Jim Martin backs Clair Muller for ATL council prez
Jim Martin, the former U.S. Senate candidate who topped the 2008 ballot for Democrats, has moved on.
After endorsing Kasim Reed in the race for mayor last week, Martin today backed Clair Muller in her race against Ceasar Mitchell for Atlanta City Council president.
“Clair has the knowledge, skill, and integrity to be very effective in uniting all parts of our city,” Martin said in a press release issued by the Muller campaign. “I admire her ability to get people with various points of view to work together for the common good.”
We were interested in speaking with Martin, but a Muller spokeswoman confirmed that the former state lawmaker departed today for the islands of Fiji. Seriously.
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2010 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
26 comments Add your comment
Base
November 17th, 2009
5:27 pm
A couple of wackos!
Angry Taxpayer
November 17th, 2009
5:32 pm
Jim truly has lost his marbles.
Mary Norwood mess up
November 17th, 2009
5:40 pm
Vote for Kashim Reed for Mayor
Obama is tanking in the polls and he ain't losing the Republicans.
November 17th, 2009
5:45 pm
This is off topic, but too funny and sad. Since Jumbo G will never, ever post a negative story about Obama, I thought I would share this here. Check out the headline and click the link for the story.
Headline:
Exclusive: Jobs ‘Saved or Created’ in Congressional Districts That Don’t Exist
Human Error Blamed for Crediting New Stimulus Jobs to Nonexistent Places
By JONATHAN KARL
Nov. 16, 2009
Link: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jobs-saved-created-congressional-districts-exist/story?id=9097853
Do not buy the Obama excuse. Obama obviously put VP “Plugs” Biden in charge of counting created and “saved” jobs.
Raquel Morris
November 17th, 2009
5:48 pm
Jim Martin is on a roll this election season…a roll of picking the wrong candidates! Once his Mayoral and City Council candidates lose, hopefully we will never hear from his Ichibad Crane-looking self again.
To people who don't get it
November 17th, 2009
6:31 pm
GREAT PAIR!!!!! Kasim and Clair ALL THE WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Start Over!
November 17th, 2009
7:59 pm
Clair Muller is the obvious choice. All in one year, Ceasar Mitchell voted to raise my property taxes and then got a $15,000 ethics fine for getting caught illegally paying his own brother with our tax dollars. This one ain’t even a close call.
Kasim and Clair.
AtlantasFuture
November 17th, 2009
8:00 pm
Muller and Norwood together would do the best job of pulling off politics as unusual for Atlanta. This means that there will actually be accountability for where all of our tax payer $s go.
Two women are better than one!
Morehouse Guy
November 17th, 2009
8:47 pm
Ceasar didn’t get “caught.” See my earlier post. He brought it to the Ethics Office’s attention and paid his fine. Further, Ceasar wasn’t the only Councilmember who voted to raise your taxes, as doing so ended the police and fire furloughs that wrecked havoc on this city. Further, Councilwoman Muller failed to present an alternative to raising your taxes. What you have him do? Continue the furloughs? Or, are you one of those Atlantans that thinks despite rounds of employee cuts there’s a pot of money sitting somewhere that would have prevented a tax increase? But it seems to me that “Start Over!” may be more interested in rewarding politicians for political expediency than he or she does for political courage and actually doing what’s right for the City.
Again, if ethics were such an issue to you, why no response to Ceasar’s idea of advocating for the creation of an Office of Inspector General to build upon the City’s existing Integrity Line (see: http://www.atlantaga.gov/government/boards/ethics_integrityline.aspx)? Is anyone voting on the basis of the candidates’ platforms or a more reasoned consideration of their record beyond one vote? And seeing as Claire makes no specific recommendations concerning governmental transparency or ethics, one would think you would be willing to give Ceasar a fair shot. But, I’m obviously mistaken here.
And how exactly would Clair Muller “do the best job of pulling of politics as unusual for Atlanta” when she is the longest serving Councilmember in the race (or in comparison to Reed or Norwood)? She’s been there for 20 years! And what has she done to address public safety? Or to address the City’s finances? Aren’t these the issues that are driving City voters to the polls this year? Ceasar Mitchell sponsored legislation to institute zero-based budgeting and has proposed a host of other structural fiscal reforms in his campaign platform. You’ve heard nothing from Clair Muller on any of the issues that clearly matter to you (as evidenced by your comments).
But then again, @AtlantasFuture, your closing line demonstrates to me that gender likely informs your vote. And I’d be willing to support Clair had I seen something about her record on the Council or in her platform that led me to believe that she could lead on public safety or on the City’s finances, and she’s come up short on both fronts.
Jason
November 17th, 2009
9:45 pm
@AtlantasFuture, you are aware that Mary and Clair aren’t exactly best friends, right? Just because they’re both white females doesn’t mean they’re having slumber parties and gossiping on the phone. Check out how many times Muller and Norwood co-sponsored any legislation.
AtlantasFuture
November 17th, 2009
11:29 pm
Sure @ Jason, lots of disagreements can and should be had while spending Atlanta taxpayer money. I don’t care if they have slumber parties or not. Don’t belittle women to ‘gossiping’ and other women stereotypes. Looka here, you’re a gossiper yourself.
Key point in all this though is that both Norwood and Muller voted against the tax increases. This gives me good reason to believe that they’ll actually look where all this silly $ spending is going. Want more rec centers open? Want more police on the streets? Absolutely, but let’s find the $ to do it.
Atlanta CANNOT AFFORD ANOTHER TAX INCREASE. 42% IS OUTRAGEOUS AND BORDERS ON CRIMINAL.
Again, two women are better than one!
Graves Hall
November 18th, 2009
1:00 am
I know Mitchell went to Morehouse and all, but let’s call a spade a spade. He doesn’t show up to half the committee meetings he’s assigned, and when he was Committee Chair of City Utilities, he was either late or didn’t show up at all.
Half the job is showing up and Caesar Mitchell hasn’t done that. I had I hopes for him years ago, thinkking he’d be running for Mayor this cycle. However, I think he’s more in the mold of Jim Maddox just keeping a seat warm. This dude is voting for Clair Muller.
“To be on time is to be late.”
Morehouse Guy
November 18th, 2009
1:46 am
@ Graves Hall: I’m not supporting Ceasar Mitchell because he’s a Morehouse Man. Let’s be honest. Reginald Eaves, Lamar Willis and Jim Maddox are all Morehouse Men, and I have found all three of them to be profoundly disappointing.
You’re simply incorrect about Mitchell’s attendance. Please substantiate your claims. If his attendance or tardiness were such an issue, don’t you think someone in Creative Loafing or the AJC would have made an issue of this before? And even assuming that what you say is true, it’s obvious that what matters more to you is whether someone “shows up” rather than their productivity.
Mitchell has been a prolific legislator, and comparatively, he has more substantive legislative accomplishments in eight years than Clair does in twenty. Furthermore, I find it curious that you make no mention of what Muller and Mitchell say they will do in their platforms as a consideration on how you’ll cast your vote. I’m guessing public safety and the City’s finances aren’t issues to you. A cursory review of both campaign platforms clearly demonstrates which candidate has an actual vision for the City and specific responses to the City’s pension crisis, other financial challenges and public safety issues.
Vote productivity over attendance. I actually want a City Council President that’s shown a grasp of what ails the City, a record of delivering (not just being on committees but delivering policy solutions) and substantive vision on the City’s way forward out of its mess. If your vote is substantive, then Ceasar’s your man. If you want someone whose shown a particular effectiveness for being on time, being on committees and taking politically expedient votes despite a City suffering from public safety furloughs, vote for Clair Muller.
AH
November 18th, 2009
8:13 am
Not as much fan fair for this endorsement. Wonder why has Jim lost his touch with all those people?
@Morehouse Guy
November 18th, 2009
10:27 am
I don’t even know why you wasted your time responding to, so-called, Graves Hall. His/her comments made absolutely no sense and we Morehouse men are taught to be critical thinkers.
@Graves Hall
Tell me how many floors are in Graves Hall and where the bookstore at Morehouse was formerly located? If you can’t tell me those things, you probably don’t know how many meeting Ceasar’s missed or been late to. You’re regurgitating the weak talking points Muller has tried to push during this election. Ceasar is a full-time practicing attorney with a national law-firm, meaning he has to work. These council posts are supposed to be “part-time” jobs. When you are out working to make a living, sometimes you’re going to be late or even absent to a meeting or two. Oh yeah and Clair is the one that’s been warming a seat. I mean honestly, what the hell has she accomplished for this city? It’s very easy to be on time when you represent one of the smallest districts in the city and you’ve been retired for a number of years. What’s Clair’s excuse for letting Ceasar out legislate her though?
Graves Hall
November 18th, 2009
12:01 pm
@ Morehouse Guy- Do you want me to sing Dear Old Morehouse too, or show up for Crown Forum tomorrow as well? Critical thinking is what I learned during my time spent in Dansby Hall as a Psych. major. Being a councilmember is not a regular ‘part-time job’ like working @ UPS. If someone doesn’t have the time to show up in committee when pertinent discussion is had on pieces of legislation then maybe they aren’t the ones for the job. Thats when things are hashed out, in committee. In full council there is generally an up or down vote, and councilmembers tend to vote based on how the committee votes.
Funny how a critical thinker such as yourself just wants to bash someone who has an opposing opinion from yours. I applaud Mitchell’s SAT workshops and other things, but Muller has a more technical grasp of the legislative process. Mitchell may ask questions based on his legal background, but Muller asks the questions that needs to be asked. I’ve seen her in action as chair in transportation committee. What you should be asking is why wasn’t Mitchell retained as CUC Chair if he was so effective? Shouldn’t a lawyer know about the ethical implications of paying your brother with taxpayer money to print t-shirts and fliers. Thats a LeRoy Keith move if I ever saw it. Tell me who that is since you suspect that I never attended the same institution as you, brotha?
Graves Hall
November 18th, 2009
12:02 pm
…..oh yeah…. G Phi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BPJ
November 18th, 2009
2:50 pm
In my neighborhood there are several yards with signs for both Kasim Reed (for mayor) and Clair Muller (for council president). Evidence that not all voters are voting by race (or gender, for that matter); some, like Jim Martin, are carefully looking at the candidates as individuals and are trying to choose the best person.
Morehouse Guy
November 18th, 2009
5:21 pm
@ BPJ: Just a thought here, but do you think it’s possible for someone to “[look] at the candidates as individuals” and come to the conclusion that Mitchell is the superior candidate in the Council President’s race and Reed the best in the Mayor’s race?
II’m still trying to figure out how anyone could come to the conclusion that Muller would make a better City Council President than Mitchell as it seems that the only knock on Mitchell is one ethics violation that he brought to the attention of the Ethics Office and paid his fine. Reed also has a state ethics violation in his background, so why doesn’t that also disqualify him? See the inconsistency here? Now, I’m a Reed supporter for many of the same reasons that I support Reed — they’ve both shown in the campaign to have the most viable set of proposals to address public safety and the City’s finances and they both have impressive records of legislative accomplishment. I simply don’t see the appeal of Mary, though I do see why people would might vote for Clair (she’s spent twenty years on the Council and hasn’t rocked any boats…awesome!) though folks like Mitchell, Reed and Farokhi strike me as the future of the City.
But then again, if you want people who voted to create the furloughs and then failed to provide an alternative to a tax hike, seems like Norwood and Muller are a perfect pair!
Creative Loafing lamely described Muller a “technocrat” in the same breath that they dismissed Mitchell for having too many bright ideas (now, wouldn’t you expect the technocrat to have a more substantive platform?).
Morehouse Guy
November 18th, 2009
5:22 pm
Meant to say that I’m a Reed supporter for many of the same reasons I support Mitchell.
brecko deforrest
November 18th, 2009
8:48 pm
Morehouse Guy,
You sound like the kind of guy who has contracts to protect.
@breckop deforrest
November 18th, 2009
10:04 pm
You sound like a desperate Norwood supporter that’s out to distract others from factual analysis.
I find it hard to believe that the better educated voters in this city are voting for Norwood. Her supporters on this thread are very shallow.
Evander
November 19th, 2009
9:21 am
@ Morehouse Guy- You’re obviously in the tank for Mitchell. Are you his brother that got the $68K for printing up some t-shirts and fliers? I see a lot of legislation introduced by Mitchell, but most of it is on the held agenda in Committees. Seems like he introduces things for the sake of introducing them, with no hope of it actually becoming law.
Instead of the knee-jerk reaction to just raising my taxes, what has your boy done to find alternative revenue streams of income for the city. If the answer is nothing, then his actions are no better than Clair. He’s a lawyer who should know an ethical violation when he sees it. Going to the Ethics board and making them aware of his indiscretion does not let him off the hook for doing it. He was gonna get caught anyway when he filed his yearly financial statements with that same board. Try something new.
Morehouse Guy
November 19th, 2009
11:20 am
@ Evander: I said a few posts ago that I’m supporting Ceasar. So, you’re “in the tank” comments seems redundant. Legislators introduce lots of legislation, and Ceasar’s no different. But he’s gotten a host of significant pieces of legislation passed including: a) many of the Southwest TADs; b) the COPTAP foot patrol legislation; and, c) the schooltime curfew that finally puts parents on the hook for their children who roam the streets when they should be in school, just to name a few. Check his record for yourself (http://ceasarforouratlanta.com/site/record) and compare it with Claire’s. The proof is in the pudding, my friend. And, he’s done what he’s done in eight years compared to twenty for Clair. Check her website and tell me what you see.
As to your second question, he’s proposed a host of initiatives that could generate revenue for the City. He’ll advocate that the next mayor commission a revenue optimization study to identify NON-PROPERTY TAX SOURCES OF REVENUE (they comprise only about 28% of the City’s revenues) to fund the expansion of APD (see: http://ceasarforouratlanta.com/site/on-the-issues/thriving), he’s open to managed competition and shifting more city services to the private sector when there’s a solid business case for doing so (see the link above), he’s proposed legislation to create zero-based budgeting across City agencies, he’ll also support the institution of annual budget growth caps to reign in non-public safety spending, he’s supported the IBPO’s revenue-generating ideas (like taking over the City’s towing operations) to generate more dollars for APD and he’ll ensure that the next mayor has his/her pension reform strike team in place within the first year of his term (see above link again) to finally get our pension challenges under control. He’ll do more than find alternative revenue streams, he’s proposed measures to restrain spending. Both cost and revenue ideas for our fiscal crisis. What else do you want to see? And given all of his proposals (some of which he’s already introduced as a Councilman), are you willing to cast your vote for Clair anyway simply because of the ethics violation? So, you’re telling me finding alternative revenue sources is what you’ll need to see, I’m showing them to you, but you’re probably still on the fence. Is this REALLY about alternative revenue streams for you or about something else?
I’ll reiterate a point I’ve made a few times. When Mitchell first contracted with his brother, it was legal. The law changed, and he made the mistake of keeping the contract intact. Was that stupid? Yes. Should he have known better? Yes. But the larger question: what did he do about it? He brought it to the attention of the Ethics Office, paid his fine and made a part of his platform advocacy for the creation of an Office of Inspector General (http://ceasarforouratlanta.com/site/on-the-issues/thriving) to build upon the City’s Integrity Line. He’s realized the need for a “top cop” in the City and the value of bringing Legal Compliance, Ethics and Audit under one organizational umbrella to investigate fraud, abuse and waste in City Hall. And, he wants to put City contracts over one million dollars online. What do you think about that?
And how do I know this stuff? Because it’s either: a) on his website; or, b) he’s said these things on the campaign trail. So, that’s why I’m “in the tank” because he has a vision for this City and a record a stand on. I can’t say the same for Clair. She’s been on a lot of committee, and according to Graves Hall, she asks great questions and apparently knows the legislative process better than Ceasar (still waiting on some proof of this). And his response to the ethics violation is more telling than anything else he’s done — it speaks of the kind of leadership we want in this City. Man up to your shortcomings and address them substantively. What else would you want?
Yep, I’m in the tank for any politician with a record and a platform that instills in the me the confidence that they’ll do what’s right for the City’s public safety and fiscal challenges. The better questions is given the public availability of everything I’ve said, why aren’t you all in the tank as I am. And again, don’t worry about the Morehouse connection because I don’t support Lamar Willis, I cheered when Maddox retired and I’m not a fan of Michael Julian Bond.
Morehouse Guy
November 19th, 2009
11:28 am
@ Evander: As an aside, most legislation that legislators propose at every level of government doesn’t get passed and dies in committee. So the mere fact that everything he proposes doesn’t pass in no way suggests that he proposes legislation just for the heck of it. Civics 101, my friend. I notice you had nothing to say on what Clair does or proposes.
Notice Martin’s endorsement has nothing to do with Clair’s accomplishments as a legislator of what she’s done for the City. They’re friends, and they’ve known each other for some time and he got out in support of her. Who’s supporting Ceasar? Check for yourself: http://ceasarforouratlanta.com/site/endorsements. It’s from a pretty diverse group and not just the “homies” (as is the case with Clair with the exception of Creative Loafing’s endorsement where Ceasar had too many ideas for Thomas Wheatley).
brecko deforrest
November 22nd, 2009
10:33 pm
morehouse guy,
No, I’m not a “desperate Norwood” supporter. I am someone who can spot a poster with “interests” to protect. By the way, Mitchell’s forthcoming was simply a case of getting the bad info out before your opponents do. Surely you know that. The contract with his brother was shady. Imagine if Mueller had given a contract to a sibling. Would you be as forgiving? Methinks not. And did his brother really get 68K? That’s a nice chunk of change, especially when you can buy t-shirts wholesale for less than $2.