War of words over Budget continues.

Mike Coan is not happy

“There are so many things we did right and for someone to play politics with it is disheartening,” Rep. Mike Coan, R-Lawrenceville, said at Gwinnett Chamber of Commerce’s town hall meeting. “I get angry because it’s not the right thing to do. It’s a raping of the process.”

And more….

Coan, a member of the appropriations committee and chairman of the industrial relations committee, said the Senate “hijacked” a bill he wrote to set unemployment insurance rates with the budget version, but the bill was released because its failure would have meant an additional surcharge for businesses.


  1. jsm says:

    Can someone clarify what Coan is saying about the Senate ‘hijacking’ his bill and it being released? I don’t quite understand what he is saying happened there.

  2. buzzbrockway says:

    From what I’ve heard, when all this got started, the House said no Senate bills would be considered until the budget impasse was resolved. Perhaps the Senate did the same thing to House bills.

  3. jsm says:

    I’m disappointed that Coan is more concerned about ‘raping the process’ than looting the taxpayers. If efforts toward decreasing spending are considered playing politics, then I say, “Let’s play politics.”

  4. tony r says:

    When are you losers going to realize this has nothing to do with cutting spending. In the end, they’re going to spend all this money. They’re just fighting over when and the senate/ is trying to fool everyone into thinking this is a cut.

    I’m all for cutting spending. I just don’t like hypocrites.

  5. jsm says:

    tony, you’re not making any sense. We ‘losers’ like the idea of waiting to spend the money in the annual budget so that these items can be prioritized among all other spending items that are considered. I like the fact that waiting demonstrates some spending restraint in our government, which is a step in the right direction. The term ‘supplemental’ says it all.

    If we need these items so badly, we can pay for them in the regular budget after proper consideration.

  6. tony r says:

    No jsm you’re not making any sense. I’m all for changing budget process and I’m all for cutting out funding to museums and all that. What I’m not for is a bunch of peacocks strutting around saying we’re so conservative, we’re cutting spending when they’re not cutting a damn thing.

    If they want to change the process, great. Might work better if you don’t cheap shot your fellow republicans, but go ahead and change the process. Just don’t try to tell me that you’re working so hard to cut spending when in the same breath you’re saying you want to fund these projects a couple of months later.

    Chest thumping hypocrites don’t deserve our praise.

  7. tony r says:

    And yes unfortunately I’m talking about cagle ( a guy I voted for because I thought we were going to get more than these silly games). What a lightweight this guy has turned out to be.

  8. jsm says:

    Other initiatives may have to get cut to fund these in the annual budget. The net result could be less spending. The previous supplemental budget will be out of sight and out of mind when the annual budget is created, as well as the dollars that were spent. If you can’t see that, then arguing with you is a waste of time.

  9. tony r says:

    Jsm, you can’t be this stupid. Every news report has been clear and jim galloway has done a good job of explaining this. The 07 supplemental budget is voted on now and the 08 budget will be voted on this session too! They’re working on the 08 right now! These legislators will literally vote on the supplemental, bragging how they supposedly cut spending and then the following week vote on the 08 budget spending all that money on the same projects. Not out of sight or out of mind but voted on within days of each other.

    Your post is as stupid as all this ridiculous posturing by cagle and co!

  10. IndyInjun says:

    jsm –

    You explained it well.

    Spending deferred might not happen at all, for it will not crowd out greater priorities. If is approved later, it displaces OTHER SPENDING.

    It is hardly surprising that there are very few fiscal conservatives left in the GOP, as the majority within the party continue to support the wild-spending, borrowing-from-China, money-printing, and off-budget disaster that is the Bush Administration.

    Dediscovering the party platform of fiscal responsibility is the GOP’s only hope and Cagle has come to understand that.

    The Tony R’s of Georgia are no different than the Democrats we threw out.

  11. jsm says:

    -From the Political Insider, March 26, 2007, by Tom Baxter & Jim Galloway:

    “Because our constitution prohibits a deficit, state spending is usually a notch below that.

    “Which means that each year, the state usually gathers in extra revenue. This year the amount is about $700 million. Most of it will go to local schools, to help pay for increases in the number of students.

    “When Democrats controlled the Capitol the remainder would be divided among the state’s most powerful lawmakers and sent to their districts —- to pay for anything from museums to libraries to high school band uniforms.

    “Republicans were appalled. In 2002, candidate Sonny Perdue and nearly every other Republican on the ballot called for the abolition of the supplemental budget. This year, Gov. Sonny Perdue included in the “little budget” a healthy portion of his “Go Fish Georgia” program.

    “House Republicans have followed Perdue’s lead with projects of their own but were stopped in their tracks when Cagle announced he wanted to do what he’d promised in his campaign —- to strip excess spending from the supplemental budget. On Friday, Cagle told reporters he wouldn’t back down.

    “You could say that the newbie lieutenant governor is engaging in grandstanding, that he’s making an early bid for the 2010 race for governor. All of that is probably true. Even so, the grandstanding is resonating with the GOP’s anti-tax base.”

    Where’s the part where Galloway explains funding all the supplemental budget projects in the 08 budget vote a few days later?

  12. tony r says:

    No indy, I’m part of the gop base that doesn’t like a bunch of peacock strutting, decpetive hypocrites running my state or my country. Its why I didn’t like the dems and its why I didn’t like the national gopers. And its why I’m pretty frustrated by cagle and others. Just cut the spending. Cut it! Don’t say you’re doing something when you’re really doing nothing and tell me I’m supposed to like it.

    And jsm, spare us all the selective quotes. He has explained repeatedly the budget process. Its clear. All cagle and the senate is doing is deferring the same projects they say they’re condemning. I don’t like what the house has spent. But I hate the hypocrisy of the senate.

    Please someone save us from these fools.

  13. Icarus says:

    Tony r,

    To paraphrase the “great” Donald Rumsfeld,

    You go to the budget process with the fools that you have, not the fools that you want.

    Now, do you prefer the house, under Lobbyist-lovin Richardson, who want’s to maintain the Tom Murphy status quo, or Cagle, who at least says let’s weigh all spending at the same time, and quit spending supplemental money as if it were a windfall?

  14. tony r says:

    I prefer neither. I prefer someone who will just say “hey, let’s change this process” and actually cut some spending. Without trying to cheap shot other repubs and without being a lightweight hypocrite. Yes, I’m naïve. Bit is that really so much to ask?

Comments are closed.