Monday, November 3, 2008

A Walk through the Magical Land of My Sample Ballot…

Let's go for a walk, shall we? Hand in hand, let's peruse the political landscape of my district and see who we encounter along the way.

President

This is a no-brainer. Obama will raise taxes. Obama will use those taxes to give free money to people who haven't earned it. He will give government control of our healthcare. He will surrender in the war on terror. He will cater to the unions, environmentalists, and pro-abortionists. If he also has a Democratically controlled Congress, he will do damage to our country that will be next to impossible to undo. I'm voting for John McCain.

Senate

The Democrats think they have a shot at gaining a super-majority in the Senate. This means they can do whatever they want and Republicans won't have enough votes to stop them. They are so desperate that they have been running ads lying about Saxby Chambliss and the Fair Tax. It is crucial that I get out and vote for Saxby Chambliss.

Public Service Commissioner

The Public Service Commission (PSC) regulates utilities. They will decide very soon whether or not to pursue nuclear power plants for Georgia. There are two seats open on the commission.

The first seat is between H. Doug Everett (Republican) and John H. Monds (Libertarian). Everett seems happy with the way things are right now. Monds would like to deregulate and let the free market have more control rather than government. Both favor nuclear power plants. I'm voting for Monds.

The other seat has a candidate from all three parties. Therefore, it is necessary to ignore the Libertarian so that the Democrat doesn't win by default. The Democrat thinks we should use biomass energy instead of nuclear despite the high amount of carbon pollution. The Republican, Lauren McDonald (a man), favors nuclear power as part of a diverse spectrum of energy. I'm voting for McDonald.

House Representative

It is important that the Democrats do not get a stronger hold on the House this election. Our current representative, John Linder, is also very important as he is the author of the Fair Tax. I'm voting for John Linder.

State Senator

Rene Unterman is running unopposed.

State Representative

Michael Coan is running unopposed.

District Attorney of Gwinnett County

Danny Porter is running unopposed.

Judge of the Probate Court

Walter Clarke is running unopposed.

Clerk of Superior Court

The Clerk of Superior Court is the official records keeper for the Superior Court. Tom Lawler, a Republican, is being opposed by Abby Alaoui, a Democrat. Ms. Alaoui's website includes a buttload of grammatical errors and misspelled words. If she can't even manage a simple website how can she be trusted with the Superior Court records? I'm voting for Tom Lawler.

Sheriff

Butch Conway is running unopposed.

Tax Commissioner

Katherine Sherrington is running opposed.

Chief Magistrate

George Hutchinson is running opposed.

County Commission Chairman

The County Commission is the legislative branch of our county government; they pass laws and levy taxes at a county level. Let's look at our contenders:

Charles Bannister (Republican): Is presently the Chairman. He is examining the county government to find places to cut spending so taxes won't be raised. He has authorized the Sheriff to deport illegal immigrant criminals. He eliminated illegal immigrants from getting County contracts and hopes to deny them business licenses in the future. His highest priority is continuing to reduce traffic and increase jobs.

Vincent Passariello (Democrat): He says he will avoid raising taxes by charging fees to developers to offset the government's cost to provide services to new developments. (BTW – fees are passed on to the consumer – so we end up paying them – these are called 'hidden taxes') On the illegal immigration front he suggests we simply have the Federal government reimburse us for our costs to jail them; (of course the Federal government get's its money from us through taxes, so this is not really saving us anything.) His highest priority will be slowing down development in Gwinnett so we have enough water.

My vote is going to Bannister.

County Commissioner

Shirley Lasseter and Michael Beaudreau are running unopposed.

Supreme Court Justice

Robert Benham and Harry Hines are running unopposed.

Appeals Court Judge

In Georgia, the Appeals Court does not hear cases that have any question of Constitutionality; those cases go to the Supreme Court of Georgia. Therefore, the Appeals Court is the last bit of hope for someone who is appealing a lower court's decision. It is the Appeals Court's job to ensure that the lower courts properly interpreted the law and afforded all parties due process.

There are three open seats in the Appeals Court this election:

Gary Andrews and Charles Mikell are both running unopposed for the first two seats.

The third seat is contested by seven candidates. Some would argue that knowing the judge's political stance is irrelevant as judges simply apply the law as written and their own personal opinions do not matter. I disagree. In recent years we have seen that liberals do not believe a judge should simply apply the law as written, but should interject their own beliefs and opinions, thus changing the 'common law'. Conservative judges understand that the law is sacred; if the law is wrong the legislature should fix it – judges should not interfere unless the law is unconstitutional. So, in my opinion the more we know about judges the better.

Of the seven candidates, three are conservatives: Christopher McFadden, Perry McGuire, and Mike Sheffield. Two are definitely liberals: Sara Doyle and Michael Meyer von Bremen. Bruce Edenfield and Tamela Adkins are not really giving enough information to know what they are about. In the interest of full disclosure I should point out that Mike Sheffield goes to my church.

I'm voting for Mike Sheffield.

Superior Court of Gwinnett Judge

Ronnie Batchelor, Michael Clark, Melodie Conner, Warren Davis, and Dawson Jackson are running unopposed.

There is one contested seat on the Superior Court. Karen Byers is running against Richard Winegarden, alleging that he is verbally abusive in court and neglects his family law cases. Judge Winegarden claims he is 'taking the high road' and only point out that Byers has no judicial experience and is running a 'slash and burn smear campaign'. There is little to no press on this race. I checked with the Georgia Bar Association and found that Winegarden is licensed in good standing with no public disciplinary history. Surely if he was as bad as Byers' claims there would be a complaint or two? As the District Attorney has endorsed him, I'm voting for Winegarden.

Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor

The Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission regulates the use and protection of soil and water resources. Three guys are running, and none of them have any information online. Charles Warbington, answered a questionnaire for the AJC and the other two declined. I'm voting for the guy who cared enough to tell someone who he is. I'm voting for Warbington.

State Court Judge

Randy Rich, Carla Brown, John Doran, and Robert Mock are running unopposed.

SPLOST- Special Election

Our current SPLOST (the extra 1 cent of sales tax in Gwinnett County) is due to expire in March of 2009. This will extend it for five years. The money is used for road improvements and things like that. I like the idea of SPLOST because it is minimal and doesn't really impact my budget, but it also gets the millions of people who shop in our county to help us pay for the roads and services that they use. I'm voting yes.

Amendment 1

Amendment 1 is a forest conservation act. It is very simple – if you own forested land that is at least 200 acres, and if you agree to keep that land forested for 15 years, then you get a break in your property taxes on that land. Consider this: you are a landowner and buy hundreds of acres of forested land for your own use. Years later suburban sprawl catches up with you and suddenly your land is worth a ton of money because developers want it. The county can then tax you on the present value of that land, even though it generates no income to you. You are then practically forced to sell the land, or develop it, into something that generates enough revenue to pay the taxes. Amendment 1 simply makes it legal for the government to give you a tax break if you decide to just leave it as forest. (We already do this for land areas of over 2000 acres.) It protects forest land, it gives land owners a break; I like the idea. What I don't like is the provision that would require the State to reimburse the County for the lost property tax income. The taxpayer is still footing the bill; which means now everyone in the state gets to help Joe Landowner pay his property taxes on forested land we are not even allowed to use because it is private property. I have to vote no on this amendment.

Amendment 2

Amendment 2 is a tax reallocation act. It is fairly simple – taxpayer money that is designated to go toward education will be diverted to development projects instead. THAT SOUNDS HORRIBLE! Here is the catch; education funds come from property taxes. Development of land usually results in higher property taxes and therefore more funds for schools. For years the schools have been voluntarily diverting their funds to development and then reaping the rewards of such investments in the long term. The problem is that last year the Supreme Court pointed out that doing so violated the Constitution which says that tax dollars for schools are to be spent IN THE SCHOOLS. Amendment 2 is an attempt to fix that constitutional problem. I think this is a bad idea. The problems with our schools are not caused by a lack of funding, but by a mismanagement of the funding they already receive and a philosophical misunderstanding of how people should be educated. I think the school boards have enough to think about without having to become financial investment experts as well. If the legislature wants to invest in development projects and then give that return on investment to the schools, then do it, but leave the school boards out of it. Why would we want to amend our constitution to make things more complicated? I'm voting no.

Amendment 3

Amendment 3 is a bit complicated. It reminds me of the "mello roos" we saw a lot of in California. Basically this amendment would allow land developers to issue bonds to get enough money to pay for the infrastructure of new development (water pipes, electricity, roads, etc…) so they would not have to burden the county or city. The bonds would be paid back by the people or businesses who eventually move in through a monthly fee paid to the developers. The local government (county or town) will be able to say no if they don't want a developer coming to their area. Proponents of the amendment point out that this would encourage building in the 'forgotten' parts of the state where connecting to existing infrastructure is difficult. Opponents say that the ability to tax people should not be given to developers. The truth is the only people really opposing this amendment are environmentalists who oppose development no matter what. The problem will be that the new development will be more expensive because of the fees; but if the developers think that they can find customers willing to pay, then what is the harm? We all pay for the infrastructure beneath our homes and businesses through taxes and fees anyway. The only difference here is that the developer is responsible for paying for it up-front and recouping the costs after-the-fact. I see no reason to oppose the amendment. I'm voting yes.

Well that concludes our walk. Please go to your county's website and download your sample ballot before you go to vote. If there is something on there you want my opinion on, let me know!

EB


HANDY BREAKDOWN

PRESIDENT – McCain

US SENATE – Saxby Chambliss

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER – John Monds and Lauren McDonald

US REPRESENTATIVE – John Linder

STATE SENATOR – Rene Unterman

STATE REPRESENTATIVE – Michael Coan

DISTRICT ATTORNEY – Danny Porter

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT – Tom Lawler

SHERIFF – Butch Conway

TAX COMMISIONER – Katherine Sherrington

CHIEF MAGISTRATE – George Hutchinson

COUNTY COMMISSION CHAIRMAN – Charles Bannister

COUNTY COMMISSIONER – Shirley Lasseter

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE – Robert Benham, Harris Hines

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE - Gary Andrews, Charles Mikell, Mike Sheffield

SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE – Ronnie Batchelor, Michael Clark, Melodie Conner, Warren Davis, Dawson Jackson, Richard Winegarden

STATE COURT JUDGE – Carla Brown, John Doran, Robert Mock, Randy Rich

SOIL AND WATER ELECTION – Charles Warbington

AMENDMENT 1 – No

AMENDMENT2 – No

AMENDMENT3 – Yes

SPECIAL ELECTION - Yes

Labels:

3 Comments:

Blogger Samw613 said...

In terms of the Seventh Congressional race, I encourage you to look up more about Doug Heckman. As a Colonel in the Army Reserves, a veteran of both the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq, he knows how to serve his country. He also doesn't take marching orders from any one political leader. He wants to serve his district by actually serving their interests.

Our current congressman, John Linder, does nothing but peddle the FairTax. In sixteen years in Congress, only two of his bills have come into law. He's not serving as a legislator. He's on record saying, "I don't represent your views or anybody else's views. I represent my own views." So he doesn't represent us either. Those are his only two jobs in Washington: legislate and represent us. He fails on both counts.

I encourage you to look up Doug Heckman's positions on the issues. He's a fiscal conservative, good man, a devoted, practicing Christian, and he cares about the district and wants to serve us. He's already served his country on the battlefield. Now he wants to serve us in a new dangerous environment - only this time people won't shoot at him.

He's a good man, and he'll be a good Congressman - both a Legislator and Representative.

Tuesday, November 04, 2008 12:15:00 AM  
Blogger E.B. Dean said...

With all due respect, I did research Mr. Heckman quite a bit. His website is full of lies about the FairTax. Or maybe, to be fair, they aren't lies. Maybe he just doesn't understand the FairTax. So he's either a diabolical liar who will do anything to get elected or he's too lazy to take the time to read about the FairTax, or he's too stupid to understand something that really isn't all that complicated. Whichever is the truth: he's not the candidate for me.

John Linder, on the other hand, has been an excellent representative. He does peddle the FairTax, which is in my opinion the single most important piece of legislation out there, but he also works hard on a plethora of other issues. Most recently, he voted AGAINST the bailout bill twice! Never in my history have I had a representative that I so consistently agreed with.

But I thank you for your comment. I'm flattered that Heckman's volunteer staff thinks enough of my modest site to SPAM my comments.

Tuesday, November 04, 2008 7:18:00 AM  
Blogger Samuel said...

Well, sir I wish I had seen your response earlier, so I could have heard more from you.

In terms of the FairTax, Mr. Heckman read John Linder's and Neal Boortz's books on the FairTax and based his opinion on his own research, as did all of his campaign staffers and advisors. I would be interested to find out what these "lies" are that you are referencing.

"So he's either a diabolical liar who will do anything to get elected or he's too lazy to take the time to read about the FairTax, or he's too stupid to understand something that really isn't all that complicated." I certainly hope you're not as cynical as this statement seems to imply.

"He does peddle the FairTax, which is in my opinion the single most important piece of legislation out there." Having researched the FairTax for several months, I understand why it's proponents think it's so important - they claim it will save our economy. I know you guys believe that, but we'll have to agree to disagree - the FairTax isn't going anywhere.

"but he also works hard on a plethora of other issues"
I'd challenge you to name one.

"Never in my history have I had a representative that I so consistently agreed with."
In which case I'm glad you had the opportunity to vote for him.

I'll be honest: I have no earthly idea how writing one short post on a good man and candidate constituted spam, but I'm sorry you felt that way.


Oh and I agree with you about Abby Alaoui. The website is horrid - and I even emailed him weeks before the election to learn more, and he never responded. (Mr. Alaoui's a man by the way.)

Anyway, thank you very your time, sir. I'm glad there are other folks passionate about politics and good government - even when that person disagrees with me.

Saturday, November 22, 2008 11:04:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home