groundedgraphics.com/hiking-trails/blackburn-park-trails.php

The 2^nd Public Hearing on the Budget was held at 9:00 AM on Monday morning.  To my surprise a number of folks actually showed up at that time to speak out against a tax increase.  As in the first Public Hearing, the people did not hesitate to make recommendations for cuts.  They clearly expect government employees to share their pain during this recession and they fear the economy will be even worse next year.

I told the commissioners that I appreciate how difficult it is for them to recommend specific cuts in the various departments when none of them had attended the county manager’s individual budget meetings with department heads.  I pointed out that those meetings would have given them insight into how the departments operate and where cuts might still be made.  I, also, suggested that this would be good time to consider eliminating some government activities.

Chairman Raber responded that the enabling legislation leaves all decisions about government operations to the county manager.  He seems to think that attending the county manager’s individual budget meetings with department heads would constitute interfering with the way the county manager runs the government operations.  He doesn’t consider it a commissioner’s job to spend time listening to department heads.  He pointed out that commissioners are only part time and are not paid enough to do that.

My statement about eliminating some government activities was ignored.  I highly recommend the last Public Hearing on Thursday, July 15 at 5:00 PM just before the monthly Commission Meeting.  It will be worth your time.

The following is from my notes taken during the Public Hearing:

The session began with a gentleman asking, “Do you start from a “0” based budget?”  The answer from Finance Dept. representative Mark French was, “No.”  The gentleman pointed out that his experience in business and the military had led him to appreciate the importance of examining every line in the budget.

French explained that the budget has decreased over the last several years.  Commissioner Scott stated that the proposed property tax increase would only amount to $10 for a $300,000 house.

Frank Gilkerson, a candidate for 4^th District Commission seat, passed out his own information sheet on the budget.  He has set up a website: www.FixLCBudget.com.  He wants taxpayers to go to the site, review the budget and make recommendations for cuts that can be presented at the final Public Hearing.

John Tomkins asked about predictions for future years budgets.  Chairman Raber said, “You are asking a question that no one can answer.”

Lori Hackinson insisted that since budget cuts can be expected to be needed again next year, why not fix the budget (start making more cuts instead of increasing taxes) now?   She insisted that there is room to make more cuts citing road crews who stand around talking instead of working and employees who spend time doing personal business while the public waits.

Chairman Raber bellowed out at her, “This is not a forum to lash out at county employees!  When there is an ice storm, these employees are out in the middle of the night working!”

Commissioner Bowden reminded the Chairman in a point of order that the purpose of a Public Hearing is to listen to the public, not to challenge the speaker.

Hackinson continued, “I believe you need to consider furlough days.  That is what private employers have to do.”

Commissioner Stowers said he opposesd furlough days at the beginning of the budget because they might be needed later in the year to make ends meet.

Hackinson then suggested letting departments cut out those things that volunteers can do.  She added that in tough times Park & Rec can be run by volunteers.

Chairman Raber said, “If we make any more cuts, we will have to cut public safety.”

Commissioner Stowers added, “According to the YMCA, we have the best Park and Rec anywhere around.”

Human Services Director Fran Sullens pointed out that a number of positions had been eliminated from county government, there had been no salary increases for four years and the insurance deductibles had been increased to $400.

Hackinson who was still standing at the podium, responded that she has to have a $5000 deductible in order to afford any insurance at all.

Tax Commissioner Rachel Pruitt assured the audience that all excess expenses had been cut from her department.

Then Raber was going again, “We bust our buns working for you!  I’ve been chosen to be State Wrestling Championship Chair this year.  Everything is an open book.  We can’t hide anything.”

Jim Neal said, “You are the last line against this thing.  Many of us are fighting to keep what we have.  I don’t like to see cuts but we need to use cuts everywhere except fire and police that are essential (services).”

The Lumpkin County Trails Committee worked successfully for five years as a required public involvement for trails grants.  A single experienced county resident contractor had worked with the committee to lay out a route for the trail with switchbacks that would make the trail accessible to almost anyone who could walk.  Numerous volunteers who had training in trail construction had committed to help construct such a trail.

Public concerns were disregarded and public input eliminated when commissioners hired an independent contractor at a much greater cost to the county.  You see, when the trail was built, Lumpkin County had more money than it had sense.  The building boom was still going full force with property values and taxes still rising.

The hired contractor designed and constructed a trail straight down a steep hill toward and within a few feet of the reservoir.  It’s no wonder the EPD finally questioned the wisdom of a silt fence to protect the reservoir from a mudslide down that hill.

Unfortunately, the county now seems to have made the situation worse by widening the trail into an un-surfaced road that will need constant attention.  Rip rap added at the edge of the water may prevent erosion of the bank; but it doesn’t stand a prayer of stopping dirt that will be washed down the hill.  See the pictures.

During trail construction, members of the public were concerned about dirt entering the reservoir.  In response to those concerns, Lumpkin County Trails Committee members requested an opportunity to look at the work that was being done.  Immediately following their visit to the site accompanied by the contractor and numerous county employees, the Trails Committee was abolished.  Or to be more accurate, a determination was made that the committee never existed.  County employee members of the trails committee are well aware that the grant for our reservoir trail would have been lost without the efforts of that committee.

In the current economy, the county can no longer afford to kick volunteers to the curb.  This is our government.  Public land belongs to all of us.  If you are an elected official who does not value and respect volunteers, you are in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Maybe it is time for you to move on.

You created a disaster around our reservoir where we wanted a lovely winding trail that would be accessible to anyone who can walk.  Your so-called improvements have made it wider and much more likely to erode.  You have created pollution instead of protecting our water reservoir.  Where is the EPD?  Hopefully they will soon be all over you.

Numerous recommendations were made to the commissioners on how the budget might be reduced including more furlough days, eliminating employees, eliminating the county contribution to employee retirement, reducing the size of government and going to a four day work week.  Karen Bowden, Commission Bowden’s wife, pointed out that County Manager Stan Kelley had offered budget options that did not require a tax increase.

Ronald Caldwell asked, “What can we do without?”  Melvin Turner pointed out that 10% of taxpayers are being furloughed 365 days a year.” Jeff Clymer said, “You are trying to make employees happy instead of the taxpayers.”

Missy Wymer pointed out that Raber’s statement about every department being asked to reduce their budget by 10 % was misleading.  She pointed out that budgets of most departments had actually been increased.

Greg Puetz pointed out that there is a $379,000 increase in the proposed 2011 Budget over the current budget. He said that the budget needs to be written so that people can understand it.  He is familiar with such budgets, but finds our budget difficult to decipher.

County Finance Dept. representative, Mark French, responded to requests about the amount of department cuts with percentages ranging from 25% in one department to only 13% for Park & Rec.  He said only about half the departments actually had reduced budgets.

Commissioner Scott said he vigorously opposed cuts to essential service like EMS.  The audience unanimously opposed cuts to essential services, however, they clearly wanted cuts to non-essential services.

Lori Lee Hackerson asked, “What about next year?”  Commissioner Scott acknowledged that this budget only applies a band aid. Hackerson replied, “Then we need to take a scalpel (to it).”

Jeff Clymer told the commissioners that they will make next year’s budget decisions even worse if they raise taxes this year and put more people out of business.  He pointed out that a tax increase this year will reduce the number of property owners who will be around to pay taxes next year.

Robert Small praised people for speaking out and said we have to get over being intimidated by elected officials.

Taxpayers clearly expect government employees to cope with the same kind of income reductions that they have.  Numerous persons talked about how they are having to make do with less.

The only person in the room who claimed to be having great financial success was the chairman who bragged that he had just invested in another great financial enterprise.  John Raber, who has spoken out supporting tax increases every year that he has been on the Lumpkin County Commission, is clearly out of touch with his constituents.

Many people spoke during the meeting.  Please send corrections to <Emily@lumpkinsunshine.com> if the names are not correct.  If you would like to comment on this article, you may register as a USER on the Homepage and submit the comment.  To prevent SPAM, Users must be approved by the Administrator before a comment can be posted.  Emily Lewy

In recent months several animal shelters around the state had to very quickly reduce the number of animals housed.  In each case, they notified the public of the desperate situation and promoted adoption.  And in every case, the public responded and the animals were provided new homes.

Instead of publicizing the problem and encouraging adoption as other shelters do to reduce numbers, Lumpkin County quietly and without the knowledge of the public euthanized more than 100 animals within a matter of days.

According to the now unemployed former shelter director, Valerie Dombrowski, County Manager Stan Kelley never wanted the number of euthanized animals made public.  Yet, he ordered the shelter population reduced and these animals to be euthanized.

It seems to me Lumpkin County Commissioners have turned over policy decisions to the county manager that are not in his job description.

I can appreciate the fact that commissioners enjoy dumping controversial matters onto the county manager.  It is a smooth move if the public lets them get away with it.

Reality is, the purpose of a multi-member commission is to provide public oversight of policy decisions.  Decisions about the capacity and/or size of the animal shelter should not be made behind closed doors by a county manager.

A new mission statement for the shelter is needed since the one for our shelter on http://www.petfinder.com/shelters/lumpkincountypaws.html no longer seems applicable.  Commissioners need to hear what residents of this county want the mission of our shelter to be.

When an animal is picked up by county authorities or brought in as a stray, how long should it be held before being put up for adoption or euthanized?  At the present time it is held for five days.  Is that long enough?  A three day wait is being considered.  What if you are on vacation and your pet gets away from the person keeping it?  After three to five days, you can lose all rights to your pet.

Would the public support expanding kennel space at the shelter if it was done by volunteers and their contributions?  At the present time, county policy allows no expansion.  Do the commissioners support this policy?  Do they know what’s going on at the shelter?  Do they care?

Ultimately, county policies are determined by you, the voter.  Speak up, demand a voice in decision making, or reconcile yourself to being just another sheep in the flock.

HB 1106, effective July1, 2010, requires animal shelters to scan for microchips before euthanasia and notify the owner.  The sad fact is that animal shelters don’t have enough space to keep the animals for very long.  Wonderful pets are euthanized every day.  The new law provides protection for the pet with a microchip.

The Lumpkin County Animal Shelter will microchip your pet for $20.00 any time during shelter hours Tuesday thru Saturday.  PAWS will provide the same service during Pet Adoptions in front of Walmart.

Pet Adoptions at Walmart will take place on June 5 and June 19 from 11:00 AM til 2:00 PM.

http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2010/04/12/preston-smith-on-prostitutes-pimps-and-puppets-in-the-senate/

Text of Preston Smith’s speech in the Georgia Senate

Abraham Kuyper once said, “When principles that run against your deepest convictions begin to win the day, then battle is your calling and peace has become sin. You must at the price of dearest peace lay you convictions bare before friend an enemy with all the fire of your faith.” Today I rise to speak during our debate about the process by which this bill and others come before our Senate body for consideration. As you may know, when I was elected in my late twenties, I was the youngest member of the State Senate then serving. Today, four terms later, I am still the youngest member of the Senate, although I am now equal to, or greater, in seniority to the majority of our members.

I formerly served as one of the Governor’s Administration Floor Leaders and then served three terms as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But that changed today. In retribution for my refusal to go along with the Lt. Governor and the rest of the Senate Republicans and vote for a tax increase, my role as chairman was stripped away from me by the Lt. Governor, Majority Leader, President Pro Tem and Senate Republican leadership. I take the well today with a heavy heart – not because of a loss of any position, but rather because of what is happening in State Government and its larger implication for the legacy of our Republican party and the posterity of our state.

I have been a loyal member of the team and have fought many battles side-by-side with my Republican colleagues and members from the other side of the isle. But, inasmuch as they have handed down a very public punishment for my refusal to vote for a tax increase, I am compelled to make a public response and offer my explanation. My remarks are largely intended to my leadership and my Republican colleagues in the Senate – as they are the ones who have decided upon this course.

On Thursday, April 1st, HOUSE BILL 307 came before the full Senate body for a vote. HOUSE BILL 307 is a bill that imposes a tax upon hospitals’ net revenues to help balance the state budget. I have consistently told my leadership and my deputy whip, that I was not going to vote to raise taxes to balance the budget. I have made a commitment not to raise taxes and I believe that it is the bedrock principal of the Republican Party and the unifying glue of fiscal, social and libertarian conservatives. That Thursday, when the votes for passage were uncertain, the Lt. Governor suspended our action and recessed the Senate for a hastily called meeting in the office of the President Pro Tem. He ordered the Majority Leader and President Pro Tem to go get the votes and to tell the members that their chairmanships were at stake.

The President Pro Tem used to tell me that he would never ask me to vote against my conscience or my district. But, at the meeting, President Pro Tem Williams spontaneously called for a motion for a “caucus position” on the bill. This means that if two-thirds of the caucus vote to support it, ALL members of the Senate Republican Caucus must vote to support the bill. Neither the concept of the so-called “caucus-position,” nor any punishment for not following it is found in any caucus rules. There was no discussion. There was not opportunity for dissent. He did not even ask for the members who were voting no. He simply announced that 2/3 having voted, we all must vote the same way. Like a scene from ‘Lord of the Flies,’ we marched back in to the Senate to follow the order.

It is a distinctly un-American concept that subordinates the will of my constituents to 2/3 of my colleagues. I am ashamed that they did this. Can you imagine that some of the most deeply held convictions that people claim to have in this chamber will vanish as soon as 2/3 of the group tells them to vote the other way? Some in here have made protecting gun-owners’ rights established in the 2nd Amendment their seminal issue. Yet, if 2/3 of a caucus votes to make them change they will abandon that so-called principle! For those who have passionately argued in favor of the sanctity of life will no longer support that conviction if 2/3 of the caucus demands that they vote the other way? This is almost beyond comprehension!

I represent between 150-200,000 constituents and I am the ONLY voice that they have in this Senate. Neither my principle nor their voice is on the auction block, nor should it be abdicated to any group of people who are not elected to represent them. I represent a diverse group of wonderful people in northwest Georgia and even my delegation of House members were split on their vote on this issue representing those same constituents.

You will hear that we must pass this bill because there are no other options and the alternative of reducing Medicaid reimbursement is a worse alternative. They have after all, concocted this plan as a mechanism to game the system to suck down as many taxpayer dollars as possible from the federal money machine. And, they’ve coupled this with a tax kick-back to the state to help spend on this state healthcare program. This is an argument that requires you go along with growing government rather than reducing its size and scope.

You will also hear that the hospitals volunteered for this tax. This argument is fallacious. The hospitals were very publically given the choice of paying this tax or suffering the threat of Medicaid reimbursement cuts. So, given the choice of us amputating their leg at the ankle or the knee, most of them chose to give up their foot. But that is the logical fallacy of either/or reasoning which promotes a false choice. Of course there are other options that limited government conservatives would propose. And falsely couching their choice in those terms should not force the legislative branch to participate in cutting off the foot of the hospitals, which ultimately will pass their increase tax along to patients, consumers of healthcare and health insurance companies who will then charge it to their policy holders.

Moreover during the debate on HOUSE BILL 307, the President Pro Tem argued that we should take from those who have two coats and give to those who have none. This is almost as pure a definition of wealth redistribution and socialism as you can possibly craft. And the fact that such a system is passed under threat of the government penalizing you with a worse result is also a central tenant of a socialistic system. If a person voluntarily surrenders his coat to someone less fortunate, that is an example of Christian charity. But, if they are forced to do so in some ‘Robin Hood’ scheme by the government, that is a nearly perfect example of socialism in action.

But it is really not about the issue. You can spin that anyway you want. Reasonable people can reasonably disagree about the best policy. I am a conservative. That means something to me. I believe in limited government with lower taxes, free enterprise, personal responsibility and a strong defense. I also believe that we have allowed ourselves to become far too dependent upon government to provide the needs of our society. I do not apologize for that belief.

Let me share one analogy with you. If you go out into the woods and build a fenced-in pen, you would never be able to get a deer, wild boar or any other wild animal to voluntarily enter that pen and cage himself. But there is a very simple way to accomplish the same goal. Place some food for the animal to eat. After a couple of weeks, continue place the food in the same place while you begin construction on the pen. On the last day, place the food in the same place and leave the gate open. The wild animal will voluntarily enter the pen to eat the food and you can close the gate. The same animal that would never have surrendered his freedom to enter a cage, will voluntarily do so once it has become dependent on your handout. We became great as a nation of free men who once placed a high value on our liberty. And the survival of our Republic depends upon the retention of those freedoms.

In feudal times, the surfs in medieval Europe only paid 1/3 of their income to the King and no textbook considers them free men. Yet today, many Americans pay more than 50% of their income to the governing authorities through combined federal, state and local taxes. When are we going to blow the whistle and say, “Enough!” The founders of our country would never have agreed to our enslavement to a government so big as to give you everything you want and so powerful as to take away everything you have. But, over time, like that wild and free animal, we have sacrificed our freedom at the alter of security. We have become so dependent upon the provision of Government to meet every need that we find ourselves in a cage having voluntarily surrendered our precious liberties for the solace of servitude.

Let me share a little of my personal story I’ve never shared before. When I ran for office, I was recruited primarily by three state senators, Eric Johnson, Bill Stephens and Tom Price. At the time, I was a young attorney working in a local law firm which represented a large hospital. Shortly after obtaining permission from my law firm and entering the political race, certain leaders in State Government threatened to deny the Certificate of Need application for state approval of the multi-million dollar hospital expansion. My firm instructed me to withdraw from the race or resign from the firm in order to avoid the threatened harm to our client by the power players in State Government at that time. At the meeting called to discuss my fate, the firm was on the verge of splitting over this threat. When I refused to resign, the client and the principal lawyer left the firm so that the State could no longer extort the CON approval.

While that process was very difficult for me to go through, the Senators who recruited me at the time told me that my response was evidence of what they needed at the Capitol – someone who was willing to stand up to that kind of pressure and not bow down or sell out their principles. They told me that although the road would be difficult, they needed someone with an iron constitution and a strong backbone to withstand the pressures I would face.

They also told me, rightly or wrongly, that their biggest criticism of my predecessor was that they believed he voted the party line every single time without deviation. They believed that when his majority leader, Charles Walker, held his thumb up or down, that determined how my predecessor and his colleagues in that caucus would vote. Now, it seems the current leaders are less concerned about who they believe is a political prostitute than who they view as the pimp controlling him.

When I ran for office, several of those very same recruiters encouraged me to make a taxpayer protection pledge to my constituents that I would not come to Atlanta and vote to raise taxes. I agreed. I wanted to be a different kind of Senator – one who spoke his mind and meant what he said. I made that commitment. But the commitment was to my constituents, not to some outside group. I gave my word – my bond – that I would not come down to Atlanta and raise taxes. I believed, perhaps incorrectly, that one of the foundational cornerstones of the Republican Party was to reduce the size and scope of government and to cut fraud, waste and abuse rather than raising taxes. And, now those people who urged the need for an independent thinker – who begged for a strong willed leader with backbone who would not bow to pressure or sell his constituents’ vote – have now attempted to threaten, harass, intimidate and punish me for being exactly the person they recruited me to be. This Republican Senate leadership punishes me today, because I will not break the word I gave my constituents, which the same leadership urged me to make.

Today is a very sad day for Republicans in Georgia. Our Lt. Governor has repeatedly said that if the people of Georgia can only afford to send us $15 Billion in tax revenues, that is the amount we will spend. We will balance our budget to that figure. We will live within our means and will not raise taxes. But now the Lt. Governor, Majority Leader and President Pro Tem, have completely reversed that position, engaged in a rhetorical game of semantics and abandoned that commitment to balance our state budget to the amount of revenue that is available. They have instead decided to pursue the easier route of raising new revenue through taxes and fees.

Prior to the beginning of this legislative session, in December of 2009, the Republican Senate leadership had a poll conducted by McLaughlin & Associates. The question was posed, “When the General Assembly convenes in January, state leaders will be faced with a $2 billion budget shortfall. How do you think the State Legislature should balance the budget?” The top two responses were cut waste and cut spending. The lowest response was “raise taxes” which only 5% of Georgians chose. Only 5% of Georgians feel we would help balance the budget by raising taxes! 5% didn’t respond or didn’t know. 90% of Georgians felt we should balance the budget through some means other than tax increases. Then they asked a second question, saying, “Thinking more about the state budget, which of the following do you think would be the most effective way for the State Legislature to balance the budget? Again, exactly 5% said “by increasing taxes and fees on individuals and Georgia businesses.”

The Republican leadership used this poll to argue in December that we should not raise taxes. Now, when it comes to decision time, I vote with 90% of Georgians on the poll that my leaders commissioned. They stand with 5% of Georgians who want more taxes to balance the budget. And, they punish me!

The Senator from the 21st, our Majority Leader, used to be a champion of taxpayers. He used to brag that he had never voted for a tax increase. But you cannot claim to be a champion of taxpayers when you vote to raise taxes and then punish those in your caucus who are convicted not to raise taxes. For the rest of his political career, the Majority Leader will have to face voters who know that he not only sold out to vote for a tax increase but he fired some of his most conservative members because they refused to go along with a tax increase.

Of what purpose is it to have a majority if you abandon the very principles for which the voters entrusted that majority to you? If the Republican Majority is going to start down the road towards raising taxes and even punishing their more conservative members who refuse to march like lemmings off that cliff, then why should Georgian’s trust them any longer to lead?

Last week, a Senator came by my desk and called me the ‘Lion of the Senate’ from Northwest Georgia. That may not be true. I may just be one of the last lone voices calling out to my party to stick to its principals and maintain its identity. I watched sadly as Washington Republicans obtained power and then followed the lead of power-seeking men to act the same way. I believe that our Republican tent should be broad enough to include a very diverse set of ideas. But, in seeking that power, we should never punish and jettison those members who hold firm to the ideal that we should reduce spending to balance budgets rather than raise taxes. If the Republican Party no longer has room for people who are convicted not to raise taxes, then in seeking to grow its appeal, it risks losing its identity and brand.

I have watched my leaders stand aghast at the past dictatorial display of power in the House of Representatives in years past where members were banished for failing to toe the line. Yet, now our leaders are doing the same thing. Last year when House members voted their convictions for their district, they were stripped of their positions by former Speaker Richardson. My leaders decried that dictatorial response. But today, they do the same thing on a bill that they already won!

And that is perhaps the most ironic part of this. In the quest to consolidate power and rule over the Senate, the Lt. Governor has not only gotten his way to raise taxes but after winning his vote, he is punishing those who voted no because he wanted to win the vote by a bigger margin. He is today sacrificing his strongest and most conservative allies at the altar of his own hubris and zeal to control our votes.

Members of the Senate, hear me now. If this raw exercise of power can be used to crush me today, it will be used on you tomorrow. If your votes are controlled, why are you here? We have seen this type of leadership exercised just last year in the House of Representatives. We know where that leads. And, those that so easily forget the lessons of our history are certainly condemned to repeat them.

We have men and women fighting and dying around the world to preserve our freedoms. You give lip service to their heroism but you mock their sacrifice when you don’t even allow us to vote the conviction of our conscience freely. How has it possibly gotten to this point where people are so afraid of our so-called leaders that they will give up their vote and the voice of their constituents in order to maintain some position. Are you really controlled that easily? Some might say that your position of influence is important to represent your district, but how can that possibly be if the price of maintaining the position is giving up that voice of your constituents.

Is this really America? Can you really condemn the backroom arm twisting and deals cut in Washington DC when you do the same thing here? Last week, we heard that voting for this was one of the “tough votes.” That it took courage, that it was leading and “governing”. This despite overwhelming evidence that Georgians don’t want us to raise taxes. That is precisely what President Obama argued to twist arms and get votes to pass a healthcare bill that the majority of Americans opposed. He said the time had come to govern, to lead, to make the tough choices – meaning to pass something that was against the will of the very constituents that elected them. That is precisely what happened here on Thursday night.

And, I will tell you something else. I firmly believe that when you attempt to improperly influence a legislator’s vote through promises of reward or threats of recrimination, I believe it is unethical, immoral and illegal. I have a constitutional right to vote for my constituents and I should never be subject to bullying, intimidation or harassment because anyone wants to force me to cast my vote in some other way. That constitutional right is not diminished or superseded by a caucus position on an issue. That is one of the rawest forms of political corruption. And it must stop if our government is going to regain and earn the trust of her citizens.

To my leaders, I say, “Is your title that valuable to you? That you would punish those who stand on principle even if you quietly agree with them?” When you lay down at night, do you revel in being a leader when that leadership means you crush your friends who have faithfully stood beside you just because they are convicted not to vote for a tax increase?

You recruited me to be an independent voice and a man with a backbone of steel who would not cave in to pressure. I shared with you my conviction on the issue of raising taxes. Rather than respecting that, you sought to break my will with a procedural move and in doing so have forced me to choose my principle or my caucus. You are proud of my intellect when you agree with me but are quick to dismiss my conviction when I won’t yield to your will. Georgia’s citizens expect and deserve true leaders today. They deserve people of principle who will stand up and vote their conscience regardless of the consequences.

People still marvel at why no Republicans seemed to stand up and call their leaders out in Washington when they had the majority. They all seemed to mindlessly walk in goose-step fashion regardless of the consequences. I have experienced the pressure of a patronage system and I know why. No one wants to be bought, traded, coerced, intimidated, or harassed into voting against their conscience. And the consequences are severe.

But if someone had stood up and voiced concern over their direction, Republicans probably would not be in the situation we find ourselves in Washington today. I do not want to lose my chairmanship of Judiciary. I believe I have worked hard and earned the respect of my colleagues on both sides of the isle in that role. But, I will never allow any assignment to become so valuable to me that I would violate my word, vote against the conviction of my conscience, or cease being an independent voice for my constituents.

I understand the position that my leaders have chosen to balance the budget this way. But it violates the pledge that I have given and am expected to uphold. I hope and pray that you will come back to your roots as champions and defenders of the taxpayers and continue to seek ways to live within our means and deliver services to our constituents at the level they can afford to pay.

I am not leaving the Republican Party. I want to see it reformed from the inside and become an answer to what people have been searching for in their government. In 2005, I was actually named the Georgia Republican Party’s ‘legislator of the year’. And I sincerely hope that the Republican Party never abandons its own members who stand up against tax increases. If so, it has surely begun the long descent into the ash heap of history as a party which lost its meaning in search of its majority. I say those words not because I dislike my party. To the contrary, because I love my party, I am compelled to speak up that my party leaders would change course before going down the same destructive road that removed them from power in Washington DC.

If I am one of the last voices in the legislature who calls for lower taxes and smaller government and balancing budgets by cutting spending rather than raising taxes (and who actually means it), then so be it. And if the Lt. Governor, Majority Leader and President Pro Tem punishes me for following my conscience, that is the prerogative that the power of their position offers them and it will be their legacy. But, if the Senate Republicans are willing to punish its members who stand on the foundational precept of lower taxes, then it risks squandering and abusing the privilege of governing.

We have fought a lot of battles together. You know how hard I have worked for this Senate and to assist the Lt. Governor. You know the passion I have had to promote a business and job-friendly Georgia and the passion with which I have fought for making this a physician-friendly state to improve access to affordable healthcare. But the decision you have made today to satisfy some personal goal turns your back on a lot of people who have supported you and our mutual cause. And, it is simply not in the best interest of Georgia.

But if you don’t respect the people of Northwest Georgia enough to let their voice be heard through my independent representation of them, then perhaps you should take your chairmanship and give it to a puppet who will feel indebted to you and surrender his constituents’ voice. I do not need your position to have respect. And, I do not need your title to have honor.

Q.  What is a fragmented politician?
A. A fragmented politician is one who has single focus vision and is incapable of or not desirous of understanding the total picture because of levels of education, social awareness, greed, global awareness, desire for power, and inability to be a team player.  The fragmented politician is not capable of realizing that he or she is first and foremost elected to serve the good of all the citizens and not an overzealous few.  The fragmented politician will not or cannot understand that his or her decisions are based on the beliefs of those who seek to divide and demoralize rather than enhance and promote.  The fragmented politician may well think that he or she is anointed and not elected.  A fragmented politician does not play or work well with his teammates.
 

We greatly appreciate the weekly opportunity provided by The Dahlonega Nugget to learn about this elected official.  How sad that Raber does not recognize himself.

USPS unveils ‘adopt a shelter pet’ commemorative stamps

USPS will unveil its “Animal Rescue: Adopt a Shelter Pet” sheet of commemorative stamps March 17, kicking off a major 8-week promotion. The set features photographs of 10 shelter pets.   The stamps go on sale April 30.   “Our hope is these stamps will encourage pet adoption and promote humane and responsible pet care.” Anticipating the popularity of the series, the Postal Service has printed 300 million stamps — 15 million sheets — and is prepared to print more if 7.5 million sheets are sold by the end of May. Information on the stamps and promotion events is available on usps.com and also stamps to the rescue.com, a microsite developed to promote the stamps.