Tuesday, November 07, 2006

My Endorsements

I will be voting this afternoon, but I thought it would be a good idea to come clean. Even though I have been posting reasons to vote Republican lately, I am actually going to vote Libertarian in most races, because I am not happy with the GOP either.

Truth be told, I expect the Republicans to sweep most of the offices in Georgia. What I would like to see is the Libertarians get more votes than the Democrats. THAT would be impressive.

Without further ado, my endorsements:

GOVERNOR: I expect Sonny Perdue to win easily. He has been a decent governor. He is a status quo candidate, and that is not too bad in Georgia.

As for Democrat Mark Taylor, does anyone know what he stands for? Me neither. I am not sure I want to find out either.

But my vote is going to Libertarian Garrett Michael Hayes. He is going to try to end the state income tax. How can you not like that? (For those of you out-of-staters, Georgia has a sales tax and an ad valorem tax too.)

LT. GOVERNOR: Libertarian Allen Buckley. Check out this list of primary beliefs from his website:
-The private sector is more efficient than public sector
-Separation of church and state
-Competition is good
-Government should exist only to serve the people, by handling things of common benefit that cannot be done efficiently on an individual basis (e.g., police services)
-Eminent domain needs to be restricted to traditional government needs
-Open government is essential
-Entitlements are not good
-Parents should be responsible for taking care of their children
-Protection of the environment
-A reasonable immigration policy should be enforced, primarily by significantly penalizing employers that hire illegal immigrants
-Fiscal Responsibility is a MUST

Hard to argue with that.

SECRETARY OF STATE: This is the one race where the Libertarians lost me. When you go to Kevin Madsen's website, there is a link which says "The Issues". Click on that, and you get a page which says "Vote For Kevin, He's the Best Man for the Job!". It is difficult for me to take a candidate like that seriously.

So my vote is going to Karen Handel. I like her plan for reforming our election process:
-Establishing a Truly Centralized, Fully-Integrated Voter Registration System.
-Providing uniformity in the voter registration and identification qualifications.
-Ensuring that only U.S. Citizens are participating in our elections.
-Providing for a practical approach for Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail, audits and software.


ATTORNEY GENERAL: This is the only race you will see me supporting a Democrat. Thurbert Baker has been a "tough on crime" A.G. for Georgia, and he deserves re-election.

COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE: I have one issue which NONE of the three candidates have offered solutions: What are they going to do about kudzu? Maybe next election...

In the meantime, my vote goes to Libertarian Jack Cashin. All three candidates look the same, but Cashin is the only one proposing bringing horse racing to Georgia. I would love to see that.

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: Sorry folks, but I have to send Republican Nathan Deal back to Congress. His only opponent is Democrat John Bradbury, who just strikes me as an anti-war radical.

OTHER STATEWIDE OFFICES:
COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE: John Oxendine (R).
STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT: David Chastain (L).
COMMISSIONER OF LABOR: Brent Brown (R).
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER: Paul MacGregor (L).
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER: Kevin Cherry (L).


PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS: The first one which restricts the use of Eminent Domain is a no-brainer. Vote yes.

The second one is a bit iffy:
"Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to provide that the tradition of fishing and hunting and the taking of fish and wildlife shall be preserved for the people and shall be managed by law and regulation for the public good?"

Truthfully, I do not see that this issue is important enough to amend the State Constitution. I am voting no.

I am wondering why the third one is even on the ballot:
"Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to authorize the General Assembly to provide for special motor vehicle license plates and dedicate the revenue from such plates for stated purposes, including dedications for the ultimate use of agencies, funds, or nonprofit corporations where it is found that there will be a benefit to the state?"

Considering this is entirely optional, I cannot think of a reason not to support it. If people want to buy the plates, more power to them. Vote yes.

STATEWIDE REFERENDA:
"Shall the Act be approved
which expands the ad valorem tax exemption for agricultural products and equipment to include certain additional farm equipment held under a lease purchase agreement?
"

I am against the ad valorem tax anyway. But if we have to have it, EVERYONE should suffer under it. I am voting no.

"Shall the Act be approved which expands the advalorem tax exemption for veterans organizations to include certain additional nonprofit veterans organizations which refurbish and operate historic military aircraft for educational purposes?"

If I won't support it for farmers, why would I support it for aircraft refurbishing? This one gets a "hell no".

"Shall the Act be approved which grants an exception from ad valorem
taxation on property owned by a charitable institution which generates income when that income is used exclusively for the operation of such charitable institution?
"

One more time: No.

"Shall the Act be approved which provides a homestead exemption for senior citizens in an amount equal to the actual levy for state ad valorem tax purposes on the homestead?"

No no no no no. Let's get rid of the tax, not exempt everything from it.

"Shall the Act be approved which provides a homestead exemption for the full value of the homestead with respect to all ad valorem taxes for the unremarried surviving spouse of a peace officer or firefighter who was killed in the line of duty?"

Awww...They are tugging on my heart strings. My answer is still no.

"Shall the Act be approved
which provides that, with respect to base year assessed value homestead exemptions, the surviving spouse of a deceased spouse who has been granted such a homestead exemption, shall receive that exemption at the same base year valuation that applied to the deceased spouse so long as that surviving spouse continues to occupy the home as a residence and homestead?
"

In the immortal words of Count Basie, "One mo' once": NO!

DAWSON COUNTY SPECIAL ELECTION: Welcome to the 21st century Dawson County. "Shall the issuance of licenses for the package sale of distilled spirits be approved?"

OF COURSE THEY SHOULD YOU LOONS!

Sometimes I have to remind myself where I live. Silly questions like this give me a swift kick in the head.

2 comments:

Kevin Cherry said...

I really want to thank you for your endorsements. I would also like to warn the eminent domain amendment is written with too many loopholes that allow future sessions of the General Assembly to define the definitions of "blighted" property without changing the proposed amendment. I am voting no to the eminent domain amendment to say come back with meaningful and real protection for property owners.

Again, thank you for voting, and I thank you for your trust in me to be a faithful public servant.

EdMcGon said...

Thanks for stopping by Kevin.

While I agree the eminent domain amendment does seem a bit vague, at this point I look at it as better than nothing.

Hopefully, with the right people in office, we will be able to get a more meaningful amendment in the future (hint hint nudge nudge).