life insurance coverage for current and retired state employees.

As those employees die off, the proceeds of the insurance policies would be paid off not to the survivors of the deceased employees but into the coffers of the state pension funds.

HB 1380 declares that state government, as well as any local government, "has an insurable interest in any individual who is an employee of the state or political subdivision and in any individual who is a retired employee and a member of a public retirement system."

The bill, which is now in the House Appropriations Committee, would authorize the governor or any local government to issue RFPs and then select a "qualified insurer" to issue the life insurance policies. The state would pay the premiums for these policies, but would also be the beneficiary for any benefits paid out when the insured employee dies.

This is a money-making tactic often used in corporate America. Here's how financial columnist Liz Pullam Weston described it -

Such corporate-owned life insurance is also big business:

* Companies pay a whopping $8 billion in premiums each year for such coverage, according to the American Council of Life Insurers, a trade group.
* The policies make up more than 20% of the all the life insurance sold each year.
* Companies expect to reap more than $9 billion in tax breaks from these policies over the next five years. The policies are treated as whole life policies. So, companies can borrow against the policies (though the IRS won't let them write off the interest). And the death benefits are tax-free.

Hundreds of companies -- including Dow Chemical, Procter & Gamble, Wal-Mart, Walt Disney and Winn-Dixie -- have purchased this insurance on more than 6 million rank-and-file workers.

These policies, nicknamed dead janitors or dead peasants insurance, soared in popularity after many states cleared the way for them in the 1980s. Congress recently tried to crack down on the practice, to the howls of the insurance industry -- which earlier this year managed to derail reforms.

The policies have generated lawsuits by survivors who got little or nothing when insured workers died.

HB 1380 has already caught the attention of teacher groups, who are skeptical of the proposed legislation.

"If there is extra money in the state coffers, let's use it to stop furloughs, not gamble on insurance policies," said Tim Callahan of PAGE (the Professional Association of Georgia Educators). "This idea is right up there with the state buying lottery tickets to cover its pension obligations."

No help for 'Casino Jack'

2010-03-10T20:59:01Z

When right-wing activist Ralph Reed announced Wednesday he would not be a candidate in the 7th Congressional District race, he said he decided against running because he wanted to spend his time "continuing to serve as CEO of Century Strategies, LLC, and founding chairman of the Faith and Freedom Coalition."

]]> Reed, an unsuccessful candidate for lieutenant governor in 2006, might also have been placed in an awkward position by the planned release later this year of "Casino Jack," a movie about GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, currently an inmate in the federal prison system because of fraud and corruption convictions.

Abramoff is a longtime friend of Reed who worked with Reed to advance the interests of Native American gambling casinos, among other clients. Those Abramoff connections helped sink Reed's candidacy in 2006, when Casey Cagle beat him like a tom-tom in the Republican primary.

"Casino Jack," a big-budget Hollywood production, is sure to dredge up a lot of memories of the Abramoff years. The movie's cast includes Kevin Spacey as Abramoff, Christian Campbell as Reed, Jon Lovitz as Adam Kidan, Spencer Garrett as Tom DeLay, Daniel Kash as Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis (who was found murdered after selling his gambling cruise ship business to Abramoff and Kidan), David Fraser as Karl Rove, Jeffrey R. Smith as Grover Norquist, and Brian Paul as Sen. John McCain.

According to the internet movie database, the cast does not include Padgett "Pat" Wilson, who worked with Abramoff at the Washington firms of Preston Gates and Greenberg Traurig before being hired as a government affairs staffer by Gov. Sonny Perdue in 2005.

Wilson described his relationship with Abramoff in a 99-page deposition taken by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The job involved billing Indian tribes for pricey dinners and helping distribute tickets to rock concerts and sporting events to government insiders. (Reports from the state auditor's office show that Wilson was paid a salary of $93,730 in fiscal 2009 for his work on the governor's staff.)

Reed's withdrawal from the congressional race means it will be a lot less interesting for the reporters who will be covering the campaign. It also deprives the producers of "Casino Jack" of a lot of free publicity they would have otherwise received.

Weak tea

2010-03-10T13:53:54Z

Tuesday was supposed to be a day when Tea Party activists would show up in force at the state capitol to demonstrate their growing political clout for all those legislators foolish enough to think that Georgia might need a tax increase to keep state government from collapsing. The stage, thanks to the financial support of tobacco giant Altria, was set for anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist to swoop in as the featured speaker who would fire up the teabagger hordes.

]]> The only problem was, there weren't any hordes. The skimpy crowd that assembled Tuesday could not have numbered more than 100 and at least a fourth of the people were either media types or right-wing legislators looking for a little teabagger love.

Norquist delivered his usual exhortation to the secessionists and Obama haters, but he was shooting at an unexpected target: although he didn't identify them by name, Norquist accused Gov. Sonny Perdue and the Republican majority in the General Assembly of being wasteful spenders who are too quick to consider tax cuts.

"We need to reduce spending," Norquist thundered. "The government spends too much in Georgia."

The era of big spending, Norquist added, "is coming to an end. It needs to come to an end in Georgia. I don't think they can ignore us in Atlanta anymore."

Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, was criticizing a state government that has been headed for nearly eight years by a Republican governor and for five years by a GOP majority in the Legislature.

That government is currently struggling with a budget crisis in which they have to cut the current state budget by another $200 million and find a way to erase a revenue shortfall that could exceed $2 billion in fiscal year 2011.

There was also a whiff of hypocrisy at the Norquist taxapalooza.

Republican activist Virginia Galloway noted the small size of the crowd and said the participation would have been greater if the event had been held after working hours.

"What are most conservatives doing now?" Galloway asked.

"Working!" the audience members shouted back. Of course, every audience member screaming that word either did not have a job or was taking time off from work to attend the rally. But whatever.

Rep. Ed Setzler (R-Acworth), one of several lawmakers who spoke at the rally, said that legislators had a duty to reject federal funds that come to the state from Washington.

"With those shekels come the shackles," Setzler said. "We're going to recognize that and return the money back to Washington."

Setzler, like many of his colleagues in the Legislature, voted on four different occasions last year to approve state budgets for FY 2009 and FY 2010 that each incorporated about $1.4 billion in federal stimulus funds. He sure didn't have any objections then to all those federal shekels.

Norquist's organization routinely asks local elected officials to sign pledges that they will not vote for any tax increases -- "any and all net tax increases," Norquist said in his speech.

A glance at his organization's website shows that 51 representatives and 19 senators in the General Assembly have signed the pledge in which they promise they "will oppose and vote against any and all efforts to increase taxes."

On Monday, the day before the Norquist rally, the Georgia House voted 151-13 to adopt HB 903, a bill that will impose a 7 percent hotel-motel tax for a 30-year period to pay for building a new domed stadium for the Atlanta Falcons.

HB 903 clearly fits Norquist's definition of a tax increase, because the hotel-motel tax that financed the current Georgia Dome facility will be terminated on Dec. 31, 2020. The bill in effect creates a new 7 percent tax as of Jan. 1, 2021 and keeps it in effect through 2050.

There are 34 House members -- 31 Republicans and three Democrats -- who have signed the Norquist pledge and also voted for the tax-raising HB 903.

These members include Mark Burkhalter, Jerry Keen, Ben Harbin, Bill Hembree, Larry O'Neal, Amos Amerson, Tim Bearden, Mark Butler, Mike Coan, Sharon Cooper, Katie Dempsey, Matt Dollar, Mark Hamilton, Calvin Hill, Penny Houston, Sheila Jones, Sean Jerguson, John Lunsford, Gene Maddox, Judy Manning, Fran Millar, Billy Mitchell, Allen Peake, Alan Powell, Bobby Reese, Tom Rice, Carl Rogers, Ed Rynders, Donna Sheldon, Barbara Sims, Bob Smith, Len Walker, Mark Williams, and John Yates.

Crist un-anointed

2010-03-10T13:39:19Z

We've posted about this before, but I continue to be amazed at how steeply Florida's Republican governor, Charlie Crist, has fallen off a cliff in the U.S. Senate race. The latest indicator comes from Public Policy Polling with a survey out of the Sunshine State that shows teabagger favorite Marco Rubio leading Crist by 60-28 percent.

]]> Stop and think about the implications of that. In the space of less than a year, Crist has collapsed from a 30-point polling lead to a 32-point deficit. Hell, even Roy Barnes didn't do that badly against Sonny Perdue. PPP noted in its poll analysis:

It appears to be too late for Crist to change his mind about the Senate and just run for reelection either. 49% of voters say they would choose Bill McCollum in the primary if Crist decided to make another Gubernatorial race compared to only 35% who say they'd support the incumbent.

56% of GOP voters say they would like to see Crist out of public office a year from now, compared to 19% who would like to see him still as Governor and 14% who want him to be elected to the Senate.

"It's been an amazing fall for Charlie Crist," said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling.

We've said it before so I'll say it quickly: Crist is not going to win the Republican Senate primary and even with the primary still five months away he is not going to overtake Rubio. Goodtime Charlie has been dropping hints that he may run as an independent candidate, but that's not going to do it for him either.

If he wants to stay in elective office, Crist needs to get himself to the White House, pronto, and beg Rahm Emanuel (if Emanuel can take time off from screaming at Eric Massa in the House gym's shower room) to schedule a news conference where President Barack Obama announces that Crist has now come over from the dark side and joined the Democratic Party. That's the only winning scenario for him, at this point.

Deal gives Democrats a helping hand

2010-03-01T18:12:43Z

Nathan Deal did Democrats a big favor by deciding to resign early from his seat in the U.S. House to concentrate on running for governor (Deal did himself an even bigger favor, because his early resignation will squelch an embarrassing move by the House Ethics Committee to resolve an ethics complaint related to Deal's lucrative business deal with the state involving an auto salvage firm he owns).

]]> By leaving the House on March 8, as he announced Monday, Deal will make it slightly easier for Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the House leadership to assemble a majority vote for healthcare reform.

How does this come to pass? First of all, Gov. Sonny Perdue is required to set a date for a special election to fill Deal's vacant House seat. He must issue an order called a "writ of election" setting the date of that special election "within ten days after the occurrence of such vacancy," which means the writ of election must be signed and sent to the secretary of state by March 18. The law further requires that the date for the special election cannot be "less than 30 days after its issuance."

The law thus requires that at least 30 days must pass between the time Perdue issues the writ of election and the day when the special election is held. The law does not set any requirements beyond that. That would presumably allow Perdue to schedule the special election to coincide with the primary election in July or the general election in November, if he chose to do that.

Regardless of when the special election is held, it appears that Deal's House seat will be vacant for at least the next month or two, which could be a crucial time for healthcare reform legislation in Congress.

One scenario now being discussed by the Democratic leadership involves the House voting to agree with the healthcare reform bill that passed the Senate with 60 votes on the day before Christmas. (The Senate would also approve some House-requested changes in that bill through the reconciliation procedure that does not require 60 votes for passage.)

Because the House is not hobbled by the antiquated filibuster rules that obstruct votes in the Senate, a simple majority vote in the House could pass the Senate version of the healthcare reform bill and send it to President Barack Obama.

Normally, a House majority would be 218 votes because the full membership of the chamber is 435. But with the resignation of Deal and three other current vacancies, the House membership will be reduced to 431 and Pelosi will need only 216 votes for a majority.

In addition, Deal's resignation deprives Republicans of a certain "no" vote against passage, which also makes it slightly easier for Pelosi and the Democratic leadership to achieve a majority vote for healthcare reform legislation.

Thus the irony that Deal, who adamantly opposes healthcare reform, makes it easier for Democrats to pass healthcare reform by resigning early from Congress.

Deal's decision to resign before his term ends came only two days after the staggering announcement by Rep. John Linder, a Gwinnett County Republican, that he will not run for another House term.

There has been a lot of comment on the number of Democrats who have decided to retire from the House, but there has actually been a larger number of GOP members who won't be coming back.

Linder's retirement, according to the National Journal, brings the number of Republican House members who are stepping down to 20 -- which is more than 10 percent of the total GOP membership. By contrast, there have been 15 House Democrats who have said they won't run for another term -- which is less than 6 percent of Democratic membership.

The county of horndogs and hypocrites

2010-02-24T14:34:48Z

You've got to love the voters of Paulding County -- they appreciate a good joke better than any other group of people I know. Where else in Georgia would you see the voters put such a colorful bunch of horndogs, carousers and hypocrites into public office?

]]> Voters in this suburban county that lies to the west of Atlanta seven times elected Glenn Richardson to the Georgia House of Representatives, where he eventually became the House speaker and one of the most powerful political figures in the state.

During the five years that he was speaker, Richardson acquired a legendary reputation for drinking and partying with the capitol's lobbyist crowd. He was barely slowed down by an ethics complaint filed by Democratic Party Chairman Bobby Kahn in January 2007, alleging that Richardson had an "inappropriate relationship" with an Atlanta Gas Light lobbyist (at the same time, coincidentally, that Richardson was pushing for passage of a pipeline bill supported by the gas company). That complaint was quickly tossed out by a legislative "ethics committee."

Richardson's wife wound up divorcing him after that ethics controversy but it never hurt him among Paulding County voters -- they just kept reelecting him.

The good times for Richardson ended not because of Paulding voters but because of his now former wife, Susan. She sat down for an explosive interview with TV newsman Dale Russell last November and confirmed that Richardson did indeed have an affair with that Atlanta Gas Light lobbyist. That was too much for Richardson's colleagues in the Republican caucus and he resigned as speaker and as a member of the Legislature.

They held a special election in Paulding this week to replace Richardson, so who did the voters pick? A 29-year-old banker and Republican named Daniel Stout who's a pleasant-looking young man and a politician who professes a deep faith in God.

What's the catch here? Simply this: it came out during the campaign that 10 years ago Stout committed adultery. While his first wife was pregnant. With his first wife's mother. That resulted in a divorce for Stout (he has since married another woman).

Here's how Stout handled the matter in an email:

Kelly and I wanted to respond together to a question about a painful past event that someone has recently raised during this election.

Ten years ago I committed adultery that led to a divorce from my first wife. While the relationship was stopped short of "sex", I recognize my mistake as adulterous and unfaithful nonetheless. I own the reality of the pain I caused to my first wife, my daughter and others. This humbling experience changed my life dramatically.

I have asked for and received forgiveness from my first wife, my daughter, my family, my friends, my church, my community and, most importantly, God.

I met my current wife, Kelly, four years later. We were completely open with one another, and we discussed all this as soon as we began dating. We got married in 2005, and God's loving forgiveness for us has been a constant theme of our relationship. The Lord has blessed us with a wonderful marriage, and through God's strength we remain faithful to one another.

Of course, we knew when I announced for the House seat that belongs to the people of Paulding County that this and all matters of our lives would be open to the public. We believe in total transparency, even in matters of past sins anyone would rather forget.

Do I even have to mention that Stout received nearly 60 percent of the vote in the special election and will soon be sworn in as Richardson's replacement?

Paulding County is also the home of Rep. Howard Maxwell (R-Dallas), who has voted at least four times in the past four years to pass bills that have given Georgia what is considered to be one of the toughest sex offender laws in the nation.

Maxwell went along with the Republican leaders -- ironically including Richardson -- who wanted to make the state code so harsh and unforgiving that persons convicted of sex crimes would be forced to leave the state and move elsewhere.

That all went out the window last summer when one of Maxwell's friends and constituents was convicted on child molestation charges.

Maxwell, who voted for each and every bill that ramped up the penalties for child molestation, appeared in Paulding County court to testify as a character witness for his child molester associate. "I believe in coming and supporting my friends," Maxwell said.

His support obviously helped. The judge in the case allowed Maxwell's constituent to remain under house arrest rather than go to prison.

I asked Maxwell if he saw any contradiction at all between voting for tougher sex crime penalties and then testifying to help a convicted child molester avoid going to prison.

"I don't particularly like the laws, no," he told me. "I think they're too stringent. I don't like it that we've taken the power to sentence away from the judges, basically. You've got to use common sense."

Can someone who changes his position so dramatically on sex crimes be reelected to public office in Paulding County?

Judging from the results of this week's special election, I'd say yes.

What part of 'no' don't you understand?

2010-02-24T11:55:09Z

The U.S. Justice Department told Georgia election officials this week that their program for verifying the citizenship of voters has been rejected because it violates the Voting Rights Act. You would think that our state's officials would have gotten the message by now -- this is at least the third time in nine months that the DOJ has turned down this plan because it discriminates against non-white voters.

]]> For good measure, the Justice Department also said that a new state law requiring persons to show proof of citizenship before they can register to vote is "unenforceable" because Georgia has not obtained federal clearance for that particular change in its election laws.

This issue goes back a couple of years and involves efforts by Republican officials to make it more difficult for blacks, Latinos and other non-caucasian voters to cast ballots. When Karen Handel was secretary of state, she devised a program of cross-matching data from the voter registration rolls with the Department of Driver Services database. This program supposedly would flag non-citizens who should not be voting.

Voter rights groups went to court and protested this attempt at voter suppression. A panel of federal judges ruled in October 2008, as early voting was proceeding in the presidential election, that the state would have to allow all of these voters Handel's office had been flagging to cast "challenged ballots."

After Barack Obama took office, the Justice Department rejected Handel's voter-flagging program and charged that it had prevented numerous African American, Latino and Asian persons from voting who should have been allowed to cast ballots.

"Our analysis shows that the state's process does not produce accurate and reliable information and that thousands of citizens who are in fact eligible to vote under Georgia law have been flagged," said Loretta King, assistant attorney general in the civil rights division, in a May 29, 2009 letter to state Attorney General Thurbert Baker.

Handel has a history of being stubborn when judges and lawyers try to tell her she's done something illegal, so she ordered the state law department to appeal that denial of the verification program. Her appeal was turned down by the Justice Department in October. An assistant attorney general in the state law department asked the Justice Department in December to reconsider that decision once more.

The Justice Department sent a letter to the law department this week informing them that the state's voter flagging program has again been rejected -- making it the third time that federal officials have tried to convey this message to Georgia.

"I remain unable to conclude that the State of Georgia has carried its burden of showing that the original voter registration verification program has neither a discriminatory purpose nor a discriminatory effect," Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez said in the letter to the law department.

Perez said that SB 86, the law passed by Republican legislators last year that requires proof of citizenship for people registering to vote, has not been submitted to the federal court in the District of Columbia or to the Justice Department for administrative review as required by the Voting Rights Act.

"Changes that affect voting are legally unenforceable unless and until the appropriate Section 5 [Voting Rights Act] determination has been obtained," Perez reminded the law department.

Handel is long gone as secretary of state, but her successor appears to be determined to keep fighting this battle. Brian Kemp said he will ask Attorney General Baker to file a petition for a declaratory judgment in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in an attempt to salvage the citizenship requirement.

"The State of Georgia will no longer watch the Obama Justice Department play politics with our election processes and protections," Kemp said in a statement released by his office. "The Justice Department is denying Georgia's legal requirement to verify the information provided by new voter registration applicants."

What we have here is really a very simple situation. You can get away with programs that deny some citizens the right to vote when a guy like George W. Bush is president. When you have a president like Barack Obama, however, the Justice Department is going to take a dim view of attempts to keep non-caucasian citizens from casting their ballots.

Attorney General Eric Holder needs to have a conference call with Kemp and Handel and ask them this: "What part of 'no' do you have trouble understanding?"

How much good did the stimulus act do? Quite a lot, actually.

2010-02-21T17:13:51Z

This past week marked the one-year anniversary of President Barack Obama's signing of the federal stimulus act. It's a fair question to ask how much good, if any, the stimulus act did in creating new jobs or saving existing jobs.

]]> If you listen to the people and the organizations who actually know what they're talking about and have some expertise on economic matters, you'd have to conclude that the stimulus program has performed fairly well.

The Congressional Budget Office issued an estimate that as of September 2009, a little over six months after the stimulus act was signed, 640,000 jobs had been created as a result.

Mark Zandi, the chief economist of Moody's Economy.com, said in an Oct. 29 speech: "Although the exact number of additional jobs that would have been lost without the fiscal stimulus will never be known, it is clear that the number is significant. The research of Moody's Economy.com suggests that a million fewer jobs would exist today."

Moody's and other economic research firms such as IHS Global Insight and Macroeconomic Advisers have estimated the number of jobs attributable to the stimulus act spending so far at 1.6 million to 1.8 million, with an ultimate job impact of 2.5 million.

Let's take it down to the state level. One of the major recipients of stimulus funds was the Georgia Department of Transportation, which pulled in about $930 million to pay for highway construction projects.

Vance Smith, the DOT commissioner, was a Republican member of the Georgia House for 17 years before he got his current job. For more than 20 years he ran a family construction business in the Pine Mountain area. Smith understands that when you undertake a construction project, roads and buildings don't magically appear by themselves: people have to show up and work to get it done. A construction project, in other words, creates jobs.

As a conservative Republican from rural Georgia, Smith can't be very happy about the fact that a black Democrat is the president.

Nevertheless, even Smith's DOT says that the stimulus funds created jobs in Georgia. A couple of weeks ago, the department estimated that highway projects funded by stimulus money resulted in 961 jobs over the past year and added that "more will be employed as more projects get under way."

"The message is pretty simple," Smith said at a news conference. "Transportation investment equals good jobs now and produces lasting assets for the future . . . Even though with all the stimulus funds we have, we still have great needs in the state of Georgia."

A report issued in January by the state's Office of Stimulus Accountability estimated that stimulus funds had accounted for more than 20,000 jobs in Georgia. That office is headed by Sid Johnson, who was appointed to the position by Gov. Sonny Perdue. Perdue, if memory serves, is a Republican who has been one of Obama's biggest critics.

At a legislative hearing last July, state school Supt. Kathy Cox, who is a Republican elected official, testified that without the $1.5 billion in stimulus funds that Georgia had received from the federal government for education, the state budget cuts to public schools would have been "devastating."

"We have had a positive impact on saving jobs in education with this money," Cox told legislators. She added that the stimulus funds are "helping our systems focus on student achievement."

Georgia's Republican congressmen have routinely contended that the stimulus hasn't created any jobs. But it's amazing how many of them have requested stimulus funds for the jobs the money would create back in their district.

Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, for example, voted against the stimulus act. Isakson called the stimulus act an example of "throwing money at the symptoms" of the recession. Chambliss said it was proof that "Washington is more concerned with pet projects than with the welfare of taxpayers."

But last summer, the dynamic duo went to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and asked him to steer $50 million in stimulus money for one of their own "pet projects," a bioenergy initiative proposed by one of their constituents.

Gates turned down the request, but Chambliss and Isakson have continued to be graceless hypocrites about funding from the Obama administration. Last week, Obama announced the federal government would guarantee $8 billion in loans to help the Southern Co. build two nuclear power plants near Waynesboro in east Georgia. Chambliss and Isakson promptly issued a news release praising the loan guarantee, but did not mention Obama's name a single time.

We saw that same kind of classy behavior from Rep. Jack Kingston of Savannah last summer. In a July 28 floor speech, Kingston ranted: "Mr. President, where's the stimulus package? Where are the jobs?"

On the same day as that anti-stimulus speech, Kingston's press office sent out news releases boasting about a total of $245,000 in Department of Justice grants that went to local police departments in Alma and Jesup.

"We've seen from experience that local initiatives go a lot further toward solving local problems that policies set in Washington," Congressman Kingston said. "This funding will provide tax relief by savings local tax dollars and, under the stewardship of Chief Takaki, will go a long way to fight crime more effectively through community policing."

Both of those grants in Kingston's district were funded by Obama's stimulus act.

Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Marietta), like Kingston, voted against the stimulus act and has criticized it at almost every opportunity. But last October, Gingrey presented an oversized ceremonial check of $625,000 to the city of Cedartown to help pay for a local beautification program:

The money comes from federal stimulus funds and will fund the second phase of Cedartown's Streetscape project, with new sidewalks, landscaping and other improvements to the downtown area . . .

Believing that the project qualified for federal stimulus funds as a "shovel-ready" project, Gingrey presented the proposal at the federal level, his spokesperson, Linda Liles, explained.

In a recent interview with the Gainesville Times, Rep. John Linder said that all spending of stimulus money by the federal government should be halted: "The first thing I'd say is no more spending. Of the half of the stimulus money that hasn't been spent, we won't spend it. We'd just put it back. We'll just stop all that."

Linder also blogged last October that the stimulus act "has done nothing for job growth in this country."

Before he posted that particular blog item, Linder evidently had a higher opinion of stimulus funding. As reported by the conservative Washington Times:

Two weeks earlier, Mr. Linder had sent a letter to Mr. Vilsack [the agriculture secretary] backing an application for stimulus money by the Elauwit Community Foundation, records show. With unemployment in Georgia topping 10 percent, "the employment opportunities created by this program would be quickly utilized," Mr. Linder wrote.

Let's bring it down to the local level again with state Rep. Tom Graves (R-Ranger), a delicately handsome legislator from Gordon County who is running for the 9th Congressional District seat this year. Graves, who has never been in charge of the Georgia Department of Transportation and has never been responsible for governing a local school system, sent out this statement last week: "The stimulus has failed and the American people know it."

Graves did not have that aversion to stimulus dollars last year when it came time to vote on the state budget. During the 2009 General Assembly session, there were four votes in the House to pass the amended state budget for fiscal year 2009 and the state budget for fiscal year 2010. Both of those budgets incorporated nearly $1 billion in federal stimulus funds. Without the federal stimulus funds, both budgets would have run an unconstitutional deficit.

Graves voted all four times to adopt those stimulus fund-laden budgets.

Other ultra-conservative Republican lawmakers who voted four times to accept the same budgets included: James Mills, Mark Burkhalter, Charlice Byrd, Sharon Cooper, Jerry Keen, Mike Keown, Martin Scott, Chip Rogers, Chip Pearson, Tommie Williams, John Douglas, Bill Heath and Mitch Seabaugh.

Read the numbers, you idiots

2010-02-13T02:26:44Z

When you observe the national media's continuing obsession with Sarah Palin, you can only come to the conclusion that the learning-impaired, half-term governor of Alaska has made a lot of veteran journalists quite horny. How else to explain the gushing adoration expressed in so many political columns by so many pundits who really should know better. The lady from Alaska has obviously caused a lot of scribes to start sporting boners.

]]> The latest of many star-struck swains is David Broder, the so-called "dean" of the Washington press corps who in his dotage has become like the embarrassing great uncle who sits in a corner at the family reunion drooling all over himself and soiling his Depends.

The "dean" went ga-ga this week over the dim-witted Sarah's recent speech to a crowd of about 600 Obama haters at a teabagger event in Tennessee:

Her lengthy Saturday night keynote address to the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville and her debut on the Sunday morning talk show circuit with Fox News' Chris Wallace showed off a public figure at the top of her game -- a politician who knows who she is and how to sell herself, even with notes on her palm . . .

Blessed with an enthusiastic audience of conservative activists, Palin used the Tea Party gathering and coverage on the cable networks to display the full repertoire she possesses, touching on national security, economics, fiscal and social policy, and every other area where she could draw a contrast with Barack Obama and point up what Republicans see as vulnerabilities in Washington.

Her invocation of "conservative principles and common-sense solutions" was perfectly conventional. What stood out in the eyes of TV-watching pols of both parties was the skill with which she drew a self-portrait that fit not just the wishes of the immediate audience but the mood of a significant slice of the broader electorate . . .

Palin did not wear well in the last campaign, especially in the suburbs where populism has a limited appeal. But when Wallace asked her about resigning the governorship with 17 months left in her term and whether she let her opponents drive her from office, she said, "Hell, no."

Those who want to stop her will need more ammunition than deriding her habit of writing on her hand. The lady is good . . .

I only hope that someone checked the "dean's" trousers for stains after he put that particular ejaculation into print.

Broder is not alone, of course. There are an astonishing number of pundits, both moderate and conservative, who continue to be star-struck by the low-IQ politico from the 49th state.

What none of them will tell you is that Palin, in reality, is a very unpopular politician when you look outside the hardcore 25 percent teabagger fringe of the American population. In the same issue of the Washington Post where Broder rhapsodized about Lady Sarah, there was an article about a Post poll that showed Palin to have very unflattering numbers.

Reporters Jon Cohen and Philip Rucker wrote:

The new poll shows that the political standing of former Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, who was the keynote speaker last week at the first National Tea Party Convention, has deteriorated significantly . . .

Although Palin is a tea party favorite, her potential as a presidential hopeful takes a severe hit in the survey. Fifty-five percent of Americans have unfavorable views of her, while the percentage holding favorable views has dipped to 37, a new low in Post-ABC polling.

There is a growing sense that the former Alaska governor is not qualified to serve as president, with more than seven in 10 Americans now saying she is unqualified, up from 60 percent in a November survey. Even among Republicans, a majority now say Palin lacks the qualifications necessary for the White House.

Palin has lost ground among conservative Republicans, who would be crucial to her hopes if she seeks the party's presidential nomination in 2012. Forty-five percent of conservatives now consider her as qualified for the presidency, down sharply from 66 percent who said so last fall.

Among all Republicans polled, 37 percent now hold a "strongly favorable" opinion of Palin, about half the level recorded when she burst onto the national stage in 2008 as Sen. John McCain's running mate.

Among Democrats and independents, assessments of Palin also have eroded. Six percent of Democrats now consider her qualified for the presidency, a drop from 22 percent in November; the percentage of independents who think she is qualified fell to 29 percent from 37 percent.

Let's repeat those numbers for the benefit of "Dean" Broder and the other pundits who are so bedazzled by the wolf-slaughtering resigned governor: only 37 percent of those polled have a favorable opinion of Palin, while fully 55 percent have an unfavorable opinion of her. Only 26 percent think she is qualified to be president; 71 percent think she is not qualified. That 71 percent includes quite a few Republicans.

This is not a popular politician and this is also a politician who, in the opinion of 71 percent of the people, is too f**king retarded to be president. Why does our media keep panting after her?

Georgia's own special senator

2010-02-04T14:08:12Z

Georgia's senior senator Saxby Chambliss has always been a special member of the U.S. Senate -- special in the sense of those special education classes offered at most public schools.

]]> That Chambliss specialness was on display this week at a hearing by the Senate Armed Services Committee into the "Don't ask, don't tell" rule involving gay personnel who want to serve in the military. Chambliss theorized that repealing DADT would result in "alcohol use, adultery, fraternization, and body art" in the military.

Chambliss added that the military, in his informed opinion:

"must maintain policies that exclude persons whose presence in the armed forces would create unacceptable risk to the armed forces' high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion."

"In my opinion," he said, "the presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would very likely create an unacceptable risk to those high standards."

Chambliss, of course, avoided military service during the Vietnam era of the 1960s because of what he later described as a "bum knee." Had he actually served in the military, he might have learned that there are, in fact, quite a few heterosexually oriented soldiers who drink, engage in adulterous sexual acts, and get tattoos.

Our "special" senator really should get in a car and drive around a military base like Fort Benning or Fort Stewart. He would see, if he cared to look, that these bases are surrounded by dozens if not hundreds of bars, beer joints, massage parlors and tattoo parlors.

Goodbye, Charlie

2010-02-02T22:13:58Z

The trend has been evident for quite some time, but the latest poll should remove any doubts: Charlie Crist is dead meat in the Republican primary for Florida's Senate seat.

]]> The latest survey from the GOP polling firm Rasmussen has Crist trailing the more conservative Marco Rubio by 49-37 percent. That's an astounding development in a race where Crist, who had been a very popular governor at one time, started out with a huge advantage in money and name identification.

As the teabagger faction has taken control of the Republican Party, however, Crist has continued to slip in the polls. It's hard to see him reversing the momentum that has been steadily building behind Rubio for months.

Right now, it looks like Crist has two choices: stay in the Republican primary race and get pulverized, or switch to the Democratic Party. Which way does he go? If he decided to run as a Democrat for the Senate seat, would he be able to beat Kendrick Meek? This is a race to keep your eye on.

Got to get us some of that ethics

2010-01-30T15:31:44Z

He's a little late to the game, but Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine has called for the allocation of more money and more independence for the chronically underfunded and legislatively hamstrung State Ethics Commission.

]]> Oxendine sent out a statement Friday urging that the commission "be established as an independent body with a funding mechanism which is free from political interference." That funding source could come from a beefed-up registration fee from lobbyists or a dedicated fee paid by candidates qualifying for state office or both, he suggested.

"It is unconscionable for our Georgia Ethics Commission to have to beg for money from the very people that they are trying to watch over," Oxendine said.

Ethics reform usually pops up as a campaign issue every time Georgia has a governor's race. In 2002, as I remember, Sonny Perdue made ethics reform one of the central issues in his underdog (and ultimately successful) campaign against incumbent Roy Barnes. Sonny swore he was gonna get some of them-there ethics for the good people of Georgia.

That was, however, before Perdue became the first governor in the state's history to be cited and fined (a total of $1,900) for an ethics law violation. It was also before Perdue's real estate attorney, Rep. Larry O'Neal, introduced a bill that was surreptitiously amended in a Senate committee and rushed through the House for final approval to give the governor his very own $100,000 tax exemption on an expensive real estate deal.

Yes, there's ethics, and then there's ethics. So it's only natural that the Ox would join candidates like Barnes and former secretary of state Karen Handel, among others, to urge stronger oversight of the behavior of elected officials. That's a good thing and we can all get behind it.

It is a little awkward, at the same time, for a candidate like Oxendine to be making demands for more authority for the State Ethics Commission. This is the same commission that launched an investigation several months ago into his receipt of $120,000 in contributions from insurance industry sources that fall under his regulatory control.

That money, which Oxendine returned after newspaper articles called attention to it, was funneled to the Oxendine campaign via a network of political action committees established in Alabama.

To hear Oxendine now urging more money and power for the Ethics Commission is a little like hearing Al Capone request additional funding for the FBI. But whatever.

What next after Massachusetts?

2010-01-20T14:33:37Z

Massachusetts Democrats -- most especially Martha Coakley -- have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and managed to give away a U.S. Senate seat that had been held by Democrats for more than half a century. With Republican Scott Brown headed to Washington, let's speculate on what some of the long-term effects might be.

]]> Is this the end of healthcare reform legislation?

Probably so. Brown promised throughout his campaign that he will be the "41st vote" against healthcare, which means that Senate Republicans can now sustain filibusters against any and all attempts to achieve final passage of a House-Senate compromise version.

It is possible that a healthcare bill could be "ping-ponged" to Obama's desk if the House would simply agree to pass the Senate version of the bill, but that's not likely to happen either. The House version of the healthcare bill only passed by a 220-215 margin. Coakley's defeat in the Massachusetts election will surely scare off enough marginal Democrats in the House to keep that chamber from ever agreeding to pass the Senate bill.

If I were a betting man, I'd put my money on healthcare reform being killed this year -- which means it won't resurface for another 15 to 20 years.

How would the loss of healthcare reform hurt Democrats?

Obama's loss on this issue will further energize the teabaggers and birthers who are assuming effective control of the Republican Party and kill Democratic enthusiasm heading into this off-year election. Remember, the collapse of healthcare reform in 1993-94 was a key factor in the Republican wave that swept congressional Democrats out of office in the 1994 elections. The failure to pass healthcare reform this year would similarly discourage Democratic voters even as it fires up Republican activists.

The Democratic congressmen who are most endangered by the collapse of healthcare reform will be those in swing districts such as Jim Marshall and John Barrow of Georgia. Even though Marshall and Barrow voted against the Democrats' healthcare bill, they will become prime targets of Republican PACs that will be looking for GOP candidates to finance in competitive districts. The defeat of healthcare reform won't hurt congressmen in safe districts -- but it could be an absolute killer for Blue Dogs.

Who's really to blame here?

There's no question that Democrats at the state level in Massachusetts blew it big time. Martha Coakley was a charisma-impaired candidate who got her doors blown off when she took it for granted that she could win an election without actually campaigning. Massachusetts Democrats should have nominated a candidate who would get out there and work for the office.

The biggest part of the blame should rest with Barack Obama and the Senate leadership, who bumbled and miscalculated on the healthcare reform issue every step of the way.

Shortly after Obama was elected in 2008, the question arose among the Senate Democratic leadership of what to do about the Joe Lieberman problem. There were many, many progressive Democrats who said loudly and clearly on websites like Daily Kos that Joe had to go. Obama and Harry Reid had the idea that it was better to be "inclusive" and "forgiving" of Lieberman and let him continue as a committee chairman because, after all, "he's with us on everything but Iraq." All of those dirty leftwing hippies at Daily Kos obviously didn't know what they were talking about and should be ignored.

That really worked well.

Obama's insistence on a "bipartisan" approach to healthcare and other issues was also a disastrous mistake for Democrats. Here's a news bulletin for the Democrats in Washington: Republicans are the opposition party. One thing an opposition party does is oppose. It was obvious since Jan. 20, 2009 that Republicans were going to oppose every issue brought forth by the White House and Senate Democrats. It didn't take a genius to see this -- and yet, Democrats continued to believe that somehow a "bipartisan" consensus was going to be reached on healthcare reform.

South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint said it about as plainly as it could be said back on July 20: "If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him." Did the Democrats think he wasn't serious? Were they not aware that DeMint's comment was a clear and concise summary of the GOP strategy? And yet, they continued to waste months of valuable time pursuing a "bipartisanship" that was never going to happen.

It's also difficult to overstate the incompetence of Harry Reid as Senate majority leader. DeMint's "Waterloo" remark made it obvious -- from the middle of July on -- that Republicans were not going to negotiate in good faith on any healthcare reform bill. But Reid and the Senate leadership kept allowing Republicans like Olympia Snowe to blow up the process and push back a Senate vote on the issue. The Republicans were simply trying to run out the clock on this issue -- and Reid allowed them to do it. It turns out that the best political tactician in Washington was Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Even though he had only 40 Republicans to work with, he used the Senate's archaic rules and the stupidity of the Democratic leadership to effectively kill the legislation.

Is there any reason for Democrats to be hopeful about the 2010 elections?

The indications are strong that Harry Reid is going to lose his reelection race for another term in the Senate. That's about the best outcome Democrats can hope for, because a Reid defeat means that someone like Chuck Schumer, who's actually competent, could become the majority leader. If the Democrats are even able to hold on to that majority.

Craziness of the highest degree

2010-01-12T21:21:31Z

What are our legislative leaders up to? Let's look at what Sen. Mitch Seabaugh (R-Sharpsburg), the majority whip in the Senate, is introducing in the way of public safety legislation.

]]> Seabaugh and the Senate majority leader, Sen. Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock), have rolled out legislation that would make it legal to carry guns in a wider variety of public places and would make it easier for persons with criminal records and mental patients to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon. I kid you not.

Seabaugh's bill would repeal the current prohibitions in state law against carrying firearms in public places such as sporting events, political rallies, non-secured portions of airports and bars. The bill would allow weapons to be carried at K-12 schools and college campuses (except for dormitories). The only prohibitions against carrying firearms would be in a government building, courtroom, jail, prison, or college residential housing.

Seabaugh said persons with permits would be allowed to carry weapons at the state capitol in general, but could not take those weapons into government agencies at the capitol such as the secretary of state's office or the legislative chambers.

The bill would allow persons with a criminal background to obtain a gun permit if they have been "free of conviction" of any other offense for at least 10 years since their criminal violation. Mental patients would be allowed to apply for permits five years after their hospitalization.

Seabaugh and Rogers said they were not concerned that people with criminal records would be allowed to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon under the proposed legislation.

"That list of prohibitions against people who can receive a license really needs to be updated," Rogers said. "You have some prohibitions on there that shouldn't be on there."

When asked by a reporter if he was concerned that the bill would allow weapons to be carried in bars that serve alcoholic drinks, Seabaugh said: "I'll let the property owner make that decision."

He added that he also supported the idea of allowing firearms to be carried into any government offices. "Personally, I don't have a problem with it," Seabaugh said. He characterized public concerns about the bill as "misconceived hysteria."

Here's the punchline: Seabaugh calls his proposed legislation "the common-sense lawful carry act."

Seabaugh's description, of course, is erroneous. This bill is located about as far from common sense as you can be and still remain within the confines of the Milky Way galaxy. It is full-blown, skull-bending craziness. It is just about the most ill-conceived legislation ever introduced in the General Assembly by someone whose name isn't Bobby Franklin.

It probably is not a surprise that one of the bill's supporters, Rogers, has plans to run for governor some day.

Awkward questions

2010-01-11T20:17:18Z

The General Assembly kicked off a new session on Monday with much of the legislative leadership reeling from media exposes of scandals and ethics controversies, some of them involving female lobbyists

]]> The flurry of TV and newspaper stories over the past six weeks has resulted in some awkward encounters between politicians and reporters. I'm talking about very awkward.

One AJC reporter, who was recently interviewing media commentator Matt Towery for an article about past legislative scandals, tried to question Towery about a trip to Daufuskie Island, S.C. in 1995. On that memorable junket, a lobbyist hosted five House members and took along some exotic dancers from the Cheetah III nightclub in Atlanta to serve as hostesses.

Towery was one of the five legislators who participated in that Daufuskie outing. When questioned about it, he got flustered and told the reporter, "That question is out of bounds."

Ironically, the lobbyist who set up that Daufuskie junket was Rusty Kidd of Milledgeville. Kidd was elected to the House in a special election last fall and began his career as a legislator on Monday, where he was introduced to House members by Rep. Mark Burkhalter -- who also took part in that Daufuskie excursion.

Another AJC reporter at the Wild Hog supper Sunday evening tried to question Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle about rumors of an extra-marital incident that has been the subject of recent postings on political websites.

"That question is inappropriate," Cagle told the reporter. "If you've got a question on substance, I'll answer it, but I won't answer silly questions."

With those kinds of questions already hanging around, this could be a very uncomfortable session indeed.