All Photos
jawgadude
|
June 17, 2013
Bill, you seem to think so. You have voted yes for hundreds of new laws.
Court reinstates death sentence for bank robber
by The Associated Press
Jun 17, 2013 | 416 views | 0 0 comments | 14 14 recommendations | email to a friend | print
ATLANTA — The Supreme Court of Georgia has reserved a lower court's decision and reinstated a death sentence for a man convicted of killing a man shortly after the robbery of a suburban Atlanta bank. The court on Monday released its opinion that sends Michael Wade Nance back to Georgia's death row. The state had appealed a lower court's ruling that had thrown out his death sentence but upheld his convictions. Nance had claimed that his lawyers were ineffective and should have taken a different strategy in defending him. Evidence at Nance's trial showed that he robbed the Tucker Federal Bank in Lilburn on Dec. 18, 1993, ran from the bank and then shot and killed Gabor Balogh, who was backing his car out of a parking space at a nearby store.
Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
Are more laws the solution?
by Bill Heath, Ga. Senate Dist. 31
Jun 17, 2013 | 402 views | 1 1 comments | 27 27 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Senator Bill Heath
Senator Bill Heath
slideshow
The pendulum of power that governs American politics continues to teeter towards an unhealthy balance of power that, if left unchecked, could result in the mistaken belief that an enormous amount of bureaucratic power is the answer to society’s ills. While I’m not one that espouses the belief that America’s best days are behind us, we are now entering a time in history where it’s more permissible to blame-shift than take responsibility for the issues of our day. This is no more evident than the corrupt Washington bureaucracy that keeps gaining influence and power over the American people. In fact, nothing sheds light into government largesse better than the recently implemented Affordable Care Act or “Obamacare.” Recognized by economists as one of the most complex tax codes in American history, Obamacare is estimated to create some 70,000 additional tax codes and institute over 20 new taxes on hardworking Americans and the healthcare industry. What was meant to be “affordable” health care quickly became entangled in a labyrinth of codes and regulatory laws. This can’t possibly be the solution to an already taxed electorate and healthcare system that’s riddled with inefficiencies. Although we can all agree that our country’s healthcare system has serious flaws, suffocating free market enterprise in the name of health care reform isn't the path towards lasting change. In addition, hastily passing laws in response to a problem without even reading the legislation is not a solution; it’s irresponsible. All it accomplished was more laws and bigger government. This scenario is also true in the event of a nationwide crisis. Instead of looking to the reason behind the problem, Congress is quick to respond with a series of legislative efforts aimed at preventing future bleeding. But are these merely reactionary responses that achieve nothing more than patching a wound when the real solution lies in healing its root? What if the answer is not as cut and dry as enacting stronger gun laws or allowing government to regulate our healthcare system? What if the answer is you and me? Bombs are illegal but that didn't stop the bombings from occurring at the World Trade Center, Oklahoma City or the Boston Marathon. There is a plethora of driving laws yet drivers break them every day. Murder is illegal but violent deaths continue to claim the lives of countless Americans each year. The list is lengthy but it makes a solid case for the inability of laws to impact individual behavior. Society is not simply governed by a series of rules, but by personal choices and values. Thomas Jefferson once said, “A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have.” This seems to be a self-fulfilling prophecy as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) –the agency responsible for collecting Obamacare tax provisions – finds itself embroiled in scandal. While we should be able to trust government agencies, top officials are still not taking responsibility for targeting conservative groups and withholding tax exempt status. At a recent congressional hearing, one of the top IRS officials involved in the scandal invoked her Fifth Amendment rights during her public testimony. While this is her constitutional right, her actions signal a much deeper problem where federal agencies and their top executives have too much power and very little oversight. Taxpayers are rightfully demanding answers by the very agency that’s intended to protect their interests. However, these unconscionable actions are symptomatic of a generational problem that’s been allowed to propagate for decades. What we need is greater personal responsibility. It is not the government’s responsibility to hold individuals accountable; it is ours. As a state legislator, I am held at a higher standard, but that’s not unique to me – we're all leaders in our respective areas of influence. When we take responsibility for our actions, others will naturally follow. Actions speak louder than words, especially when we’re called to influence the next generation of leaders. Children are astute and highly observant. They watch our every action and listen to our every word. As a parent myself, one of my greatest responsibilities while raising my children was to train them to respect and honor authority while understanding the value of personal accountability. It simply takes one person to affect change in an entire generation –maybe that person is you. As campaigns gain momentum across the nation for the upcoming 2014 elections, it isn’t uncommon to hear candidates run their campaign off the increasingly popular buzzword- “change.” While this is a noble effort, change is not a matter of simply voting new laws into effect; it requires a shift in our culture’s mindset. It requires individuals like you and me to make a conscious effort to do what’s right when no one else is looking. Most of all, it requires character. Without it, we will not see the “change” we’re so desiring. It must start with us, and then eventually we’ll see change in Washington, in our communities and at home. So I’ll let you decide. Are laws the solution to transformative change or are you?
Comments
(1)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
jawgadude
|
4 Hours Ago
Bill, you seem to think so. You have voted yes for hundreds of new laws.
Milk money: Farm bill could hinge on dairy vote
by MARY CLARE JALONICK, Associated Press
Jun 17, 2013 | 297 views | 0 0 comments | 26 26 recommendations | email to a friend | print
FILE: This Feb. 11, 2009  photo shows a shopper looking over the milk aisle at the Hunger Mountain Co-op in Montpelier, Vt. Approval of a massive farm bill _ and the cost of a gallon of milk _ could hinge on a proposed new dairy program the House is expected to vote on this week. (AP Photo/Toby Talbot, File)
FILE: This Feb. 11, 2009 photo shows a shopper looking over the milk aisle at the Hunger Mountain Co-op in Montpelier, Vt. Approval of a massive farm bill _ and the cost of a gallon of milk _ could hinge on a proposed new dairy program the House is expected to vote on this week. (AP Photo/Toby Talbot, File)
slideshow
WASHINGTON (AP) — Approval of a massive farm bill — and the cost of a gallon of milk — could hinge on a proposed new dairy program the House is expected to vote on this week. An overhaul of dairy policy and a new insurance program for dairy farmers included in the farm bill have passionately divided farm-state lawmakers. Most importantly, it has caused a rift between House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee, Rep. Collin Peterson of Minnesota. The farm bill, which the House is scheduled to consider this week, sets policy for farm and nutrition programs, including food stamps. House Agriculture Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., will need Boehner and Peterson to bring in votes from the moderate wing of each party if the bill is to pass. Many conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats, especially those from districts with little agriculture, are expected to vote against it due to concerns over cuts to food stamps. The proposed dairy program would do away with current price supports and allow farmers to purchase a new kind of insurance that pays out when the gap between the price they receive for milk and their feed costs narrows. The program is voluntary, but farmers who participate also would have to sign up for a stabilization program that could dictate production cuts when oversupply drives down prices. The idea is to break the cycle in which milk prices drop and farmers produce more to pay their bills, flooding the market and forcing prices down further. Peterson wrote the proposed dairy policy, which Boehner last year compared to communism. Boehner is backing an amendment by the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Virginia Republican Robert Goodlatte, which would scale it back. "I'm caught between two raging bulls in a pasture," Lucas joked as he lobbied colleagues to vote for his farm bill last week. Peterson said the stabilization program would prevent a recurrence of what happened in 2009, when many dairy producers went out of business after they were hit hard by a combination of low milk prices and high feed costs. He says the market partially stabilized because the shuttered dairies meant less supply, but they don't want to see that happen again. The National Milk Producers Federation, the largest U.S. dairy producer organization, worked with Peterson on the amendment and has lobbied members to back it. But throwing equal weight against the measure is the International Dairy Foods Association, which represents the milk, cheese and ice cream industries and other food processors and manufacturers that use dairy products. Those dairy processors say the stabilization program would drive up the prices they pay for dairy products and those costs would be passed on to consumers. Supporters of the new program argue that their own studies show it would not significantly raise the price of milk since there are multiple factors that determine price levels. The processors are backing the Goodlatte amendment, which would keep the insurance program but eliminate the stabilization program. Those pushing the amendment are hoping the weight of Boehner's support will help it win. Boehner, a former senior member of the agriculture panel who has fought to roll back dairy supports for more than a decade, said last year that the market stabilization idea is "Soviet-style." Lobbying has been intense on both sides. Peterson and Goodlatte, both former chairmen of the agriculture panel, have been aggressively making their case to colleagues individually and speaking at caucus meetings. Rep. Peter Welch, a Democrat from the dairy state of Vermont, is part of a team Peterson has assembled to lobby colleagues. He said Boehner's opposition is a significant hurdle but he believes they have a shot at winning. He said a loss could upset the delicate balance of the farm bill in which lawmakers support each other's regional interests to get the bill passed. "If you take this out because of the might of the speaker, it's going to create some resentment among dairy-state legislators as to why that was targeted," Welch said. "You lose some votes if you lose dairy." Peterson has in the past conditioned his support of the farm bill on the dairy program, but appeared to be still deciding whether he would vote against it if his dairy program is removed. He said in an interview that he'd have to see how the rest of the bill looks on a final vote. Boehner said last week he will vote for the farm bill even though he has concerns about farm supports and has opposed it in the past. But he may be less enthusiastic if the dairy program he feels so strongly about survives. Lucas says he has extracted promises from both men that they won't turn on the bill if they lose the vote. One thing in Peterson's favor is the Senate version of the farm bill, which includes a similar dairy provision. That chamber passed its farm legislation last week after no debate on the dairy issue. If Peterson loses on the House floor, he could still fight for it in House-Senate conference. All involved in lobbying on the amendment say it has been a tough issue to explain to members, primarily because most don't know much about dairy policy. The House has around 200 new members since the last farm bill was passed in 2008, and many urban and suburban lawmakers don't have much interest in dairy beyond the price of a gallon of milk. Both sides have used that lack of knowledge to make their case in simple terms. Opponents say that because the stabilization program is designed to help dairy farmers sell their product to companies at higher prices, consumers would be paying more for dairy products in the grocery store. The bill's supporters say the new program would have little effect on grocery store prices but would keep taxpayers from having to shell out more in dairy insurance. Peterson says the issue has been "almost impossible to explain." "Everyone's kind of playing on everyone's lack of understanding on this," he said.
Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
Investors guess Fed's actions, push stocks higher
by CHRISTINA REXRODE, AP Business Writer
Jun 17, 2013 | 190 views | 0 0 comments | 12 12 recommendations | email to a friend | print
NEW YORK (AP) — The U.S. stock market rose in early trading Monday, driven not by any new economic data but by investors counting on the Federal Reserve to extend programs meant to boost the economy. The Dow Jones industrial average was up 158 points, or 1 percent, to 15,228 after the first half-hour of trading. All but two of the 30 stocks in the Dow rose, led by Cisco Systems, which gained 64 cents, or 2.7 percent, to $24.73. With little in the way of big company announcements or economic reports, investors instead started guessing what the Fed will do when it begins a regularly scheduled two-day meeting on Tuesday. The stock market's relation to the Fed is a bit of a paradox: The market was rising Monday because investors think Fed leaders will determine that the economy is still suffering. That might not sound like good news, but it would influence the Fed to continue the programs it has implemented to try to breathe life into the economy, like keeping interest rates low to encourage borrowing and buying bonds to push investors into stocks. The action of the Fed, the central bank of the world's largest economy, carries weight around the globe: Stocks in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the U.K. also rose. Greece was an exception. Stocks were down in the debt-ridden country, where bickering is still reverberating over the prime minister's decision last week to shut down the state TV and radio broadcaster to try to save money. Tokyo's Nikkei 225 jumped nearly 3 percent, extending Friday's gain of more than 2 percent. One reason why Japanese shares did so well was renewed weakness in the yen following a recent rally — a lower yen makes the country's exports more competitive. In other U.S. stock trading, the Standard & Poor's 500 index was up 16, or 1 percent, to 1,643. The Nasdaq composite was up 35, or 1 percent, to 3,458. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note rose to 2.15 percent from 2.13 percent Friday. The price of crude oil rose 32 cents to $98.17 a barrel in New York. Gold edged down $4 to $1,383 an ounce. Among U.S. stocks making big moves: —Pinnacle Entertainment jumped nearly 5 percent after announcing that it had moved closer to getting approval from regulators for its purchase of rival Ameristar Casinos. Pinnacle was up $1.11 to $19.96. Ameristar Casinos didn't enjoy quite the same boost: It was up 20 cents, less than 1 percent, to $26.40. —SodaStream, which makes machines that let people make soda at home, was up 48 cents, less than 1 percent, to $73.30 after announcing that it would work with KitchenAid to sell an at-home carbonation system. Whirlpool, which makes KitchenAid products, rose $2.13, or 1.7 percent, to $131.37. —Boeing was up after Qatar Airways and the aircraft leasing arm of General Electric both put in an orders for aircraft. Boeing rose $1.60, or 1.6 percent, to $103.43. —Rexnord Corp., a Milwaukee-based manufacturer of power transmission and water management products, fell $1.29, or 7 percent, to $16.66. The company said its largest shareholder, Apollo Global Management, is selling part of its stake.
Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet