Rep. Ed Lindsey Says He “Will Not Abandon Georgia”

House Majority Whip Ed Lindsey took a swipe at fellow candidate and former Congressman Bob Barr, and now he’s taking a shot at Senator Barry Loudermilk who resigned today:

Friends,

In light of Sen. Barry Loudermilk’s resignation today, many have asked if I will follow suit.

The answer is simple: No.

As a young man, my Dad always told me that, “the best way to get a job is to do well at the job you have.”

Ten months ago, I asked my constituents in House District 54 to send me back to the Georgia General Assembly to fight for conservative principles and reform. Sticking taxpayers with the enormous cost of a special election for the sake of advancing my political career is an example of the kind of self centered politics that dominate Washington today. It will only stop when conservative leaders actually lead.

Next year, I am asking the people of Georgia’s 11th Congressional District to send me to our nation’s capitol to fight for real conservative reform.

In keeping with my Dad’s wisdom, I will prove that I am the strongest candidate for Congress by finishing the job I was elected to do under the Gold Dome. On issues such as expanding school choice, preserving our 2nd Amendment rights, reforming the tax code with the FairTax, and protecting the sanctity of life, you can expect me to always do what is best for the taxpayers and for our country.

After all, isn’t that what public service is all about?

Discuss in the comments below.

76 comments

  1. Michael Silver says:

    I like the cut of this guys jib.

    If he can champion gun rights in the next session, he’ll be able to distinguish himself further from Barack Loudermilk.

    Ole’ Barack Loudermilk voted to exempt legislators like himself from Georgia’s carry laws and tried for years to add mandated training to Georgia’s carry license requirements.

    • Edward Lindsey says:

      I will work next session to get the Senate to agree with the gun bill that the House passed twice.

    • NorthGeorgiaGirl says:

      As has been said many times before, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

      Barry Loudermilk has never supported any legislation that only allowed legislators to carry weapons under the Gold Dome. In 2011, he introduced and passed out of the Senate SB98, which allowed anyone to carry in the Capitol or any other government building. That bill overwhelmingly passed the Senate but the Leadership in the House (which Lindsey was part of) refused to give it a hearing in committee.

      In 2012, Loudermilk introduced and passed out of the Senate a bill which allowed for our servicemen and women to get a Georgia Weapons Carry Licensee at age 18 instead of waiting until they were 21.

      Barry Loudermilk has never been an advocate of mandatory training and opposed that measure throughout his time in the House and Senate. I know that there are certain candidates who plan on using a conference committee report from this year to try to convolute the facts, but ask anyone on that SB101 Conference Committee—Barry was the only one from the Senate who tried to get the bill to the floor.

      Here is a list of bills he sponsored just the past few years that disprove your theory. Look them up if you care at all about facts:

      SB 74 (2013) Leading Sponsor… Lowers the minimum age to obtain a Georgia Weapons Permit from 21 to 18 years old for anyone who has served or is serving in the armed forces.

      SB 493 (2012) Leading Sponsor… Lowers the minimum age to obtain a Georgia Weapons Permit from 21 to 18 years old for anyone who has served or is serving in the armed forces.

      SB 188 (2013) Leading Sponsor… Repealed restrictions on where holders of Georgia Weapons Permits can carry weapons, including churches and certain government buildings.

      SB98 (2011) – Leading Sponsor…Repealed numerous restrictions on where citizens can carry firearms in the state. This bill was the most expansive 2nd Amendment bill in decades. Passed the Senate and held in the House of Representatives.

      SB 88 (2013) – Primary Co-Sponsor…Prohibits the federal government from regulating the manufacture, purchase or use of any firearm or accessory that is manufactured, purchased and maintained in the State of Georgia.

      SB 197 (2013) – Primary Co-Sponsor… Prohibits the government from releasing any information on or the identity of persons who have applied for and received Georgia Weapons Carry Permits.

      SB 432 (2012) –Co-Sponsor Prohibits local governments from imposing any ordinance or policy restricting the carrying of certain weapons.

      HB 860 (2010) – Rep. Neal & Rep Loudermilk Co-Sponsors… Repeals the statewide prohibition of carrying weapons on church property.

        • NorthGeorgiaGirl says:

          With all due respect, all you show is the signature page. Where is the rest of the conference committee report that backs up your claim?

          As for the other bill, there were a lot of things in it that loosened up where you could carry for everyone.

          I guess Loudermilk should be crucified being very pro-2nd amendment, but not pure enough from you. Perhaps you prefer the candidate that accidentally shot at the president of the NRA? There are not many legislators that have tried to pass as much pro-2nd amendment legislation as Sen. Loudermilk, and Rep. Lindsey cannot even come close.

      • Michael Silver says:

        The vote where he voted to add himself to the “better than you and I” list was for SB 102, Senate Vote 160, on March 16, 2011. The bill would also allow him to carry in the capitol.

        If Sen. Loudermilk is such a champion of gun rights, why didn’t he introduce a bill to lower the licensing age back down to 18 for everyone? Since he refused and was aware of the issue, I can only think he agrees with Segregationist Lester Maddox and the Democrats who made the licensing age change from 18 to 21 in 1968.

        • NorthGeorgiaGirl says:

          Um…probably because it didn’t have a snowball’s chance of passing? People can go for the military thing a lot easier than they can everyone. Baby steps/incrementalism works a lot better than Hail Mary passes every time.

          Think of football…consistent short yardage has a lot more chance of moving the ball forward than long passes.

          But since I can see there are a few narrow minded people who will accept nothing but Hail Mary passes, I leave you with the daunting task of finding a legislator who will measure up and actually be successful in advancing the ball towards more freedom instead of just making noise about it.

  2. Three Jack says:

    He already did abandon Georgia:
    – Co-sponsor HB87 costing Georgia farmers and their customers millions
    – Supported charter school amendment which removed local control from elected school boards to be replaced by a politically charged appointed commission
    – Voted for stricter non-compete during a jobs recession making it even more difficult for unemployed workers to find new work
    – Big proponent for TSPLOST, epic fail on his part.

    You may evolve, but you cannot erase your past record.

    • Edward Lindsey says:

      1. HB 87 was a needed crackdown on legal immigration which is a 2 billion dollar+ drain on Georgia taxpayers. It is a good law and The federal law should follow our lead.

      2. The Charter School Amendment gives students and parents greater school choice and encourages education reform from top to bottom. That is why Georgia voters rejected the naysayers and voted for it.

      3. The employment covenant bill simply puts our employment law in line with 45 other states. It is never healthy to be the business outlier when competing for new jobs for Georgia.

      4. The bill gave the authority to create the plan to local officials to create the plan and gave the people the power to accept or reject it. How much more small government and people power can you ask for? In the end, the people rejected a bad plan and I appreciate that. I have worked for a plan B and will be happy to accept any recommendations.

      • 3. 23 states (and counting) representing over half the US population are expanding Medicaid. Employers who hire people on Medicaid whether lower salary, short term, etc, who live in one of the states will pay the exact same amount in taxes as employers who live in Georgia. Yet in those states, their employees (and families) will be able to sign up for Medicaid. In Georgia they won’t.

        If 45 other states are doing non-compete, how many other states have to do Medicaid before Georgia levels the playing field for its employers – who don’t forget are paying federal taxes for Medicaid expansion whether we do it or not.

        Oh wait – I’m sure you’ll solve this once you get to Congress. Not.

      • Three Jack says:

        1. I’m guessing you meant (il)legal immigration, so I will operate under that assumption. HB87 was a carrot for the wingnuts that ended up hurting Georgia’s economy. If I remember correctly, there was a study showing some $300M in ag losses as a result of not being able to find good help (even though you GOPers tried to force prison labor on the good farmers of this state, but even they would not work in the summetime conditions of S GA). Instead of passing a politically motivated bill, you should have come up with a viable worker program…you know, recognize need then address it instead of the usual ‘ready, fire, aim’ mentality of elected officials.

        2. The charter amendment has been debated ad nauseum on this site, but in the end it does wrestle local control from an elected board so that an unelected group of political appointees at the state level decide local matters.

        3. So if 45 other states decided to adopt Obama/Roberts Care fully, then you will join with other GOPers to do the same in order to remain competitive? Not exactly the best defense for hindering a persons opportunity to pursue happiness (job) in this state.

        4. TSPLOST was a bill to try and get voters to do your job for you. Good luck defending that vote.

        • Edward Lindsey says:

          1. Thank you for catching my typo re illegal immigration. Viable guest worker programs can only be done at the federal level and I agree that we need one and have long advocated that we do so. I will owrk on this if elected. So on that we agree.

          2. Charter School Amendment: We will agree to disagree.

          3. Medicaid expansion: See below.

          4. As I acknowledged, Plan A failed. We need a workable Plan B. Give me ideas. This is not a partisan issue. We all need to get from point A to point B and back home to point A.

          • Three Jack says:

            Transportation ideas conjured up while sitting at least 2 hours a day for the past 4 yrs on I75 from Acworth to Midtown and back:

            1. 18 wheelers dominate the expressway during morning rush hour in particular. The governor you previously supported killed the Northern Arc so we are left to figure out a solution with the best idea already in the trash bin, thanks Sonny. Adding lanes doesn’t seem possible due to budgetary constraints so it would appear we must find an answer utilizing newer ITS technology with existing lanes. I’m not sure it’s possible, but the ideal scenario would limit tractor-trailer traffic during peak hours on certain roadways. Of course, then you run into dealing with the fed since the expressways are federally funded.
            2. Move wrecks out of the roadway quickly and don’t have 4 cops, ambulances and fire trucks with lites flashing for simple accidents.
            3. Ticket drivers who insist on impeding traffic flow by driving slow in the left lane. Law is on the books, just need to add the penalty which gets introduced annually without action.
            4. Have flexible speed limits on expressways so travelers can adjust according to conditions.
            5. Stop funding buses. I know it is anecdotal evidence, but I see the ‘Express’ buses daily with much less than full capacity. Shift the funding to additional lanes and ITS.

            Just a few, but you must know as well as I that the legislature needs to make this a top priority instead of wasting time pushing thru bogus tax reform, saving unborns and running off hispanics who simply want to work.

            Thank you for participating in the discussion. Despite our many disagreements, I appreciate the dialogue.

  3. MattMD says:

    Candidates resign from office all the time to run for a higher office. His release comes off sounding more than a little sanctimonious to me. Running for office is not exactly like finding a normal job.

    Why does he bother bringing up the FairTax? It just ain’t happening. I’d wager there is a higher probability that we invade Canada.

    • Edward Lindsey says:

      I mention the Fair Tax in Georgia because we need to be looking at moving away from our reliance on the state income tax in Georgia because it is putting us at an enormous economic disadvantage when competing with surrounding states for business. HB 688 will hopefully begin a serious discussion on the issue.

      • MattMD says:

        Tell you what, Edward, I’ll play your game.

        In Fantasy-land let’s say Georgia enacts the so-called “FairTax” and then the the U.S. Congress does as well. Does that mean we get a 50-60% sales tax?

        There is a reason why the vast majority of people do not take the FairTax seriously.

  4. Noway says:

    Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!, Ed, for not “abandoning” us! Political theater at it’s worst. God, we have another 9 months of this crap?

    • Edward Lindsey says:

      When Bob Dole resigned I do not believe that triggered a costly special election borne by the Kansas taxpayers. That is the difference here. Let me also add that Donna Sheldon only stepped down because there will already be a SPLOST election in Gwinnett so there will be no additional cost to taxpayers.

      • Hey guess what – everyone in your district is already having an election for mayor and city council of Atlanta. Go ahead and resign – the only added cost will be the extra ink and electrons it takes to add your race to the existing ballot.

        • Douglasville Dude says:

          Good point.
          Also, if he is elected to the US Congress, he will have to resign his house seat, triggering a costly special election.
          Makes it a bit silly to use that as a club against one’s opponents doesn’t it?

          • bulldawg11 says:

            There wouldn’t be a special election because he is serving till the end of his term. Win or lose there will be an election for his seat in November of next year without him

            • Douglasville Dude says:

              You are right. Somehow I had it in my mind (incorrectly) that he was running for re-election at the same time.
              Can I use the Peach Pundit editors’ line of blaming others, or at least the excuse that I am stuck with David Scott as my congressman in CD-13? 🙂

  5. Bill Arp says:

    Ed’s toast. He’s trying to take some swings because his grassroots are not working outside Atlanta. Heard Sheriff in Cherokee is withdrawing support and getting behind Loudermilk.

  6. KingRichard says:

    Term Limits, we the people waiting on these people to reform themselves is not going to happen. The only way to remove entrenched politicians is to remove entrenched politicians. Everyone would support term limits except the entrenched politician, and Ed is one of them since 2004. These Government Masterminds have to go. They work for us…

    • Edward Lindsey says:

      As to the issue of term limits, I agree that we work for you and am open to listening. What would you propose?

      • KingRichard says:

        Honorable Lindsey – I would propose that no State or US Representative or Senator be allowed to serve 3 consecutive terms. Our founding fathers would have never imagined where we are now with Government Representatives serving as long as they do now. Many of our early founders went home to work while they were Government Representatives. Does this sound reasonable to you? It may not be strong enough.

        • Edward Lindsey says:

          Six years is probably too short. It has given lobbyinst in Florida too much of an upper hand. I personally favor 12 years in Congress which allows for two full Senate terms or 6 terms in the House. If you cannot get done what you set out to do in that time, it is time to come home.

  7. Edward Lindsey says:

    There is a saying in politics that everyone is entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts. With that in mind let me correct one blogger. Sheriff Roger Garrison remains a strong supporter and is an integral part of my campaign. Our grassroots is also doing well throughout the district.

    As to my reason for staying in the House and finishing my obligations through the next session, I simply do not believe that it is right for me to leave early and burden taxpayers with the cost of a special election as Barry’s resignation will do. This is a column by Kyle Wingfield explaining the likely cost of the last spate of special elections. http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/2012/12/07/poll-position-should-politicians-who-resign-early-help-cover-the-cost-of-special-elections/. This cost will be borne by the taxpayers in Cherokee and Bartow.

    As always, if anyone wants to talk with me further, feel free to call me at 404-926-4155.

    • Three Jack says:

      If you leave early, maybe you won’t burden taxpayers with the cost of your actions as a state representative. That would save us far more than any special election will cost. Please, leave early!

      • Edward Lindsey says:

        In Georgia over the past 5 years we have cut spending by over 15%. We rank 49th in the nation in per capita spending. I think we are pretty fiscally conservative.

        • Noway says:

          Ed, just so I’m clear on what your saying, Georgia’s budget in 2013 is 15% less than the budget passed in 2008? For purposes of illustration, if Georgia’s budget in 2008 was, say, $100 million, you’re saying that Georgia’s budget in 2013 was $85 million, a true 15% cut?

          • Edward Lindsey says:

            Yes. Using 2008 as a baseline from then until now, we have made real cuts of around 15% and that is not allowing for inflation. If you factor in inflation it is even greater.

            On again, good discussion and I apologize for having to go.

            • Three Jack says:

              If the budget actually decreased by 15% since 2008, that was not accomplished because good conservatives wanted to cut, it happened because the economy tanked and there was no money to spend. Nice try sir.

          • Looking at FY08 appropriations bill amended: all amounts in billions
            Total spent: $35.4
            State funds: $20.4
            General funds: $18.4 (broken out separately but part of state funds)

            FY13 amended:
            Total spent: $40.3
            State funds: $19.3
            General funds: $16.9

            Average annual increase of total spending of 2.6% – right about inflation. State funds down a little, general funds down a little. Lower taxes, high fees/tuition etc. Big assist from the feds in maintaining spending.

            Ed – do you just need us to buy you a plane ticket to Washington so you can thank the feds for all their help with the budgets?

            • Edward Lindsey says:

              Chris: You are mixing apples and oranges. Georgia like every other state manages a large number of federal programs through state government offices. The increase in federal dollars is a reflection of the increase in federal programs and spending over the past 5 years and not an expansion in state programs or state spending.

              • Please show me how $19.3 billion is 15% less than $20.4 billion then. Or if you prefer, how $16.9 billion is 15% less than $18.4 billion.

                I get what you’re trying to say, but general funds aren’t down 15% pre-inflation. No where close to it. And I believe if I looked deeper into the budget, I’d see that most cuts to general taxes are made up for by increases in fees for things where fees should be higher – like hunting licenses, and things that we can debate as to whether they should be higher – like tuition.

                • Edward Lindsey says:

                  The budget passed in 2008 is for FY 2009 which begins July 1, 2008. This is the last budget passed before the Great Recession hit. That is why I use it as the baseline. It was for 21.4 billion. Using this figure as the baseline and compare it to each year thereafter, the total cuts are approximately 15%. Annual cuts earlier in these tough years were much higher than 15 % and have gradually been reduced as revenue has picked up in recent years.

  8. Stephen in Southside says:

    Ed, it’s probably time to play some golf. After you play a few rounds of putt putt, be sure to FIRE your campaign advisors.

  9. Edward Lindsey says:

    Guys,

    I gotta run but I think I answered everyone’s comments except for Jason and Jessica’s eyes rolls. I do not expect anyone agrees with everything I have said but I hope you will appreciate I came on and took your comments seriously enough to respond. I pledge I will do it again after I am elected because I have always believed that my job is not to deliver edicts from the capital but to deliver the wisdom of my community to table where decisions are made — and you guys are part of that community.

    Take care,

    Edward

  10. Atlanta is having a regularly scheduled election this November for mayor and city council. He can resign at virtually 0 cost to the taxpayers if he does it soon.

  11. Edward Lindsey says:

    I have found myself with a little more time this afternoon and blogging on Peach Pundit can be addictive so let me have a go at responding to a few more comments:

    1. Chris Hutton’s comments:
    a. There are two practical problems with signing on to Medicaid expansion: 1. We have a system in place which is already causing doctors to flee the system and not accept Medicaid patients. Increasing the Medicaid roles by the estimated 600,000 that is predicted if we sign onto to the Obamacare plan will only further strain the system and make it nearly impossible for any one to get proper care (In other words, its not just the amount of water you pour out of the pitcher that matters, it the capacity of the glass you are pouring the water into); and 2. the federal government is simply not a reliable financial partner at this point in time given the enormous federal deficit and its inability to get control of its spending.

    b. Your comment about local elections in my area is partially correct but as it stands it is highly unlikely that there will be a runoff in any of these elections. By contrast 4 strong people have already announced for my House seat next year. Therefore, there is very likely to be a runoff in any election for my seat. If I were to resign and cause a special election, therefore, it likely would result in a very expensive special runoff election that I do not believe my taxpayer constituents should have to shoulder.

    2. North Georgia girl’s comments: We will leave it for another day to discuss my and Barry’s second amendment record. The only thing I will say here is that I will work hard to pass next session the gun rights bill as passed by the House. It is good bill that I am proud to have supported and hope to see is passed and signed by the governor. I trust you agree and will use your activists skills to promote its passage.

    3. Stephen in Southside: Sorry but I am going to church meeting right now in Cartersville to discuss the role of faith in politics and not playing putt putt. I also like my advisors just fine although some of them are probably pulling their hair out right now over the time I am spending today blogging.

    Once again, take care and this time I really am gone. Cartersville awaits.

    Edward

    p.s. I think you should challenge my opponents to do the same as what I have done here.

    • benevolus says:

      I hope y’all talk about the role of politics in your faith too, because it comes with the other, free!

    • Ed, to respond to your responses, first #2 because it is easy. At least one city wide council seat has 3 candidates, and one city wide school board seat has 5 candidates – both have controversial incumbents. The likelihood that at least one of these races goes to a runoff is about 90%. So go ahead and resign.

      On 1 – two thoughts. First, I expect Georgia will become a haven of great doctors fleeing the other states (sarcasm). 2 – I seriously question your basic ability to understand how the world works and therefor your qualifications to serve in Congress if you really believe “the federal government is simply not a reliable financial partner at this point in time given the enormous federal deficit and its inability to get control of its spending.” First of all, what magical fairy do you think has been propping up Georgia’s budget since you’ve been “cutting” it? Second – the federal government can’t run out of money – they print it. If the federal goverment’s word isn’t their bond, then we’re all screwed unless we’re sitting on a pile of gold. Third – annual deficits have been going down the last few years, even if you are worried about runaway federal spending, that isn’t really the trend right now. You may still think spending is too high, but the annual deficit is shrinking, not growing.

      • Edward Lindsey says:

        Chris: I think my logic on not resigning is fiscally sound and in keeping with what my constituents expect of me. Yours asks me to roll the dice. I do not gamble with my taxpayers money. Let’s simply agree to disagree.

        As to your continued argument on Medicaid, I first refer you above to your confusion over federal and state dollars in Georgia. Except for the short term stimulus money allocated in 2009, the federal government has not been proping up the state budget. Also, the fact that the federal government has a prinitng press and can spend more than it takes in year after year is part of the problem and not the solution as you suggest. Once again, good discussion but we simply ideologically disagree. So be it.

        If anyone would like to discuss things turther, give me a call at the above mentioned number.

        • I am fine with agreeing to disagree on resigning. I just think in the grand scheme of things, it’s a pretty pointless argument to have on either side. If someone decides they want to run for Congress because a seat opens up that they didn’t know for certain would be open when they ran for their current term, I applaud them for stepping down, even if it does cost the state some money. Plans changed, they have a new goal, and the new person that wins the special election can start building up some seniority now instead of later, which especially in a rural area has historically been good for the area. Now look, if you run for office in November and then in December decide you want to do something else, then yeah, I think maybe you should have to forfeit your remaining campaign funds to pay for the special election. But there should at least be some value to the state to having someone who actually wants to be at the session be there vs someone who is just there because they don’t want to cause a non-controversy. That said if I were advising your campaign, I’d tell you to resign so you can raise money full time. Doesn’t matter what great things you accomplish in the session (and really the odds of anything great ever being accomplished in the general assembly are small) if you can’t tell people about it in mail and on tv.

          Now, onto the deficit. FY 09, the last “Bush” year the deficit was $1.4 trillion.

          Since Obama has been in charge, here have the deficits been:
          2010 – $1.3 t 2011 – $1.3 t 2012 – $1.1 t 2013 – $1.0 t 2014 – $0.7 t estimated.

          So as you can see, the deficit skyrocketed during Bush’s last year – again not really Bush’s fault we were entering into what could have been another Great Depression and he started spending money to help deal with that. Obama took office as that was starting, but since then the defecit has been reducing. As a percentage of GDP, the trend is approaching…Ronald Reagan territory.

          As great as Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich’s record in the late 90’s seemed with lower or non-existent deficits, the 2000’s were pretty much a bummer economically. I’ll go with small (as a % of GDP) structural deficits as were the case pretty much the entire second half of the 20th century. Deficits aren’t scary.

    • NorthGeorgiaGirl says:

      When you get to Cartersville, make sure you repeat the little joke about changing your name to Bubba that you told at the District convention. I’m sure folks up there will laugh and you will fit right in with the fine “rednecks” up in Bartow County.

      Question….since you have a problem with someone resigning to focus on running for another office, I suppose you let Gov. Deal have it in writing about abandoning his constituents when he quit Congress to run for Governor?

      • Edward Lindsey says:

        Well, from your posts it is pretty clear where your sympathies lie and I appreciate that. However, My family comes from a tiny town called Pineview in Wilcox County. I spent every summer there on my granddaddy’s farm from Memorial Day to Labor Day. I started my law practice in Toccoa, Ga. I would appreciate it of you would not derisively refer to my family, friends, former clients, or future constituents by the term you used. I do not think your candidate would appreciate it either.

        I also had a great time in Cartersville tonight. The video will be on YouTube in a couple of days.

        Take care and good night.

        • NorthGeorgiaGirl says:

          Nice try at turning this around on me. I assumed that you thought everyone in Cartersville was a “redneck” based on your comments about changing your name to Bubba made in the context of visiting Cartersville. That is certainly how all of my friends in the Bartow delegation took your comments. Maybe you need to go watch the video of your remarks at the convention to refresh your memory and see how it came out. Maybe you didn’t mean it the way it sounded, at least I hope not, but that’s certainly how a lot of the more rural delegates took it.

          And you artfully dodged my question about the Governor quitting Congress.

          In any case, I’m glad you enjoyed your visit to Cartersville. Have a nice evening.

          • Edward Lindsey says:

            NGG: ok, let’s put one issue to bed quickly and hopefully for good. I am going to take you at your word that you were offended by a joke that was intended to be on me entirely and no one else. I was taught from a young age that a joke is not funny unless everyone laughs. Therefore, I apologize. Give me your number and I will run all future jokes by you. I will make you my official Joke Monitor so this does not happen again. What do you say? Peace — let’s move on and squabble about more important things. That is what people who respect each other should do. — and I certainly respect you 🙂

            As to Governor Deal, I also have great respect for him but I disagreed with what he did in 2010 but i have worked with him extensively since. That is how politics works. You do not have to agree with folks all the time to still respect and like them. I do not agree with my wife all the time and I am married to her. (Another joke.).

            • NorthGeorgiaGirl says:

              Fair enough, thank you for the explanation.

              Do me a favor, though, and run your jokes by your wife before you take them public. I bet she would have told you to say Ben or Brian, not Bubba. Women have instinct about these things, and I am sure your wife could keep you out of a lot of trouble:)

              Have a nice night, and I look forward to more exchanges in the future.

  12. southernpol says:

    I approved of the attack on Barr.. it was well-timed and well-deserved.

    But to me (a voter in CD11), this release appears you want to raise money during session from all of the lobbyists, reps, and senators that have to go through you to get a bill passed.

    How about you really shake things up? Show the voters that you aren’t doing this to get $ from those groups by returning all money from lobbyists, PACs, and other representatives in both your federal and state campaign accounts. Then sign a pledge to not take a single dollar from them from here on out.

    That would assure to me that this release is not silly politics, where the most likely case is you know you can raise a ton of money by holding up bills and actually being a massive burden on the legislative process.

    Ball is in your court, Rep. Lindsey. We’re watching.

    • Edward Lindsey says:

      “. . . this release appears you want to raise money during session from all of the lobbyists, reps, and senators that have to go through you to get a bill passed.”

      I already stepped aside from my majority whip leadership position for the exact appearance concern you cited. I will still be there working on what I think is important but I will not be in leadership.

      As to your suggestion on campaign finance reform, as I have told others, give me your ideas.

      • southernpol says:

        If this were true, that you do not have the ability to raise funds based on influence -> Where is the release shaming yourself? 10 months ago your constituents elected Ed Lindsey the leader, not Ed Lindsey the back-row Representative. Right?

        Silly argument? Yes, of course it is. And so is your release that says Loudermilk abandoned his constituents. Any consultant can slice anything they want.

        Hit your opposition when they deserve it, don’t go looking for petty things. I don’t think anyone wants to see that, sir.

        And I’m not looking for campaign finance law changes. I’m all for everyone being able to give money. I’m asking YOU, who will be in a position to barter for a LOT of campaign dollars this next session, to go ahead and relieve yourself of this suspicion that many people will have of your true intent, and return all of that money and refuse to take any more.

        Everyone here knows (including you) that you will receive campaign dollars for being in front of bills that Barry Loudermilk (and Donna Sheldon as well) will not. I can’t vote for that, sir. Because you and I know how the game is played.

        Thanks for your reply. I’ve pulled for you in the past with the charter school stuff, but with all due respect I will not support the “appearance” claim. It’s not honest, and in that way I am a 1 issue voter.

        – Jacob, Cartersville

  13. Harry says:

    Mr. Lindsay, Thanks for your thoughtful responses and input. We may not agree on everything, but if I lived in your district I would certainly consider supporting you. I have revised my opinion about you.

  14. Jason says:

    State Rep. Lindsey,

    Here’s my problem with this sort of press release. Granted, there’s an election next year and, of course, silly season is already upon us. But you’ve spent more time taking a dump on your opponents rather than actually discussing issues that are important to the district and the rest of the country. Rather than taking cheap pot shots and grandstanding, why don’t you discuss things that, you know, actually matter?

    — There’s a push to defund ObamaCare currently happening in Congress? Are you supportive of these efforts. Why or why not?
    — What would you propose to replace ObamaCare?
    — What areas of spending would you address on the off-chance you’re elected? While Republicans talk about non-defense discretionary spending, that’s a relatively small piece of the budgetary pie, as defense and mandatory spending (ie. entitlements, debt service, etc) are the bulk of federal outlays?
    — Would you join other House Republicans in abandoning the pernicious practice of earmarks?
    — Would you have voted for Rep. Justin Amash’s amendment to limit NSA spying or would you support future efforts to rein in the surveillance state?
    — Do you believe that a president has to go through Congress before engaging in a war or acts of war?
    — Would you support an end to mandatory minimum sentencing for nonviolent drug offenders?

    • Edward Lindsey says:

      Jason: it has been a long time since someone said I was short on opinions. i obviously have failed to get you on my e mail list or have you Like my Facebook page because I have covered extensively each of these issues since I announced my candidacy. Let’s fix that. Please visit my official Ed Lindsey for Congress Facebook page and you will see what I have said on these subjects. If you would like to keep up with all my e newsletters in the future simply e mail me at [email protected] and I will sign you up.

      Ok guys. It is late. Whoever post next wins. I quit. Good night to all.

      • Jason says:

        You’ve obviously missed the point. The perception is that you’re running a campaign that only takes cheap shots at your opponents. That’s about the only coverage you’re getting.

        • John Konop says:

          Really Jason? First it is early so nobody is getting any real coverage at this point that means anything, I would bet the average voter has no clue about any of this…..Second agree or not, he had the guts to engage in debate. Third how many people on this thread know about your long time working relationship with Bob Barr? Forth, when you did not like his answer you just took a cheap shot. Finally you could of really debated him on issues rather than taking the shot. And it would of been interesting, instead of just the same old political mud slinging……

  15. John Konop says:

    I give Mr. Lindesy a lot of credit for answering direct questions, agree or not on the blog. It would be great if the PP set up all the candidates to do the same…..

    I have a few questions for Mr Lindsey if you have time:

    1) What is your solution for people with preexisting healthcare problems not being able to get health insurance at a readonable rate? Please not the the special pool for high risk, it only will creates a larger subsidy by tax payers…..

    2) Why should a charter school be able to get free federal tax dollars, not be forced to pay back tax payers first before they can make profits made on proberty in a private company if they go out of business….btw this is part of the charter rules in Michigan. Also why not have the charter schools put up surity bonds to make sure they stay open for the school year. If they have solid financing this would be cheap. Would that not put a real financial quality check?

    3) what is your position on us getting into another military action with Syria?

    Thank you for your time!

    • Harry says:

      John, preexisting conditions are high risk almost by definition, and therefore a subsidy will be required either directly or indirectly, or?

      • John Konop says:

        If you pool it all together as they hit risky issues, the rate would be much higher…….When we build pools it is based over time combined with risk……If you just separate at first incident the price would skyrocket for that risk pool via no offset…..Insurance companies would push the risk into that pool even quirkier then they do now. Trust me, I really understand the risk game……Nothing against them, but you represent stockholders as an executive…..

      • Most companies that have 100 or so employees don’t have problems insuring for the ones with higher risk or preexisting conditions. Neither does Medicare or S-CHIP. The thing is, a large enough company that is hiring based not on health has a randomly distributed pool when it comes to health. And since everyone is in Medicare, and every poor child (the vast majority of them who are in good health) are in S-CHIP, they don’t have a problem.

        The problem comes when health insurance pools are not put together randomly. In the individual market, the prices are pretty much only based on the average expenses required to cover a healthy person. So they deny coverage to the ones with high risk flags that they can identify in advance – preexisting conditions.

        Now, sometimes that preexisting condition is the fault of the person seeking the insurance – they were unhealthy and got diabetes. Sometimes it isn’t – they got cancer when they were 5. Unfortunately, if only one insurer decides to take people with preexisting conditions, their pool won’t be random and their costs will escalate. And healthy people will flee that insurer, which will lead to even higher costs for those that are more expensive to insure – whether through fault of their own or none.

        Essentially, that insurer would turn into a high risk pool. The costs would be astronomical. So yes, we could make a high risk pool – but what we’d essentially be doing if we did that is we’d be constantly bailing out the insurance companies, as they’d pretty much do whatever they could to move people to that pool once they become expensive to insure.

        So as you can see, no insurance company is going to be the first to move in that direction. But – if we could make the individual market resemble the business/government market where coverage is universal (more often than not, a healthy 25 year old employed by a company that offers insurance is going to take it) the individual market would work just fine.

        I’m guessing your preference would be to do health insurance kind of like term life insurance. If you’re responsible, you’ll sign up when you are young and healthy and you’ll have a guarantee of coverage. In a perfect world, I’d be with you. But some people can’t qualify or can’t afford coverage in this model, and so we have to do something – because collectively we do not agree that just letting them die or go bankrupt is a good alternative, and personally I believe a government run pool would be gamed by the insurance company to send all of their most expensive customers to, in essence privatizing the profits of healthcare and socializing all the risk and losses.

        So we basically have to do some sort of mandate and guaranteed issue. If you think through this logically, it’s the only outcome that will work, unless you want one of two things: a libertarian free-for-all where some people have access to insurance and many others don’t, or single payer where we just tax everyone and put them all in the system. If you’re paying attention to America and our history, the first option will never happen. The second still could, and this is why moderate Democrats, Republicans and conservatives who have gamed this out have ALL eventually settled on some version of either guaranteed issue/mandate or single payer.

        The problem is, Republicans are so blinded by their hatred of Obama that they don’t realize that of the only two possible options that could ever happen or ever work, he picked the conservative option – because he didn’t go with single payer or a public option. If Republicans do everything they can do block the only possible solution that incorporates the market, do you really think President Hillary or whoever is going to not pick single payer the next time she has a chance to?

  16. Bill Arp says:

    Mr. Lindsey, have you pledged to not support the reorganization of Cobb, Bartow, and Cherokee counties? They all saw what you did to the Fulton County Commission and I am sure they are afraid to support you after the association for county commissioners is not supportive. Is your position that the state should meddle in Fulton Counties business but not any other counties? I would like some clarification on why other counties are different than Fulton…

Comments are closed.