Political Vine: The Insider's Source on Georgia Politics

The Political Vine is the home of political news, satire, rants, and rumors.

17 Responses to “Open…Open…Open Thread…”

1. Buzz Brockway Says:
   March 15th, 2006 at 12:02 pm

   How ’bout them Dawgs?

2. Bill Simon Says:
   March 15th, 2006 at 12:17 pm

   Funny thing…I don’t feel anywhere near as hostile about Dawgs in the off-season, Buzz. I must be losing my touch…or, my edge. 🙂

3. Elvis Says:
   March 16th, 2006 at 12:18 pm

   Since the Republicans have morphed into Democraps, is it time to vote Libertarian?

4. Donald Singer Says:
   March 16th, 2006 at 4:08 pm

   The solution to whatever shortcomings exist in the Georgia GOP is to have more competition in the Republican primaries, not gravitate over to the Libertarians, who, because of the ideological extremists, kooks, and cranks of the people in their ranks, are forever destined to remain a third-party spoiler.

   Those of us who have stayed with Georgia GOP through the lean times did not wander in the political wilderness for years to give up and cast our lot with the “Losertarians.” Let us resolve to return to the principled conservatism of Ronald Reagan that rests upon limited government and an ordered liberty under the rule of law. If I have offended any Libertarian readers, tough; get a thicker skin, and then go read the 1957 book review of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” by the great Whittaker Chambers in National Review if you want to understand the real pitfalls of ideological Libertarianism.

5. Elvis Says:
   March 17th, 2006 at 12:59 pm

   The problem with trying to effect change via the primaries is that the ‘viable’ candidates tend to be those with centrist leanings rather than true conservatives. They are deemed ‘viable’ by the power brokers who benefit from the status quo. Going against the grain always takes a toll, and few are willing to take the risk.

6. Donald Singer Says:
   March 20th, 2006 at 10:02 am

   Going against the grain does indeed take a toll; just ask John Konop, who is making a laudable and highly necessary run against an entrenched GOP power structure that is indifferent and unresponsive to the real concerns of grassroots Republicans.
   However,the primaries are a realistic vehicle through which substantial dissatisfaction and protest can be registered. The other is to withhold money from the Georgia State GOP and give only to candidates who are responsive to the party rank-and-file. I am neither willing to engage in a futile third party effort via the Losertarians or anyone else nor am I willing to leave the party that has been my political home for nearly three decades, thereby leaving it to the depredations of people whose commitment to limited government, indvidual liberty, and the rule of law is, at best, highly questionable.

7. Bill Simon Says:
   March 20th, 2006 at 11:29 am

   Donald,

   By its very definition, “individual liberty” has a difficult time existing in a government dominated by religious zealots intent on shoving their theocratic ideology on everyone else.

   Here’s an interesting story out of Afghanistan.

8. Donald Singer Says:
   March 20th, 2006 at 3:33 pm

   Bill,
   Thanks for giving us the opportunity to post our thoughts and comments. I want someone, anyone, to explain why, in the fourth year of a GOP administration in Georgia, no GOP State Senator or Representative has made a public case for cutting the Georgia income tax, which is the essence of a conservative program? As you have noted, conservatives have different opinions on a number of issues and tend to engage in robust debate over these questions to a degree that you do not see on the left, especially the mad dog, bark at the moon left. However, it seems that the one key policy on which most conservatives could agree would be an income tax cut to allow people to keep more of their money rather than fork it over to the government, which consistently sports an unending appetite for cash. Any thoughts on this point?

9. Ramblin Jim Says:
   March 21st, 2006 at 1:40 pm

   It’s amazing to me that the Georgia Republicans have developed the arrogance in just 2 years that it took the Dems 150 years to acquire. And I’ve been a Georgia Repub for 45 years; never expected this.

10. John Konop Says:
    March 21st, 2006 at 5:07 pm

    Donald,

    Your strategy of challenging within the party is why I am running.As you ,I cannot understand how any Republican can tolerate this disregard toward fiscal responsibility. Unless people like us speak up who will ?

11. Bob Says:
    March 21st, 2006 at 9:03 pm

    Donald, re “cutting the Georgia income tax, which is the essence of a conservative program”, I’m all for lower taxes if we Georgians aren’t getting what we’re paying for – i.e. if our money is being wasted rather than being spent on services the voters reasonably expect from government.

    However, I would disagree that tax cuts are automatically a good thing. Any thinking conservative realizes that there ARE services that it is the proper function of government to perform. On the state level, the obvious ones fall in the areas of justice, education, infrastructure, public safety and health, and the operation of government. Now, it’s probably a safe bet that there is some amount of waste in some programs – hey, it’s government – and cutting real waste is always a good idea, but unless someone can point to some big numbers somewhere, there is no basis for saying a meaningful tax cut is even possible, much less a good idea. After all, as far as I can tell, the Georgia Legislature doesn’t work quite like the US Congress, with earmarks for bridges to nowhere and such.

    BTW, as you may recall, just a few short years ago, the state was forced to cut way back in many areas because of a revenue shortfall from the recession. Total state revenues fell by $642 million in 2002 and another $611 million in 2003.

    Meanwhile, based on state budget documents, it appears that we lost some $900+ million of federal funding from 2003 to 2005.

    Now, in light of these funding realities, I’m guessing belts got tightened considerably over the last few years.

    So what I’m wondering is just what the state should slash to pay for this tax cut you say we should all agree is a good idea. I’m all ears.

    Regards.

    PS: State budget info is available at http://www.opb.state.ga.us/SC%20Web%20Page%201/OPBfsp.html

12. Donald Singer Says:
    March 22nd, 2006 at 9:52 am

    John,
    Thanks for your comment. Our task is to move the party to where it should be using the primary system and vigorous, reasoned debate. As I noted above, the most robust debate concerning policy and ideas resides firmly on the right, most often within the GOP. The Republican Party can withstand the debate and will be a stonger party as a result. The Democrats and the left are stuck on the model that government can,and should, solve every problem and that the most effective way to address a problem is to, no surprise here, spend more tax money. Take heart and keep up the great work. Many of us who reside outside your district have taken notice of your worthy effort.

13. Donald Singer Says:
    March 22nd, 2006 at 10:21 am

    Bob,
    You make an excellent and accurate point that government has a number of legitimate functions for which it needs revenue. I don’t dispute that point. My more general point is that government at all levels does far more than it needs to do and spends a great deal more money than it should. This money in the form of tax revenue, including income tax revenue, comes from individuals and families who, by their earning the money, have a powerful claim on it. There is, as you rightly note, considerable waste in government that could be largely eliminated. Beyond the waste, government simply spends lots of money taken from tax payers on welter of programs and initiatives that ought not to exist. For example, Georgia just landed the Kia Plant in West Point by offering $400 million in tax breaks and incentives. For that kind of money, the legislature could have reduced or even eliminated the state corporate income tax, thereby making Georgia a magnet for all sorts of businesses, large and small, not just a big multi-national conglomerate. Moreover, the top Georgia income tax rate of 6% applies to every dollar earned over $20,000 dollars. Would you not concede that this relatively high marginal state individual income tax rate and a low threshold at which it applies are significant disincentives to savings and investment by individuals and families? Personal and dependent exemptions and the standard deduction in the Georgia income tax code are not indexed for inflation, so each year Georgia taxpayers are subject to “bracket creep” in which a diminishing portion of their income is shielded from taxation. Once more point: tax policy has to meet a standard of reason and justice, and from my perspective, there is always justice in structuring the tax code so that individuals and families are able to keep more of their hard-earned money without forking it over to the government, which will always find a reason to spend what revenue it has, and more. The burden, and it’s a substantial one, should always be on the government to justify why it needs more of your money, not on you to justify why you should be permitted at the sufferance of government to keep the wealth for which you have labored. Thanks for the comments and thoughts.

14. Bob Says:
    March 22nd, 2006 at 12:09 pm

    Donald,

    I agree that the state spends too much money on incentives to attract single, large employers. The rush to throw money at the Nascar museum was also ridiculous, especially considering that the family that controls it was just playing us to pressure Charlotte for more money. As an economist, I can tell you that these kinds of targeted incentives – really preferences for businesses and communities that know how to pull political strings – are not a particularly efficient way of accomplishing economic development objectives. Broad-based incentives are better, but of course, they don’t make headlines and no one will pay lobbyists to fight for them.

    However, I would caution against latching on too quickly to political sound bites. Eliminating corporate income taxes sounds great when you read in the paper than some pol suggested it, but whoever said it either wasn’t serious or needs a new calculator. My understanding is that the $400 million of incentives was the value spread over a number of years, for one thing. For another, Georgia’s revenues from corporate income taxes are projected at almost $800 million this year. Even if we offered Kia nothing and even if the $400 mil was all cash this year, the best we could do is suspend corporate income taxes for six months, which would have little or no long-term effect on business relocations to GA.

    As for individual income tax rates, for all practical purposes, GA has a flat tax beginning at relative low levels of income. I’m sure you wouldn’t get much opposition from the left to raising the threshhold, making the tax more progressive. I’m not sure, however, that this would have much impact on savings and investment. Even if you exempted another $10k from taxation, you add only $50/month to the taxpayer’s disposable income. That’s not an argument for not doing it, mind you, just a reality check on the significance of it.

    More generally, I agree that it is OUR money, not the governments. We may be compelled by law and social compact to contribute our fair share, but the burden is on our elected representatives to handle our money prudently, not wasting it and not spending it on things that are not the proper functions of government.

    Of course, what is and what isn’t a proper function of government is a matter of widely divergent opinions. Which is why we should expect candidates for office, in particular, to be specific about what they think should be cut, rather than letting them get away with “it’s our money – we deserve a tax cut” sound bites.

    Regards.

15. Donald Singer Says:
    March 22nd, 2006 at 3:26 pm

    Bob,
    Good points, and a realistic assessment of the political river in which tax and economic policy swims. It is indeed up to the elected officials to tell the voters how they will spend the public funds and which, if any, programs they would cut. The purpose of a just and reasonable tax policy is, I think, to raise revenue and serve as an incentive for economic growth, which in turn will produce more revenue. With that point in mind, would it not constitute good economic policy to reduce the number of brackets in the Georgia income tax system to, say, two at 3% and 5% and then index personal and dependent exemptions and the standard deduction to inflation in order to militate against “bracket creep”? The program could be phased in over a period of several years to diminish any jarring disruptions to state revenue. The lower tax rates would allow people to keep, spend, and invest more of their own money, thereby providing significant economic stimulus and greater measure of tax justice for working and middle class individuals and families. Your example of $50.00 a month is instructive becuase it perfectly illustrates how marginal and incremental changes in tax policy could have substantial real-world effects over time. That amount over the course of a year would be a mortgage payment for a lot of people or money added to a child’s college fund or savings plan—$600.00 a year over 18 years would be in excess of $10,000 for college expenses with interest, dividends, and capital gains added in. Modest sums over time don’t buy the world, but for the average family, they do help a great deal when viewed over a longer period of time. Thanks for the information and your perspective. Best regards,

16. Bob Says:
    March 22nd, 2006 at 7:56 pm

    “Modest sums over time don’t buy the world, but for the average family, they do help a great deal when viewed over a longer period of time.”

    Very true. As for your specific proposal, yes, it does make sense to index deductions and exemptions so that a little inflation doesn’t result in an automatic tax increase, however small. The marginal rate cuts I’d have to weigh against their impact on programs and services, of course. Wouldn’t want my kids’ teachers going hungry, you know. 😉

17. PCDavis Says:
    March 26th, 2006 at 10:28 am

    Ah yes, the benefits of republican governance that is enjoyed by the rest of the country. As always concerning things republicanism, follow the money.

    It’s tax time, remember halliburton is spelled with 2 L’s.