Martin and the Harbor

Is it not big news that Jim Martin has come out opposed to the deepening of the Savannah Harbor?

At a time of economic loss, does it not make sense to expand the harbor to increase shipping to increase jobs/economic flow rate?

Seems expanding the harbor would be wise, so why does Jim Martin oppose it?

Likewise, what’s the deal with him wanting to lower the age of consent?

UPDATE: on the ports thing, here is an article on point:

WTOC’s Sonny Dixon served as a panelist at a debate hosted by Raycom Media sister station, WALB. His question about deepening the harbor, a long-studied proposition aimed at maintaining growth at the ports, revealed three very different views about the project, including some that surprised the Georgia Ports Authority.

“I’m not for it at this point,” explained Democratic candidate Jim Martin during the debate. . . .

On the age of consent thingy, I don’t know much about it, other than Cagle had it in his oppo bag and people are wondering why Saxby isn’t using it.

BTW, again, Saxby, can you kick Tom Perdue and Charlie to the curb after you win? Please?

8 comments

  1. johnmartinforafreegeorgia says:

    @grift:

    The Ports comment Erick is referring to has to do with Martin’s response during a debate earlier this week.

    http://savannahpolitics.com/?p=66

    Basically, Martin had no idea what he was talking about. I doubt he even knew there was a port in Savannah. He is nothing but an ITP stuffed shirt liberal that, along with Frank, want to raise your taxes to pay for those not willing to work. He is for Atlanta interests, and not for the people of Georgia.

  2. Decaturguy says:

    Likewise, what’s the deal with him wanting to lower the age of consent?

    Wow. This race must really be close!

  3. GOPGrassroots says:

    Jim Martin Was One Of Three Members Of The Georgia House Of Representatives To Vote Against A Bill Making It A Felony To Solicit A Child For Prostitution

    Jim Martin voted against passage of a bill relating to sexual offenses, so as to change the definition of the offense of pandering; to provide that a person convicted of the offense of pandering when such offense involves the solicitation of a person under the age of 17 years shall be guilty of a felony; to change the definition of the offense of solicitation of sodomy; to provide that a person convicted of the offense of solicitation of sodomy when such offense involves the solicitation of a person under the age of 17 years shall be guilty of a felony; to provide penalties; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes. (Passed 163-3)

    (Georgia House Journal, pages 503-505, HB 1221, Feb. 1, 1988)

Comments are closed.