The Georgia Green Party

Category: 2018 General Election

  • Midterm Results: the War Party Rules

    There is no doubt who won the midterm elections: the War Party, which for generations has been virtually unopposed in the US.

    “Democrats gave a wink and a nod to the military industrial complex by remaining silent on the question of war.”

    Forget the midterms. The “blue wave” was a low tide. The Democrats took the House but lost the Senate, and badly. The good news is that another excessively hyped election is over. Let’s talk instead about how under US imperialism, war is a constant. Republican and Democratic Party officials are members of the War Party. US imperial wars rage on regardless of whether a Democrat is elected for President or Congress. The War Party follows of the dictates of Wall Street and the war machine. Party membership not only includes Democratic and Republican officials but also the corporate media.

    Democratic Party officials described last week’s midterm elections as the most important electoral moment in U.S. history. So-called “blue wave” politicians such as Stacy Abrams and Beto O’Rourke were deemed the “new” face of the Democrat side of the War Party. Democrats have promised their base that they will protect Obamacare, institute immigration reform, and “resist” Trump. These empty promises lacked the substance necessary to improve the conditions of poor and oppressed people. Beyond empty promises and corporate gesturing, Democrats gave a wink and a nod to the military industrial complex by remaining silent on the question of war.

    “The War Party follows of the dictates of Wall Street and the war machine.”

    The War Party planted military and intelligence candidates in midterm electoral races throughout the country. Stacy Abrams colluded with billionaires like Oprah but said nothing about war in her failed bid to become Governor of Georgia. Beto O’Rourke went a step further in his losing effort to the despicable Ted Cruz by promising the military industrial complex that he would shore up the resources necessary to “win” the six wars that his campaign identified in the global War on Terror. Corporate media outlets such as MSNBCand CNN further silenced the question of war by speaking non-stop about the elections as a “referendum” against Trump. What the corporate media and the Democrats didn’t say was that their “resistance” to Trump has always been a pro-war project.

    The midterm elections were a partial success for the Democrat side of the War Party, especially in the House. However, people all over the world will feel no relief. Not one candidate running for War Party seats campaigned to close the eight hundred U.S. military bases that occupy nearly every nation on the planet. The U.S.-backed Saudi war on Yemen continues to starve and murder the people of Yemen with only scant and ineffectual coverage emanating from the New York Timesand other corporate media outlets. In fact, the New York Times has made it clear that its opposition to Trump’s plan to increase troop levels at the U.S.-Mexico border is rooted in the principle that those troops should be fighting in wars in the Middle East or elsewhere . Thus, the Democrats do not oppose much of what the Trump Administration stands for, but rather howthe Administration implements its policies.

    “Their ‘resistance’ to Trump has always been a pro-war project.”

    The War Party has opposed Trump based on the billionaire’s proposed reforms to the imperial war machine. These proposed reforms have been less a product of Trump the individual and more the consequence of an imperialist system on the decline. The War Party exhausted its bipartisan war consensus under the Great Compromiser, Barack Obama. Obama solidified the war machine and expanded domestic and international counterinsurgency campaigns beyond the wildest dreams of the military industrial complex. Ukraine fell to fascists, Libya fell to head-chopping jihadists, and Syria became the prime location of one of the greatest refugee catastrophes in recent human history—all thanks to Obama. This made Israel and the US’ band of fascist allies smile, regardless of how much they disliked his skin color.

    The War Party fell into instant crisis under Donald Trump, which it hopes to rectify in the 2020 Presidential race. Trump campaigned on cordial relations with Russia and anti-free trade rhetoric. The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), multinational capital’s plan to strangle China, was instantly thrown away with the stroke of a pen. NATO trembled at the thought that Trump would speak to Putin in a fraternal manner and possibly discuss the de-escalation of its military arsenal from the Russian border. The War Party could care less about Trump’s racist epithets and policies toward undocumented immigrants. Its mission since Trump came into office has been to stabilize the imperialist system by marginalizing Trump where it matters and aligning with him when doing so maximizes the profits of the global capitalist elite.

    Such is the game of bourgeois politics. This round of midterm elections is no different. The War Party does not preside over a democracy. Even mainstream observers have labeled the U.S. electoral system an oligarchy . Corporations and their armed guards reign supreme. The wars raging on in Palestine, Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, and throughout Africa, Asia, and Latin America are set to expand regardless of which side of the corporate duopoly rules Congress.

    “Ukraine fell to fascists, Libya fell to head-chopping jihadists, and Syria became the prime location of one of the greatest refugee catastrophes in recent human history—all thanks to Obama.”

    This is evident in the political debates that have dominated the midterm elections. Trump has blown the racist dog whistle over the thousands of Central American migrants making their way from Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala. However, Trump would have no whistle to blow were it not for over a century’s worth of US imperial policy in the region. The War Party is responsible for the violence in Honduras. When Obama was at the helm, the War Party supported the overthrow of leftist President Manuel Zelaya. The coup made Honduras one of the most dangerous place to be an environmental or trade union activist in the world.

    Under Obama, the Democratic Party solidified its allegiance to the War Party. In the spirit of Lyndon Johnson’s massacre of the Vietnamese people, Obama committed resources to proxies that committed massacres in Libya and Syria. He authorized ten times the number of drone strikes on civilian populations as George W. Bush. Under Obama, the military budget ballooned even as discussions among both sides of the War Party ensued about a “Grand Bargain” to cut Social Security and Medicare. The War Party made it clear under Obama that the masses would have to starve for the war machine to be fed.

    “The wars raging on in Palestine, Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, and throughout Africa, Asia, and Latin America are set to expand regardless of which side of the corporate duopoly rules Congress.”

    Not much has changed with the War Party under the Trump Administration. However, what has changed is the progress that the people of the world have made to counter US imperialist hegemony. Imperialist propaganda mill, Voice of America, has complained that China and Russia have developed deeper ties to nations in Latin America. Korea is working toward real and lasting peace . Cuban President Diaz-Canel is traveling through the DPRK, China, Vietnam, Laos, and Russia to further develop ties of solidarity . Amid much hardship and struggle, the people of the world are maintaining their resolve against imperialism.

    This has infuriated the War Party. Members of the War Party know that Donald Trump cannot deliver what it seeks: permanent global hegemony. The War Party and the imperialist system it governs is no longer able to achieve its own interests. Imperialism is at a dead-end. Trump is merely the most acute indicator. The fake “resistance” hopes to right the War Party’s sinking ship.

    “Black Americans will continue to fill prison beds and graveyards at the hands of the police.”

    In this midterm election and for U.S. elections to come, victory for the War Party is guaranteed. The War Party will continue its assault on oppressed people and exploited people, at home and abroad. Black Americans will continue to fill prison beds and graveyards at the hands of the police.Poor people will continue to struggle to find work, healthcare, and housing. Civilian populations in every corner of the globe will be maimed by U.S. bombs and military operations.

    These are the fruits of the War Party. The core of every one of these fruits is rotten. This is a dangerous time and not because Trump is a Nazi in the White House. Economic crisis and world war are on the horizon. It is time to dump the War Party and build an independent organization comprised of all that the War Party has forsaken.

    Danny Haiphong is an activist and journalist in the New York City area. He and Roberto Sirvent are co-authors of the forthcoming book entitled American Exceptionalism and American Innocence: A People’s History of Fake News- From the Revolutionary War to the War on Terror (Skyhorse Publishing). He can be reached at wakeupriseup1990@gmail.com.

    This item was originally published at Black Agenda Report on November 14, 2018.

  • Election Clearly Stolen from Georgia Voters

    Greens welcome Abrams stand for election integrity, concerned for scope
    Green candidate documents cronyism in Kemp’s mismanagement of Georgia elections

    “This election was clearly stolen from the Georgia voters, in a campaign of a thousand cuts and involving at least outgoing Secretary Kemp. Undoubtedly, private profit is in there somewhere,” said Bruce Dixon, cochair of the Georgia Green Party and managing editor of Black Agenda Report. “Kemp acknowledges the inherent conflict of interest in a person certifying their own election with his own resignation. It was only after he had managed as Secretary of State his own election as Governor that he took this step. How more clear can he make it that his own integrity and the integrity of the election, the legitimacy of its results were never a real concern for him.”

    Over the past few years Brian Kemp has purged hundreds of thousands of voters from the rolls. This cycle alone he closed over two hundred polling places, mostly in precincts where republican candidates have performed poorly. He has restricted early voting opportunities. Some 50,000 new voter registrations submitted to his office have simply disappeared. A variety of tactics resulted in hundreds of thousands of voters being obligated to use second class provisional ballots, which state law requires be subsequently defended by having the voter show up a second time to resolve questions related to their identity and registration.

    “We welcome the attention of the blue team to the critical issue of voter suppression. We have much work to do if we want to operate our elections with the integrity necessary that they can serve as a means for naming a legitimate government with a popular mandate,” said John Fortuin, commenting on the pending litigation and the Democrat Gubernatorial nominee’s statements that she would not concede this week’s election. “We welcome Abrams’ insistence on an accurate vote count. We also urge her to stand firm against the pressures which will be brought to bear as we call out the theft of this election.”

    John Fortuin is a co-founder of Defenders of Democracy and a candidate this year for the Georgia Assembly in Senate District #46 (Walton, Oconee and Clarke Counties), a nominee of the Georgia Green Party. He is a certified write-in candidate for the 2018 general election. His status as a write-in candidate is due to a 75 year old voter suppression scheme enacted in 1943 by Democrats elected by the all-white primaries of the day. The initial intent of their rules was to deny black veterans access to the ballot in Georgia’s General Election. These rules continue to keep important voices, independent of corporate wealth, off of the ballot in Georgia.

    Previously, Democrat candidates have turned a blind eye to opportunities to fight for the right of voters to have the intent expressed on their ballots honored by the certified results of elections; and in Georgia have actively opposed Green Party initiatives to reform the ballot access barriers.

    In 2004, in Ohio and New Mexico, witness reports gave rise to concerns that the election had been subverted and that the results would not represent voter intent, that the election results had been compromised. Results that year showed irregularities that were not credible, based on statistics and reports from voters and elections observers. The Green Party’s Cobb-LaMarche campaign launched recounts in both states. The reports generated by the Green Party recount effort led to an investigation by the minority caucus in House Judiciary and became the basis for the first challenge to the seating of an electoral college delegation in the history of the country. The challenge was rejected and the Republican delegation was seated for Ohio based on compromised results, changing the outcome of the election. Ohio Green Party’s former nominee for Governor, journalist and now attorney Bob Fritakas, continued the investigation, and the evidence compiled by Greens led to the prosecution, conviction and incarceration of multiple Ohio election officials, but not the revisiting of the tainted election results in a closely divided state, which changed the outcome of a national election.

    Likewise in 2016, when Greens identified voter suppression issues in Pennsylvania and two other states, Jill Stein, the party’s Presidential candidate for a second cycle, mobilized her campaign to raise and spend millions of dollars to initiate recounts, which appeared likely to show evidence of significant election fraud. The Clinton campaign sent an observer, but otherwise stood by and watched judges appointed by Democrat and Republican administrations shut down the effort, again changing the outcome of the national election.

    “Greens and Democrats may disagree on some points of public policy. That does not mean we think it is ok when the will of Georgia voters is subverted to deny their preferred candidate a place in a run-off, or perhaps an outright majority. I urge that the Abrams campaign stand firm; and break from her party’s pattern of conceding defeat in the face of victory,” said Fortuin. A long time election integrity advocate, Fortuin has just published a new report, “Brian Kemp: Like his Democratic Predecessors, Suppressing Ballot Integrity and the Legitimacy of Georgia’s Elections”.

    Fortuin’s report contextualizes the finding of Federal Judge Amy Totenberg of Georgia’s Northern District in her recent Order, that “State election officials had buried their heads in the sand… [on known computerized voting vulnerabilities]”. The report documents the revolving door relationships between state election officials and richly rewarded private contractors doing business with the office of the Secretary of State, to provide for the administration of public elections.

    “The Green Party has been raising the alarm on these critical election integrity issues since at least 2003,” said John Fortuin. That year Party activists served in a leadership role with the Voter Choice Coalition, a multi-partisan coalition originally organized to work for reform to Georgia’s ballot access barriers. Coalition participants worked to require that the Diebold machines produce a voter verified paper ballot, which computer scientists understood even then, as the minimum standard for election integrity.

    Greens have a long history of supporting voting integrity issues, and welcome this focus on ‘voter suppression’ by a Democratic party candidate. “But we must demand more,” said Dixon, state party chairman and Cobb County resident. “Abrams must broaden her perspective on voter suppression to embrace the need to replace faith-based computerized voting with paper ballots, to enact automatic, permanent voter registration, to provide for publicly funded election campaigns, to end the abuse of the reapportionment process to deny voters contested races among competing perspectives, to tear down the barriers to ballot access used to deny voters an opportunity to vote for the candidates of their choice, to end the exclusion of otherwise qualified candidates from the public airwaves, news reports, polls and debates. These mechanisms deny voters information about our options and are fundamentally anti-democratic. The coming years will provide us an opportunity to see if Abrams concerns for voter suppression are serious or simply motivated by her own short term partisan interests. There is plenty of this agenda she can contribute to.”

    “Even with all the legitimate critiques of Stacey Abrams’ track record and her silence on crucial issues, there is something to be said about her fight for a fair election in Georgia,” said Andrea Merida, a cochair of the Green Party of the United States. “Gillum concedes Florida, Clinton ignored evidence of flagrant 2016 violations in battleground states, Gore abandoned the field in 2000. We do not generally expect this from her Party, but Abrams is right to fight, not just for herself, not just for Black women, but for all voters in Georgia.”

    — 30 —

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    Friday, November 9th, 2018

    For further information, please contact:
    Bruce Dixon 404-797-2087; bdixon@georgiagreenparty.org
    John Fortuin 706-534-6001; info@FortuinForGeorgia.com

  • Yes on B — allow non profits serving mentally disabled to leverage anticipated federal tax credits to secure private sector financing for construction and renovations

    Statewide Referendum B
    Provides a tax exemption for certain homes for the mentally disabled.

    Controlling legislation: HB-196 * HB-196-AP

    Does the ballot question and measure name accurately and fully reflect the effect of passage without obfuscation?

    Yes.

    Who would benefit from the proposed change?

    Non-profit corporations which can access federal tax credits for the provision of residential services for the mentally disabled would be able to established a Limited Liability Corporation, wholly controlled by the non-profit; and use that LLC to contract with a for-profit corporation to finance the construction or renovation of a residential facility to serve the mentally disabled. These changes to the law, would permit the federal tax credits to be used to retire the debt to the for-profit corporation which provided financing. Significantly, and requiring the assent of the voters, the involvement of that for-profit company in the financing of that work, and the indirect ownership through the use of the LLC would not disqualify the non-profit company from claiming the ad-valorem tax exemptions to which they would otherwise be entitled for their work to provide housing to the mentally disabled.

    Who supports the passage of this measure?

    Who supports the defeat of this measure?

    What is the Georgia Green Party’s recommended position?

    The Georgia Green Party urges a YES vote on Referendum B.

  • No on A — reject effort to deny Atlanta residents notice, hearing for millage rate increases

    Statewide Referendum A — Urging a NO vote
    Provides for a homestead exemption for residents of certain municipal corporations.

    Controlling Legislation: HB-820 * HB-820-AP

    Does the ballot question and measure name accurately and fully reflect the effect of passage without obfuscation?

    No. First, the provisions of this measure are narrowly drawn to apply only to the city of Atlanta. Neither the question title, nor the ballot question makes clear that adoption of this state wide referendum would exempt the city of Atlanta from notice and hearing requirements related to any proposal to raise the millage rate applied to property values to compute ad-valorem taxes.

    Who would benefit from the proposed change?

    The city of Atlanta will be relieved of certain public participation requirements related to notice and hearings when considering a millage rate increase. Although the details are difficult to discern, supposedly some municipal property tax payers in Atlanta will benefit from an additional exemption of their primary residence for properties less than five acres.

    Who supports the passage of this measure?

    Who supports the defeat of this measure?

    What is the Georgia Green Party’s recommended position?

    The Georgia Green Party urges a NO vote on Referendum A.

  • Yes on Five — facilitate SPLOST for educational purposes in counties with multiple school districts

    2018_ballot_questions_yes_on_5

    CA #5 — Urging a YES vote
    Authorizes Fair Allocation of Sales Tax Proceeds to County and City School Districts

    Constitutional Amendment: SR-95 * SR-95-AP

    Enabling Legislation: implementation will be by local school boards

    Does the ballot question and measure name accurately and fully reflect the effect of passage without obfuscation?

    Question name suggests that the current formulation is not fair, but a per-capita allocation based on full time enrollment of students seems to be an appropriate means for the distribution of educational sales taxes. We find that the ballot name is predujicial in its framing, but that the ballot question itself accurately reflects the effect of passage.

    Who would benefit from the proposed change?

    Passage would permit school boards representing a majority of the students in a county’s school systems to put the question to the voters of imposing a tax, without the cooperation of other school districts in the county which serve a minority of the county’s students. The existing language in this Constitutional provision, which would continue to govern were #5 defeated on November 6th, requires universal agreement among all school systems in a county in order to ask the voters to impose such a tax.

    Concerns have been raised that this would permit the larger school systems in a county to impose their will on the smaller systems in a county; and that the agreement of prior school boards for a distribution formula in lieu of a per-capita allocation would bind the hands of future school boards.

    An existing provision of the state Constitution limits such local sales taxes for educational purposes to a term of five or fewer years, unless re-authorized. Given that protection, the concerns raised above are minimized.

    Who supports the passage of this measure?

    Who supports the defeat of this measure?

    What is the Georgia Green Party’s recommended position?

    The Georgia Green Party urges a YES vote on Constitutional Amendment #5.

     

  • No on Four — protect presumption of innocence, juvenile process, reject dangerous intrusion by corporations into criminal proceedings

    CA #4 — Urging a NO vote
    Provides rights for victims of crime in the judicial process.

    Constitutional Amendment: SR-146 * SR-146-AP

    Enabling Legislation:  none identified

    Does the ballot question and measure name accurately and fully reflect the effect of passage without obfuscation?

    The name of this ballot question suggests that the victims of crime do not already have rights in the judicial process, when in fact they do.  Adoption of #4 would create a new class of such rights, including the right to notice, the right to not be excluded from judicial proceedings and the right to be heard with respect to the release of, a plea by or the sentencing of the accused, the right to retain counsel to represent the interests of the victim of an alleged criminal act.

    The framing of the ballot question fails to acknowledge that its ratification would apply to cases of delinquency (of minors) as well as criminal proceedings against adults.

    Who would benefit from the proposed change?

    Although presumably drawn for the benefit of the victims of alleged criminal acts, the most likely beneficiaries will be the prison industrial complex which reaps huge profits from our current system of mass incarceration, as the current punitive focus of our criminal justice system works against efforts for reconciliation between victims and offenders or the restoration of justice.

    A similar measure on this year’s Florida ballot is being criticized by the ACLU of Florida for its potential to extend new powers to corporate ‘victims’ of criminal acts who would be able to use the criminal justice system to assert its property interests in a punitive response and without respect to the interests of justice or rehabilitation. A reading of the language in this Georgia Constitutional Amendment makes clear that here in Georgia as well, the Court’s current confusion about the personhood of corporate entities would give Walmart for example undue influence in the resolution of simple shoplifting cases. In fact, the provision permitting victims to be represented by counsel will work to the advantage of corporations, and cash-strapped humans victimized by crime operating without the assistance of counsel would be relatively marginalized in the process.

    Who supports the passage of this measure?

    California billionaire Henry Nicholas

    Who supports the defeat of this measure?

    ACLU

    Georgia Public Policy Foundation

    What is the Georgia Green Party’s recommended position?

    The Georgia Green Party urges a NO vote on Constitutional Amendment #4.

    As the national ACLU wrote in their analysis around this nationwide effort, “Victims’ rights are not rights against the state. Instead, they are rights against another individual. . . . many of the provisions in Marsy’s Law could actually strengthen the state’s hand against a defendant, undermining a bedrock principle of our legal system — the presumption of innocence.”

    Michelle Alexander, author of “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness”, in a 2015 interview on Democracy Now said that what is required is “transforming our criminal justice system from one that is purely punitive to one that is based on principles of restorative and transformative justice, you know, systems that take seriously the interests of the victim, the offender and the community as a whole.”

    In her book, she spoke of data pointing out that voters ‘often the most punitive’ were the ‘least likely to be crime victims’. She also wrote that “researchers found that racial attitudes – not crime rates or likelihood of victimization – are an important determinant of white support for ‘get tough on crime’”.

    As Re:store Justice, a California non-profit put it: “We believe that victims’ rights can be met most effectively by creating more opportunities for restorative and non-adversarial processes for both victims and offenders within and beyond the criminal justice system.  Acknowledging the humanity of victims and offenders allows us to identify and meet the full range of what victims may want from offenders. More than punishment and retribution, their healing may require that the offender is accountable, makes an apology, expresses regret and remorse and makes amends to the extent possible. While these actions cannot be required from an offender, when freely given, they may be the source of true justice.”

     

  • NO on Three — reject impoverishing rural schools to subsidize one of wealthiest industries in state

    CA #3 — Urging a NO vote
    Encourage the conservation, sustainability, and longevity of Georgia’s
    working forests through tax subclassification and grants.

    Constitutional Amendment: HR-51 * HR-51-AP

    Enabling Legislation: HB-85 * HB-85-AP

    Does the ballot question and measure name accurately and fully reflect the effect of passage without obfuscation?

    Not really. At least this name is honest that it deals with ‘working’ forests, though we consider calling a tree farm a forest, euphemistic and misleading. This measure seems more concerned with sustaining the profitability of the forest industry than with the conservation of habitat. And nowhere in either the ballot question, nor in the title assigned to this measure by the _______ Committee, is the voter advised of the adverse impact this change will have on local school funding, though the language of the change proposed to the Constitution does make concessions to that concern.

    Who would benefit from the proposed change?

    The Georgia Forest Industry, mostly, and large tract land-owners who would benefit from the tax concessions provided by these changes.

    Who supports the passage of this measure?

    The Fair Forest Tax PAC was organized to support passage. To date, they have raised $8,700 and spent $3,150 in support of passage of this change. The money comes from a small handful of tree farmers and corporations in the timber and pulp industries.

    Who supports the defeat of this measure?

    What is the Georgia Green Party’s recommended position?

    The Georgia Green Party urges a NO vote on Constitutional Amendment #3.

    98% of Georgia forests are commercial forests, producing pulp, timber and related products. A 2010 report by Georgia Tech puts Georgia tax revenues from its forest industry at $448 million annually. Adoption of #3 is likely to put a significant dent into that figure, shifting responsibility for funding state operations onto the rest of Georgia and threatening an adverse impact on school budgets across the state, particularly for its rural counties.

    In the early 90’s Question #3 added the relevant Constitutional language to provide for preferential tax treatment for ‘conservation use property’. That measure included provisions permitting the state to provide grants to impacted local school districts, to account for the revenue lost to our schools by assessing land in these conservation use convenants without taxing the timber or pulp growing on the land. The rules required that land under such covenants be preserved for at least 15 years or that the land-owner pay the full weight of the taxes due if they were to harvest their tree farm any earlier.

    The changes offered with this year’s #3 change those rules so that a land owner can remove land from such a covenant after only ten years, instead of the original 15 years.

    These provisions of the state Constitution, Article VII, Section I, Paragraph III, subparagraph (f), were again amended in the General Election of 2008, after the Georgia Forestry Association PAC raised and spent roughly a quarter million dollars for their YES-on-1 campaign, including $30,000 contributed by Montana based Plum Creek, Georgia’s largest land-owner which is a part of the Nebraska based Weyerhaeuser Company, which owns 13 million acres nation-wide. Now economic interests in the timber and pulp industries are again seeking changes to these provisions.

    The 2018 changes now requiring approval of the voters include provisions to permit the Revenue Commissioner to receive up to 5% of the assistance grants created to offset the adverse fiscal impact on our local schools, to cover the cost of state administration of the program. HB-85, which provides enabling legislation sets the amount due the Department of Revenue at 3%, initially.

    Although our research has not identified any specific beneficiary by name, this year’s changes include a curious provision which seems narrowly drawn to extend the benefits of these tax advantages to one or perhaprs a small number of land owning tree farmers.

    And the key feature acknowledged in the ballot question adds a new subparagraph (f.1) to permit a distinct formula for the valuation and taxation of ‘qualified timberland property’. Such property would not be subject to the conservation covenants of subparagraph (f), but would nonetheless enjoy tax benefits which would shift the burden from large private land holdings to the working people of Georgia with further adverse impacts on local school districts.

    The enabling legislation which becomes effective should the voters approve the ratification of the underlying constitutional provisions which authorize it, HB-85, adds new additional tax examptions so that ‘conservation use property’ and ‘qualified timber property’ would be assessed and taxed at 40% of its fair market value, rather than its full market value, as provided by current law. This preferential tax treatment is in addition to the exclusion of the value of the timber subject to covenant under the ‘conservation use property’ provisions adopted in 1992.

    The HB-85 enabling legislation permits lands to be fragmented and subject to multiple convenants, although originally this legislation would only extend these tax benefits to tracts of 200 or more contiguous acres protected for at least 15 years by a single covenant.

    ‘Qualified timber property’ is required to consist of at least 50 contiguous acres. Thinning and timber sales are permitted uses for such tax exempt land, and no covenants are required as for ‘forest land conservation use’ designation, although both classes of property will benefit from the same cap at 40% of fair market value for tax purposes.

     

  • NO on Two — Reject business courts, a premature, anti-democratic, corporate power grab

    CA #2 — Urging a NO vote
    Creates a state-wide business court to lower costs,
    enhance efficiency, and promote predictable judicial outcomes.

    Constitutional Amendment: HR-993 * HR-993-AP

    Enabling Legislation: HB-185 * HB-185-SCS (Senate Committee Substitute)

    Does the ballot question and measure name accurately and fully reflect the effect of passage without obfuscation?

    No. Adoption would create concurrent jurisdiction in equity cases between publicly elected superior court judges, and the judges of the newly created business court who would be appointed by the Governor.  The ballot question implies that these new courts would only sit on cases involving ‘certain complex business disputes’. In reality, these changes to the Constitution would permit the Governor appointed judges to consider any case of equity, whether or not they involved ‘complex business disputes’. Jurisdiction over a case might be transferred from superior court to the business courts by agreement of the parties; but no reciprocal provision exists to transfer a case in the other direction. Presumably a new case filed originally by a plaintiff in a business court would provide no mechanism for a defendant to transfer jurisdiction back before an elected judge.

    Who would benefit from the proposed change?

    Who supports the passage of this measure?

    Who supports the defeat of this measure?

    What is the Georgia Green Party’s recommended position?

    The Georgia Green Party urges a NO vote on Constitutional Amendment #2.

    The Senate Substitute to HB-185 outlines an office to conduct a study on the scope of jurisdiction for these proposed courts.

    This enabling legislation intended to effectuate the creation of the business court system anticipated by the adoption of this amendment, died when the General Assembly adjourned in 2018, with HB-185 having been tabled in the Senate. Although adopted by the Georgia House on February 15th, 2017, the version which the House sent to the Senate was related to matters involving the Probate Courts. The bill number was picked up as a zombie, gutted, and substituted late in the 2018 session and recommended to the Senate by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Four days later, on March 27th of this year, the bill was tabled in the Senate, and later died with adjournment.

    So the enabling legislation for this constitutional amendment was not adopted by the Senate, where it originated, and has never been considered by the Georgia House of Representatives.

    At best, consideration of this proposal by the voters of Georgia is premature. As worst, it serves as an anti-democratic means for removing jurisdiction over a broad swatch of litigation from elected judges and assigning those cases to judges appointed by the Governor.

  • No on One – Taxpayers and Elected Officials should Prioritize Tax Expenditures, not a private industry group

    CA #1 — Urging a NO vote
    Creates the Georgia Outdoor Stewardship Trust Fund  to protect water quality, wildlife habitat and parks

    Constitutional Amendment: HR-238 * HR-238-AP (pdf)

    Enabling Legislation: HB-332 * HB-332-AP (pdf)

    Does the ballot question and measure name accurately and fully reflect the effect of passage without obfuscation?

    No, an existing fund of the state, repealed by the enabling legislation, already provides a source of dedicated funds for these purposes. The effect of the adoption of this measure would be to divert certain sales taxes from the general fund to this purpose, denying the ability of the Georgia Assembly to allocate those funds in other ways to meet our shifting priorities.  While it took a two-third majority of both houses to put this question before the voters, with no change to the Constitution the Assembly already has the authority to allocate these funds and more for these purposes.

    Who would benefit from the proposed change?

    Members of the Outdoor Industry Association would benefit most by seeing the tax collected on their retail sales dedicated to public expenditures likely to increase demand for their products, rather than being allocated in the General Fund for other priorities of the state.

    Who supports the passage of this measure?

    Outdoor Industry Association — a trade organization including DuPont
    and a wide number of outdoor outfitter manufacturers.

    Russell M Currey, Boxwood Capital, LLC ($10,000)
    Tall Timbers Research, Inc. ($10,000)
    James Lews Glenn, Sea Island Company ($5,000)
    James A Lanier, Jr., Retired ($5,000)
    Scott Satterwhite, Retured ($5,000)

    The Conservation Fund ($50,000)
    The Nature Conservancy ($50,000)
    The Trust for Public Lands Action Fund ($10,000)
    The Georgia Conservancy
    Georgia Wildlife Federation
    Park Pride

    Who supports the defeat of this measure?

    What is the Georgia Green Party’s recommended position?

    The Georgia Green Party urges a NO vote on Constitutional Amendment #1.

    This change if ratified would provide a dedicated pot of public sales tax money which would be spent according to the priorities of a private trade association, and do so in a way which would bind the hands of future elected officials to prioritize expenditures outside the scope of those preferred by this industrial trade group.  The existence of this tax allocation would serve as cover for the Assembly to cap funds for this purpose to that generated by this tax dedication.  The effect of this change is non-lapsing and to revisit this allocation would again require a vote of the citizens in a General Election.

     

  • Ballot Questions 2018: Corporate Welfare, Significant Cost to Georgia Taxpayers

    Please help us spread the word.  You can print the Summary of the Georgia Green Party’s Recommendations on the 2018 Ballot Questions front and back, then cut them in half to get two leaflets per sheet you print.

    The democratic will of Georgians has been thwarted. Wealthy private contributors, including anonymous donors, not voters, determine candidate viability. Elected officials draw maps to choose their voters, before voters can choose their elected officials. Barriers to ballot access deny voters the ability to choose our preferred candidates and parties, while exclusion from polls and debates deny voters information on our options.

    Voting may have been reduced to a choice among competing evils. But the corporate oligarchy must still seek our permission to amend the constitution.

    The Georgia Green Party urges Georgia voters to use that power to say NO. The Georgia forestry industry is among the largest and most profitable in this state. That may give them the power and resources to purchase policy. But it is no reason to excuse them from their obligation to help fund our public schools. While #3 is perhaps the most egregious example of corporate welfare on our 2018 ballot, it is by no means the only one.

    With your help, with your vote, we can deny this abuse of power and defeat these ill advised changes to the Constitution of Georgia.

    For further background on the Green Party’s position, please visit:
    http://www.GeorgiaGreenParty.org/2018_ballot_questions

    Green Values are Majoritarian Values
    Peace and NonViolence * Social Justice
    Grassroots Democracy * Ecological Wisdom

     

    Georgia Green Party Recommendations on 2018 Ballot Questions

    NO on #1, sales taxes should be spent on the evolving priorities of the community, not be dedicated by the Constitution to the priorities of the Outdoor Industry Association

    NO on #2, reject these experimental, premature and anti­-democratic business courts which would favor lawyered­up
    corporations over Georgia citizens

    NO on #3, reject impoverishing Georgia public schools, particularly in rural communities; one of Georgia’s largest industries does not need a 60% property tax exemption to remain profitable, the working people and home­owners of Georgia should not have to subsidize their profit to fund our public schools

    NO on #4, reject this billionaire pet project; protect the presumption of innocence for the accused and equal protection under the law; constitutional rights have traditionally protected people from their government, not from one another; let’s not pit human defendants against corporate ‘victims’

    YES on #5, facilitate Special Local Option Sales Taxes for educational purposes in counties with multiple school systems

    NO on A, reject this measure to deny Atlanta residents notice and hearings for millage rate increase

    YES on B, preserve access to federal tax credits and county property tax exemptions for nonprofits which operate homes for the mentally disabled, even when they use private financing for construction or renovations