The L-O-S-T in T-SPLOST refers to public trust
There’s a saying for politicians and for those of us who cover them: The voters are always right. While we’re bound to be subjected to a round or two of recriminations about who’s to blame for the absolute debacle that was the metro Atlanta T-SPLOST campaign, pay attention to those who show signs of understanding and accepting that saying. They’re the ones who will be most likely to find the way forward from here.
For my part, here’s what I think the voters were saying in their 63-37 defeat of the $7.2 billion tax.
The political class has lost our trust.
If that sounds obvious, consider that it’s also a puzzling situation, given that many of the same people who voted overwhelmingly against the T-SPLOST have been voting in large numbers to elect the same Republican politicians who gave us the T-SPLOST. I think there’s a pretty clear explanation: This is the consequence of having a one-party state.
Georgia has been a one-party state for pretty much 140 years now. The first 130 years, it was a one-party state ruled by Democrats. The past 10 years, it’s been a one-party state ruled by Republicans and Democrats-turned-Republicans. (Note: I am referring here only to the party holding the levers at the state level, not municipal or federal offices.) For most of those 140 years, there has been very little credible, effective opposition from the minority party. I’m sure it was worse for the Republicans at times between Reconstruction and Sonny Perdue’s watershed win in 2002, but the situation is pretty bleak right now for Georgia Democrats. And that means Georgia Republicans feel very little electoral heat, which leads them to act in a very insular way.
That’s played out no more clearly than in their attitude toward ethics: If legislators are wise, they’ll recognize that the lack of public trust on display in the T-SPLOST vote means they can’t very well ignore the support of 87 percent of GOP voters for a lengthening of the proverbial arm separating lobbyists from legislators. If I heard one voter say he thought T-SPLOST was all about rewarding political contributors and allies, I heard it from dozens of voters. Legislators cannot go too far in trying to improve the negative public perception around our lawmaking process.
Geographically, at least as it relates to the T-SPLOST, you can locate the center of that lack of trust along the Ga. 400 corridor. Perdue arguably lost Tuesday’s tax vote two years ago when he reneged on the longstanding promise to end the toll when the original bonds were paid off. An opinion poll conducted for the AJC, published last weekend, showed the 400 toll extension was a factor for 55 percent of voters — and that 64 percent of voters doubted the T-SPLOST would end when promised and be limited to the projects on the list.
Nathan Deal obviously thought he could show some good faith by announcing recently that the tolls would come down by the end of next year, fulfilling one of his campaign promises. But the AJC’s opinion poll showed the maneuver actually made voters less likely to vote for the T-SPLOST by a net 6 percentage points. The reason, in my view, is that it sends a signal that state government decides when and how to make these decisions on purely political considerations. Bad political considerations, it now appears.
There are a couple of ways for elected officials to show they understand this message. First and foremost, they must demonstrate clearly that all available transportation money is being spent as wisely and efficiently as possible.
That means showing transportation spending really is a priority for the state. All revenues from the motor fuel tax should be directed to transportation; currently, part of it goes to the general fund. When the inflation-driven formula for the motor fuel tax dictates that the rate should rise to keep spending level in real terms, state government should let it rise. Where money can be cut from lesser priorities and redirected to transportation infrastructure, it should be cut and redirected.
As for efficiency, the state needs to be much more transparent about which projects are priorities based on pure cost-benefit analysis, and begin spending the money we do have on the highest-rated projects. If that means re-examining the wisdom of balancing spending based on congressional districts — they might be equal in population, but they aren’t necessarily equal in terms of transportation needs — so be it.
The money I’ve talked about so far would probably be skewed toward roads rather than mass transit, if only because a constitutional amendment allowing gas-tax revenues to fund transit looks like a sure loser. Transit should be addressed in a two-step manner: First, create a truly regional (if not state-run) governance structure for mass transit in metro Atlanta that incorporates MARTA and the other transit agencies. Second, allow voters beyond Fulton and DeKalb to vote in a referendum to participate in the system, with specific descriptions of the infrastructure and services that would come with it. If they want to join, let them join the same way Fulton and DeKalb joined MARTA.
If some of that sounds like baby steps, well, that’s because they are. One of these days, the people who run our government — at the local, state and federal levels — are going to realize a little modesty on their part would go a long way toward re-establishing the public trust they’ve clearly lost.
– 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
1,018 comments Add your comment
Eat a Peach
August 1st, 2012
5:09 pm
USMC
How is that Electoral College looking for you?
hahahahahaha
All that talk will mean NADA on election day
Joe Mama
August 1st, 2012
5:10 pm
E. Cat — “Joe…sorry, my bad…sometimes it’s hard to tell who is quoting who…”
No worries.
USMC
August 1st, 2012
5:11 pm
Josef @ 5:07
Brother, I love you, but you left out the most important, key ingredients that make up a marriage…
One Man and One Woman.
Is the idea of a civil union so bad???
Pee Wee Herman
August 1st, 2012
5:12 pm
T-SPLOST? I have a Hyundai. Don’t agree with those stretching to compare homosexuality to race. One is a behavior and the other isn’t. There is no honest comparison though I understand your dishonest attempt top make it so. Personally – I have no room for hate in m heart.
josef
August 1st, 2012
5:13 pm
CAT
What you say, as you said, I get sorta (
)….I don’t much like the term “gay marriage” myself…marriage suits me just fine, and like I said above, when it comes to describing ours, we’re about as “traditional” as you can get…
Del
August 1st, 2012
5:14 pm
Doom,
You’re correct in your 4:51. The left goes on offense against anyone or any group of people who disagree with their position on issues. The majority of Christians disagree with same sex marriage based on religious beliefs but the left brands those who disagree with same sex marriage as bigots including Christians like Dan Cathy. This issue has gone on the ballot in 28 states and in each state same sex marriage was voted down. In the handful of states where it’s recognized, it was pushed through without a vote by activist politicians. I guess from the lefts viewpoint most Americans or at least half are all bigots.
Erwin's cat
August 1st, 2012
5:15 pm
josef I was at least hoping yours was more exciting than most considering the amount of attention the subject gets….I guessed everyone else thought you were having too much fun
Joe Mama
August 1st, 2012
5:17 pm
Tom — tried to respond to you twice, but the Intertubes swallowed my posts.
In short: check Wikipedia, Biblical Recorder and we’re going to Popeye’s.
josef
August 1st, 2012
5:17 pm
USMC
Okay, Mec, one mo time…marriage is a religiously sanctioned thingie and some theologies are not so limited in their definitions of what is and what is not…civil unions are another matter entirely. As Granddaddy said, “marriages are made in heaven. Civil unions are made at the Court House.” The State has no place in the marriage business, it has every interest in the civil union business. Make it a civil union license bureau and require the same document for any paring which wants state sanction. The European model…
Eat a Peach
August 1st, 2012
5:18 pm
14th amendment
Thulsa Doom
August 1st, 2012
5:18 pm
“I would posit that preaching damnation to hell fire eternal a pretty nasty attitude…and NO, not all Christians do it and not all brands preach it…but a lot, including Cathy’s do…jus trying to keep it in perspective…”
josef,
I feel ya josef but keep in mind that that eternal damnation that they preach doesn”t just mean gays. It means liars, pornographers, fornicators, etc. Its quite a long line. I would be just as damned if not more than you given the fornicatin I’ve done. The reality is that I’m in the same boat for the similar sins of the flesh as any gay and so are many other heterosexuals. But I don’t believe in the concept of any eternal hell where everyone is burning in perpetuity anyway. IMDO this is not what the bible says in regards to hell.
Eat a Peach
August 1st, 2012
5:21 pm
Del
Many issues in the history of this nation required the courts.
Should we go through them all. No, but here are two.
Suffrage
Civil Rights
Wouldn’t have need the those “political activists” if the neanderthals had done the right thing, uh?
josef
August 1st, 2012
5:22 pm
ERWIN’S
Bruno
August 1st, 2012
5:24 pm
Bruno brought up the notion of the good that CFA has done outweighing the bad. I pointed out that the Catholic Church tried the same argument in several of the child molestation trials of priests. Given that the RCC has done *far* more good than CFA could ever hope to do, I don’t think CFA’s use of that argument draws much water.
Sorry, Joe, have to side with the others here. Comparing the Cathy’s support for “traditional marriage” with the Catholic Church’s willful tolerance of crimes against children is a bit over the top. Most importantly, none of the organizations which the Cathy’s support wrote or enacted any of the “traditional marriage” laws. Those laws began hundreds of years ago, and have only recently been challenged. You’re comparing apples and sour grapes, Joe.
BTW, since Obama has also vocally supported DOMA in the past, did that change your support him?? Or did you simply look at the “big picture” and decide that the “good” outweighed the “bad” in making your political choice??
USMC
August 1st, 2012
5:24 pm
Josef@5:17
Okay Josef, Touche (as usual), but we just disagree.
BUT, I don’t HATE you or any other HOMOSEXUALS merely because I believe that the definition of marriage should not change from ONE Man and ONE Woman.
(nor do I believe in trying to “rescue” homosexuals as Michele “smoking hot corndog eater” Bachmann does)
Skip
August 1st, 2012
5:24 pm
It’s great that that whole jobs thing is over so you can spend 10 pages on a chicken sandwich. And some wonder why the country struggles.
Eat a Peach
August 1st, 2012
5:25 pm
Thulsa Doom @ 5:18
Good points, but to say that some expressing those views bring up the other things you mentoned slightly less than gays, would be an understatement.
Seems may are more in the condemnation of others business, but aren’t to harsh on themselves. At least on the blogs. Not all, but some seem to get down right self righteous when it comes to gays and how their “religion” views it, but not much about their own “sins”, if you will.
ank
August 1st, 2012
5:26 pm
Kyle, i dont often agree with your columns, but i have to give you credit on this one. I think that you nail it on the head. Trust seems to me to be a major player here.
What i would ask you, and all these bloggers, is the following: what percentage of people on this site voted for Sonny (TWICE!), Deal (once), Cagle (TWICE), and the list of republican dominated state offices, including both house and state senate.
I would guess >80%, including just blindly marking a straight republican ticket. Why, because of the R?
Karma bites, doesn’t it.
josef
August 1st, 2012
5:27 pm
THULSA
Ah, but so many of them have jumping on gays have “evolved” on those others, you know, like divorce and remarriage! They got ‘em one of the Bookman’s Get out of Leviticus Free Cards…
As for the fire and brimstone hell, it’s Zoroasterian, not even Jewish, much less Christian!
Thulsa Doom
August 1st, 2012
5:29 pm
“Well, I can’t peer into the hearts and minds of the people who were trying to deny African-Americans their civir rights back in the 50s and 60s, but given the firehosings, the dogs, the church bombings and the beatings, I feel pretty safe in defining attempts to infringe upon a group’s civil rights as hatred for the members of that group.”
Joe mama,
The big difference here is that you clearly delineated a variety of *actions* such as bombings, attack dogs, etc. which very clearly showed these people’s hatred of blacks. You can show no such thing regarding Mr. Cathy. All you have with him is an opinion based upon his religious views. Big difference between that and bombings, attack dogs, etc. I’m surprised you can’t see that.
“Do you think that infringing on the civil rights of gay Americans falls under loving the sinners or under hating their sin?”
Rejected. Mr. Cathy is not infringing upon anyone’s civil rights. He is simply stating his opinion. When he refused to serve gays then you would have a case. As of now you do not. And just because you think its a *civil rights* issue does not make it so. That is just your opinion.
“Believing it is one thing. Donating large sums to groups who are trying to deny civil rights to people is quite another thing,”
Again regarding the *civil rights* issue. That is just your opinion and your decision to frame gay marriage as a *civil rights* issue. It does not make it so.
One thing I find interesting is that when California rejected gay marriage in exit polling the groups that most adamantly opposed gay marriage and who carried the day were blacks and to a lesser extent latinos. I believe blacks opposed it 60-40 or more and that proved to be the difference. Perhaps your time would be better spent educating minorities on their *hate* problem vs focusing on Mr. Cathy. Or is that just more of the selective outrage of white liberals?
josef
August 1st, 2012
5:30 pm
USMC
One man and one woman? So, no divorce and remarriage? Or is it just one at a time? Have as many as you want, just keep the paperwork in line?
md
August 1st, 2012
5:31 pm
” And sensible analysis shows that the return to prior rates will not have adverse consequences for that small group (2 million people) and will raise revenues. ”
Does that sensible anaysis show an economy backing up?
And Joe Mama:
Yes, Obama has “evolved” (so he says), but when he made that statement I read of no Mayors telling him to stay out of their cities……did you?
Bruno
August 1st, 2012
5:31 pm
The State has no place in the marriage business, it has every interest in the civil union business. Make it a civil union license bureau and require the same document for any paring which wants state sanction.
josef–Since most people (to my knowledge) are fine with civil unions, why isn’t there more of a push to re-frame the issue in this way from the gay “side” of the issue. Seems like semantics keep getting in the way of what you’re really after–the same benefits that heterosexual couples enjoy.
Beverly Fraud
August 1st, 2012
5:33 pm
But…but…but…who wouldn’t trust Kasim Reed after all he did to help Beverly Hall remain in power after the cheating scandal?
I mean after showing SUCH unparalleled integrity by supporting Hall, how could voters NOT trust him?
Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American
August 1st, 2012
5:33 pm
One party criminalizes thought and regulates speech.
Fix this problem in November.
Vote American. Vote Republican. Pardon the redundancy.
Del
August 1st, 2012
5:34 pm
“Wouldn’t have need the those “political activists” if the neanderthals had done the right thing, uh?”
With over half the states in the union passing laws or amendments banning same sex marriage it’s only the highest court that can legalize it as the law of the land. Because there’s no constitutional basis for making same sex marriage the law of the land it will remain a state legislative issue or an issue for the voters in each state to decide. Good luck living among the neanderthals, we’ll outlive you.
Joe Mama
August 1st, 2012
5:34 pm
Bruno — “Sorry, Joe, have to side with the others here. Comparing the Cathy’s support for “traditional marriage” with the Catholic Church’s willful tolerance of crimes against children is a bit over the top.”
Except that’s not what I did. *You* brought up the notion of the good CFA has done outweighing the bad; I simply pointed out that using the selfsame argument didn’t help the RCC. Claiming that I’m making that comparison is a clear misrepresentation of what I said.
“Most importantly, none of the organizations which the Cathy’s support wrote or enacted any of the “traditional marriage” laws.”
But they *have* gotten involved in court cases about them. I tried to post the CFA Wiki page; if you go there and look at the section entitled “Controversy regarding LGBT issues,” that section *begins* with a discussion of a CFA-supported group that filed an amicus brief in the Prop 8 case in California.
“Those laws began hundreds of years ago, and have only recently been challenged. You’re comparing apples and sour grapes, Joe.”
Prop 8 began hundreds of years ago? Come now. You’re leaping to a lot of conclusions here, Bruno.
“BTW, since Obama has also vocally supported DOMA in the past, did that change your support him?? Or did you simply look at the “big picture” and decide that the “good” outweighed the “bad” in making your political choice??”
I’ve said several times that Obama wasn’t my first choice, and I’ve criticized him several times on Jay’s blog. If you’re looking for me to excuse him, then you’re looking in the wrong place. And if you’re looking for me to criticize him, I’ll certainly do it. That said, if you’re anticipating that I’ll switch parties based on that (and I’m not saying that’s your objective), then show me a Republican Presidential candidate who will clearly state that he’s opposed to DOMA and wants to do away with it. Then we’ll have something to talk about.
Otherwise, the GOP’s got no high ground on this issue from where I stand, Obama may be an abject disappointment to many liberals in this regard, but the GOP is unlikely in the extreme to have anything better from our POV.
josef
August 1st, 2012
5:35 pm
BTW
Al’s cuddin’ Gore Vidal died…RIP, you old fraud…
Thulsa Doom
August 1st, 2012
5:35 pm
josef,
No doubt. There lies an incredible amount of Christian heterosexual hypocrisy on the issue of hetero marriage and divorce alone. I think that the only time divorce is suitable in the bible is in the event of divorce and some other allowances such as severe abuse but that’s about it.
As for the issue of an eternal hell don’t get me started. I was agnostic for many years because I had a difficult time reconciling a loving God with the idea that he would let sinners who didn’t make it into heaven burn into writhing hellfire for all of eternity for the sins of one meager lifetime. Especially when Jesus paid for all the sins of the world in only 1 day of suffering. I like Scout’s views and others but we would go round and round on this subject all day long.
getalife
August 1st, 2012
5:35 pm
Why is will robme not in jail for not paying taxes for 10 years?
10 years should get 10 years in a federal penitentiary.
Arrest will robme.
Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American
August 1st, 2012
5:35 pm
Homosexuals have the same right to marry as anyone else. They just can’t pervert the meaning of the word by pretending that it’s possible to marry someone of the same sex.
Real Americans know what marriage is.
They BOTH suck
August 1st, 2012
5:36 pm
“nor do I believe in trying to “rescue” homosexuals as Michele “smoking hot corndog eater” Bachmann does) ”
That is the technique she employs when her husband needs an extra hand or mouth at the cure the gays clinic he operates.
Thulsa Doom
August 1st, 2012
5:38 pm
“Seems may are more in the condemnation of others business, but aren’t to harsh on themselves.’
Eat a peach,
As 2 pastors told me the biggest hypocrites in the world are usually some of the people sitting in the front pew at church. And from Doomy’s own personal experience the biggest ho I ever knew was the most church going girl I ever knew.
Joe Mama
August 1st, 2012
5:38 pm
Doom — “The big difference here is that you clearly delineated a variety of *actions* such as bombings, attack dogs, etc. which very clearly showed these people’s hatred of blacks. You can show no such thing regarding Mr. Cathy. All you have with him is an opinion based upon his religious views. Big difference between that and bombings, attack dogs, etc. I’m surprised you can’t see that.”
Because Cathy *funds* groups who take action against gays. I’m surprised you can’t see that.
“Rejected. Mr. Cathy is not infringing upon anyone’s civil rights.”
Denied. He’s funding those who are trying to do it.
“He is simply stating his opinion.”
No, he’s clarified that his opinion is also his *company’s* opinion.
“When he refused to serve gays then you would have a case. As of now you do not.”
Rejected. You don’t get to decide my opinion on this, Doom.
“And just because you think its a *civil rights* issue does not make it so. That is just your opinion.”
And I’m not asking you to share it, Doom. I’m surprised you can’t see that.
“Again regarding the *civil rights* issue. That is just your opinion and your decision to frame gay marriage as a *civil rights* issue. It does not make it so.”
Persuasion, Doom. Give it a try.
“One thing I find interesting is that when California rejected gay marriage in exit polling the groups that most adamantly opposed gay marriage and who carried the day were blacks and to a lesser extent latinos. I believe blacks opposed it 60-40 or more and that proved to be the difference. Perhaps your time would be better spent educating minorities on their *hate* problem vs focusing on Mr. Cathy. Or is that just more of the selective outrage of white liberals?”
No, it’s just your ham-handed attempt at race-baiting, Doom.
getalife
August 1st, 2012
5:38 pm
I don’t care what you do with your junk, I care about willard hiding his papers.
Eat a Peack
August 1st, 2012
5:39 pm
Del
Nice side step on those “political activist” judges.
Must be heart wrenching for you that they would ban legal segregation, allow people to vote, etc.
Thanks for reply.
hahahahaha
Joe Mama
August 1st, 2012
5:39 pm
md — “And Joe Mama: Yes, Obama has “evolved” (so he says), but when he made that statement I read of no Mayors telling him to stay out of their cities……did you?”
Don’t know. What kind of food does Obamarama serve?
josef
August 1st, 2012
5:40 pm
BRUNO
I would agree with that. The problem is so long as we keep calling it a marriage license and a marriage license bureau, we’re trapped into a “separate but (not quite) equal” argument…once we get to the point of requiring the same document and registration of civil union for one and all in state recognition, we can go full tilt boogie into the is too-is not nyanh nyanh over what “marriage” is…
getalife
August 1st, 2012
5:41 pm
Real American will not vote gop for another collapse.
It will take a decade to clean up their last collapse.
Joe Mama
August 1st, 2012
5:41 pm
Everyone, be well and drive safely. I’m out.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
August 1st, 2012
5:41 pm
josef- Try to keep the sickening details to yourself. I cannot even imagine!
ew
Thulsa Doom
August 1st, 2012
5:41 pm
“Yes, Obama has “evolved” (so he says), but when he made that statement I read of no Mayors telling him to stay out of their cities……did you?”
md,
Its that selective outrage thing again with white liberals.
Eat a Peach
August 1st, 2012
5:42 pm
Thusla Doom
I hear you. If those same bloggers were calling out their own “sins”, they might have some credibility whether I agreed with them or not.
Since they don’t, I can only laugh at them. Oh well, it certainly isn’t the majority so that is a good thing.
Thulsa Doom
August 1st, 2012
5:42 pm
Joe Mama,
We’ll see you tomorrow. Welcome to Kyles.
pogo
August 1st, 2012
5:43 pm
Political Correctness is the storm bringer for the new Orwellian state that is our world. Free speech has been trampled upon by it and companies and the government now conduct their business based upon it. Ultimately, even the people that were so in love with it will despise it because what it will finally deliver to them will be total control of both their minds AND their bodies by “The State”. Without Freedom of Speech, freedom is gone forever and we are now about there. But beware for all of those that are so enamoured of PC. What is considered to be Political Correctness today may be totally different tomorrow dependent upon what kind of leader/dictator you have. That leader could very well be a fascist, a communist, a socialist, a marxist, a religious fundamentalist or any number of other un-pleasant psycho leaders. But when laws are passed based upon present day political or socialogical whims it is hard to undo them.
USMC
August 1st, 2012
5:44 pm
“One man and one woman? So, no divorce and remarriage? Or is it just one at a time? Have as many as you want, just keep the paperwork in line?”–Josef
I couldn’t have said it better myself, josef.
I don’t get the “no divorce and remarriage” part.
Is that supposed to change the definition of marriage?
I don’t see how.
getalife
August 1st, 2012
5:44 pm
Another friendly reminder to our cons friends.
You will be the minority one day so stop discrimination or it will happen to you.
Thulsa Doom
August 1st, 2012
5:45 pm
“If those same bloggers were calling out their own “sins”, they might have some credibility whether I agreed with them or not.”
Eat a peach,
If it made you feel better about some of us conservative critics/hypocrites I would start by calling out my own sins. But who the hell wants to hear that boring litany of crap for days on end about Doomy’s lasciviousness. Besides the girls would just say EWWWW! and be driven from the blog outta pure disgust.
josef
August 1st, 2012
5:45 pm
THULSA
I’ve always been kinda partial to the Catholic purgatory…
When I was in Catholic school, the priest teaching religion (remember that Rolly Hosiery didn’t discriminate in admission practices so we had a large Jewish and Protestant component who were in separate religion classes) explained it to us as : “it means you better be nice to everyone you meet so you’ve got more friends to pray you out!”
They BOTH suck
August 1st, 2012
5:46 pm
getalife
Not sure how unreal of an American an individual is because they vote GOP. I would probably disagree on numerous issues with a good percentage of them, but they are real Americans.
Those words make you appear to be basically the same as some of the right leaning bloggers at Bookman’s and here at Kyle’s place.