How I’m voting on July 31
The July 31 primary is almost upon us, and early voting has already begun. It’s time to declare.
Not about the T-SPLOST. Not today.
Nor about contested elections. I make endorsements for elections I vote in, and my Buckhead district offers me no say in the races that are among this year’s most impressive (the State Senate 6th District fight among Josh Belinfante, Drew Ellenburg and Hunter Hill), most interesting (the fireworks-laden 9th Congressional District contest between Doug Collins and Martha Zoller) and most infuriating (the 12th Congressional District, where Republicans seem to be working to let John Barrow squeak out re-election despite a new, more GOP-friendly map).
There are, however, some non-binding ballot questions facing both Republican and Democratic voters in this election. Here’s how I plan to vote on the GOP questions:
1. Should Georgia have casino gambling with funds going to education?
No. Georgians aren’t well-served by expanding gambling at all.
I’ve gambled in casinos a time or two but see no reason to have them here. Certainly not for development: Casinos don’t want their customers to spend money elsewhere. That’s why, during a trip to Tunica, Miss., a few years ago, I found little besides a Wendy’s and had to drive to the next town just to find a grocery store.
That, not the glittering Las Vegas strip, is what we can expect here. And as a friend said the other day, when was the last time you heard someone say they were moving their family to Biloxi?
People with the means to visit casinos in nearby states arguably can afford to lose their money. A local casino will attract those who can’t. The state shouldn’t be in the business of enabling them.
You might say the state already is in that business, via the lottery, and you’d be right. That’s no reason to go further.
Nor is money for “education.” (Let’s assume we’re talking about the HOPE scholarship.)
HOPE spurred growth in prestige for many state colleges. It spurred even faster growth in tuition and fees, as many colleges knew many new students, at least, would feel insulated from price hikes. If you’re on HOPE, that’s a good deal, if decreasingly so. If not, college is now less affordable.
The United States faces a bubble in higher education that reflects the worst of the housing bubble (people taking on debt they can’t afford, hoping for financial gains that are becoming illusory for many) and health care (too much of the cost borne by third parties). Georgia needs to figure out what that’s going to look like and how to deal with it, not pump more gambling-infused air into it.
2. Do you support ending the current practice of unlimited gifts from lobbyists to state legislators by imposing a $100 cap on such gifts?
Yes, as I’ve written many times.
3. Should active duty military personnel who are under the age of 21 be allowed to obtain a Georgia weapons carry license?
Yes. The idea is that soldiers have been trained to use weapons. I would also license others equally well-trained.
4. Should citizens who wish to vote in a primary election be required to register by their political party affiliation at least thirty (30) days prior to such primary election?
No. Voters would be better-served by reducing barriers for third parties to stage primaries, spurring competition.
5. Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to provide that the paramount right to life is vested in each innocent human being from his or her earliest biological beginning without regard to age, race, sex, health, function, or condition of dependency?
No, with an asterisk.
If asked whether I agree with the right to life for the unborn, I’d say “yes.” The problem with this “personhood” approach is it amounts to a Hail Mary pass from our own 30-yard-line on fourth-and-inches.
Such an amendment would allow no circumstances under which an abortion would be legal, except (possibly) when the mother’s life is threatened. This amounts to moving the goal posts significantly, at a time when the pro-life movement is making progress legislatively — though the efficacy of this year’s “fetal pain bill” remains to be seen — and in public opinion. (I wrote more about this shifting of the goal posts a couple of years ago.)
The progress on public opinion, however, practically vanishes without the most common exceptions (rape or incest, plus danger to the mother’s life). What’s more, these exceptions apply to a tiny fraction of all abortions. So personhood, which has been rejected in Colorado and Mississippi, sacrifices potentially big pro-life progress for purity of principle. That’s not my idea of a clear conscience.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
90 comments Add your comment
@@
July 19th, 2012
10:56 am
I’ve always wondered. Is there a state law that prohibits gambling on private property?
My father-in-law was a gambler (as is his son). He only went to Vegas occasionally. Most of his gambling (high stakes) was done on private property…usually a barn or cabin in the woods.
ChazInAtl
July 19th, 2012
11:00 am
If “personhood” is granted, do pregnant women get two votes?
We need to stop wasting time and money debating abortion. It needs to remain legal for the simple reason that it needs to remain a safe medical procedure.
If you’re against abortion, don’t have one. Yours is the only body you need be concerned about.
It’s a “slippery slope” issue rooted too deeply in religion. Why stop at abortion? Ban blood transfusions, organ transplants and cosmetic surgery! How’s that for interfering in your god’s plan?
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 19th, 2012
11:06 am
Again, troll, not sure what you’re getting at.
Perhaps if you can misrepresent my position with a little more specificity?
Progressive Humanist
July 19th, 2012
11:08 am
How are you doing Tiberius?
@@
July 19th, 2012
11:12 am
Detroit man gambled away more than $1.5M after ATM error
Ronald Page, 55, took advantage of a bank mistake that placed his account into a “pay all’ status that allowed him to withdraw unlimited overdrafts, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Detroit said. And withdraw he allegedly did: From August 1 to 18 in 2009, Page hit the ATMs, mostly at casinos, and cashiers –for $1,543,104.
It’s the ATM’s fault.
Yours is the only body you need be concerned about.
That’s good to know. Next time some liberal accuses me of being self-absorbed…worrying about no”body” other than myself, I’ll use it.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 19th, 2012
11:15 am
“How are you doing Tiberius?”
As they say, Progressive Humanist, fine as frog’s hair!
Whoever “they” are. . .
You?
Just saying..
July 19th, 2012
11:20 am
“…misrepresent my position…”
Progressive Humanist: Looks innocent, with his palms up like that, doesn’t he?
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 19th, 2012
11:21 am
@@
To you question about gambling on private property, yes, in GA it is illegal. We had a Sheriff back in the day, who survived by getting payoffs from people playing poker, fighting chickens, running moonshine, playing the “bug”, etc. and his job was to tip them off, if a GBI raid was being planned. Still illegal, but it goes on most everywhere and since it involves otherwise law abiding citizens, it is usually ignored by LE, unless trouble starts there.
Bruno
July 19th, 2012
11:21 am
People with the means to visit casinos in nearby states arguably can afford to lose their money. A local casino will attract those who can’t. The state shouldn’t be in the business of enabling them.
As an enthusiastic gambler, I completely agree with you on that point, Kyle. I enjoy my yearly jaunts to Biloxi or Vegas, but am glad that they are far away and take significant planning to go. If there were a casino in downtown Atlanta, it would be too easy to hop in the car and drop a few hundred every week. I’m not arguing that the State needs to be my nanny, but they shouldn’t be my enabler either. The fact that we have no casinos is one of the things I love about GA.
Everyone: Please vote NO to casino gambling in GA.
Just saying..
July 19th, 2012
11:24 am
“Is there a state law that prohibits gambling on private property?”
Fairly certain the state uses the same principle that covers murder on private property…
Bruno
July 19th, 2012
11:26 am
Still illegal, but it goes on most everywhere and since it involves otherwise law abiding citizens, it is usually ignored by LE, unless trouble starts there.
I think one of the determining factors also revolves around whether any fees are being charged or if there is a house “rake”. That turns a friendly poker game into “commercial gambling”.
From reading the paper, it does seem that LE is cracking down pretty hard on all of the “slot machines” in gas stations lately. When I lived in Atlanta, I had a video gaming establishment open up next door to my office. I called every LE agency I could think of, and they never lifted a finger to shut them down. My guess is that some payola was involved.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
July 19th, 2012
11:26 am
Bruno, surprised at your position, as you are obviously a freedom loving American. What are you going to do if Alabama takes the lead, and opens a poor person fleecing station in Phoenix City?
Bruno
July 19th, 2012
11:28 am
2. Do you support ending the current practice of unlimited gifts from lobbyists to state legislators by imposing a $100 cap on such gifts?
I’m guessing #2 should be a no-brainer.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 19th, 2012
11:28 am
I win every time I go to Vegas. 7 card stud only, know your house shills and fold every hand that isn’t a pair or 3 of a straight or flush. Have extreme patience. It’s rather enjoyable.
@@
July 19th, 2012
11:29 am
I think one of the determining factors also revolves around whether any fees are being charged or if there is a house “rake”. That turns a friendly poker game into “commercial gambling”.
Like paying for a cot? A chair? A new deck? A sandwich? A soda?
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 19th, 2012
11:32 am
Progressive Humanist, you have now just violated two of Kyle’s new rules. One, where you have engaged in a personal attack rather than on the topic at hand. Second, in referring to a poster as something other then their blogging name.
Your comment has been reported to the AJC.
Hopefully, this is goodbye to you.
Bruno
July 19th, 2012
11:33 am
Bruno, surprised at your position, as you are obviously a freedom loving American.
I generally do support libertarian positions, but also recognize my own personal weaknesses and try to seek environments which minimize the temptation. A person is allowed a few personal inconsistencies, aren’t they??
What are you going to do if Alabama takes the lead, and opens a poor person fleecing station in Phoenix City?
Wise people stay on this side of the border.
Not sure if you are aware, but Phenix City (the correct spelling) had a loooong history of gambling and vice. Here in Columbus, a general’s wife led a campaign to shut down the strip clubs a few years ago. Now the dancers have to keep their clothes on.
Progressive Humanist
July 19th, 2012
11:35 am
Come one, Tiberius, I’m just asking a relevant question. Care to answer it? Or do you want to report me again?
citizen
July 19th, 2012
11:39 am
Off topic, but I still have a constitutional law question. We need campaign finance reform.
The only way that I can see accomplishing this is with a 28th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. If we could vote into office enough constitutionlist, do you think the new law would be upheld in the Supreme Court as constitutional since the Supreme Court considers campaign contributions as a form of free speech? This will take a few election cycles but I do believe we can get this done with enough support.
Bruno
July 19th, 2012
11:42 am
Come one, Tiberius, I’m just asking a relevant question. Care to answer it? Or do you want to report me again?
PH–I don’t care about the insults, but you need to respect people’s blog names. Would you like for us to publish your real name and address here?? Quit being a jerk.
Just saying..
July 19th, 2012
11:46 am
Tiberius – pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 19th, 2012-11:32 am “…Second, in referring to a poster as something other then their blogging name.
Your comment has been reported to the AJC.”
Did someone say “troll”?
Cause we all look up to integrity.
And down on those who don’t have it.
Kyle Wingfield
July 19th, 2012
11:47 am
Progressive Humanist: I fail to see how that’s relevant to the discussion. And Tiberius is right about the use of blog handles. I’ve removed the comment and will remove you from the blog unless you drop that topic. This is exactly the kind of thing that threw comment threads way out of bounds recently.
@@
July 19th, 2012
11:47 am
March 24, 2009, may go down as a turning point in the history of the campaign-finance reform debate in America. On that day, in the course of oral argument before the Supreme Court in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, United States deputy solicitor general Malcolm Stewart inadvertently revealed just how extreme our campaign-finance system has become.
The case addressed the question of whether federal campaign-finance law limits the right of the activist group Citizens United to distribute a hackneyed political documentary entitled Hillary: The Movie. The details involved an arcane provision of the law, and most observers expected a limited decision that would make little news and not much practical difference in how campaigns are run. But in the course of the argument, Justice Samuel Alito interrupted Stewart and inquired: “What’s your answer to [the] point that there isn’t any constitutional difference between the distribution of this movie on video [on] demand and providing access on the internet, providing DVDs, either through a commercial service or maybe in a public library, [or] providing the same thing in a book? Would the Constitution permit the restriction of all of those as well?” Stewart, an experienced litigator who had represented the government in campaign-finance cases at the Supreme Court before, responded that the provisions of McCain-Feingold could in fact be constitutionally applied to limit all those forms of speech. The law, he contended, would even require banning a book that made the same points as the Citizens United video.
There was an audible gasp in the courtroom. Then Justice Alito spoke, it seemed, for the entire audience: “That’s pretty incredible.” By the time Stewart’s turn at the podium was over, he had told Justice Anthony Kennedy that the government could restrict the distribution of books through Amazon’s digital book reader, Kindle; responded to Justice David Souter that the government could prevent a union from hiring a writer to author a political book; and conceded to Chief Justice John Roberts that a corporate publisher could be prohibited from publishing a 500-page book if it contained even one line of candidate advocacy.–National Affairs Magazine
Be very careful what you ask for, citizen. The voice you silence may be your own.
@@
July 19th, 2012
11:53 am
Kyle:
How I’m voting on July 31
So you don’t do the early voting thing?
bigbill
July 19th, 2012
11:57 am
T-Splost represents a drastic sea change in the way state and local governments have funded road building and improvement funding from taxpayers’ tax funds: the T-Splost approach taxes local citizens where the roads and improvements are needed. This T-Splost approach constitutes a huge change in the source and methodology of taxing: who is taxed, how the tax funds are allocated. It becomes all local, not statewide. For decades this type of funding has been achieved through road taxes on the general population of the entire state in the form of gasoline taxes mostly. But increasing the gasoline tax in Georgia to pay for needed road and rapid transit improvements is a no-no in the Republican-controlled Georgia General Assembly a large number of whose Republican members signed the Grover Norquist no new taxes pledge or otherwise support it. Plus state tax revenues are down due to the recession. So, what to do? T-Splost provides the answer for these Republicans. Let the local citizens in the area needing improvements vote to pay for it through a T-Splost local sales tax increase voter referendum. Start the discussion not with, “Should we even agree to this new methodology? Do we even want to do this?” but with “Which of the myriad benefits of the T-Splost do you favor? Let’s focus on prioritizing them.” So the taxpayers are increasing taxes (by a direct vote) on themselves. The Republicans in the General Assembly get a free pass. They don’t have to vote on a needed tax increase. If the General Assembly won’t fund the needed road improvements, then that should be the end of it.The improvements should not be funded.Then these Republicans can face the taxpayers in the next election to explain why they voted not to fund these needed improvements. But don’t allow them to do this end run on Atlanta citizens. Don’t let them violate their sacrosanct philosophical opposition to any new or increased taxes of any kind. Don’t let them achieve their tax increase through T-Splost. Keep them honest. If they want it, make them get the tax increase the right way, by a vote of the General Assembly.Don’t let them pull off this sea change in how roads are funded. Vote NO on T-Splost.
@@
July 19th, 2012
12:00 pm
Why did Neanderthals have such humongous right arms–CSMonitor
The unusually powerful right arms of Neanderthals may not be due to a spear-hunting life as once suggested, but rather one often spent scraping animal skins for clothes and shelters, researchers say.
What…no southpaws back in the day?
Bruno
July 19th, 2012
12:00 pm
5. Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to provide that the paramount right to life is vested in each innocent human being from his or her earliest biological beginning without regard to age, race, sex, health, function, or condition of dependency?
Although there is no doubt from a biological perspective that life begins at conception, I see the “right to life” amendment as a slippery slope. There are two lives at stake during every pregnancy, and the rights of each of the individuals involved need to be balanced. Hard-core Lefties seem to only want to consider the rights of the mother, while hard-core Righties only want to consider the rights of the child.
iggy
July 19th, 2012
12:02 pm
Just in time for TSplost failure, GA govt now will bring down the GA 400 toll. Too little too late.
NO TSPLOST!
Bruno
July 19th, 2012
12:02 pm
Later……
bu2
July 19th, 2012
12:08 pm
I’m with you 100% on all of these and the reasoning. Although I left #5 blank when I voted. I believe we should be changing minds, not laws. But I sympathize with the idea. I abstained with an asterisk.
Kyle Wingfield
July 19th, 2012
12:11 pm
@@ @ 11:53: I like to leave my options open, in case of last-minute information.
Btw, there’s a new post upstairs about today’s announcement by Gov. Deal that the toll on Ga. 400 will come down by the end of next year. My take is going to surprise some of you…
Just saying..
July 19th, 2012
12:12 pm
iggy
July 19th, 2012-12:02 pm:”Just in time for TSplost failure, GA govt now will bring down the GA 400 toll.”
That’s Ah-mazing.
Or maybe it’s those who can’t believe government is just cold political calculus.
Progressive Humanist
July 19th, 2012
12:13 pm
Okay, how about this: People should have the right to gamble with their own money. Yes, some people have personality quirks that make them more susceptible to become gambling addicts, but that also true of alcohol and smoking, which are both legal. Many would argue that that type of choice is part of living in a free society. What I would object to, though, is, for instance, a form of gambling in which someone offered an “investment opportunity” for people to use their retirement funds, and then having the “portfolio manager” misdirect those funds into his own bank account. Now that’s a form of gambling that should land the shyster in prison. I wonder if that is the sort of thing Romney is hiding? Or anyone else?
Uh oh
July 19th, 2012
12:14 pm
Is there a blogger named “troll” on today?
Just saying..
July 19th, 2012
12:27 pm
Only if you’re Special…
citizen
July 19th, 2012
12:28 pm
Thanks @@. How about this issue. Both parties, it appears to me, use federal government agencies to reimburse campaign contributors. I appears to me that the Republicans use the Defense Department to award their contributors and the Democrats use the Department of Energy to funnel money back into the hands of their bundlers. My beef is with the amount of money and power concentrated in Washington.
How can we right this ship before we all lose?
ld
July 19th, 2012
4:34 pm
KYLE:
Did he[[ freeze over?
Except that I’d leave off the “*” on “5″, this PROBRESSIVE AGREES with all your choices and for many of the same reasons.
ld
July 19th, 2012
4:34 pm
ooops
progressive
ld
July 19th, 2012
4:36 pm
Caveat: IF casino gambling becomes legal–require the license and other fees associated with it equal TWICE the increased cost of policing that kind of business — and tax winnings heavily.
Michael H. Smith
July 19th, 2012
6:11 pm
1. Should Georgia have casino gambling with funds going to education?
No. Georgians aren’t well-served by expanding gambling at all.
No but for different reasons. Th rest with exception to areas of number 5 is agreeable.