Morning Reads for Wednesday, February 27th, 2013


  • Two plans for Clayton: Falcons to rehome and Atlanta to chouse, (AJC)
  • but they’ll lose accreditation and Deal will replace Matt Ryan with his staffer’s spouse.
  • Cobb County’s plan to ban illegals from construction now too hot to touch (AJC)
  • Perhaps someone told them every building would then cost twice as much
  • Imperial Sugar remains impervious to criminal prosecution (Savannahnow)
  • Ogeechee Riverkeeper has a week to prove its claims on pollution (Savannahnow)
  • Bertis Downs talks education (Flagpole)
  • Tourism sales tax law badly written, requires a novation (SavannahNow)
  • Chapman bill would ding Georgia Power for Vogtle costs (SavannahNow)
  • Atlanta banishment plan for prostitutes tossed (Clatl)

BULLDOGS! (actually the rest of the world):

  • Why Wasn’t There a Chinese Spring? (The Diplomat)
  • The Agony Of The Fanboy, yes that’s a thing (techcrunch)
  • Panic-driven austerity in the Eurozone and its implication (VOX)
  • Oenophilic fun and degustation  (NYT)
  • Ending Global Warming is not that tricky (The Atlantic)
  • Why you shouldn’t name your daughter Nikki (LS)
  • Stereotyping and making decisions fast  (RealClearScience)
  • Misguided Nostalgia for Our Paleo Past (The Chronicle)
  • Hating cyclists comes down to drivers’ conceits (BBC)
  • The Happiest Places, going by tweets, disappears when examining the deets (OneHappyBird)
  • The world 50 years ago  (The Atlantic)
  • Iranian news agency hates Argo (Wapo)

Also: SCOTUS hears two today,   Shelby County v. Holder, followed by American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restauranton voting rights and antitrust.

Additionally, a terrible bill is in front of the Senate Health Committee today, or why if you love your elderly relative, you might want to consider sending him or her outside of Georgia for their Golden years. More on this later.


  1. Left Turn Only says:

    Ah, the tourism tax break bill. How many constitutional offenses can be included in one bill – let me count the ways. I come up with 4 or 5.

  2. Nonchalant says:

    This being an open thread—over at NRO there is a story about Missouri lawmakers, one on each side of the aisle, proposing a law to make it a felony to propose a law about one thing or the other–in this case, laws for gun control and right-to-work. This reminded me of the practice in ancient Athens, where anybody who tried to reopen a debate once the demos had decided forfeited his life.

    And that brought to mind Nonchalant’s Law for Stable Non-Demagogic Republics, which is, to wit, that almost nothing the Athenian Demos did should ever be adopted. That is where you should go to learn the perils of popular rule, not find a template.

    My random comment for the day.

  3. SallyForth says:

    Re SCOTUS hearing on Section 5 of the VRA, whatever they decide should apply to every state in these United States. If it is good for one, it is good for all. The Civil War established that any federal law MUST apply to every state, not a selected few. Section 5 is un-Constitutional.

    It is my personal belief that VRA’s Section 2’s strong enforcement language is more than adequate to prevent any state in the country from ever going back to the bad old days of the first half of the 20th century – if they were to be so inclined. Section 5 was written as a temporary (5 years only) administrative provision that should have expired 50 years ago and is now punitive to state and local entities where Black voting is at higher levels than in states not covered by Section 5. It is costing taxpayers in just certain states for all the paper work, staff salaries, etc. of having to send everything they do (even things as simple as updating election forms, moving to new polling places, or anything else) to Washington for pre-approval before they can even sneeze! Section 5 is so out of date that it is a total anachronism in today’s political reality and serves no purpose other than gerrymandering.

    Speaking of which, I am now part of a small percentage of my House district’s voters who are Caucasian, a distinct minority who has no voice whatsoever in anything that happens. What part of the VRA can help my civil rights?

    • Nonchalant says:

      The Voting Rights Act has issues. For example, for a state like Georgia, which has had such a large influx of transpants, you are denying those transpants equal treatment under the law based upon what an entirely different group did four decades ago, with no objective proof of ongoing wrongdoing.

      Likewise with Generation X, Millenials, and so forth. If God can be satisfied with the sins of the fathers being visited upon the sons for five generations, perhaps the Almighty Federal Government can satisfy itself with half that time.

        • Nonchalant says:

          Well, thanks, and I’m glad you posted, because Charlie hates my “reattacks”–but I just remembered part of my standard argument against the pre-clearance portions of the Voting Rights Act:

          There are basically proportionally few people left alive in the South who were of voting age in 1964 and actually living in the South. The Baby Boomers were in high school. They cannot be held responsible for segregation, and all other generations currently alive were at best just gleams in the eyes of the Boomers. The previous generation, Greatest Generation is essentially gone–and in the 1950s they would still have been a junior generation, behind the WWI and previous generations, as far as just truly starting to wield significant power.

          I thus say that the people that need to be “hung” are basically dead.

          Therefore, the Federal government simply cannot deny self-governance rights because of fears of what might happen based upon what did once happen from folks either dead or not even related to current residents, who moved in subsequent to the end of segregation.

          This matters, because the people clearly have a traditional right to self-governance, dating to since before the Founding, and I argue the people of a state also have self-governance rights via the Constitutional requirement for the Federal government to insure all states have republican forms of governments, the rights of the people retained via the Ninth, and the rights of the States and people retained via the Tenth. True self-governance, true federalism simply is not a frivalous option, to be dispensed as Washington directs or desires. Only the most powerful reasons should infringe upon it. Certainly not speculation and fears of what might be, fears not backed with conclusive, solid, and widespread evidence.

          I would also point out that there is a principle in the law that says you may only punish a man for what he has actually done, not what you think he may do, or for what his father did. No bills of attainders, no Corruption of blood, and all that. And yet…

          I am not going to argue whether the original VRA was kosher, Constitutionally, because I don’t care, and sometimes Gordian knots just need to be cut. I *am*saying its time to stop attempting to hang current residents of the South for crimes they never committed.

    • Rick Day says:

      No representation? Oh dear, it can’t be THAT bad! After all, didn’t the GOP control redistricting?

      I’m sure your white privilege still keeps you nice and warm at night 😀

      • SallyForth says:

        Rick, I’m not part of the GOP hierarchy and they don’t give a ray’s a** about me or my representation. Now tell me what white privilege I should snuggle up with?

  4. Nonchalant says:

    And work with me here Charlie–

    I’m going to add that the Left cannot on one hand say the Constitution is old and outdated and not really binding because the drafting happened a long, long time ago in a republic far, far away, and then on the other hand make large numbers of citizens functional wards of the Justice Department based on events that occured up to twenty or fifty years before they were even born (which would be the case for those born recently who will reach maturity before the expiration of the Act).

    • Rick Day says:

      To be fair, non white non male voter suppression had been the status quo since the 1600’s. There was a lot of bad history to correct there.

      The VRA was a result of the South not doing the right thing back in the day, because…NEGROS!

      It’s in the Bible: Only the sons and grandsons are forced to pay for the sins of the fathers.

      Deal with it.

  5. Rambler14 says:

    HB 267

    I would like to thank Debbie Dooley and the Atlanta Tea Party Patriots for shedding some light on this issue involving GA Power.

    GA Power’s response is laughable at best.

    “This legislation would …be seen as changing the regulatory process in the middle of the project. It would create uncertainty in the economic development and investment community,” D’Andrea said.

    New business would avoid the state, driving up costs for all ratepayers, he argued. Because business doesn’t like uncertainty.

Comments are closed.