Senate peace treaty brokered by Nathan Deal falls apart

Update: The deal brokered by Gov. Nathan Deal on Monday, intended to end a 15-month leadership feud in the state Senate, collapsed on Tuesday when it was rejected in a closed-door vote of the Republican caucus.

The plan was intended to reassert at least some of the authority stripped from Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle in late 2010.

A spokesman for the governor said Deal was under the impression that an agreement had been reached last night, after a three-hour session that brought most of the parties together. But a spokesman said the governor was privy to the reasons for the collapse.

“Senate leaders asked the governor to host a meeting in his office and that’s what he did. He was there, and he was hopeful, but in the end, the Senate’s business is the Senate’s business,” said Deal spokesman Brian Robinson. “We want a body operating efficiently and well.”

This is the second time that the governor has stepped into the fray between Cagle and Senate Republicans led by President pro tem Tommie Williams and Majority Leader Chip Rogers.

The first time was last August, when Deal’s initiative to shift the sales tax transportation vote from this July to November had bogged down. The governor shook hands with Senate leaders on an agreement – but GOP caucus members rejected the agreement.

There are many ways to increase one’s clout and reputation in the state Capitol. Wasting a governor’s time isn’t one of them.

Original file: Gov. Nathan Deal called Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and leading members of the Senate Republican caucus on Monday in a three-hour effort to bring peace to a leadership feud in that chamber – which threatens to derail the governor’s newly announced agenda.

Details are still scant, but so far this is what we’ve got:

We’re told that a quiet effort to supplant Tommie Williams, R-Lyons, as president pro tem of the Senate with Ross Tolleson, R-Perry, had achieved significant traction. A vote of no confidence, the necessary prelude to Williams’ removal, was to be held in the state Capitol this morning – just as Deal was unveiling his blueprint for the session. Democrats would have been able to provide the swing votes that determined the outcome.

Williams and Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers went to Deal to ask him to intervene. What resulted was come-to-Jesus meeting that stretched into the late evening and included Cagle; Williams; Rogers; Sen. Ronnie Chance, R-Tyrone, chairman of the economic development committee; and Sen. Don Balfour, R-Snellville, chairman of the rules committee.

The agreement that was hashed out: Cagle would chair a reconfigured five-member committee on assignments. The lieutenant governor would also have two appointments to that committee. Williams and Rogers would hold seats as well.

However, an agreement was reached that the committee would make no changes in the current chairmanship roster. Caucus elections this fall, after the November general election, would settle the matter.

Also, William and Rogers were guaranteed seats on this session’s budget conference committees.

The agreement must still pass muster with the Senate Republican caucus as a whole – so it’s not clear whether this is indeed an end to the 15-month power struggle that began when the caucus stripped Cagle of his authority over the chamber in late 2010.

But the entrance of Deal into the fray means that the governor is seriously worried about the impact the feud might have on his efforts at tax reform and economic development.

Monday’s developments also cast the Senate’s opening day in a different light. The chamber immediately took up a pair of education bills. The meatiest of the two was S.B. 184, which would bar local school boards from considering only a hiring date when deciding to lay off a teacher – or risk a loss of state funding.

The bill had failed to gain final passage last year – in large part because the lieutenant governor had placed the bill at the bottom of the final day’s calendar.

So publicly, Senate Republicans were sending a message that they were ready to do business. Privately, passage of S.B. 184 was a rebuke to Cagle, and a sign that last year’s trench warfare would continue.

Significantly, the Senate agreed to all House changes in the legislation – in order to avoid granting the lieutenant governor the privilege of appointing a conference committee.

- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.

104 comments Add your comment

DannyX

January 10th, 2012
9:54 am

“Also, William and Rogers were guaranteed seats on this session’s budget conference committees.”

WOW. Chip Rogers on a state budget committee?

This guy was part of the roach motel fiasco with partner Tom Graves. The ‘we could never have repaid that loan’ gang. Rogers horrible personal business practices qualifies him to serve on the state budget committee????

Of course since our bankrupt governor is involved it makes perfect sense. LMAO at the Georgia Republican party!

This is why ethics reform is out of the question, the crooks are guarding the money.

gsueagle

January 10th, 2012
10:01 am

ga republicans are going to dogs.

double

January 10th, 2012
10:09 am

DX Well said.Old Fox guarding the Hen House.

You get what you vote for

January 10th, 2012
10:15 am

This is what you get Georgia voters… the Democrats of years passed were much better than these looney tunes.

Centrist

January 10th, 2012
10:15 am

Internecine power struggles go on with every party in every state and federal legislative chamber in the country. While it may be passing news to some (mostly partisan bloggers and reporters), it is not a big deal to voters.

Sounds like this one may have a temporary fix until after the next election.

Partisan posters who stick with attacking Deal, Rogers, and Graves over their PAST personal business problems during the worst recession of our lifetimes which the MAJORITY of voters have dismissed is the proverbial beating of a dead horse.

Eric

January 10th, 2012
10:23 am

Keep convincing yourself of that, Centrist. Just like you convince yourself that Republicans dont eat their own and that Obama will lose in November.

Eric

January 10th, 2012
10:23 am

Keep convincing yourself of that, Centrist. Just like you convince yourself that Republicans dont eat their own and that Obama will lose in November.

double

January 10th, 2012
10:29 am

Sometimes things get so bad in your personal Deal-ings you have to resign,and move on.As you say this seems,to not get the attention of voters.

GaBlue

January 10th, 2012
10:35 am

Wait…. This post has been up 45 minutes and the alleged centrist has yet to blame the “left-wing media” for anything? Somebody is slacking off.

How hilarious is it that he wants us to forget about our tax-dollar supported Governor and representatives’ poor money management histories while they make themselves rich at the expense of the people of this state? Very little comes out of our legislature that does not enrich the legislators, state officers, and their good friends, while the state circles the drain. It has been ever thus, even when this crop of scalawags called themselves “democrats.” You know, before they sold out for a better deal.

Centrist

January 10th, 2012
10:37 am

@ Eric: ALL politicians jockey – it is the nature of the profession. You are not familiar with my politics. I have often stated that I think Obama will be re-elected for the following reasons mostly submitted by the (black) columnist Dr. Walter Williams:

Incumbency creates a campaign contribution advantage, and many strings can be pulled in an election year to buy votes. Obama is going to have a huge money advantage.

The liberal media is firmly behind him, and will get EVEN MORE partisan as the election draws near. After all, to not love him would be racist.

Blacks will vote for Obama blindly. Period. Doesn’t matter what he does. It’s a race thing. He’s one of us,

Nearly half the voters don’t pay taxes, and Obama is the best hope it remains that way or increases.

College educated women will vote for Obama. Though they will be offended by this, they swoon at his oratory. It’s really not more complex than that,

Liberals will vote for Obama. He is their great hope,

Democrats will vote for Obama. He is the leader of their party and his coat tails will carry them to victory nationwide,

Hispanics will vote for Obama. He is the path to citizenship for those who are illegal and Hispanic leaders recognize the political clout they carry in the Democratic Party,

Union members will vote overwhelmingly for Obama. He is their key to money and power in business, state and local politics,

Big Business will support Obama. They already have. He has almost $1 Billion dollars in his reelection purse gained largely from his connections with Big Business and is gaining more everyday. Big Business loves Obama because he gives them access to taxpayer money so long as they support his social and political agenda,

Most other minorities and special interest groups will vote for him. Oddly, the overwhelming majority of Jews and Muslims will support him because they won’t vote Republican. Obviously homosexuals tend to vote Democratic.

The Ghost of Lester Maddox

January 10th, 2012
10:43 am

Hell, back when Tom Murphy was our Governor for 20+ years, you didn’t see this kind of nonsense going on.

Everybody, including guys with names like Zell, Joe Frank, and Roy, knew their place and didn’t mess with the Murphy Administration.

GaBlue

January 10th, 2012
10:44 am

Oh… sorry I doubted you, C! Hahaha!

DannyX

January 10th, 2012
10:49 am

“Oh… sorry I doubted you, C! Hahaha!”

Lol!

Centrist

January 10th, 2012
11:09 am

Encouragement for Democrats early in this election year:

President Obama won North Carolina (0.32%), Indiana (1.04%), Florida (2.82%), Ohio (4.59%), Virginia (6.29%), and Colorado (8.95%). Flipping ALL these electoral votes would give an electoral victory to the Republican nominee. So far only North Carolina and Indiana might flip – Florida, Ohio, Virginia, and Colorado are still projected to stick with Obama according to this website: http://www.electionprojection.com/2012elections/president12.php

Obama is currently projected to win by 126 electoral votes compared to his 192 electoral win in 2008.

No change in House numbers with Republicans easily holding it, and the Senate has a 50 – 50 split projection.

underwater

January 10th, 2012
11:13 am

did they meet in the Senate underwater condo to make their deal?

http://www.atlantaunfiltered.com/

n

January 10th, 2012
11:17 am

Ten years of rabid greed and wholesale giveaways of Georgia taxpayer assets to insiders and cronies, under the guise of providing “incentives” to business and development interests. The only jobs created during this period were low paying construction-related mostly menial labor that evaporated when the housing bubble burst.
And during those 10 years, the state’s infrastructure, public school system, court system, parks, forestry department, DNR, Extension Services, District Attorneys Offices, mental health facilities, etc. etc. have been starved and crippled ruthlessly and stupidly by the state leadership. The quality of life of the average Georgia has plummeted.

Georgia has lost any possible claim to being a desirable place to relocate, find a productive livelihood and raise a family. It doesn’t matter how many more tax incentives and perks are ladled out. Who wants to live in a Third World backwater?

who cares

January 10th, 2012
11:18 am

I’d say the Repubs don’t trust Cagle any more than I do. But then I don’t trust Rogers at all. There aren’t any reasonable folks up there? This sounds like the playground at Kindergarden time. Maybe we should require compulsory remedial Kindergarden classes for all state reps.

Centrist

January 10th, 2012
11:27 am

n posted “Ten years of …”

Partisans always go back the number of years the out party has been out. They somehow ignore the exact preceding years that caused their party to be out. (True for Republicans too, who only refer to the last 3 years of the Obama administration). Such partisans also ignore the most recent elections that confirm the party they don’t favor.

td

January 10th, 2012
11:41 am

You libs seem to want to say that only Republicans come to the Capital to enrich themselves. Why else would a lawyer lose four or five months of billable hours? It does not matter what party they are from the legislators are there to push their own personal agenda. This would be the case for 90% of anyone running for a job that only pays $19,000 per year.

n

January 10th, 2012
11:47 am

The Democrats were greedy and ruthless also, but at least were smart enough to cover their tracks, and keep the GA economy and infrastructure afloat.

GaBlue

January 10th, 2012
11:52 am

What part of the following statement did y’all (Centrist and td) find unclear?

“It has been ever thus, even when this crop of scalawags called themselves “democrats.” You know, before they sold out for a better deal.”

The PROBLEM isn’t what the self-enriching, pandering crooks in the legislature call themselves. The problem is that the CITIZENS of this state do not hold our representatives accountable for their actions.

WHY is that? My theory: Because they’re too busy being distracted by partisan noisemakers who glut the conversation with stupid social wedge issues and pointless yammering about national politics. Guess what? The folks in Washington D.C. don’t give a good gosh darn about how far the citizens of Georgia are being sucked down the drain. But the crooks under the Gold Dome appreciate that we ignore what they’re doing to focus on everything BUT what truly impacts our local economies, property values, and quality of life here in Georgia. I’m sure you’ll get a thank-you note from them any minute now.

UGA 1999

January 10th, 2012
11:54 am

Brokers Peace…..THAT IS WHAT LEADERS DO!!!! Take notes Obama.

Will

January 10th, 2012
12:05 pm

Among the many, many things that drive me nuts about politicians is their hopelessly transparent effort to take credit for fixing something they broke in the first place.

Let’s take the HOPE scholarship for example. Politcians are falling all over themselves to take credit for stepping in and “saving” HOPE. And that would be saving HOPE from whom? From politicians who broke it in the first place. Remember when HOPE was established? It was established to give “hope” to those who did not have the financial means to attend college. When established, HOPE became very popular so politicians did what politicians do…..expanded the benefit to more voters by removing the financial ceiling for all. That was great if you wanted to make yourself more popular but expanding the pool of those eligible meant that HOPE funds could not possibly keep up with demand.

So…..politicians did what politicians do…..they sat around, year after year, receiving projections that clearly showed that HOPE funds could not be sustained and they did nothing because doing something meant doing something to fix something they broke in the first place and because doing something would not be popular – the number one driving priority of a politician.

When HOPE finally collasped under the weight created by politicians, politicians stepped in and “saved” something that, in reality, they broke in the first place.

What’s that you say – democrats had a chance to fix HOPE when they were in charge? Of course they did. This isn’t a partisan problem, this is a bi-partisan poltiician problem.

A pox on both of their houses.

td

January 10th, 2012
12:09 pm

GaBlue

January 10th, 2012
11:52 am

My post was not addressing your post in particular but instead a series of post I have read. I agree with you on your statement but disagree with your conclusions. synopsis on why. I think the true problem is that our state and nation has a bunch of apathetic voters that really do not care about politics. If my memory serves me this morning, I read where of our adult eligible population that only 50% of the people are registered to vote. Of that 50% we have at the most in a Presidential election year 60 to 65% turn out to vote. That basically means that only 30 to 40% of the adults in this country vote in a Presidential election. When it comes to State elections then the number is down to less then 30%. The rest of the people just do not care but they sure like to complain when things get hard.

Centrist

January 10th, 2012
12:16 pm

@ n – The Georgia economy is part and parcel with the entire U.S. economy which is in the toilet. Trying to put this on just the Georgia Republican administration is simply partisanship which didn’t fly with the voters only a little more than a year ago.

@ GaBlue – I didn’t refute your remark about scalawags. Some politicians line their pockets more than others, and it is good when it is pointed out. Assigning credit and blame for good and bad government, and separating the true wheat from the partisan chaff is the problem for voters. Reporters and bloggers who only attack a single party while defending/ ignoring abuses by their preferred political bent creates an opposite backlash from thinking voters.

Peter Lewis

January 10th, 2012
12:18 pm

Passage of S.B. 184 wasn’t a rebuke of Cagle. If anything it was Chip Rogers and Tommie Williams pushing their own agendas like always.

bart

January 10th, 2012
12:22 pm

Rogers and Williams both need to be sent home, but that’ll never happen, of course. I wish a couple of viable Repubs would run against them and at least give them a run for their money. The Senate would be better off without both of them.

Centrist

January 10th, 2012
12:34 pm

@ Will – There was a huge backlash from taxpayers who were supporting non-taxpayer children’s tuition with lottery money, and such socialistic policies did not sit well with Georgia’s electorate. That is why the income cap came off, and Hope was still working for those who EARNED it. It was the model for the nation. What over-stressed it was the grade inflation from pressured teachers and school administrations. Instead of resisting the grade inflation – the hugely expanded base with many marginally qualified recipients are ALL made to suffer, except for those who really earn it via a higher grade threshold or the top of their class.

Ga Values...Ron Paul for Peace & Prosperity

January 10th, 2012
12:37 pm

Who is tying Casey Cagle shoe laces now? Bet it’s a good looking intern.. Guess Casey learned that trick from Newt.

UGA 1999

January 10th, 2012
12:42 pm

Ga Values….jealous?

Amazing

January 10th, 2012
12:45 pm

Centrist,

Since the early 1960s, blacks have tended voted for Democratic presidential candidates reghardless of color. This is simply a result of the fact that democrats tended to address issues and concerns that were important to the black community. No different that the republican strategy in recent years to play to the Christian voters. If you look at the facts, Obama’s numbers in the 2008 election were not significantly higher than B. Clinton’s two elections. It is not a black thing; it is a Democrat thing that has driven the black vote. Both were above 90%. Kerry pulled almost 85% of the black vote in 2004.

Am I proud of Obama as a black man? No question but that is no the reason he received my vote. If color was the sole criteria, then I would have voted for Jesse Jackson or Alan Keyes in the past. Neither recieved my vote because they lacked vision and were not quailfied. You can debate me until the cows come home about Obama’s quailifcation. That is a fair discussion. It is absolutely wrong and ignorant to continue to promote a stereotype that is false. Black people are not as simple minded as your comment would infer. We have shown the ability to think beyond the color of one’s skin when it comes to poltical matters.

Centrist

January 10th, 2012
12:53 pm

@ Amazing – It was the increased black turnout that showed the racism in their voting pattern.

UGA 1999

January 10th, 2012
12:55 pm

Amazing…..the FACT is that Obama did receive a large majority of his votes from the black community because he is black. Sorry man, facts are facts.

double

January 10th, 2012
12:55 pm

Hispanic vote may go to Romney.

UGA 1999

January 10th, 2012
12:56 pm

double…..it could…..that has yet to be determined. If he chooses Rubio as a running mate it would certainly help.

Critical Reading

January 10th, 2012
12:58 pm

@ Amazing: I believe that Centrist was quoting and article written by columnist Dr. Walter Williams, who as Centrist pointed out and to which the quote implied, is a black man.

Centrist

January 10th, 2012
1:02 pm

@ Critical Reading – Yup. Thanks for noticing.

double

January 10th, 2012
1:03 pm

And what is wrong with being black?Or 1/2 black? I hope all blacks,and ones mentioned above in Centrist post @10;27 vote for President Obama.

Beeg Boi

January 10th, 2012
1:05 pm

I guess McCain lost because he didn’t get the white vote.

UGA 1999

January 10th, 2012
1:11 pm

Beeg Boi…..McCain lost because 100% of the black population voted for a community organizer.

UGA 1999

January 10th, 2012
1:11 pm

double…..me too….it is going to take more than just that for Obama to win in 2012. SEE YA!

DannyX

January 10th, 2012
1:12 pm

Any evidence out there that shows what race whites in Cobb county are voting for, same with Gwinnett county. Are Cobb whites racist because they voted for McCain in 2008 and not Obama?

Are all whites racist because they only elect whites? From the local school board on up the ladder, every elected office except one in Gwinnett is held by a white person even though the white population is less than 50%.

Why have we never had a black governor? Why wasn’t Cain elected to the Senate?

UGA 1999

January 10th, 2012
1:15 pm

DannyX….it is a proven fact that Obama could not have won without some portion of the white vote. You sir are a fool that post baseless comments. Keep up the good work…we count on your ignorance every day.

Danny X – it is also true that whites in Gwinnett make up less than 50% of the population. But there are so many black felons in gwinnett that it makes the table even.

Marlboro Man

January 10th, 2012
1:15 pm

Rubio, the anchor babe…

double

January 10th, 2012
1:17 pm

[...] heard this morning that Lieutenant Governor Casey Cagle is on his way back to getting power, and now Jim Galloway is reporting that Governor Nathan Deal has brokered a peace treaty between President Pro-Tem Tommie Williams, [...]

td

January 10th, 2012
1:25 pm

Beeg Boi

January 10th, 2012
1:05 pm
I guess McCain lost because he didn’t get the white vote

You are correct. McCain lost because of 4 reasons:

1: African American voter turnout was higher then a usual Presidential cycle. This helped the President in a few states but not as much as people think. The turnout will be just as high this cycle.

2: Youth turnout: This group is not as united (See Ron Paul campaign) and the unemployment rate for students between 18 and 29 is almost 50%. Can not see the same results this cycle.

3: Social conservative. About 20 to 25% of the social conservatives just stayed home last cycle because they did not like McCain’s views on his social issues. This may be the same this year but I do not think so due to the 2010 election cycle.

4: White middle class suburban women married with children: This group has been called “independents”, security moms, soccer moms and Reagan Republicans. This group has decided every election since 1980. They are conservative in the since that they want to keep what they have (SUV, nice house, good schools for their children, safe place to live and see a nice future for their children). They like Obama personally but do not like a lot of his policies. This group of voters in 10 to 12 states will decide the election and they are still trying to make up their mind.

Centrist

January 10th, 2012
1:30 pm

Obama was elected with a majority of the white vote – so white racism did not come into play.

Please note that the black vote is just ONE reason why Obama will likely get re-elected, and focusing on this single issue is racist in itself. Below are some statistics instead of politically correct statements:

Black voter turnout in 2008 was 65.2 percent—an all-time high—with about 15.9 million Blacks casting ballots. In fact, for the first time in history, Black voter turnout almost matched White voter turnout (66.1 percent)

Support for the Democratic nominee went from 88 percent in 2004 to 95 percent in 2008. The Black share of the vote went from 11 percent in 2004 to 13 percent in 2008 due to increase black turnout.

The total number of Black votes for the Democratic candidate went from 12.0 million to 15.1 million; close to 3.2 million extra votes for the Democratic candidate in 2008 were entirely due to Black voters. This increase constituted 33 percent of Obama’s total margin over McCain. In other words, if Obama had received Kerry’s raw vote among Blacks, he would have won by 5 points rather than 8. If we consider some of the battleground states from 2008. In Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, and Florida, the contribution of increased Black Democratic votes to Obama’s margin over McCain ranges from a low of 41 percent (Indiana) to a high of 1,106 percent (North Carolina). That is, Obama carried North Carolina by 14,177 votes, but his improvement over Kerry among Black voters was 156,816 votes. Clearly, Obama loses North Carolina and Florida without significant improvement over Kerry’s 2004 showing among Blacks. It certainly helped Obama’s electoral vote margin.

Shine

January 10th, 2012
1:30 pm

Throw these clowns out of power!!! The GOP is planning nothing but wealth redistribution from the many to the few with all this tax “reform” bs. Time to turn middle and south Ga back blue with democrats! Even the looney dems out of Atlanta aint as dnagerous as these republican KOOKS!

Shine

January 10th, 2012
1:33 pm

McCain lost because he was a Kook and all the GOP candidates are lipping that same failed Bush type kookyness that the country still hasnt recovered from. Only a fool would vote for those same failed policies the GOP are mouthing all over the tv screens.