There certainly IS NOT a general election until Obama & Sarah runs again!!!!!

Why do you think they keep these tax increases away from general elections? Because they would always fail due to no one wanting to vote for tax increases in a general election!

You can't be dumb about when elections occur if you want to slip something in! Political Hypocrites! Poor reporting! The standard!

They DO NOT want to live within their means any more than the far left wing does.

Blaming the depression on Barney Frank instead of George and Dick is no reason to continue spending more and more every year! Noone believes them any more.

Fully aware of what is coming. It is going to be ugly even past 2011.

What happened in the 2005 SPLOST on County level bears no resemblance to what happened in PTC.

I think your statement is a bit too all inclusive. Sturbaum and I talk about those issues frequently.

Fact remains we have a serious funding issue for several years to come. Loosing a million a year isn't going to be pretty since a .6 mil increase on property tax for that alone is something I cannot back, which leaves us high and dry Budget wise.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

and you want to give them even more money to waste? These guys collectively can't manage their way out of a closet. Why should we trust them to do better by giving them more money to waste?

The eyesore you speak of is testament to the kind of government we are funding. It seems the only enitity that gets more money for continually failing is the government: City, County, State, and National.

Buy the way, they haven't used the money they have already collected under the first SPLOST, and you want to give them more?

I for one am fed up with the government.

Most of you don't get it. If it weren't for the jobs it provides (the dudes who distribute it) we wouldn't need them at all!

The ONLY idea of the whole thing is to collect it legally with a law. Then it doesn't matter much who or what gets it except it must go into the economy and be spent or make interest in the bank!

They only need a clerk to pulll a request out of a trash can once a week and go ahead and mail that check to the luck drawee! No small print. One of Sonny's drivers could do that. Or if federal money---let Sarah Palin do it.

I say it would be used better that way! We would all know who got the check and what he did with it. We would run him off if he didn't use it locally.

So, if I understand your comment, you would rather have a government clerk spend your money for you? Why do we need the government as an intermediary in an economic transaction?

If you want to give up your money to have someone spend it for you, you can give it to me. I will spend it immediately on something to drive the economy. I thank you in advance.

I guess I know now why you have the handle “Bonkers”.

I am only saying since you and others on here say that the government is currently doing a terrible job of spending tax money and borrowed money, then why should we be concerned about who does it?

As I understand it, we are trying to prop up the economy by dumping money into it to be spent immediately. Bush started this plan with his bill before he left, so apparently both the demos and repubs think it is the only salvation. It is temporary.

It will take too long to solve the severe problem eight years has gotten us into. By creating jobs, making retail products in factories, selling tons of autos, building infrastructure like dams, roads, bridges, water supplies, energy generators, parks, cleaning up smoke stacks, burning trash instead of making piles of it, going to Mars, providing hospitals for mental cases, regulating those who have shown they are more interested in money than service to humanity, we can again succeed.

Those things above we used to have. We blew it. It will take many years to regain a new economy based upon products, useful only, rather than floating money for a living and shuffling paper and propping up inefficient banks, airlines, auto companies, herds of stock sellers, and knife traders! Not to mention useless wars.

Wow - I would love to talk to you about this stuff. I don't think I could ever change you mind, but people like you make life interesting.

"Why should be concerned about who does it?"

Let me say you are so far off the mark it's like we are on different planets. So it would take much too much effort on this page to give you a different view.

I would be interested in on what basis you make your judgments about how the economy should run? Do you have a list of books that you have read or are reading that brings you to the foundations of your economic positions? I would certainly like to see the list.

This is not a joke or sarcasm, just a question about your study of economics and what brings you to your position(s).

I totally agree with your very last comment concerning wars.

PTCO

The Feds and State put a ton of hoops to jump through to get these projects allowed.

Then, they pull tons of money up the ladder, via taxes, etc, and make us please them to be able to fund local projects by giving money back via grants. GDOT is the main fund holder for the CSX bridge and Paschall.

Now, after all the funds that get spent on process we have a local funding portion that kicks in. These funds are coming from the 2005 SPLOST.

Currently GDOT has said the funding is there and the projects will be finished. Both of them.

If they fail on the CSX we will pay to full amount locally. But while annoying the longer wait to save around $250,000 is worth it.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

.....you missed my point, we shouldn't have a SPLOST, we need to get off the tax and spend bandwagon (cocaine). The meeting on Monday night is to decide how a new tax should be divided among the cities and the county. They need to come to an agreement on this so they can get the "new" SPLOST on the ballot in November. We should let the current transportation SPLOST laspe in 2010 as scheduled, and get off the cocaine of another SPLOST. Each city should decide what their citizens need, let them pay for it within the city. If we need carthpaths we should pay for them directly. If Fayetteville wants a bypass let them pay for it using gasoline taxes, thus taxing the people who use the roads. This is how it is done in Georgia now with roads. We should not take someone elses money through a SPLOST to support our spending in PTC. It's "redistribution" otherwise. NO NEW SPLOST.

Sorry for my lack of clarity on this point

It really isn't that simple. Our roads and paths serve a lot more than PTC. We do have and will be adding more connections into the County on the Paths. A lot more than PTC uses our Rec facilities.

If you put the full cost exclusively on the PTC residents then we are fully funding County users, in example. But we still, in turn, have to pay fully for what they get from the County but we don't use since we are all part of Fayette.

I agree a better system is needed. But until that can be developed this is the best we have.

I have been talking to some State people on issues like this. But this is a real uphill battle with no clear and easy answers. Especially with what is happening in DC.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

Well are we talking about roads or are we talking about cart paths?

You seem to be mixing these:

Roads funds are provided by the state through taxes on gasoline, this seems to be a fair and simple way to fund use and construction of roads. The only better way is to have toll roads, with an expiration on the toll once the road is paid for of course. Is it not true that the county has not spent all of the money it collected already under the current SPLOST? In fact it has spent less than 10% of collections, correct? Why don't we spend this money first before you propose extending the tax?

Cart paths should be funded in the same way, people who want them and use them should pay for them. If the county wants to extend the cartpath system into the county, then unincorporated residents should pay for them. They shouldn't pay for PTC paths and we shouldn't pay for their's.

It is quite "simple" Mr. Haddix, I believe that we are simply trying to load (extend) another tax on unsuspecting taxpayers in the form of a SPLOST. If you agree that we need a better tax system you simply have to look at what we already have in a gasoline tax. People who use the roads pay for them. If the state wants to collect more tax on gasoline then them the try.

I think this falls into a category that there is no tax that should be repealed once it's in place. Or a politician has never seen a tax they don't like. If your running for something run for not increasing taxes. This includes extending taxes.

Thanks - I think it is clear you want to increase (extend) our taxes. Is this correct? This is a simple yes or no question.

Well are we talking about roads or are we talking about cart paths?

Roads funds are provided by the state through taxes on gasoline, this seems to be a fair and simple way to fund use and construction of roads.

Not that simple. PTC roads are paid for by PTC. 74 and 54 are not PTC roads, but State. Sometimes there are grants available for our roads and sometimes not. Some times we pay part and the State pays part.

Where paths interact with State roads we have to get permission to do anything along with mutual planning. Sometimes split funding and sometimes not.

There isn't any 'simple' answer that fits all.

The only better way is to have toll roads, with an expiration on the toll once the road is paid for of course.

PTC isn't building any roads.

Is it not true that the county has not spent all of the money it collected already under the current SPLOST?

True.

In fact it has spent less than 10% of collections, correct? Why don't we spend this money first before you propose extending the tax?

Because it is County money, not PTC money. I don't think you understand the money is divided by formula upon receipt and each government has it is own independent SPLOST plan. Nor can SPLOST money be spent on anything other than what it has been approved by the taxpayers to do.

The County Transportation money MUST be spent on County Transportation approved projects or returned to the taxpayers. It cannot just be shifted to other projects and it most assuredly cannot be transfered to PTC.

Cart paths should be funded in the same way, people who want them and use them should pay for them.

They are legally transportation systems, not Rec. So, they have to be funded by SPOST, LOST or property tax. There is no possible way of charging and collecting user fees for people walking, bike riding, blanding and similar.

If the county wants to extend the cartpath system into the county, then unincorporated residents should pay for them. They shouldn't pay for PTC paths and we shouldn't pay for their's.

PTC residents are County resident, use County transportation system and paying for them.

It is quite "simple" Mr. Haddix, I believe that we are simply trying to load (extend) another tax on unsuspecting taxpayers in the form of a SPLOST.

Extend, not add.

If you agree that we need a better tax system you simply have to look at what we already have in a gasoline tax. People who use the roads pay for them. If the state wants to collect more tax on gasoline then them the try.

Gas taxes won't pay for cart paths. State gas tax isn't for local roads unless they allow us a grant.

With GDOT pulling projects and moving work dates back that isn't going to happen.

I think this falls into a category that there is no tax that should be repealed once it's in place. Or a politician has never seen a tax they don't like. If your running for something run for not increasing taxes. This includes extending taxes.

I am doing everything I can to cut costs. Reality is the pushing on Rec alone has saved about a million with no service loss. But there is currently no alternative funding source for paths.

We keep loosing income but still have services, etc, to provide. That is the reality and I am not going to lie about it, like tax cut pledges in past PTC elections that became tax increases the first year in office.

The options are renew the SPLOST or do a million worth of service cuts until the economy turns around.

When turned around I sincerely hope DAPC will have found some good paying jobs to add and have a good foundation in place for attracting more. Then increase in sales tax revenues plus added income sources will allow us to catch up on postponed services and hopefully do a decent tax cut.

And after that keep efficiency in place to not allow a return to wasteful spending. Live within our means.

Thanks - I think it is clear you want to increase (extend) our taxes. Is this correct? This is a simple yes or no question.

Not want, but need. The taxpayers need facts for an educated vote. Then, Council will have to deal with the results of that vote.

Just trying to be honest here. This economy is not making anything easy. We need a more good paying jobs here, but almost no one is making such investments today. Until then we have to try to cover services with what we have available.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

You seem to be mixing these:

Roads funds are provided by the state through taxes on gasoline, this seems to be a fair and simple way to fund use and construction of roads.

Not that simple. PTC roads are paid for by PTC.
PTCO Answer - Then let PTC residents pay for the roads and upkeep.

74 and 54 are not PTC roads, but State.
PTCO Answer - Then let the State pay for 74 and 54 and all others for that matter.

Sometimes there are grants available for our roads and sometimes not. Some times we pay part and the State pays part.
PTCO Answer - OK, but state grants are using someone else money for our roads, right? Do you think this right? We can always argue that someone comes into our city to use our roads and that gives us a "right" to take their money. However, the roads are primarily for our benefit not theirs.

Where paths interact with State roads we have to get permission to do anything along with mutual planning. Sometimes split funding and sometimes not.
PTCO Answer - see above, get permission and forget it.

There isn't any 'simple' answer that fits all.

The only better way is to have toll roads, with an expiration on the toll once the road is paid for of course.

PTC isn't building any roads.

PTCO Answer - I understand this, it was merely an illustration of making use of roads fair.

Is it not true that the county has not spent all of the money it collected already under the current SPLOST?

True.

PTCO Answer - Thank you for confirming this.

In fact it has spent less than 10% of collections, correct? Why don't we spend this money first before you propose extending the tax?

Because it is County money, not PTC money. I don't think you understand the money is divided by formula upon receipt and each government has it is own independent SPLOST plan. Nor can SPLOST money be spent on anything other than what it has been approved by the taxpayers to do.

PTCO Answer - This statement doesn't answer my question. Do you or do you not think we should spend the money raised by the current SPLOST before we extend it to have continuation of this tax? It's a yes or no question.

The County Transportation money MUST be spent on County Transportation approved projects or returned to the taxpayers. It cannot just be shifted to other projects and it most assuredly cannot be transfered to PTC.

PTCO Answer - See question above. However, since it has not been spent the idea of returning it to the taxpayers seems very appealing to me. If you don't use it you lose it. Also you seem to imply by this statement that PTC has used all of its allocation of funds from the SPLOST. Is this true?

Cart paths should be funded in the same way, people who want them and use them should pay for them.

They are legally transportation systems, not Rec. So, they have to be funded by SPOST, LOST or property tax. There is no possible way of charging and collecting user fees for people walking, bike riding, blanding and similar.

PTCO Answer - This is not what I was really suggesting here, I think you missed the point about having local control. I am suggesting that if the residents of the city or county want golf cart paths they should pay for them. If they do that through property taxes that ok too. We should not "redistribute", either you agree with this concept or you don't. We can't morally and ethically say the FEDS shouldn't do this and then turn around and do it to our neighbors.

If the county wants to extend the cartpath system into the county, then unincorporated residents should pay for them. They shouldn't pay for PTC paths and we shouldn't pay for their's.

PTC residents are County resident, use County transportation system and paying for them.

PTCO Answer - OK this is a valid argument, then as PTC/County Residents we should pay our portion of county paths through a property tax. However, we should only pay proportionally based on some formula - like % of paths available to the homeowners of PTC. For example - county paths that link to PTC.

It is quite "simple" Mr. Haddix, I believe that we are simply trying to load (extend) another tax on unsuspecting taxpayers in the form of a SPLOST.

Extend, not add.

If you agree that we need a better tax system you simply have to look at what we already have in a gasoline tax. People who use the roads pay for them. If the state wants to collect more tax on gasoline then them the try.

Gas taxes won't pay for cart paths. State gas tax isn't for local roads unless they allow us a grant.

PTCO Answer - I didn't suggest that they did, in fact I was attempting to make that point. If they "allow" us a grant, we should refuse it. Gas taxes should be for roads.

I think this falls into a category that there is no tax that should be repealed once it's in place. Or a politician has never seen a tax they don't like. If your running for something run for not increasing taxes. This includes extending taxes.

I am doing everything I can to cut costs. Reality is the pushing on Rec alone has saved about a million with no service loss. But there is currently no alternative funding source for paths.

PTCO Answer - Then increase property taxes to pay for the paths. Let the citizens of PTC decide how much they want to spend on their cartpath system. Don't punish others that have little say or use of our path system.

We keep loosing income but still have services, etc, to provide. That is the reality and I am not going to lie about it, like tax cut pledges in past PTC elections that became tax increases the first year in office.

The options are renew the SPLOST or do a million worth of service cuts until the economy turns around.

PTCO Answer - Well then start cutting, and if the citizens don't like what happens they can change it by increasing their taxes to pay for it. But SPLOST is not the ethical or moral answer to local PTC issues. Can't we both cut unnecessary taxes and focus new local taxes on those things that we want? Isn't that all part of local control of our revenue sources and the democratic process? It's called self-sufficiency. You know what? If we can afford it then we just live within our means and "bumps" on our cartpaths.

When turned around I sincerely hope DAPC will have found some good paying jobs to add and have a good foundation in place for attracting more. Then increase in sales tax revenues plus added income sources will allow us to catch up on postponed services and hopefully do a decent tax cut.

PTCO Answer - What's DAPC? Some government agency?

And after that keep efficiency in place to not allow a return to wasteful spending. Live within our means.

Thanks - I think it is clear you want to increase (extend) our taxes. Is this correct? This is a simple yes or no question.

Not want, but need. The taxpayers need facts for an educated vote. Then, Council will have to deal with the results of that vote.

Just trying to be honest here. This economy is not making anything easy. We need a more good paying jobs here, but almost no one is making such investments today. Until then we have to try to cover services with what we have available.

PTCO Answer - I think you are trying to be honest. I am not against higher taxes, but I don't want the State or the FEDs increasing them. They have proven to be spendthrifts and continue down the road to ruin. I thank God everyday that the State has a provision in the State Constitution that keeps them within revenues collected. Look at what has happened in California, if we didn't have this provision we would be right there with them. I hope you change your mind about SPLOST, it is not the right or moral thing to do and it likely kills jobs within our great county. You want to bring jobs to PTC and Fayette County. Then you have to be competitive with surrounding counties. You would think Republicans would understand this fact. But that's a whole other arguement against SPLOST.

Development Authority of Peachtree City. Authorities are authorized by State law to do what local governments cannot do.

Yes, we should spend first. Done. Every penny is allocated and we will have spent all of PTC'S portion by the end of 2010.

No, you cannot collect County taxes on a pro rated basis. Everyone has the same millage rate.

I agree a lot of laws need changed at the State and Fed levels. But, to do what you want would cheat PTC residents by having them pay into the bigger money pools and not get anything back. I have to look for every penny from every source I can. Pure local financing is not feasible. Your way would increase costs for less service.

We need a lot of changes in government. Independents like me don't have a voice except at local levels. Going to take a lot of work and big money to make it happen.

I am doing what I can for change locally. Also working with some at State level. But change isn't going come easy and until then I have to work with what is and do the best possible.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

"I agree a lot of laws need changed at the State and Fed levels. But, to do what you want would cheat PTC residents by having them pay into the bigger money pools and not get anything back."

PTCO Answer - Don't see how if you don't have a SPLOST, get rid of this concept and start taxing people for what they want and demand from local government.

"I have to look for every penny from every source I can."

PTCO Answer - Even if it's not the right or moral thing to do? What gives us the right to put our hands into someone elses pocket?

Pure local financing is not feasible. Your way would increase costs for less service."

PTCO Answer - I think what you mean is we won't be able to have as much as we have now, which is true if we don't want to pay for it. The problem is that we have gotten used to robbing other people for our own needs, that's the real problem

Thanks for your service.

Everyone who shops in Fayette pays it, regardless of where they live.

Of course we should use it.

What a lot of people do not understand is in Sales Tax 4% goes to the State, 1% goes to Education, 1% is the SPLOST portion and 1% is the local sales tax, which does not come back to us 100%.

The only way to keep it truly local is to use a MOST (municipal option sales tax). But that only collects from sales within a city.

So, SPLOST is one of the most effective fundings we have. It is also good in that it must be used for what it was approved by the tax payers to be spent on. Takes the political games out of it.

We do need a point of sales system. It has proven very effective and efficient in some other states on truly returning funding to where it was generated.

This is not a promotion for more retail stores. There is a very big down size to excess and Big Boxes. Then it costs more in infrastructure and service costs than is brought in.

Don Haddix
PTC Councilman
Post 1
donhaddix.com

(and legally) I might by folks from all over the area on a daily basis, I would totally agree. All you have to do is check the City Hall parking lot for the runners/joggers/walkers from all over who get much enjoyment out of the paths. They are not only not from PTC, many are from neighboring Counties...and a SPLOST is about the only way to collect anything from them.

But I digress, you are right about once a tax starts, it's hard to stop it.

You say we budgeted one million dollars to spend which was to come from a new SPLOST which has not been passed yet?

Then don't budget to spend it!!

That SPLOST (sales tax) will mostly have to come from our lowest wage-earners in the county.

Do a "zero budgeting" for a change. Look at every single dollar spent last year and cut each area by the amount that is to be short. Or even more if found,

Just go in one day and tell one-half of the city hall staff they are no longer affordable, along with their associated costs.
Cut one-half of the senior police officers, or demote to patrolmen if they wish. Same in FD. Reduce patrolmen by the percentage loss in the "budget."

Cut town managers and officials salaries by the percentage loss in the "budget."

If some want to leave, I'm glad they can find another job right now at a high payment level.

It is not rocket science to run a small city economically.

As to cart path maintenance---use TASRP money and CCC type workers---mix your own tar and gravels!

Use some imagination, we are headed toward a Depression. Don't make any more debt if that is your problem!

You are not there to hold all jobs and costs steady!
You work for us.

arguing with a stop sign and actually enjoying it.

You made my day.

I've got one of those! I've got a special purpose!

Aren't they all republican conservatives?
It is after all a tax!

Bingo Bonker$!!! Hence the recent demise of the Republican Party.

Block the SPLOST folks. Now is NOT the time to burden the taxpayers further. Yeah projects like the widening of Jeff Davis Drive looks great but you have to ask yourself.... was the expense of sod vs hydro-seeding really a justified expense? How about the cost of all of those fancy light poles that were placed every couple of hundred feet??? And why were they spaced so closely together??? Is Georgia Power donating the the electricity to power those excessive lights and their maintenance from this point on?

That's just one project.... What justifies our local governments to spend money on projects in such ways that are as irresponsible as an adjustable rate mortgage on a $K home on a $K income without a down payment?

Come on elected leaders, it's time to start living within our means. Let's concentrate right now on the basics and not take on any new projects that we can neither afford to build or maintain via future expenses. Now is not the time. Your constituents cannot afford the tax burden and they / we can ALL benefit from our government entities starting to live within our means.

You guys always led me to believe you were the party of fiscal responsibility. Boy was I had..... Give me some sort of reason to vote Republican again. Otherwise I might as well consider Sniffles for School Board as that librul left-wing Democrat is the only candidate that has been championing conservative fiscal management of our limited resources.

Are You Freer Today Than You Were Before Obama?

You two conservative observers should run for political office. You’re both right about stopping all the spending. Fayette has too many tax and spend liberals who get elected as Republicans, but they are nothing more than liberal democrats. They are drug addicts for over-spending. Some are literally taking drugs. I’m serious, we have got to start electing real conservatives. And people who won’t lie to the voters just to get elected, like all of Tyrone’s Council.

But the difference is we decide whether or not to vote it in, not a bunch of politicians. With that being the fact, I don't see it as hypocritical. People need to get out and vote yea or nay.

Amen. I normally support sales tax increases if the money is going to be spent to improve the county. But after the bypass to nowhere developer debacle, I will vote no and make sure to turn out all of my friends and neighbors to do likewise. $5 million dollars for a college rent-a-campus? In this economy, whoever proposed that should be tarred and feathered.

But why do all these republicans even vote to put it on the ballot if they don't want it?
Why not use the budget and current income only?

I can tell you why! Any time a tax is active and is about to be retired, they see it as an easy way to NOT RAISE TAXES!

I think it fits the word perfectly---Hypocrites!

Wow.....GO BONKERS GO!

Repubs hiding behind the excuse of "well, it's up to the voters to decide" didn't use that same philosophy when the issue was Sunday alcohol sales in retail stores. Nope, that's something where those voters can't be allowed to decide! WE decided you don't get a say in that matter.

Repubs have become a sorry lot once they lost all credibility on fiscal management. I also don't want to hear their garbage about "states' rights" when they are the biggest hypocrites out there when it comes to limited federal powers and states assuming all the rest. They believe that ONLY when the issue is Roe v. Wade. The other times? Let's see:

"Hey states, your speed limits will not exceed 55mph or the feds will cut-off all your federal highway money!"-Richard Nixon, Repub.

"Hey states, your drinking age will not be lower than 21 years of age or the feds will cut-off all your federal highway money!"-Ronald Reagan, Repub.

Medical marijuana in some states? "That's a FELONY!!!" John Ashcroft, Repub. Bob Barr, Repub and now imitation libertarian.

Offshore oil drilling off the coast of Florida that the state banned in their own legislature? "We need that OIL and we can ignore your "rights"!"-Almost ever Repub not named Jeb Bush or not residing in Florida. This has been snuck into a current energy bill by all the Repubs on the Senate Energy Comm. and even some Dems are on-board with mucking up the Florida coastline by setting up drilling 45 miles off shore.

I'm more Libertarian than anything else and I understand what you are saying.

The feds and states have been getting away with too much and we should have been allowed to vote on Sunday sales.

My point is we can tell them yes or no. No matter how we feel about the feds and state, at least we have a much larger say with SPLOSTs. Everyone wants to complain about taxes but and least here's a chance to make the locals sit up and take notice if we say no.

We do need to turn back the clock and cut a lot of the federal spending that has gotten so out of hand. I'd much rather have that cash in my pocket as it is.

The only thing I disagree with you on is Reagan forcing the increase of the drinking age by withholding federal funds. At the time I wasn't happy with it but learned to respect it after I lost 4 friends in separate DUI crashes from my senior year of HS and through college.

The raising of the drinking age had no effect on me as I was older than the limit, but I point it out as a prime example of how states' rights under a guy who ran a platform advocating the same got trampled upon. I don't think the drinking age is an issue when it comes to DUI near as much as the reality of slap-on-the-wrist punishment that does little to discourage drunk driving. Most other countries have very harsh sanctions.

It's very hard to argue against judicial activism as far as Roe v. Wade is concerned when at the same time the federal govt has issued mandates to the states and superseded authority granted to the states by the Constitution.

If the republicans would actually follow through with limited governmet and fical responsibility, then they would be very popular. Both parties treat the tax payers money as their own and both parties are very comfortable with a strong and ascendant central government. But in a general two party system, who would you vote for if your were a true conservative? that is the rub.

Now let's talk about drilling off of Florida as that is one area that I question on your thoughts. I believe territorial waters extend for an individual state for 12 miles. After that, I think that it is the national right to set policy in the next several zones.

I think it's 3 to 12 miles that is state and there on out is national. Of course, when I was reading about the FL bill that stated no drilling within "125 miles"......well, another problem could be that distance encompasses Cuba. I believe Venezuela is drilling offshore in Cuban waters probably within 90 miles of Florida right now.

I can get behind that.. Throw them ALL out let's start over..

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

Lindsey, I'm IN!!!

Instead of Tea Party gatherings, can they be Beer Parties?