Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2007 > May > 04 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USAn attempt to make a vetoed property tax cut more visible
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Earlier this week, we told you about a poll that showed Gov. Sonny Perdue largely undamaged by, and the Legislature taking a beating for, the budget squabble that has forced a special session.
While House Republicans have raised hell about Perdue’s veto of a $700 million budget bill, and the $142 million property tax rebate contained within, the issue hasn’t drifted much beyond the confines of the state Capitol. The public doesn’t know about it.
Jared Thomas and the Georgia chapter of Americans for Prosperity are out to change that. The anti-tax group has dropped a mailer that urges voters, in selected Republican-dominated districts across the state, to demand that their senators join House Speaker Glenn Richardson in attempting to override the governor’s veto.
The lead headline on the mailer: “When Georgia takes in more money than it needs, send it back to the taxpayers.”
How many flyers are being sent out, and their targets, are facts that Thomas, the AFP executive director, wants to keep secret through the weekend. To give nervous fits to as many Republican senators as possible.
This move could be important. At least one reason why the governor has been hesitant to name the date for the special session is that he’s been unable to extract a promise from Richardson, leader of the House, that his body won’t attempt another override vote.
But the Senate may not be a sure thing, either. Last week, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle said he didn’t think two-thirds of his Senate were willing to rebuff Perdue’s veto.
And yet — only a day or so earlier, the governor called five conservative Republican senators into his office to find out what they were thinking. We hear that two told the Perdue they’d support the override. The remaining three made no commitment.
We’ll soon see if the AFP mailer stirs the pot.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Georgia Taxpayers
May 4, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this
Governor Perdue & Georgia Senate: We’re watching!
By Nancy
May 4, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this
I hope our Senators will listen to the people they represent instead of the Governor. Remember he’s a lame duck governor. The only one that has to go back and run again, is the Senators! Now think before you act.Taxpayers want what theirs.
By AB
May 4, 2007 2:01 PM | Link to this
When Georgia takes in more money than it needs, send it back to the taxpayers.
Sooo… does it then follow that, when there’s a deficit, the Legislature should have Georgia Taxpayers send in extra money immediately?
Americans for Prosperity: What a bunch of morons.
By Sam Sludge
May 4, 2007 2:15 PM | Link to this
Dear AB - you’re the moron ahole….any right thinking person knows when there is a “deficit” - meaning there are more legislative wants than tax revenues available, then you cut the f*ing budget….remember this: surpluses of revenue belong to taxpayers….”deficits” are to be cut!
By AB
May 4, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this
So, Sam, if taxes can never go up (by your estimation), how long until they cease to exist entirely? Do you at least agree that:
(a) A government needs to exist (to promote the general welfare, provide for the common defense, secure the blessings of liberty, etc.)?
(b) This government needs funds to exist?
You need the government to exist (to enforce the laws, making it possible for prosperity to occur); government needs your tax dollars to function. Yes, we (and any reasonable people) may disagree about the size, responsibilities, and fiscal priorities of any particular administration, but it’s unrealistic (and rather naive) to think that such a large function should be reduced to one-liners like, “when more money comes in than we need, give it back; when less money comes in than we need, need less!”
It is your money, yes, but you have a responsibility to society (just like they have a responsibility to you). WW II vets understood ideas like sacrifice and personal responsibility; why don’t you?
By Sam Sludge
May 4, 2007 3:06 PM | Link to this
Dear AB - I agree with the concept of A & B - we apparently don’t agree on their funding parameters.
As to your statement that “should less money come in, does that mean we need less”…..the answer to that is obvious, when less money comes in, you make do with less money!
No one questions the need for personal sacrifice and personal responsibility (I was a draftee) but what fries my a* is watching legislators p** away my hard earned money on a bunch of crap that benefits a handful of their cronies and contributors.
By AB
May 4, 2007 3:21 PM | Link to this
Well, we certainly agree on that (about legislative graft). I’d just state that it’s not necessarily as simple as making do with less money; sometimes, there are long-term investments (in infrastructure, education, etc.) which could benefit from surpluses (and which can’t be ignored in the case of deficits). You’re absolutely correct, though, that (in case of revenue shortfalls (and overcollections, also) ) the handouts should be the first things to go.
By Tim Raymond
May 5, 2007 12:15 AM | Link to this
You wanna know something? There is a lot of good that can be done if we begin to care about other folks as much as we care about ourselves.
Hope I don’t sound too Christian … well, probably not around here; folks are too right.
By tim Raymond
May 5, 2007 12:19 AM | Link to this
For the record, I didn’t mean stuff for “cronies and contributors” (props for a great alliteration!), nor for lobbyists. I meant for “the least of these …”