Category Archives: Georgia

Keep Tootin’ That TSPLOST Horn…

I feel like the TSPLOST will never die, even though the taxpayers bludgeoned it last summer. This week, a legislator from North Fulton threw down some legislation which would remove the penalty that local municipalities are facing after rejecting the TSPLOST. Senate bill 73 would remove a penalty, which coincides with the current clause that says ‘if a region failed to pass the referendum, every local government in that region must provide a 30 percent match to receive any Local Maintenance and Improvement Grants’ (often used for road and bridge maintenance). This would obviously be deflected onto taxpayers.

So, at first glance,it appears that Senator John Albers of Roswell does have some sense (It almost causes me physical pain to say that, though he is still untrustworthy and lacking a true value in the legislature.) Albers claimed in a press release that the measure was un-American and unfortunate. We all know Albers likes to champion himself on efficiency and ‘for the people’, but the more I thought about it, this is really a champion of nothing. Legislators voted in favor of this in 2010 and put it to the voters who said ‘hell no’. You can’t vote in favor of something, then oppose it publicly and then spearhead legislation to repeal it. It doesn’t work like that. Sure, Albers wasn’t in office when this was passed, but some of the co-sponsors were, and I can assure you some of the prospective ‘yea’ voters were as well. So here we are: after having a mistake forced on us, we are supposed to applaud the correction? No.

Like I’ve said many-a-times: I am thankful that our legislature is more conservative than liberal, yes, but please– do something conservative and follow through. Stop wasting time on resolutions when the federal government is working daily to trample state’s rights and individual liberties. Stop generating legislation that requires fixing a year or two later. Stop reading resolutions for out of state sports teams. Don’t respond to my letter regarding guns on campus by copy-pasting some statistics from the internet and imply more restrictions ‘may be necessary’ when you’re a Republican. Do something worth applauding. Serve the people. Be accountable. Like for real- get it together.

The 2nd Amendment: Give it back to students

2 Replies

Below is a copy of my letter to my State Representative (and some others that I respect) regarding 2nd amendment privileges on non-traditional college campuses:
————————————————–

January 16, 2013

Representative Edward Lindsey
415 State Capitol
Atlanta, GA 30334

CC: Representative Chuck Martin, Representative B.J. Pak, Representative Paulette Braddock,
Senator Hunter Hill, Senator Judson Hill, Senator Brandon Beach

Re: Second Amendment privileges on alternative college campuses.

Dear Representative Lindsey,

My name is Jessica ________ and I am one of your constituents. I am currently enrolled in the Masters of Public Administration program at the University of Georgia, though I attend the satellite campus in Gwinnett. If you’re not familiar with this campus, it is a multi-story office complex that serves as an alternative campus for working graduate and doctoral students. The “campus”, which includes classrooms, study rooms, a library and a few administrative offices, encompasses the entire first floor of the building, with corporate offices on floors two and three.

As I know you are aware, firearms are prohibited on any college campus, regardless of a carry permit presence or gun caliber. As a Georgia State alum, I recognize the vulnerability of students on a college campuses and I feel that vulnerability is no less simply because my current campus is in a suburb. A “gun-free” zone, regardless of location, places students at an unfair advantage. I recognized the true disadvantage when I was informed by campus personnel that even “non-traditional” campuses fall under prohibited zones. Students have no barriers, as most walls and doors are made of glass and doors open outwards into the hallways (I’m sure you recall the dilemma with this in the Virginia Tech case). Without the ability to protect themselves, the only line of defense is to duck.

Classes at the Gwinnett campus often begin late-afternoon or early evening and release late and after dark. This is true of other campuses, such as the Georgia State campus in Alpharetta, the Terry Business School in Buckhead and the Georgia Perimeter satellite campuses across metro Atlanta. Further, nearly 100% of these students are graduate level and higher, therefore invalidating any argument regarding firearms in the hands of minors or those not eligible for a carry permit.

I understand that a blanket permit of firearms on campuses across Georgia is a long shot, especially in this political climate. I am, however, asking for proposed legislation which would allow firearms on alternative campuses which are adjacent to business offices. Business persons have no restrictions on their second amendment, however, as a student, I immediately stripped of my right to bear arms simply because of a ‘status’, even though we are all operating in the same building. Not only am I student, I, along with my classmates, am a sitting duck with a label of “potential victim”. I believe Georgia can do better and I believe students deserve better.

I welcome your feedback.

Respectfully,

Jessica _________
________________________
________________________
________________________
________________________

My 30 Second Elevator Speech on Last Night in 21

Leave a reply

My thirty-second blurp on last night:

A HUGE HUGE GIANT congratulations to Brandon Beach in Senate 21. A dedicated grassroots effort pulled it out. I always find it a tad more glorious when politicians lose out after vacating a seat to seek a “better” or “more powerful” position. Not only did Will the Winner cost taxpayers thousands after we just had a primary in July, Jerguson added to that cost by abandoning his seat after he was also challenged in July. Clearly, the voters wanted him as a Rep, and told him so in July. He got a bit antsy… Now he has nada.

Had it not been for his abandonment, however, true public servant Scot Turner would not have had the opportunity to run again and give the people of Cherokee substantial representation. While it’s unfortunate that Turner was just shy of the 50%+1 vote, I’m confident he can pull out a win against not-so-organized, barely-able-to-overcome-a-Dem-in-Cherokee Brian Laurens in the runoff. Besides, Turner was the only one who cared enough to challenge an incumbent in July’s primary.

So, it continues…but we know how I really feel.

Charter School Amendment: 2 VERY DIFFERENT Conservative Perspectives

Leave a reply

Ahh, The Charter School Amendment: the issue which has conservatives calling each other liberals, debating ’til they’re blue in the face and liberals…well…just stomping their feet, like usual. So that’s why me and my pal Tori Wester (seen above fighting during our yard sign blitz) from ToriPundit decided to present two different conservative view points on the Charter School Amendment. She voted ‘Yes’ on Amendment 1 and I will be voting No.

Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow state or local approval of public charter schools upon the request of local communities?

The Perspicacious Conservative:
As I mentioned in my Sample Ballot, I don’t condone any sort of government expansion regardless of the circumstances. That alone is reason enough to vote NO.
This amendment isn’t about the kids. It’s about government control. I would like to note that I am not as opposed to Charter schools as I am to this amendment. Sometimes, there is a need for a charter school in a district. There is a never a need for this amendment or its’ repercussions.

Georgia already has more than 100 charter schools in operation. There will be ZERO effect on the already operating schools whether the amendment passes or fails. If a charter is denied, there is already an appeals process in place: to the Board of Education.
Everyone says this is about ‘local control’ and ‘the parents’. Tell me what is local about a board appointed, NOT ELECTED, that is accountable to the Governor and his friends at the Gold Dome? This will allow states to override a denial decided by the local school board and require them to honor the charter. (I’m legitimately asking someone to tell me how this is local because I don’t understand.)
The denial of charters is not as common as proponents are making you think. It’s actually a rare occurrence for a charter to be denied. Revisit bullet #1.
2010-11 State Department of Education report shows that 73 percent of traditional public schools in Georgia met AYP targets while only 70 percent of charter schools met those same targets. I thought Charter schools performed better? Isn’t that what this is about? Better schools?
I’m not one to propose more spending, but if you’re claiming students need more money, maybe you should take a look at the overall spending on education for Georgia and how it’s being distributed. Food for thought.
ALEC. I would encourage you to take a look at this analysis by PoliticalVine of funding, nationwide rankings and the role that ALEC plays in education around the nation. Do we really want an organization the size of ALEC intervening in our educational system and crafting our policies? I don’t.
Revisit the Fulton Science Academy Charter issue that caused a plethora of destruction for students, teachers and taxpayers. And what about where some charter school funding comes from? That mixes with your tax dollars. State charters are almost always managed by out of state for-profit corporations with no accountability.
Choice is not the issue. Parents may already choose public, private or homeschooling choices. They may choose which school district by living there, may enroll in any school within the local school system or any school in another school system, if there is room available. Another charter school or two will not significantly increase choice options.

I’m not sure anything could measure up to the ridiculousness of the TSPLOST, however, the government overstep with this comes close. It’s time to go back to the drawing board and find a different solution for the public education crisis. You can read more about Voting NO at VoteSmartGeorgia.

————————-

ToriPundit’s Opinion

I struggled with the charter school amendment, truly I did. Having no children and never having the extreme responsibility of putting a child through school laid heavy on my heart. I had to do a LOT of research. Also, I know so many well-informed voters (whom I respect greatly) that each have very strong opinions about the amendment, both in the affirmative and the negative. I did a little social media experiment on my Twitter and Facebook to get some of my lingering questions answered. I took the arguments I was worried about and posted them, asking supporters to defend them and nay-sayers to reinforce them. I weighed everyone’s arguments and played devil’s advocate until I felt like I had a very good understanding of what is at stake with this amendment.

Competition, Competition, Competition. School boards, teacher unions, and local elected officials are reinforcing the status quo. Is the status quo in public education good enough? I say no. Georgia is the “black sheep” of the states in education. Let these schools have an easier route to incite competition. In doing so, you make every school better. Competition is one of the biggest feather’s in a conservative’s cap. Let’s bring that principle to the public schools system.
Choice: Let me make this clear… PARENT’S DESERVE A CHOICE. Refer back to bullet point one – do you want them making choices for your kids, or do you want to make the choice? Who ultimately knows what is best for his or her own child? (Hint: it begins with “p” and ends with “arents”). Yes, parent’s already have a choice of where to send their child to school, but when a school board shuts down a charter request, that choice becomes much more limited. Allow the choice. Vote for freedom.
It creates more government… but not really. Many (conservative) folks who oppose the amendment do so because they felt a change to Georgia’s constitution was creating more government. I was one of these people, too. That was my final reservation. While the state can now overrule the local school board, it is because of the PARENTS. The state can now intercede, but it is when the parents ASK for the help…. THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! Individual liberty > local control. The state doesn’t want control’ the state wants parents to have control and is helping them get it.
Show me the money. This amendment is not a declaration of support or non-support for charter schools. Charter schools are here. At least, some are. Many, especially in rural south Georgia, are blocked from creation by local boards. Should the parents (the people whose children have to go through these schools) want a competitive alternative to the status quo public schools in place, this amendment allows the state to provide that funding

I will close with this little tidbit of wisdom from my old-man crush, Neal Boortz: “If you want Georgia schools to continue to suck, vote no.”

___________________________
The most important thing is to VOTE. I encourage you to take these facts, from both sides, and do a little of your own research to make the best decision. Which is, of course, voting NO.

Gold Dome Power Players vs. Local Bloggers

3 Replies

Back in May, I published a post detailing John Albers’ redistricting shenanigans in regards to Brandon Beach and the primary race in Senate District 21. I expressed my support for Brandon Beach in the district based on my personal interactions with him and his plans for Fulton and Cherokee counties. Apparently, this is like armed robbery of a preschool because within hours of my posting, “insiders” were calling people in my circle asking who I was and why I would do such a thing. I’m talking staffers at the Dome, attorneys and other consultants. My personal policy is support the person I think is best for this office. This is not always the incumbent. You would have thought I was the only person on earth to ever go against an incumbent. Imagine Senator Rogers’ surprise when there were a few others who weren’t on his side. Unfortunately, I succumbed to political pressure and took the blog down. This is also against my policy and what this blog stands for and for that, I apologize.

Now, there are a few things to understand. It’s been two years since I worked on the Albers Senate campaign and I sealed the bad memories solely on the fact that I have had no issue succeeding since I left Mr. Albers and figured he would self-destruct on his own. Even though I did not sign a confidentiality agreement, I originally planned to just “let it go”. And since I worked on his campaign, I know some of the mischief he encountered in a last-ditch effort to win his campaign- this is all besides the point but tuck it away for conclusion-drawing later. But since then, John Albers has made numerous attempts to discredit my reputation and defame my character. (You can read why Mr. Albers doesn’t care for me here, here, here, here, here or here.) I also spent a legislative session at the Capitol this Spring where Mr. Albers consistently and maliciously spent numerous hours bad mouthing me to aides, other Senators and staffers and accusing me of stalking him to any one that I networked with. Yes, you read the correctly: stalking. What Mr. Albers didn’t know was that I have plenty of friends down at the Gold Dome who cued me into what he was doing. At first, I was upset, as any young girl trying to start her career would be. How could an old man use his political power to try to sway others’ opinions of me? I also heard other initiatives that Mr. Albers took in an effort to get me to stop blogging, but none of them worked. I know he doesn’t do this with the AJC or the former Beacon Newspaper. Did he just think he could behave like this because I’m young? After some thought, it hit me: John Albers is scared of me and by doing this, he was attempting to disgrace me by making me look untrustworthy and misguided. As I realized what was happening and I heard some of the reactions, I realized that I had more fans at the Capitol than Mr. Albers and I was just a little ‘ol intern. I couldn’t help but giggle when someone said “Get real! You certainly have better taste than that!”. After a few months, however, this warranted action and Mr Albers received a certified letter explaining what slander is (in case he didn’t know) and demanding that he stop, with threat of a lawsuit.
I have not been a saint when it comes to blogging about Albers, it’s true. But because I helped get him elected, I feel obligated to hold him accountable for his decisions at the Dome, not to mention, I grew up in the district and many of my friends and family reside there. After the first blog I posted, John called me and asked me to take it down. I would not, simply because nothing I stated was untrue. I have always stuck to the issues and legislation when it comes to my assertions about ‘ol Johnny (except when I said I thought he was going to shoot someone out of a cannon) and I have encouraged him to correct me when I am wrong. So far, I have not misstated the facts and he has not attempted to correct me. He has resorted to childish measures and his actions are simply unacceptable. Shame on you, Senator. The people of District 56 and the citizens of Georgia deserve better than someone who will resort to slander and throwing their weight around when challenged by a youthful blogger who is simply demanding responsible government and adequate representation.

“Woe to that nation whose literature is cut short by the intrusion of force. This is not merely interference with freedom of the press but the sealing up of a nation’s heart, the excision of its memory.”

Virginia & Arizona Nullify NDAA, Georgia Legislature Nullifies Legitimacy

4 Replies

Last week, the State of Virginia did a tremendous thing: they nullified the NDAA. Arizona followed suit yesterday. The NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) is an unconstitutional act just recently passed by our lovely Congressional representatives. Each year, Congress authorizes the NDAA but this past year is far scarier. The law effectively “empowers the Armed Forces to engage in civilian law enforcement and to selectively suspend due process and habeas corpus, as well asother rights guaranteed by the 5th and 6th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, for terror suspects apprehended on U.S. soil.” You may say, hey! This is a good thing! NO. IT. IS. NOT. It is the first time since 1950 that our country has codified the power of indefinite detention into law. Have you ever thought about how discretionary the word ‘terror suspect’ is? Have you ever thought of what is truly defined as ‘terrorism’ (the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes) and what other kinds of things can be included in that category? And tell me, regardless of WHO IT IS, this is the United States and we have a Constitution for a reason. Offenders on U.S. soil and U.S. citizens should demand those rights. This law can be used by authorities to detain (forever) anyone the government considers a threat to national security and stability – potentially even demonstrators and protesters exercising their First Amendment rights.

Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson both voted in favor of the 2012 NDAA. So did Jack Kingston, Lynn Westmoreland, Tom Price, Rob Woodall, Austin Scott, Paul Broun and Phil Gingrey. The only GA Republican to vote no? Tom Graves. Even 2 Democrats were smart enough to vote ‘No’, but our Republican leadership, this is how they are leading us. –You can read more about why the NDAA is unconstitutional here.–

Virginia and Arizona both established protection for their people, invoking the 10th amendment. But Georgia did not.

But do you know what the Georgia Legislature did do during the 2012 Legislative Session? THEY PASSED 500 BILLS!!! Sure, 300 of them were local and many of them had to do with the redistricting maps, but all of them had to be voted on by EVERYONE and you certainly cannot convince me that every Representative and every Senator knows what is in each and every bill that was passed in those 40 days.

Some of their wonderful accomplishments include:
John Albers’ welfare drug testing bill, which has received harsh criticism for its’ unconstitutionality and lack of good research could actually COST Georgia taxpayers money when it is challenged in court.
HB 247: Requiring fingerprinting and investigation of emergency medical personnel.
HB 253: Allowing to sell or trade surplus vehicles.
HB 398: Fulton County Board of Education -pension and retirement, correct typographical errors (Should we even have to do this in the first place??)
HB 785: Provide Insurance limitations on licensure requirements for certain health care providers (so very important).
SB 183: Education; school health nurse programs; revise provisions
SB 515: City of Americus, provide for a date of expiration of office for terms of councilmembers and the mayor
These may be important to SOME people, but are they more important than our personal freedoms and protections from the NDAA?

Through the Facebook grapevine, I found that a few Georgia Senators who hosted a Town Hall told constituents that there ‘simply wasn’t enough time’ and they didn’t know enough about the NDAA to craft legislation regarding it. Oh, wait. Then why do you represent us? Your lack of knowledge and concern for time could prove quite dangerous. We may not have until the next year. And if the people vote right, you won’t be around for the next Legislative session.

So let’s talk priorities. You (being Senators and Representatives of the State of Georgia) thought it was more important to create more government oversight through drug testing to save a mere $103,000/year, to create licensure requirements for insurance companies, to allow trading of surplus vehicles and to edit school nurse programs but you didn’t think protecting one of our CORE FREEDOMS was important enough? I guess some of you are too busy getting your shoes tied.

I encourage you to call your Senators and Representatives and ask them why they aren’t protecting you and WHAT is more important. If they tell you they didn’t have time, I suggest you get on their opponents campaign team. Contact information can be found at http://www.legis.ga.gov/en-US/default.aspx

SB 292: Bad Policy & Bad Politics

2 Replies

Guest Blogger Jenna Howard on SB 292: Jenna holds a B.A. in Political Science from Georgia State University. She works at the Southern Arts Federation, a regional nonprofit, and is working on her Masters in Public Policy at Georgia Tech.

Hi again, folks! I’m pleased that I was asked to guest blog on the Perspicacious Conservative again, BUT, I’m even more pleased that I’m blogging about yet another one of Senator Albers (and others…) poorly researched and thought-out bills. Before I get started with this bill, I want to make one thing straight. I’m a numbers gal for which I will blame Georgia Tech. When I do any sort of policy analysis, I look at the numbers first then, try to understand the arguments around the numbers. This brings me to my next caveat; policy and politics are separate creatures. Most often, good policy doesn’t make good politics and that goes for both sides of the aisle. A politician’s goal is to get reelected and most politicians aren’t equipped to do their own policy analysis. Also, they aren’t bound to do what their policy analysts suggest (if they even have one). Glad we got that out of the way.

Now, onto this bill. The last guest blog I wrote was about a bill Senator Albers advocated to force those on unemployment to complete at least 24 hours of volunteer service for a non-profit organization. You can read more about how that was a bad idea here. This new bill, also introduced by Senator Albers (and others..), comically named, “The Social Responsibility and Accountability Act” would require a drug test for those in Georgia receiving Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. This Act does not include programs such as Food Stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, or to pay our lovely state lawmakers or other state workers. This bill probably sounds familiar because Florida and Michigan both enacted similar legislation. Georgia is requiring those seeking TANF to undergo a swab test in lieu of a urinalysis. It would initially be paid for by the person seeking the assistance and, if tested negative, the state would reimburse them. If the person tests positive, they don’t receive or reimbursement and they are banned from receiving benefits for a certain time period. The average swab test costs $17.

Before discussing the arguments here, I immediately looked at the Florida evaluation that came out a few months ago. The first evaluation was put out by The Department of Children and Families and Florida. They reported that about 1,000-1,500 people take the test monthly. So far, 2% of applicants have failed, 96% have tested positive, and 2% have declined completing the process. Florida’s urinalysis costs $30 and the state has about 1000-1500 applicants per month. In this evaluation, 96% tested negative forcing the state to owe $32,200-$48,200 worth of reimbursements. It is estimated that the state will save $40,800-$98,400 annually on rejected applicants for a program that cost almost $200 million. Obviously, more rules and regulations require more staff and resources, so we can go ahead and that savings to their paychecks. Currently, both Michigan and Florida are fighting this legislation in court on account that it violates unreasonable search and a violation of privacy. So, let’s go ahead and throw a lot more taxpayer dollars into the mix. That’s means we’ve got a deficit on our hands, folks.

Idaho commissioned a cost-benefits analysis for precisely this question. The results? The legislation would cost more than it saved. In their words,

“To fund the costs of the program, the State would need either appropriate additional funding for a drug testing program, or divert funds from current programs for the screening, testing and treatment activities… State leaders should be prepared for any drug testing policy to be challenged in court, which could result in expensive legal fees during the first year following implementation…The costs of legal action alone during the first year could exceed the costs of the drug testing and treatment program.”

So, Idaho did their homework(take note, Georgia lawmakers). Their analysis showed this just wasn’t going to save the state the money they anticipated. But there are certainly other reasons why this isn’t a great piece of legislation. A report from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism shows there is no significant difference in the rate of illegal drug abuse by welfare applicants compared to the rest of the population. In fact, 70% of drug users are full-time workers between the ages of 18 and 49. This study is dated, but was released when Clinton’s welfare reform was enacted so I find it highly relevant to this debate.

I understand the arguments for proponents of this piece of legislation. It goes straight to the heart of “subsidizing others” and “funding drug abuse.” I understand that proponents feel like their hard earned money shouldn’t be going to others in the first place, much less to their “habits.” I understand that proponents feel like because they have to take a drug test for a job, so should welfare recipients. I find all of these arguments compelling. At first glance, I think this seems like a valid piece of legislation. But the evidence just doesn’t support the cost-benefits or that these people are using drugs to that extent. I’m not claiming that none use drugs, just like I’m not going to claim that the other people receiving taxpayer dollars don’t use drugs. Our money goes to a lot of people and I’m betting most of them aren’t using that money in the best way. If you want to help drug abuse, target the whole drug-using population.

Senator Albers claims that this legislation is “compassionate.” He wants to help those people with drug problems. Senator Albers, I ask you, what happens if these people test positive for drugs? Are you going pay to send them to a rehabilitation center? Are you going to use more taxpayer dollars to actually help those people who may, in fact, have a problem with drugs? I didn’t think so. This legislation is not compassionate, it’s a political step. It’s a perfect example of bad policy being good politics. Why aren’t we using the money we’re going to spend on this program to create jobs? Senator Albers is, in fact, on the Economic Development Committee. Why aren’t we trying to raise wages (since they’ve been stagnant since the 1970s). I would find these initiatives to be far more compassionate for the people seeking these benefits and for those taxpayers who are funding this program.

I’m going to bet this legislation will be a hit with much of the constituency. I’m going to bet our lawmakers will ignore the cost-benefit analysis that shows this legislation will cost more money than it is worth. I’m also going to bet that people are going to overlook the unconstitutionality of this legislation. And I’m going to bet those in the Gold Dome pushing this legislation won’t care about losing money or violating constitutional rights. Why? They’re not pushing this bill for the right reasons – they’re pushing it for all the wrong ones.

Here is the link to SB292 in its’ entirety.

Today on the House Calendar…

Leave a reply

Some interesting bills on the House floor today….

Most intriguing and irritating to me:
HB 424 – “Superior Court Clerks’ Retirement Fund; death benefit for members; provide”.
This bill would extend the $5,000 death benefit that Superior Court Clerks receive to both active AND retired persons. The original legislation and existing code only designates the $5,000 benefit to those who die while serving. Now, the $5,000 benefit is payable to someone who has retired from the position and then passed away.

The problem with the Bill? It’s wasteful spending….they’re only doing it because the money is there. Further, if someone is retired, they are receiving retirement benefits/pensions and in the event of a death, the benefits –up to 50%– are transferred to the spouse. Why are we just giving away more money? “Because we can” is not an answer. Why not use the money on something a little more effective. Better yet…SAVE THE MONEY.

Some days I feel like they are just writing legislation for kicks and giggles…there are a lot of useless initiatives!! Some other Bills up today:

—HB 295 addressing the Georgia State Employees Pension and Saving Plans and the transfer of accrued benefits.

—HB 683 in regards to garnishment proceedings as a result of the Supreme Court of Georgia’s approval of the Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee Advisory Opinion in 2010.

—HB 713 which is the Quality of Basic Education Act. Essentially, this Bill requires a career education study in grades kindergarten through the end of 11th grade. (?????)

All legislation, past and present can be found on the Georgia General Assembly Website.

I encourage people to read legislation BEFORE it hits the floor so you can have an impact and voice your opinion to your legislators.

Hold the Applause….

Leave a reply

Did you happen to listen to or read Governor Deal’s ‘State of the State’ the other night? If you haven’t, you can read the transcript here or watch the speech here. It was interjected with repeated applause, ovations and cheers as the Governor spoke. And, it’s propositions we’re quite spendy.

Much appreciation goes to the Georgia General Assembly who balanced the budget in 2011 and funded many essential Georgia programs. Appreciation is the keyword. Not applause, not praise, not commendation. We are SUPPOSED to have a balanced budget. That’s is the job of the legislature: to ensure efficiency (as well as transparency, accountability and legitimacy) and delegate good use of our tax dollars. That being said, it’s great to hear that the rainy day fund increased 183% to $328 million and that in 2012, 10% of Georgia programs will begin working off a zero-based budget. (Why it’s only 10%, I’m not sure…I don’t know how any organization or business DOESN’T work off zero-based budgeting, but I’m not in charge).

That being said, I question a lot of the spending proposed for this year.
-$20 million for the need-based one percent program (1. The title is quite the oxymoron, and 2. For the one millionth time, Education is not a right).
-$111.3 million for enrollment efforts at technical colleges & universities. (People know what college is. So what is an enrollment EFFORT? Also, I don’t like efforts, I like execution when we are talking about implementation of hard-earned tax dollars.)
-$146 million to support enrollment efforts in K-12 (Isn’t schooling mandatory until age16? Maybe enrollment efforts aren’t the right words, but I’m not keen on spending money to promote something that is already obviously mandatory).
-$55.8 million to fund salary increases for teachers K-12
-Supplemental grants of an undescribed amount to support charter schools in an Amended budget and in 2013.
-$46.7 million for deepening the Port of Savannah to improve both transportation and infrastructure.
-$10 million for Accountability Courts to lower recidivism rates in the criminal justice system. (How? Again, what’s the cost of implementing this?)

I can appreciate the efforts to rectify the failing school systems across the state and to try and improve the overall quality of the State, but where is the data that shows how this money will help? And how much will it cost to implement new programs? What about oversight to ensure efficiency? Will we need more state employees for that? I’m not a fan. As I become more frugal in my personal life, I become more frustrated with spending on the local and state level (I have temporarily given up on the federal level).

And another thing… a true pet peeve of mine is praising and applauding our legislators and executive officers. I flashed back to a recent event where Johnny Isakson spoke. He received a standing ovation and people were chanting his name, defending him as he was being questioned by other constituents. Why stand? Why clap? Why treat them like celebrities? WE elected THEM. THEY work for US. It is a privilege to serve and they should thank the people for the opportunity to do so.

Dignity for the Unemployed?

3 Replies

Today is a big day! It’s our first guest blogger, Jenna Howard. Jenna and I often have conflicting views on policy, legislation, candidates and everything else, however, we both oppose ridiculous governmental requirements.

Jenna holds a B.A. in Political Science from Georgia State University. She works at the Southern Arts Federation, a regional nonprofit, and plans to begin her Masters in Public Policy next fall.
—-

I’m pleased to do a guest blog on “The Perspicacious Conservative,” mostly because our views usually differ a great deal. I sometimes tackle my local town’s alternative newspaper, The GRIP, which covers community news and events in Spalding and other surrounding counties. I’m glad to express my views to a larger constituency! I sent some information about this topic over to The Perspicacious Conservative and was asked to write about Senate Bill 294 – a.k.a “Dignity for the Unemployed.”

If passed, the bill would require state unemployment applicants to complete 24 hours of volunteer work for a non-profit organization in order to receive state benefits. It’s worth mentioning that many states have already attempted this, but none have been successful. If this bill passes the Georgia Legislature, we would be the first state to require citizens to volunteer. It should seem a bit oxymoronic (no pun intended) to require someone to volunteer since the very definition of the word lacks any requirement other than one willingly give him or herself up for a service without penalty.

The bill’s chief sponsor is Roswell’s finest, Senator John Albers. Senator Albers did an interview on CNN where he said he thought this bill would make unemployed citizens feel better about themselves by getting up early, doing something valuable to put on their resumes, and meeting new people. This bill is inherently flawed.

Unfortunately for John Albers, the majority of the problem with unemployment isn’t that there are people out there who are unqualified for jobs. Certainly, there are situations in which that may be the case, but Georgia already has programs in place to tackle these problems (see GEDs, college, Georgia Works, and Georgia Work Ready). But incompetency isn’t the major problem here. Georgia was creating jobs in 2007 and we had a fairly healthy economy. People didn’t all of a sudden become incompetent and lose their valuable employee skills. The major problem with unemployment is that no one is hiring. The job market is simply oversaturated with applicants looking for work.

In March, Georgia’s unemployment rate hit a record high. Georgia has had higher than average unemployment in the nation for the past 4 years. Georgia continues to lose jobs instead of creating them. What good is requiring someone to volunteer when it isn’t going to force employers to create jobs in order to hire them?

Senator John Albers stated in the CNN interview that this bill would work much like the WPA (the Works Progress Administration) that President Roosevelt initiated in the Great Depression. So, why can’t the Dignity for the Unemployed work in the Great Recession like the WPA worked in the Great Depression, Senator Albers? Because the WPA employed people. It gave them jobs, income, and provided communities with much needed infrastructure. The Dignity for the Unemployed bill is nothing like the WPA. It is requiring people to work in return for no income – or they can lose the only income they are currently receiving, their unemployment package.

Now, I graduated from college in May 2011. I started applying for jobs in June (I had a part-time job that would end in August). I applied for literally hundreds of jobs that I was fully qualified, under qualified, and overqualified for. I applied everywhere including for-profit companies and non-profit organizations. Now, I don’t know when the last time Senator John Albers applied for a job, but most applications take about an hour, at least, to complete. You have to write a cover letter and tailor it to every job in which you apply. You have to tweak your resume’ so it highlights the duties of certain positions. In addition to a resume’ and cover letter, some applications require you to manually input every job you’ve had, write about why you’re the best for the position, and pass a qualifications test to weed out applicants. Requiring someone to complete 24 hours of community service when they can be applying for a job is absurd.

Bottom line, I understand some people think unemployment benefits are too lenient. I understand people have bad tastes in their mouths about unemployment entitlements. But, most people are doing the right thing on unemployment. They should not be required to complete certain hours of volunteer work to “make themselves feel better.” Many have families, had great jobs, have incredible resumes… working for free is going to give them a boost in morale. They should be doing one thing while they are receiving unemployment benefits and that’s looking for work. It is not the state’s place to force someone to “do good.” It seems that Senator Albers has his economics a little backwards. If he wants to help the unemployed, he should spend more time helping companies and organizations get back in the business of hiring and less time trying to make the unemployed have a warm and fuzzy feeling inside.

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this:

Rate this: