Transportation Committee Considers HB 170

The entire House Transportation Committee met for the first time on Thursday in order to consider HR 170, the Transportation Funding Act. The committee heard a presentation on the bill from Chairman Jay Roberts, and then heard testimony from other organizations, but did not take a vote on the measure.

One of those testifying before the committee was Julianne Thompson, a Republican political grassroots activist who helped found the Atlanta Tea Party, although she is no longer affiliated with that organization. She opposed the 2012 TSPLOST, but promised after the vote to come to the table and support a solution. She indicated her support for the bill.

Less happy with the bill as it stands was Neill Herring with the Atlanta Sierra Club. Herring was disappointed there was no dedicated funding for transit, and wants to see constitutional amendment that would mandate some funding for that purpose. Herring also felt that the $200 tax on electric vehicles was too high, saying that amount of money was the equivalent of a car that had very low gas mileage.

Also testifying was Ed Crowell of the Georgia Motor Trucking Association, who objected to the indexing feature of the proposed excise tax, noting that because funding would increase automatically, it was likely that costs would rise in tandem. Crowell also said that estimated additional revenue of $60 million from truckers purchasing diesel fuel in the state wouldn’t occur unless sales taxes were eliminated completely from diesel fuel. As it stands now, local sales taxes will continue through at least 2020, or until they expire.

The Georgia Municipal Association offered a proposal that would increase the rate of local sales taxes, including LOSTs and SPOSTs to make up for the loss of revenue from gasoline sales. The new rate would be approximately 1.15%. The organization would also like to see modifications to the Transportation Investment Act to allow fractional TSPLOSTs in smaller areas, such as only a few counties. A summary of their proposal is below the fold.

Others spoke for and against the proposal, including several representatives of health organizations, who said that raising the cigarette tax by $1.23 per pack would raise around $450 million annually for transportation, and would also bring the Peach State to parity with the cost of cigarettes elsewhere in the country.

The committee will meet again next week to further consider the bill. Chairman Roberts indicated he hoped a solution could be found to help school districts, which would lose funding once their current ESPLOSTs and ELOSTs. Chairman Roberts is also waiting to see a fiscal note that will tell how much revenue would be raised.

As one committee member told me as we rode an elevator to the third floor of the capitol, it could be a while before the bill emerges from committee.

Download (PDF, 481KB)

This post has been updated.


  1. debbie0040 says:

    Jon, Julianne Thompson did not help found Atlanta Tea Party. Jenny Beth Martin and I did on February 22, 2009. We asked Julianne to get involved a week or so after the Tax Day Tea Party on April 15, 2009. She was Co-chairman until she left last summer.

    I am receiving reports Michael Sullivan of the Transportation Coalition misled when he inferred that he was representing tea party activists through out Georgia when he was testifying. We are notifying tea parties what Sullivan said and they are livid. I don’t know of one tea party group that has come out in favor of the current plan. The deception never ends..

    One activists that watched the hearing posted this on FaceBook.
    “I am highly offended that Michael Sullivan of GA Transportation Alliance is acting like he is the spokesman for the TEA Party. Many of us all over the state do not support the current language for HB 170.”

    • Charlie says:

      Michael Sullivan in no way represented himself as a member of or as someone speaking for the Tea Party.

      Those of us at the Capitol were able to hear him clearly.

      Hope the weather is nice in Orlando.

      • debbie0040 says:

        I am not in Orlando. I sick at home. Not sure why you keep bringing my work travel up. I am home far, far more than I travel. Are you trying to say that because I travel a lot, I should not be involved with Georgia politics? Guess you pro taxers thought I wouldn’t be interested in the fact House Republicans wanted to raise taxes in an irresponsible way and lie about it. Kind of put a damper on your plans, huh ? I got involved because tea party activists asked me to get involved..

        I had several people contact me about Sullivan’s comments and they said he was inferring he was in a round about way.

        I do think Senate Republicans are going in the right direction with their plans. Look forward to seeing the finished product.

      • debbie0040 says:

        Did really Sullivan say something like this ? Sullivan (or whoever) basically said that he talked to TEA Party folks and that they no longer had the mindset they had when we defeated T-SPLOST. So the pols shouldn’t worry about passing the tax hike

        If he did say that, then when the video is online that needs to go out in an email to activists so they can contact their state House Rep..

        Did you see where Grover Norquist called HB 170 a tax increase ?

  2. debbie0040 says:

    I posted this this morning and it was reported in the AJC:

    Atlanta Tea Party Statement –

    Sen. Tommie Williams and the Georgia Senate are moving in the right direction for funding for Georgia’s transportation needs and I thank them for their approach. They need to look at spending cuts first and adding more transparency and accountability in how the new funding is spent. The corporate subsidies need to be looked at and reformed and that money should also be used for transportation needs. There also should be no tax dollars used to build sports stadium without approval from the voters. I like giving the counties more control..

    Part of the reason for Atlanta’s transportation woes is the large amount of development in already congested areas. Many developers receive tax payer funded subsidies in the form of property tax exemptions when they build new developments . I like the approach of developers having to contribute to transportation needs.

    If the Transportation Infrastructure Bank is funded, then changes should take place before it is funded to ensure more accountability and transparency.

    I plan on reaching out to members of the Senate Transportation Committee with suggestions and encourage other conservatives to do the same. Many of the ideas the members of the Senate Transportation Committee were ideas we supported in 2012. I look forward to reading their bill when they present it.

    • Rambler14 says:

      “There also should be no tax dollars used to build sports stadium without approval from the voters.”

      You are voting for the people that approve these stadiums. You have voted for them to be stewards of your tax dollars on many other matters besides stadiums.
      Don’t like the way they’re representing you? Vote them out the next election.

      I fail to see how sports stadiums are any different than any other major decision that County Boards or City Councils make on a weekly basis. Or are you proposing that we should all take a vote every time a redevelopment/zoning proposal is submitted?

    • debbie0040 says:

      He absolutely did talk about meeting with tea party activists across Georgia and their attitudes have changed since 2012 when they opposed TSPLOST I watched the video.

  3. androidguybill says:

    Anyone considered working with the TEA Party by identifying $1 billion in spending cuts to accompany this $1 billion in spending? I am not a TEA Party member. I have not even played one on TV. But doing so might be enough sugar coating on this pill to make it easier to ingest.

    • blakeage80 says:

      I think the conventional wisdom is the recession did that for us. I love talking about spending cuts. I’m sure there’s waste somewhere there’s always a user fee to re-evaluate or some agency with one too many people in it. However, roads aren’t getting any younger or more lightly traveled and we can continue to advocate for spending cuts while fixing our infrastructure. If we have time for Beer Jobs and RFRA and Hedgehogs, we have time for spending cut talks too.

      • androidguybill says:

        I am sympathetic to the recession thing, but you must realize that the spending cuts would have never happened had the recession never forced it. Meaning that they weren’t “real” spending cuts, especially since a lot of it went to things that no conservative wanted cut in the first place such as cutting short the school year.

        But the deal is that when Democrats are in power conservatives always state that no new spending should take place until an equal amount of cuts take place in the existing budget. So, are there $1 billion in, say, social spending that can be cut in order to pay for this transportation spending? Or is it a question that no one wants to ask because it is Republicans that would have to deal with the blowback from the spending cuts and not the Democrats? If you are a TEA Partier, it is a fair question.

        Remember the Ryan plan? The cuts in social spending that it contained were never proposed when Bush was president. Ditto with the social spending cuts that Gingrich proposed with “Contract With America”: when Bush was in office and the GOP ran Congress all of a sudden they didn’t seem like such a good idea anymore. At some point spending cuts has to move from being a stick to beat Democrats with when they are in power to something that the GOP actually does when it is in power.

        Dooley isn’t articulating this message very well – which is a shame – but that is what is motivating the opponents to this plan. It isn’t that they don’t want new infrastructure. Everyone wants new infrastructure. Dooley has even taken a couple of steps forward away from her longtime animus against rail. They just want it done differently from how it would have been done if Joe Frank Harris and Tom Murphy were still running this state.

        • blakeage80 says:

          I totally get where you are coming from with the who’s in power argument and agree. However, I think that state governments are a different animal than the federal government examples you have cited. A state has to compete with 49 others. They can’t afford to be left behind or they may never catch up. Let’s just look a little ways back to Atlanta getting a major international airport instead of Birmingham, AL. Alabama still doesn’t have an Atlanta sized city. If we leave out a major piece of our economic puzzle, then what future may we be jeopardizing? That being said, I want to see the State government cut out all unnecessary functions. The problem is that a lot of those social functions are part of the Federal web.

          • androidguybill says:

            I get what you are saying. And like I said, no one opposes new infrastructure. Again, Debbie Dooley actually endorsed MARTA expansion, returning MARTA to local control and transit generally, which is almost man bites dog territory. But the problem is that we can’t even see where a serious effort to make government smaller in Georgia has even been tried. That is the main thing. Until that occurs, you aren’t going to see conservatives agree to new spending, because all they see is government getting bigger. This plan does make government bigger, and the fact that it is actually necessary and legitimate doesn’t change that.

            • blakeage80 says:

              Do you know of what areas that conservatives in the Capitol are currently proposing to cut? Have any bills been crafted that this session you know of that could be used to leverage support?

            • ArtfulDodger says:

              The reason you don’t see efforts to make government smaller is no one can agree on what government service provided isn’t necessary for the government to provide.
              We can however continue to expect government to work on making expenditures as efficiently as possible to cut waste. And yes that waste includes trashing a perfectly good stadium to build another so a private entity can make more profit or building a new stadium with public money that is then controlled by a private entity for their benefit.

        • debbie0040 says:

          Our opposition is also to non- governmental entities deciding who gets projects with the giant slush fund in the form of The Transportation Bank. In previous posts I listed reforms needed. With their past spending habits , elected officials haven’t proven they can be trusted with spending tax dollars wisely. The House plan shows they don’t intend to change that and in fact things will just get worse.

          Activists are tired of elected officials using tax dollars to enrich themselves and political cronies. HB 170 would just make it worse.

          The fact House Leadership lied about their plan not raising taxes made it worse. Add to that House members that claim they are conservatives publicly defending the plan made it much worse because it seems House Republicans are trying to deceive Georgians with their plan.

          They had over a year to work on it, why was legislation introduced without studying the ramifications to begin with. It is appalling the bill was actually introduced by Republicans to begin with

          I had several activists tell me HB170 would be the equivalent to Obamacare in terms of harm it will do to House Republicans. If you think the vote on HB170 won’t be remembered then think again and this time it isn’t just tea party members angry. Average citizens are as well

  4. WeymanCWannamakerJr says:

    So GDOT will continue to receive blame for the deterioration of the roads and traffic congestion until every scrap of waste is dredged from every other corner of state government? If you haven’t spoken directly to Debbie Dooley or her Facebook circle then you haven’t talked to the Tea Party? I’m ordering one of those home built helicopter kits out of Popular Mechanics. Anyone have an old Beetle engine for sale?

  5. Newtster says:

    Any responsible Republican would have insisted that a comprehensive operational review (audit) should be conducted on GDOT prior to asking the people for a dime. Of course, what we have in Atlanta are Democrats masquerading as Republicans, so that never happened. The Chamber and the Republican leadership would not dare risk the BIG BUCKS coming from the largess that exists through the Transportation Board, GDOT and the many contractors that are dependent on the free flow of cash. Unless you have read the GDOT state audit reports for the last seven years, you are not qualified to comment.

    The savings are there, whether it is a Billion or $ 300 Million is yet to be determined. Probably a lot closer to $ 300 Million I suspect. But it is real money and SHOULD HAVE BEEN addressed before any Republican proposed a tax increase. That is how you would run your private enterprise. But, unless you are a GDOT contractor, it is likely you are not employing lobbyists and rigging contracts in your private business.

    HB 170 most certainly IS a TAX INCREASE. Jay Roberts must be arithmetically challenged.

    Mike Sullivan ABSOLUTELY said that he had traveled the state. Learned a lot. Talked to tea party members all over the state. Said they would not oppose HB 170. HE LIED.

    Why is the taxpayer being asked to subsidize truckers, companies using the Ports, private airplane owners who use the general aviation airports and the railroads that operate in Georgia. Why is the Georgia taxpayer being asked to fund the building of multi-modal facilities and the roads that lead to them ? Sure jobs are created, but have the members of the Transportation Committee never heard of the concept of “USER FEES” ? After all, Georgia has built the facilities, why shouldn’t the users be helping to fund the expansion and the improvements ?

    Why is the Transportation Committee being permitted to present this “crisis” as though it applies to the entire state of Georgia ? First of all, if you look at any national study, Georgia ranks quite well in terms of our transportation and infrastructure. But, Atlanta has a horrendous congestion problem. So…..why not place some tolls on the roads in Atlanta ? User pays. It works.

    Why is the Georgia taxpayer being asked to fund the entire burden and the Trucking industry is on the receiving end of a TAX CREDIT ? There are numerous studies that document that tractor trailers rigs are responsible for a huge portion of the wear and tear on the roads. The GAO says that ONE EIGHTEEN WHEEL truck is the equivalent of 9,600 passenger cars in terms of the damage inflicted. And the geniuses on the Transportation Committee are giving them a CREDIT ?

    Maybe the Trucking industry should be asked to fund a larger portion of the cost. User fees. It works.

    The Port of Savannah, according to the Georgia Ports Authority, recorded over $ 66 Billion in sales last year. The number of TEU’s increased passing through the ports increased more than 10 percent last year alone. It would appear that the users are sufficiently motivated to use the Georgia ports and that a one or two percent increase in fees would not be so onerous to drive the business to Charleston or Jacksonville. So there is a potential revenue source of $ 1 BILLION right there. User fees. It works.

    If the people had true representation and elected officials who actually did their job, the available solutions are too numerous to detail in this space. The point is, that no one of the House Committee can think to do anything but tell every other member of the Committee how proud they are of the GREAT WORK that has been done and the HUGE sacrifice that has been made by Jay Robert, Steve Gooch et all and aren’t we so fortunate to have them in the General Assembly !!

    I am not on that list.

    • benevolus says:

      “…it is likely you are not employing lobbyists and rigging contracts in your private business.”

    • Charlie says:

      GDOT’s entire budget including federal funds is $2.2 Billion.

      For you to imply that there’s as much as $1 Billion in waste there tells me that it’s likely you that’s not the one actually qualified to be commenting.

  6. Newtster says:

    How would you know Charlie ? Have you read the audit reports ? I clearly said that given the size of the total GDOT budget that the amount of waste would be closer to $ 300 Million, did I not ? Until someone verifies that the Department needs 4,300 people to function, I don’t anyone can intelligently determine what the savings might be. That is EXACTLY what I said, that the amount was not determinable given the lack of information. You are so invested in the effort to tax the citizens of Georgia you cannot even provide an objective thought.

    • Charlie says:

      Remember zero based budgeting? GDOT’s been through that process. As I recall, GDOT actually netted additional employees.

      GDOT’s number of employees has gone down from 9,110 in 1972 to 5,895 in 2002 to 4110 today.

      So, the great white hope of conservative budget cutting, ZBB, said GDOT needed more people last year, and the department has cut more than half of it’s employees since ’72 and about 30% of them in just the last decade.

      There’s some actual data. Chew on that while you continue to rail on this fat you’re so eager to cut but can’t actually quantify.

      • Newtster says:

        Yeah, and I suspect you forgot the special report done by Lori Geary and Channel 2 hiring a CPA to review the state audit reports and he concluded that GDOT was NOT AUDITABLE. So while you chew on that, how about addressing the other points about the alternative funding and the absolute ignorance of the Transportation Committee when it comes to the Trucking Industry. Did you happen to notice when Ed Crowell spoke yesterday Jay Roberts was surprised at what he had to say ?
        As a reminder, I NEVER said I had audited GDOT, and nothing you have said convinces me that there are NOT some savings to be realized at GDOT. The reduction in personnel is nothing more than a natural progression due to the improvement in technology and anyone with an IQ above 50 would not be relying on data from 1972.
        From the 2011 Audit Report :
        The Department of Transportation, however, declined to sign the “Letter of Representation” certifying the accuracy of the amounts reported by fund source within budgetary program.
        – Page 63 Russell Hinton, CPA (State Auditor)
        Basically management at GDOT was NOT WILLING to take responsibility for their own Financial Statements by refusing to sign the Letter of Representation.
        From the 2012 Audit Report :
        Furthermore, the Department does not have an adequate system in place to maintain correct revenues, accounts receivable, or fund balances at the fund source level.
        Failure to monitor the fund source ledgers in a timely manner could affect the proper recording of revenues and expenditures which could result in material misstatements in the financial statements.
        – Page 47 Russell Hinton, CPA (State Auditor)
        1. Of the (47) individually significant item contracts examined, thirteen (13) contracts totaling $ 296,946,421.19 had Certificates of Qualification that were expired.
        – Page 50 Russell Hinton, CPA (State Auditor)
        So Charlie, that is an error rate of 28 percent, which would be significant to ANY Auditor, especially when you are looking at a potential misstatement of hundreds of millions of dollars.

        So please don’t attempt to lecture me about whether hundreds of millions of dollars is the potential for correction any longer.

        Have a great weekend Charlie while you chew on that.

  7. debbie0040 says:

    Once again, I am calling out deception. Apparently, a lot of things are sticking….Activists are outraged…

    I actually said very positive things about the path the Senate was on, but don’t let a little thing like facts get in your way…

    • Charlie says:

      Look in the mirror for your deception.

      The committee, despite you not attending a meeting, did exactly what you demanded by capturing the 11.2 cents/gallon currently taxed on gasoline but not going to transportation. You, always needing to be against whatever is on the table, immediately turned against that.

      The Senate isn’t on a path. They’re letting the House pass a bill, then they’ll consider it. Those of us at the capitol know that. Those who are flying around the country selling solar energy such as yourself are relying on second and third hand information – and calling it “leadership”.

      One. Trick. Pony.

      • debbie0040 says:

        I am not relying on third party information as you keep stating. Just because I am not selling HB170 as you and others are being paid to do doesn’t mean I don’t know what is going on.

        I immediately turned on the tax increase and the Transportation Infrastructure Bank slush fund and the fact House members were being deceptive about it not raising taxes. The local government part came later.

        When I mentioned the gas tax in 2012, I was talking about the state portion. The House plan would raise taxes then require local governments to raise taxes. Removing the local portion was done in an attempt to claim it wasn’t a tax increase because taxes were being raised but taxes were being cut. House Leadership is using local governments so they can make a feeble attempt to claim no taxes were being raised.

        It is very amusing that you guys thought that because the bill mandated the gas tax would all go to transportation, I would be on board with raising taxes. Very laughable..

        I have actually spoken to Legislators. The Senate will likely dramatically amend the House Bill with their own version.

        It really bothers you I am fighting this doesn’t it ?

        What a tangle web you weave when you attempt to deceive.

        • Charlie says:

          Let’s talk about webs of deception Debbie. You love to ask questions. I think it’s time you answered some publicly.

          But this is Sunday morning and tomorrow is a holiday. I think I’ll hold them for a couple of days and get back to my morning. I have no interest in remaining in the circular loop you always deflect to when called out for campaigning against your own demands you made here back in mid-November.

          Check back Tuesday morning. I’ll have a few more questions for you then.

            • Ghost of William F. Buckley says:

              “Those of us at the capitol know that.”

              Choking back vomitus. Really, Charlie?

              You repeat that little phrase repeatedly, frankly, it is pretty lame. You ‘know’ what you are told, you have earned some cred to be sure, but for the love of truthiness, get over yourself.


      • debbie0040 says:

        Tea party activists don’t need to be led and I am not trying to lead them. There is no one spokesperson for the tea party. I just relay what I am hearing. I got involved with the fight because activists asked me to.

        I plan on meeting Wednesday with a member of the Srnate Transportation Committee to talk about some of the things they are looking at that look promising. as I would like to see a good plan passed this session. The current House plan is unacceptable If I had been asked earlier about the direction the House plan,, I would have made it clear it was not going to be supported by tea party activists. I was also quite vocal about not raising the gas tax since last Fall.

        It doesn’t matter what I as one person thinks because I am just one voice. It does however matter what the thousands of conservative and tea party activists think. Trust me, they inform me of their opinions.


  8. debbie0040 says:

    Here are just a few of the responses from tea party activists about HB170:

    Lanier Tea Party Patriots does not support the plan, Mike Scupin, Founder

    I don’t know of any member of our Tea Party who is in favor of HB170. It is detrimental to our county government and our county school system.
    Penny Barker
    Pickens County GA Tea Party

    I don’t know of anyone who supports the transportation bill as it now stands. Conrad Quagliaroli, Cherokee Tea Party Patriots

    Canton T.E.A. Party does not support HB 170. Carolyn Cosby

    The Dalton Tea Party would not support the transportation bill at this time.
    Naomi Swanson

    Tea Party Gilmer County does NOT support HB 170 –Frank Oglesby

    Savannah TEA Party does not support HB 170 and it’s current language. Encourage all to have forums on transportation and invite the public and you legislators on the City, county including school board members and State level! Let your voice be heard!
    Thanks Jeanne Seaver

    Absolutely oppose any bill that increases taxes & HB170 as written does.
    Rob Thibodeaux
    Union/Towns County Tea Party

    The Conservative Leadership Coalition opposes HB170 in its current form and strongly encourages the legislature to fix the holes that waste our tax dollars FIRST before asking to raise our taxes.
    Thank you Jan Barton

    From Jeff Kilgore Golden Isles Tea Party
    I am opposed to HB 170, the Transportation Funding Act of 2015. This bill has, at its origin, no foundation that has been adequately researched and documented. The ONLY basis offered by the bill’s author is a study commissioned and paid for by the Chamber of Commerce. Even if you assume that the COC study is accurate, HB 170 GROSSLY underfunds the amount documented in that study (pages 14 and 15) for the purposes as stated in the bill. This bill is characteristic of a Democrat effort, indiscriminately raising taxes on the people of Georgia while expanding the size of state government, with no limit on the amount of future tax increases to make up for the deficiencies of the bill. The entire premise of this bill is fraudulent on its face, as the ONLY real transportation problem in Georgia that constitutes a “crisis” as has been portrayed by the promoters of the bill is the congestion in the Metropolitan Atlanta area. The Metro Atlanta issues should be explored separately with the Atlanta Regional Commission and solved through local “user fees” such as tolls, enhanced fees or local taxes on rental cars, hotel / motel taxes or increased landing fees for commercial airlines at Hartsfield International Airport.

    The Transportation Joint Study Committee should have spent some time studying alternative revenue sources rather than spending the entire year on a “listening tour” entertaining nothing more than how to spend additional funds from whatever source. In other words, a REAL Republican solution would be to analyze alternative revenue streams resulting from business activity at the Ports, from Truckers and from the general aviation airports in Georgia. The Government Accounting Office has documented that one Tractor Trailer inflicts the equivalent damage to our roadways as 9,600 passenger cars, yet HB 170 provides the trucking industry with an estimated $ 60 Million TAX CREDIT.

    The conversion to an excise tax and the elimination of a sales tax on fuel is, however, a valid concept and should be studied further for possible implementation when the other flaws in HB 170 have been corrected.

    Why is the Georgia taxpayer being asked to subsidize the GDOT responsibilities at the airports, sea ports, rail and trucking operations without any consideration of a User Fee approach ?

    Jeff Kilgore
    Golden Isles Tea Party

  9. debbie0040 says:

    Jack Staver sent me this :

    Here is the resolution as passed on January 22 and sent to our elected employees.
    WHEREAS, it is the duty and obligation of the elected leaders to represent the desire and best interest of their constituents; and
    WHEREAS, the citizens and businesses of Georgia have repeatedly elected candidates who pledged to exercise fiscal restraint, pass balanced budgets, and build a state government that lives within its means; and
    WHEREAS, the Governor and General Assembly should understand that the ongoing financial challenges and struggles of unemployment and underemployment that face many of our hard-working citizens, due to no fault of their own and, have therefore made appropriate cuts in their own lives; and
    WHEREAS, the citizens insist that any and all motor fuel taxes be used for the construction and maintenance of roads and bridges; and
    WHEREAS, the citizens and businesses of Georgia have the right to expect the same financial discipline at all levels of government and have vigorously voiced opposition to any transportation tax increase on the part of State government; and
    WHEREAS, there is no benefit in any government entity increasing the tax burden on individuals and businesses, such increase hampering economic activity and recovery; and
    WHEREAS, we do hereby adamantly oppose tax increases on fossil fuels for transportation;
    Therefore, be it resolved that:
    The Georgia 11th District Committee of the Republican Party opposes an increase in the State Gas Taxes or fees.
    BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, a copy of this resolution is to be delivered to the Honorable Governor of Georgia Nathan Deal, Lieutenant Governor Casey Cagle, House Speaker David Ralston and disseminated to the Georgia House of Representatives and Georgia Senate for action.
    Agreed upon at the GAGOP 11th District Committee Meeting, Marietta Georgia this 22nd day of January, 2015.

  10. Newtster says:

    Interesting to me that if you have some thoughts that don’t correspond with Charlie Harper that you get nothing but personal attacks. Substantive issues get ignored and all you get is an instant shot at whatever Charlie thinks is the weakest point of what someone has written, as though HB 170 (in this particular case) is the most perfect piece of legislation that has ever been crafted and that any disagreement MUST indicate a character flaw in the writer suggesting otherwise. Just a passing observation, but I am thinking that strategy is not going to lead to anything productive.

Comments are closed.