It’s Official!

That’s right boys and girls, we have officially moved. We will still be monitoring this site for a little while, but we’re focusing on our new site now. And just where is that?

http://swgapolitics.com/index

If you’ve got us on your blog roll, we’re going to ask you to update the link.  We’ve moved all of our links to the new site, so don’t worry 😉

Constitutionally Speaking

The book club in Albany is currently reading the 5000 Year Leap. The book is a simple read about the founders of this country and the principles that they considered when writing our founding documents.

After reading the book, it is clear that this country has abandoned many of those principles. Currently we are on a fast track, not to return to the original intention of the founders, but to distance ourselves even farther from that intention.

How can we get back to the garden? A new effort is being entertained by the states. Resolutions are being passed to return the power to the respective states and limit the size of the federal government, States’ Rights.

Georgia Senate Resolution 632 passed, “affirming states’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles; and for other purposes.” Nine states have passed similar resolutions and twenty-five others have resolutions calling for states’ rights pending.

A few states have taken the measure a step further. Montana has passed a bill (HB 246) that would allow guns and ammunition that are produced in the state and remain in the state to be regulated by the state, not the federal government. The bill will become law on October 10, 2009 and is suspected to be challenged by the Supreme Court shortly after. Texas is considering similar legislation.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution states that the federal government has the power, “…to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;” Because the federal government gets its power from the states according to the Tenth Amendment, the government has no power to regulate intrastate commerce. This should prove to be a fascinating court case when the law is challenged.

There is talk about calling for a Constitutional Convention to repeal or alter Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 which gives the federal government the power to collect taxes. It is believed that such a Constitutional Convention, or even the threat of one, will help to curtail the spending spree that the federal government is currently enjoying.

All of this talk of States’ Rights is fascinating, but I have to wonder if these resolutions are just words on paper. Since the War Between the States, the states have surrendered more and more of their power to the central government until state boundaries have become little more than historical lines on a map. Are these resolutions too little too late or are they the beginning of something big? Time will tell.

We’re Moving

This is just a friendly head’s up. SWGA Politics has grown a great deal just since I’ve come on board, and it was growing well when Jeff was flying solo on this. We’re thrilled with how well things have gone here. So thrilled, in fact, that we are going off the reservation a bit…well, off of the free wordpress site and onto the new horizons of self hosted.

As for what the future holds, one never knows. However, we figure that you all read this blog because of what we write, so we might as well keep going with that if nothing else. In other words, if you like what we’re doing, don’t worry. We plan on continuing down that path.

The big move will happen Saturday morning by 10:00 AM. All posts and comments will be on the new site, and the last post on this particular site will be our new URL. The only reason I’m not sharing it now is because the site still has a little ways to go. I’ve gotta have my secrets, right?

On behalf of Jeff and myself, we hope everyone will come on over to the new site and check us out Saturday. We’re excited by the new possibilities and hope you are as well!

Time to Reach Out

We have reached a point in this country where Libertarians have a real shot. Granted, we’ve always had a shot, but now more and more people are ready to hear what we have to say. Here’s a quote from a Rasmussen poll article someone passed along to me earlier today.

Winfred Dukes, Albany State, and Transportation

By now, you’ve probably heard that State Rep Winfred Dukes has been accused of costing Albany State University the funding for the Ray Charles Fine Arts Center.

You may have even heard that he got into a very verbal and visual altercation with his accuser around lunchtime today.

I can verify that the accusations are indeed accurate, and to steal a phrase from the late great Paul Harvey, here’s the REST of the story…

It all began, according to several sources, on January 30. On that day, the House of Representatives debated the Homeowner’s Tax Relief Grants. At about one hour and 36 minutes into the debate, Rep Dukes makes the comments shown in this video – which was taken directly from the video in the GPB archives. Now, the comments Rep Dukes makes about Delta and Gulfstream could be taken as attacks on Reps Burkhalter and Keen, respectively. Rep Burkhalter’s district is in the North Fulton/Alpharetta area, where Delta is a major player due to the proximity of its home base at Hartsfield Airport. Rep Keen’s district in Brunswick is the site of a major Gulfstream office. Burkhalter and Keen are also 2nd and 3rd in charge of House leadership, right behind Speaker Glenn Richardson.

So the comments in the video, and the fact that this early in the session he was already balking on major initiatives of House Leadership, didn’t earn Rep Dukes too many favors. And ultimately, as we all know, the way politics unfortunately works is who owes who favors. I personally can’t STAND this, but until we elect people with spines that will stand for right no matter what, it is the way the game is played.

So Rep Dukes already was shooting himself in the foot, when ANOTHER major pet project of House Leadership came up. Indeed, this particular project was SB 200, the Department of Transportation reorganization that was signed by Governor Perdue today, and has been a pet project of his throughout the session. House Leadership knew this particular bill was going to be extremely close, and the voting was kept open for quite a long time – roughly 5 minutes, about 5x as long as any other vote. While it was speculated then by myself, Jason Pye, and many others, that much deal making was going on during this time, I can now confirm this – and Reps Dukes and Fullerton were at the heart of it.

You see, according to what I am hearing, a deal was made whereby if Reps Dukes and Fullerton voted for SB 200, BOTH the Ray Charles project at Albany State AND the project at Darton would be funded in this year’s budget. Rep. Fullerton upheld her end of the deal and voted for SB 200, and Rep Dukes simply walked away from the chamber and did not vote. Because he did not vote, the Speaker himself was forced to take the EXTREMELY unusual move of casting a vote himself, and the Speaker’s vote – that should have been Rep Dukes’ vote – was the deciding factor in the passage of the bill.

Because of Rep Dukes reneging on his end of the deal, and because he had made no secret that the Albany State project was a pet project of his, Leadership then decided to strip the Albany State project from the budget during the final conference committee.

So you see, Rep Dukes DID, in fact, cause Albany State to lose the funding for the Ray Charles project, no matter how much he protests it.

SB 200 House Vote Record

Project VoteSafe

I have just been informed that Governor Perdue has signed HB 227 into law as of last Friday.

This is a VERY good law that allows people who are victims or potential victims of family violence to not risk their lives by registering to vote. Basically, it says that if you have a protective or restraining order or are a verified resident of a family violence shelter, you can request that your voter registration data not be made public.

In case you didn’t know, by and large, voter registration data is publicly available, at least for political organizations and the military, and maybe other individuals/organizations. Meaning that prior to HB 227 and Project VoteSafe – the Secretary of State’s name for her implementation of the bill – if a guy wanted to know where his ex-wife was living now and knew she had registered to vote in Georgia, he could get the voter registration data and track her down. This WAS perfectly legal, and now – thankfully – it is not, once the proper procedure has been done.

So consider this a public service announcement: To those with protective/restraining orders and/or who are living in a family violence shelter: You no longer have to fear for your life or your kids’ lives if you want to vote. PLEASE go register, and PLEASE vote in every election affecting your district!

For everyone: If we here at SWGA Politics can be of any use in helping you locate any information about who your politicians are and/or where they stand, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Republicans Jumping Ship?

How I came across this piece, from The Lantern (student paper for Ohio State University), but I did just the same.  In it, the author argues that more Republicans will be jumping ship for the smoother sailing of the Democratic party, namely Olympia Snowe of Maine.  Well, that’s all fine and good.  The author, Mr. Jack Millman who is a junior majoring in political science, argues that Republicans need a massive disaster to the economy to retake their place of dominance in the American Legislative and Executive branches.

Understanding the Damage of Government Intervention

One of the most hotly debated issues today is probably government involvement in the economy. This is a point that I feel deserves some very careful examination. Now, I’m not an economist, or a statistician or anything else of the type. I’m just a guy who can use his own head, and wanted to lay out a few things for you to think about.

First, let’s assume we can agree that the turning point for economic policy was during the Great Depression with FDR’s “New Deal” policies. As such, I took an average of recession lengths and time between the start of recessions from before and after the Great Depression. Unfortunately, these numbers only tell part of the story.

First, the average length for a recession (then called “Panics”) prior to the Great Depression was actually 4.1 years, while post Great Depression was only 1.21 years. Obviously, this looks like a strike against truly free markets, right? Well, not so fast.

You see, the time between recessions prior to the Great Depression was an average of 13.4 years, while post FDR we had only 9.75 years. What’s more, during that time we had two huge wars that artificially propped up the market, namely World War II and Vietnam. This caused gaps of 24 years and 13 years respectively. These numbers skew the average a fair amount, obviously.

You see, I’ve never claimed that Keynesian ideas that government spending can get us out of a recession are actually wrong. They’re not. What my claim is, and has always been, is that the prosperity is artificial. The 24 year period post World War II was a result of debt spending to finance the war, yes, but also the lack of anyone’s ability to actually spend any money. Rationing was the norm in those days, and both adults in a household were typically bringing in money. The guys fighting the wars often had wives at home working in places like aircraft factories (my grandmother worked in a munitions plant for example). This forced savings, and permitted people to buy things like cars and houses in great amounts. It created an era of prosperity.

However, this prosperity was an illusion. Behind the scenes was massive debt, and 8 years after the war ended, we were slammed with yet another recession. This is similar to what happened during Vietnam, as more people were working to support the war, and large numbers of Americans were being drafted (and plenty were volunteering) to go to war, which kept even more people employed. Only this time, the war was barely over before we were smacked with yet another recession.

I should also, in the interest of fair disclosure, mention that I did not count the Long Depression.  The reason for that is that I don’t feel it was truly a recession.  Production actually increased fourfold during that period, which is hardly indicative of a recession.  Instead, prices went out of whack as the United States tried to get the US back on the gold standard, among other factors that were based outside of this country.

Recessions are a part of life.  Keynsian ideologies haven’t done a thing to prevent them from happening, and it is an ideology that requires that governments take on massive debt and tax the people to pay for it.  Since the numbers don’t show this to actually solve anything long term, why not let people keep their money and stimulate the economy that way.  It’s what this nation was founded on, so lets just step up and return to a true free market economy.

Government intervention doesn’t actually work, and it provides yet another way for Uncle Sam to take away our freedoms.  It’s time for this to end.

Winning The Hearts and Minds

Recently, the Albany Herald ran an editorial by Bill Shipp regarding “gun free zones”, apparently in regards to the shooting in UGA by a professor.  Frankly, gun free zones are a waste of effort.  Criminals don’t care about the law by definition, so why limit where those who we don’t mind having guns (i.e. the good guys) by stupid laws.

A Libertarian Paradise Part 2: Social Freedom

After outlining this Libertarian’s ideas for economic freedom, I thought I’d lay out the ideas for social freedom.  Honestly, the great thing about Libertarianism is that our philosophy is incredibly consistent.  While we want businesses to be free to do what they will so long as there is no harm to anyone else, we tend to feel the exact same way toward the individual.

Libertarians are notorious for embracing the idea of legalizing drugs, especially pot.  Now, plenty of people disagree with us on this issue, saying that drugs leads to a host of other crimes such as robbery and burglary.  We don’t necessarily argue this point.  However, alcoholism leads to drunk driving and assault, and how do we deal with this?  Easy.  When a drunk punches someone, we arrest them for assault.  Drugs should be treated the same way.  While I personally think that drugs are bad for you, both physically and spiritually, I don’t feel the state has any business telling you so.

Crimes that are considered “victimless” should, in my opinion, be repealled immediately.  Drug use, in and of itself, doesn’t hurt anyone else.  If someone wants to be stupid and use drugs, then so be it.  I fail to see why the state needs to get involved whatsoever.   Our government wastes billions of dollars each year to prosecute the “drug war” and have little to show for it besides crowded prisons, bloated budgets, and a continuing epidemic of drug use and addiction.

Prostitution is another such “crime” that doesn’t hurt a sole in and of itself.  The problems with prostitution involve pimps forcing young girls into prostitution against their will, and forcing them to stay in.  Were prostitution legal, this would abruptly end.  These girls wouldn’t be labeled criminals, but instead would be seen as the victims that they truly are.  They could go to police without fear of arrest themselves for what they’ve been doing.

Another change in the Libertarian Paradise is the removal of state mandated seat belt laws.  They would be a thing of the past.  Now, some may be thinking “why shouldn’t we have them?  I don’t want my tax dollars to pay for some brain dead fool who didn’t wear a seat belt.”  I understand the sentiment, I really do.  However, remember that there is no socialized medicine in the Libertarian Paradise.  The individual’s insurance has to foot the bill.  If not, then his family.  If not his family, then private charities will do it.  But it will not be anyone’s tax dollars.

Also, in my Libertarian Paradise, the borders would be opened.  Those from South of the Border who want to enter the US simply have to fill out a form and have an instant background check done to make sure they’re not fleeing prosecution in their home countries, then they’re welcome to come on in.  Sure, this sounds bad.  Frankly, for a long time, I disagreed with the Libertarian Party’s stance on illegal immigration.  However, I came to realize that you have to look at the party’s platform as a whole, and the same is true here.

Yes, you will have immigrants able to just enter the United States.  However, there is no longer any socialized health care.  There’s also no minimum wage laws.  What this means is that immigrants will have to compete on a level playing field with Americans.  As such, fewer will actually enter the US, since employers will tend to side with people who actually speak English versus those who don’t.  And yes, I understand that many are fans of the minimum wage.  However, it serves to drive costs up.  Employers who are no longer bound by such laws will be able to lowers costs, and thereby prices (they’ll have to…people won’t have the income they might have had at one time).

In short, people are free.  They are free to make any decision they want, so long as they don’t hurt a living soul.  But they also have a responsibility to act right, or else they’ll get the full brunt of their stupidity.  And really, the right to be stupid is one of our most fundamental rights.  When government tries to take it away, they destroy our liberties in ways that people are oblivious too.

We must remain vigilant each day, and then, maybe, we’ll find our Libertarian Paradise.