Wednesday, February 26, 2003

In his letter, S. Christopher Hagin criticized the notion of a referendum on the state flag. He showed a naive ignorance of the value of referendums.

Our state does not allow citizen-generated initiatives. The lobbyists, through politicians, want to control what is done and what is not done in Georgia. This is very unfortunate. In California, it is different and much has been changed because of it. Let's examine a little of what has been accomplished.

In the early 1970s, as now, California property values were escalating at incredible annual rates. The government countered by raising assessments. There were retired couples who had to sell their completely paid-for homes because they could no longer afford to pay the property taxes. And nothing was done about it. Proposition 13 (June '78) rolled back assessments to 1975-76 levels and limited annual increases to 2 percent. It passed 65 percent to 35 percent.

The citizens of California were offended by the unconstitutional uses of affirmative action. Politicians steadfastly ignored the dissent. Proposition 209 (November 1996) put an end to this practical discrimination. It passed 54 percent to 46 percent.

Californians became fed up with bilingual education, teaching foreign students in their own language instead of just English. The citizenry rightly believed that those students needed English-only immersion programs to successfully learn our country's language. Once again "politically correct" kept legislators from doing the right thing. Proposition 227 (1998) passed 61 percent to 39 percent.

We should be asking for more than a referendum on our state flag. We should be demanding the right to have voter-initiated laws. Playing politics had not served the constituents. We would not have elected officials pointing fingers, being too concerned about what a financial supporter wanted and too unconcerned about what the people who voted for him think.

The Georgia state flag is an issue of perception and a battle of symbolism. We have people on both sides asserting what they have been taught. I have lived here, from California, for 11 years. I can see both sides. It is interesting, though, to watch the side that is ordinarily preaching tolerance standing in inflexible opposition to the Confederate flag as part of our state flag.

I have four adopted daughters. Two are Korean and two are African-American. The two black daughters do not have a problem with the Confederate flag. How can this be? I never taught them to hate it. They understand the history of their race, but they do not let innocuous things such as a historical flag control their thoughts and emotions. They understand that it means different things to different people. In addition, they were not indoctrinated with a world-view of victimology and entitlement.

Many do not want the old flag because it is divisive. We live daily with a much more divisive issue that has dire consequences to particular individuals. Abortion kills harmless babies every single day for no good reason. I am told that I must realize that not everyone sees the issue as I do and am thus obligated to accept that babies are being murdered. Now let me get this straight: I am to tolerate infanticide, but the Confederate flag is intolerable? Get real.

Personally, I object to the way the flag was changed last year. It irritates me to no end that people who did not even live in our state told us what we had to do or else. If people do not want to come here because of our flag, there will be more room for me on the roads. If businesses do not want to be in a state with our flag, they can go to 49 other states. The dollar bill is not the ultimate criterion.

With 159 counties it is obvious that we believe in local government. This means that every voice needs to be heard. I believe the people of Georgia should have a voice. Politics would say otherwise, but I say, "Bring on the vote."

Bill Webster

Peachtree City