State Senate Bills I Find Interesting (SB211 – SB221)

Conclusions:

SB 211: SUPPORT
SB 212: OPPOSE
SB 213: OPPOSE
SB 214: OPPOSE
SB 215: OPPOSE
SB 216: SUPPORT
SB 217: OPPOSE
SB 218: OPPOSE
SB 219: OPPOSE
SB 220: OPPOSE
SB 221: OPPOSE

SB 211 would remove some bureaucracy from the purchase of routine office supplies that are commonly restocked at least once per year. Because it lessens the red-tape burdens of State offices and thus improves their efficiency to some degree, I SUPPORT this measure.

SB 211: SUPPORT

SB 212 would place regulations on motor common or contract carriers used to transport railroad employees. I’m assuming this means busses and their drivers, correct? In any case, because it violates the rights of private contract and individual freedom, I must OPPOSE this measure.

SB 212: OPPOSE

SB 213 appears to limit liability for businesses based on any industry-wide liability theory, including market share. I firmly believe everyone, including businesses, should be held completely liable when their decisions actually harm another, and therefore I OPPOSE this measure.

SB 213: OPPOSE

SB 214 would allow county jail officers membership in the Peace Officers’ Annuity and Benefit Fund. While an equal opportunity argument could be made, I’m going to hold that retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual and not the State, and I’m going to turn the equal opportunity argument on its head in saying that it would be better served by having no one using such a plan than having everyone using it. For these reasons, I OPPOSE this measure.

SB 214: OPPOSE

SB 215 is another insurance matter, and we all know this isn’t exactly my strong point. This one appears to allow for independent review of certain insurance company decisions as they relate to refusal to pay for certain procedures. If the independent board rules in favor of the patient, the decision is binding. While I was leaning towards support, it is this clause that causes me to OPPOSE this measure. I believe these decisions should be made in court, with all due process requirements, and settled by a court of law. At this level, we are essentially talking about a contract dispute, and while the recommendation of the independent board should be duly considered by the court, settling of contract disputes is one of the FEW legitimate functions of government.

SB 215: OPPOSE

SB 216 would establish that any state employee who is the spouse of a combat disabled military member shall be entitled to up to 90 days personal leave with pay and an additional 30 days unpaid leave upon the spouse’s return to Georgia. While I was leaning towards opposition upon reading the summary and thinking that it would apply to everyone in the State, the language of the bill indicates that this bill only applies to employees of the State, and because the State is acting in its capacity as an employer and not as a governmental agency, I SUPPORT this measure. This measure is cosponsored by SWGA’s Sen. George Hooks (D-Americus).

SB 216: SUPPORT

SB 217 would add date-violence education into the sex education requirements. While date violence, as well as any other form of violence and particularly sexual violence, is extremely bad and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, it is not the State’s job to provide this education. It is the parents’. Indeed, the State should not be involved in education at all, and because of this I must OPPOSE this measure.

SB 217: OPPOSE

SB 218 is a ‘Driving While Distracted’ bill that explicitly bans texting while driving, but a loose interpretation would allow for dozens, if not hundreds, of other activities being banned, including talking on a cell phone, eating, putting on makeup, maybe even changing the radio station or changing CDs!

SB 218 would make a violation of the ‘Driving While Distracted’ law as severe as having an open container of alcohol in your car or speeding between 14 and 19 miles over the limit.

If you’ve been following my entries regarding the Albany Cell Phone Ban, you know exactly what is coming.

Because of its egregious attempts to limit individual freedom, I must most strenuously OPPOSE this bill.

SB 218: OPPOSE

SB 219 deals with where teachers who have leadership degrees but are not in administration will be placed on the salary scale. My problem is that I can’t figure out where it indicates they would be placed. Because I don’t fully understand this bill and my default stance when unclear is OPPOSE, I go with my default stance.

SB 219: OPPOSE

SB 220 would grant full scholarships to the children of any veteran who is killed or significantly disabled in combat in a post-9/11 combat zone. I have several problems with this, not the least of which is that the State should not be in education to begin with. Furthermore, however, is that the bill only allows this to apply to college students under age 25, and yet there are many students getting their first degree after this age as well. Because the State should not be involved in education at all, and because of the limited nature of these scholarships, I must OPPOSE this measure.

SB 220: OPPOSE

SB 221 is the annual attempt to allow any student that graduates in the top 10% of his class to receive automatic admittance into the college of his choice within the State. Again, the State has no business being in education to begin with, but there are multiple other problems with this bill. For one, no one should receive automatic admittance to any school. Another point is that being in the top 10% of one graduating class at one school is not even the same as being in the top 10% of another graduating class at the same school, and this doesn’t even take into consideration every other school in the state. Because of these and related issues, I must strenuously OPPOSE this measure.

SB 221: OPPOSE

Advertisements

One Response

  1. […] SB 211: SUPPORT SB 212: OPPOSE SB 213: OPPOSE SB 214: OPPOSE SB 215: OPPOSE SB 216: SUPPORT SB 217: OPPOSE SB 218: OPPOSE SB 219: OPPOSE SB 220: OPPOSE SB 221: OPPOSE SB 211 would remove some bureaucracy from the purchase of routine office supplies that are commonly restocked at least once per year. Because it lessens the red-tape burdens of State offices and thus improves their efficiency to some degree, I SUPPORT this measure. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: