‘I’m crazy, crazy for voting for you . . .’ (Sorry, Patsy)

Cal Beverly's picture

Some people say you have to be crazy to run for public office.

After covering politicians over a span of 37 years, I have a different perspective. I say they go crazy after they get elected.

Some local cases will illustrate my point.

Here you have what you thought were sober-minded, fiscally conservative guys of the Fayette County Commission. So what crazy things do they do, after conducting themselves like somewhat sane men before their election?

This summer, they vote in a genuine tax increase for most of Fayette’s taxpayers, from last year’s 4.88 mills to this year’s 5.43 mills. Additionally this year marks the first non-rollback of a tax rate in more than six years.

Then, virtually in the same breath, the tax-and-spend commissioners decide to “retreat” down to Callaway Gardens resort, the first out-of-county meeting in many years.

What, have our in-county accommodations become too sleazy for our good GOP commission?

At the same time as all this, the purported fiscally conservative guys now in charge of our county decide to consider an expensive make-over of the perfectly good (and solvent) county employee pension system.

If they continue being such “good” Republicans, they will obligate county taxpayers for untold millions more in future liabilities to fund a defined-benefit pension plan.

That’s the same kind of pension that Delta Airlines had to shed to come through bankruptcy, the same kind of financial drag on U.S. automobile manufacturers that has caused them to lose market share to foreign car makers.

Have they lost their minds? Have they gone collectively crazy?

Now look toward the Peachtree City Council. Within a couple of years of being elected — for a council salary that surely attorney Cyndi Plunkett must have considered before running — the post-election craziness has blanketed the reason of a majority of council members.

They want a pay raise.

They decide to hold public hearings on a bump in their pocket money at the same time — AT THE SAME TIME! — as they are holding hearings on a combined city tax increase and a cheerful raiding of the city’s rainy-day reserve fund.

This council wants more money in their pockets, and more money out of your pockets. How’s that for a crazy combination?

Another crazy item: So-called conservative state Senator Ronnie Chance of Tyrone has signed on as state co-chair of a Republican presidential candidate’s campaign. Which conservative candidate is purportedly conservative Chance supporting?

None other than pro-abortion, pro-gay-rights champion Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City.

See what I mean? You elect ’em, and then they go crazy.

login to post comments | Cal Beverly's blog

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fiscal vs. "Moral" Conservatism
nuk's picture
Submitted by nuk on Thu, 08/16/2007 - 7:38am.

Just because a person holds one of those beliefs doesn't mean they hold both. There are a lot of people that could be described as "pro-choice" that are fiscal conservatives, just as there are a lot of Repubs who are "pro-life" and spend money like no tomorrow.

Cal's whole article is about fiscal conservatism and use of taxpayer dollars until the last line about Chance and Guiliani. I don't know Chance's thoughts on the endorsement, but I'd imagine it has to do with him desiring a candidate that has a proven track record in running government instead of being a Steve Brown-type of an outsider with nothing but ideology and theory. Maybe he doesn't have a litmus test for presidential candidates where one or two or three specific issues qualifies/disqualifies the person?

Here's a tidbit for all those 2007 "conservatives": who signed the USA's first legislation that legalized abortion in certain circumstances? Why, that would have been Gov. Ronald Reagan in 1967! Which closest confidante and foaming-at-the-mouth fundamentalist strongly urged him to SIGN it? That would be Edwin Meese.

Candidates views may or may not change over time, but there is no doubt that the label of what is a "conservative" has dramatically changed into something very different than a couple of decades ago. Back then, THE ultimate conservative was Barry Goldwater, a guy who would make present-day conservatives run in total horror if he was around in 2007. They'd wet themselves. Now, a conservative is someone who tows the religious right moral line and spends like a drunken sailor. Oh yeah, don't forget the part about making government big big big either!

One reason why Guiliani and Romney are polling well is because they have a proven record of success in government, something that the American electorate considers very important in a president. They want somebody who can make government work, not a grandstander who'll get nothing accomplished.

One example is Bill Clinton, a total weasel to me but a guy who got elected twice and another ex-gov. Say what you will about Slick Willie and all his BS, but he did manage to get a few key things done that everyone before him had talked talked talked about and didn't. That would be major welfare reform-something that mirrors the immigration issue now where everyone wants "something done" and no one is implementing anything because of political risk-NAFTA, and a balanced budget. These 3 things were also done over very strong objections from his Democratic bases of support like the black voter block(welfare reform, which for some bizarre reason most black politicians assume only affects black people), labor unions(NAFTA), and a balanced budget(most Democrats:).

NUK


login to post comments
Cal Is On to Something -- Best We Take Notice? How About 2008?
Submitted by wheeljc on Wed, 08/15/2007 - 1:05pm.

Think that Cal is absolutely CORRECT!

While we are discussing some of the local politicians, what about the selection of the 3d Congressional District in November 2008? Will there be any competition for the seat, or will the present incumbent sail right back to DC?

login to post comments
Cal's Careless Comments on Proposed County Pension Plan
Submitted by Fayetteresident on Tue, 08/14/2007 - 10:18pm.

Cal, You didn't do your homework, again. The proposed pension is the same as other law enforcement agencies. You cannot compare it to Delta & the Auto Industry. Compare apples to apples and stop being so dramatic! Spalding, Fulton, Henry and Clayton Counties all have a pension plan, as well as The Cities of Fayetteville & Peachtree City. So why not the County Employees of Fayette? I'm not sure who is feeding you this "info", but you should get the correct FACTS before you report on it. There are a lot of County employees that cannot retire under the current "retirement plan", and many are readers that will be outraged at your careless comments. I hope you reconsider your stand...

login to post comments
Careless Comments?
Submitted by lawaboveall on Wed, 08/15/2007 - 8:48am.

Fayette Resident,

Why are these comments careless? Because you disagree with his position?

I think there is confusion about the term pension plan and defined benefit plan. What is being discussed here is a plan that "guarantees" a fixed amount to a retiring county employee based on salary and years of service. The defined benefit plan is paid for ENTIRELY by the county (and your tax dollars).

A pension plan, which they already have, allows them to set aside a certain portion of their salary and the county matches that contribution up to certain percentage. Just like the private sector, just let the rest of us working people.

A defined benefit plan would essentially burden the county with paying what would amount to multiply salaries for the same position.
Jack Krakeel would be getting paid to be County Administrator after he retires while the county continues to pay his replacement.

Multiply that burden over dozens of employees and you can see a huge burden on the tax payers. I have a problem with that.

They have a pension plan as described above just like people in the private sector. Why should I take ownership for a county employee's retirement plan. Are they going to contribute to mine?

This plan is costly, burdensome and the county commissioners would not even be considering it if it were not an Eric Maxwell campaign promise to the sheriff to get him elected. I do not want my tax dollars going to payoff Eric Maxwell's political debts.

login to post comments
There was no change!
Submitted by dollaradayandfound on Tue, 08/14/2007 - 6:31pm.

Just lies to get elected. Until we call these dudes on this sort of thing, often and soon, they won't change!
It would be better if we elected someone to commissioner, council, etc., where no particular skill is needed (unlike the law), than to continue to elect friends, same party hacks, impressive BS spouters, people with obvious reasons for running, and so forth.
Just common, intelligent people for one term and out! Someone to oversee the career people is all we need, plus maybe a few NEW ideas.
Polarization and polarized philosophies are killing simple town management.

login to post comments
Cal, that explains it....
Submitted by susieq on Tue, 08/14/2007 - 5:57pm.

I was sure I had ALWAYS voted for the right person. Thanks for explaining. The same thing happened to me.

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.