“It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning cannot be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people.”

These words, spoken at the 150th celebration of the Declaration of Independence by Calvin Coolidge still hold true today. You can disagree with what our inalienable rights entail. You can disagree with what it means to be equal and what the governments role in guaranteeing that equality is. However, it is that document, written almost 250 years ago, that reminds us of the reason behind our founding. Religious and economic freedom sparked the birth of this country and these should continue to fuel the flame that keeps America and her ideals alive today. I don’t care if you’re a Republican, Democrat, Green party, Libertarian or whatever. Today (and throughout the weekend), let’s remember what makes America beautiful: Liberty.

Read more about this here.

Kaffie McCullough has a guest piece at the AJC on the issue of underage sex trafficking in Georgia. She notes that the problem with trafficking lies not in its rampant spread throughout Georgia or our inability to solve the problem. Instead, the problem lies in the methods we are taking as a state to “solve” the problem of underage trafficking.

When you hear of “Spa Raids,” this generally refers to police officers going into these places and arresting the prostitutes, the ones who are “breaking the law.” They are brainwashed into admiting fault, unable to tell the police officers what is really going on. Often, they wouldn’t know enough English to do so anyways. By this method, the “johns” and pimps go free, normally closing one spa and relocating.

I want to hone in the fact that “johns,” the men who are paying for these sexual acts, are normally going free. With little to no risk of reprieve, many men continue to use this service to their advantage, neglecting to acknowledge the atrocities these young women are facing. We must decrease the demand for underage prostitution. While this seems like an impossible task, increasing the punishment for these men, educating them on the realities of sex trafficking and publishing their information in newspapers when they do get caught could, in my opinion, help greatly reduce the demand, thus reducing the market for this horrible business.

However, when it comes to stopping the behaviors that produce the victims, we have a long way to go. The behavior of the men who take advantage of girls should cause outrage — and from that outrage should come action — and that has not happened yet.

We must insist that our law enforcement and publicly elected officials increase the frequency of arrests and prosecution of johns and pimps to deter others from seeking sex from our children. We also must change the cultural attitudes that excuse grown men who exploit young females.

Commercial exploitation of under-age girls is not a problem without a solution. No new technology or medical breakthrough is needed. We know what the solution is — we just haven’t summoned the public will to make it happen. Georgia has the laws to arrest and prosecute perpetrators. We just need to do it.

It is not legal to pay for sex in Georgia. Argue with me all day long about whether you think this is right or not. All I’m saying is that there is no reason these men should go free if they are caught. This problem has got to stop. I’m glad to see the outcries in Macon through the Sex Traffic Opposition Project and the editorials in Atlanta. I’m happy to see legislation coming through that will help these poor girls; however, until demand is reduced, we cannot solve the problem in the best way possible.

Andre, a contributor over at Peach Pundit has pointed to an e-mail from General David Poythress, pleading with former Gov. Roy Barnes not to run in the Democrat primary in 2010.

Riiiight. This is laughable.

Sometimes it takes a friend to speak the truth, even when that truth is hard to hear. Roy Barnes and I have been friends for many years, but I believe I have to say out-loud what is being uttered in hushed tones all across the state: Roy, you shouldn’t run.

Democrats are worried that he’ll bring the Party down – again. All the groups of people that Roy offended before – including all the teachers who still feel insulted – are ready to vote against him. And the Georgia Republican Party is lying in wait to slam-dunk his attempt to get back in office.

All I’ve heard from Georgia democrats are great things about Barnes’ entry into this race. He’s the only candidate they have with enough name recognition to actually have a chance at turning Georgia a little blue in 2010. Roy Barnes will win the Democrat’s primary and he has a very good chance at the entire election if the Republicans can’t rally around one solid candidate.

The final disclosure period is this week for these candidates and I’m sure Poythress will show little improvement in his fundraising abilities, unlike a very resourceful Barnes.

This is an Op-Ed I’m working on getting published. Any suggestions/resources are greatly appreciated.

Georgia prides itself in being set apart from other states for its diversity and innovation. Unfortunately, a sore thumb for Georgia is its lack of venture capital investment through state employee pension funds. The only state in this country that does not invest its pension funds in venture capital, playing it safe with these funds deprives Georgia of billions of dollars worth of returns and jobs each year. In fact, some studies predict that had Georgia introduced a venture capital option to the pension plan 10 years ago, there would be $20 billion more worth of investment in Georgia, 400,000 more jobs and about $4.5 billion added to the state budget. In fact, all seven of Accuitive’s Georgia companies, a venture capital firm, moved to California because of investment and regulation, costing Georgia about $1 billion in lost tax revenue and jobs.

With resources like the Georgia Research Alliance, Georgia Tech and Emory all located within miles of each other, there is no reason not to allow state investment through pension funds in startup medical research. Taking the first step, Governor Sonny Perdue has invested $10 million in the Georgia Research Alliance through the public sector, matched at 3:1 in the private sector. This cannot be the final step, however. Startup investments in medical research will exponentially multiply years down the road, benefiting the entire state. Today, businesses deciding on whether to invest in a Georgia-based startup hesitate upon realizing the state itself will not invest in its own research with pension funds.

Legislation presented to the General Assembly has generally called for just a 3-5 percent investment, a small price for dividends that could solve many budget issues and help guarantee teachers and other state employees the retirement funds they deserve. In Florida, legislation recently passed allows about $250 million of the $150 billion pension fund to be invested in venture capital. A private company accepts applications for investment, removing political cronyism from the process. Already, high-skilled jobs are being created and research is flocking to Florida universities. Opponents of public venture capital investment cite failures in states like Connecticut; however, Connecticut used pension funds to essentially bail out a troubled gun company within the state. Florida’s program would not allow a bail out such as this one to occur. The program, currently capped at only 1.5 percent of the pension fund, will be expanded if it is successful, as most predict it will be.

Georgia’s lack of venture capital investment through retirement funds indicates its lagging progression toward financial stability within state government. Maryland’s venture capital fund has brought back every dollar invested. Indiana’s pooling of about $20 million in seed money for seven local bio-life science companies has generated $73 million in out-of-state funding in the companies, creating new jobs and tax revenue. Similarly, Yale University, holding one of the largest endowments in the nation, has seen an average rate of return of about 15.9 percent through 2008. While recent reliance on hedge funds has caused a decline in Ivy-League returns, the point is clear: Alternative assets such as venture capital, if diversified, will yield large returns. This sustainability could alleviate the budget shortfalls faced by Georgia government. By pooling money returned from venture capital investments in the state’s reserves, Georgia could exponentially grow it’s rainy day fund at a rate this state has never seen while still increasing benefits for the retired.

Unfortunately, teacher’s unions oppose the very idea that would benefit them the most. They feel the risks outweigh the returns, neglecting to note the successes such investments have produced in other states. Venture capital investments through state pension funds are beneficial to state employees, teachers and the state of Georgia as a whole. Typically, when stock prices are up, venture capital is down. However, at a time when stocks are down, venture capital tends to be more successful, diversifying the portfolios of our state employees.

Startup investment creates innovation and capital and will allow Georgia to remain on the forefront of technological advances. The arguments against venture capital in regards to pension funds are tired. The promises of a small investment from the state through pension funds promise large returns. Instead of bailing out failing business models, let’s invest our state employee retirement funds in innovation and enjoy the benefits.

This is not a post taking up for Governor Mark Sanford. See below if you don’t believe me.

I was checking my RSS feed a few minutes ago and noticed the following on Daily Kos:

Like the Taliban and Islamic fundamentalists, conservatives seek to impose their morality on the rest of us via governmental coercion (legislation and the bully pulpit). They are incapable of minding their own business, and seek to stick their noses into peoples’ bedrooms and doctor offices.  Yet time and time again, their relentless moralizing is proven to be hypocritical grandstanding, as they are unable to meet even the lowest of bars they try to impose on others.

For starters, not all conservatives seek to impose any morality on any one via governmenaal coercion or any other method which would invade the liberty we are all priveliged to have. Next, it is very important to remember that Governor Mark Sanford was quite far from claiming to be a social conservative. To my knowledge, I don’t know that he ever tried to stick his nose into peoples’ bedrooms or doctor offices (although he may have been too busy sticking his nose in their pocketbooks to fund his extramarital affair.)

However, let’s not forget that statists are far from innocent when it comes to “sticking their noses” where they don’t belong. For instance:

1) President Obama signed legislation Monday that will give the federal government broad new power to regulate the manufacturing, advertising and marketing of cigarettes and other tobacco products.

2) A vote this week will decide whether we as Americans pay for the greenhouse gas emissions of the energy companies we use. Democrats seem to think that making companies that contribute to emissions pay a “credit” to companies that don’t is a smart idea. They leave out the fact that in places like Georgia, wind energy isn’t exactly happening any time soon and if the market demands cleaner energy, the market will create it. Now, government oversight is going to determine that Georgia Power and other companies like it “need” to be cleaner, thus raising everyone’s bills. Great timing, right?

3) Let’s not forget healthcare. This also from the Daily Kos:

Public option available = Americans get the health care they need.

Public option not available = Americans have much more trouble paying for health care, put off needed treatment and visits, and end up incurring more serious conditions.

No viable public option = No health reform.

Again, let’s make my argument. If we determine that it is our job to pay for other people’s health care, everyone’s rates go up and everyone’s quality of care goes down. Let’s keep in mind a few things here:

• The amount of people that are uninsured, not by choice and with no current public option, is grossly overestimated. In fact, 75% of uninsured folks only stay that way for about a year. Further, many people are quite eligible for medicaid or medicare and choose not to take it.

• Many “uninsured” that Statists love to talk about are also illegal immigrants. Estimates show that about 9.7 million of the nation’s uninsured are not U.S. citizens.

• The plan introduced by Senator Kennedy will probably only insure about 1/3 of the current uninsured and it will cost upwards of one trillion dollars over ten years

• It will also require everyone to buy health insurance, fining those who do not.

I don’t think the Daily Kos reads my blog. Actually, I know that they don’t, but to those who consider themselves left-leaners, please tell me: what justification is there for this ridiculous health care reform that everyone is talking about? To me, the answers are not in more governmental oversight and I just don’t even understand the argument. Consider this a wide-open thread.

By the way, one of my buddies has a great blog at Americanly Yours.

R.I.P. Michael.

I know news of Governor Mark Sanford’s affair is, in many ways, getting a little exhaustive; however, I am going to use this avenue of media to express a few of my opinions on the matter.

Governor Sanford has been a hardline fighter for fiscal conservatism since his time in Congress when he rolled with Ron Paul. His stance on the stimulus funds and insistance on the irresponsibility of our nation’s leaders in spending our tax dollars has impressed me since I first heard of him. His leadership in the Republican Governor’s Association, South Carolina and in the GOP fueled excitement for a race in 2012 that we all know will be challenging. I hoped he had every intention of running and I had every intention of supporting him. I was finally excited about a candidate.

Further, news of his disappearance invoked a fascination for me in the way that he handles things. I thought it was so cool that he decided to hike for a few days alone to clear his head. I had no problems with this and had decided that most folks were overreacting to a situation that wasn’t at all a problem.

Instead, upon hearing that Governor Sanford had cheated on his wife, I realized that I was quite wrong. Adultery is a plague that is sweeping this country faster than cancer. Cries in opposition to universal healthcare, socialism and fiscal ineptitude pale in comparison to the horrid implications that extramarital affairs have on families. It is a terrible, terrible reality that is becoming far too common for me to stomach. The difference in a Governor, a pastor, a Senator or a plumber being involved in an affair is minute, but Governor Sanford’s decision and subsequent actions will affect his family, his constituents, his party and his inner-most conscience for many years.

Hopes of being the next President, in my opinion, are shattered. I cannot support a candidate who cheats on his wife. All talk of family values and the sanctity of marriage aside, it is never okay to cheat on your spouse. Divorce, while also devastating, is far too accessible to justify such a horrifying action. I stay away from social issues, on this blog and elsewhere, but this is something I care deeply about and I am terribly sorry that Governor Sanford made this mistake.

The government wants to take over your life a little more. This time, the market apparently can’t take care of the size of your airline bags, so someone has decided it should be up to congress to do so:

Lipinski has introduced a bill in Congress to set a standard limit on the size of carry-ons and put the Transportation Security Administration in charge of policing it. The Association of Flight Attendants supports the measure to lessen hassle and safety risks during boarding, but airlines oppose additional regulation that would force them to adopt a federal standard.

While most agree the bill will not go very far, we need to get this Lipinski fellow a copy of Capitalism and Freedom or I don’t know, the Constitution? This is a silly bill with silly government oversight and it needs to be killed. I think Delta, American, AirTran and even SwissAir can take care of themselves. We already have a Federal Aviation Administration and a TSA. We don’t need any more government in the airline industry. Maybe I should start calling it the airline bureaucracy.

Over at Reason, talk of transportation “stimuli” in Washington should scare us all. Doubling transportation spending while the Highway Trust Fund is almost broke and the Gas Tax isn’t working makes about as much sense as spending $1 Trillion to fund 10% of the uninsured (maybe). Unfortunately, it’s happening in Washington, but paying for it is the least of their concerns:

“What is it going to cost to deliver this? That’s an issue you have to put off till the end,” Oberstar said of the bill, which he expects to roll out in the coming days. “You can’t talk investments and dollar amounts until you have something to show the public.”

Riiight…

For a real look at transportation policy, check out the Georgia Public Policy Foundation’s newest study.

High speed rail is not the answer in Georgia. There is not enough money in the stimulus plan to even dream of paying for such a system and the average Georgian would rarely use the service. To anyone who thinks this may be a good idea, I highly recommend you look into the effects High Speed Rail has had on other economies in other countries.

In response to Cynthia Tucker’s column on President Barack Obama’s health care proposal, I would like to point out that the problems involved in allowing the government to dictate premiums and guarantee coverage across the board far outweigh the benefits of enacting such a system. Tucker’s assertion that profit-driven mechanisms are costly to consumers does not acknowledge the fact that a public takeover of the healthcare industry would only increase the cost for the insured and lower the quality of care provided to citizens.

While Tucker is right about our exorbitant health care spending in relation to the health of American citizens, the fault should not be placed on the “self-interested physicians.” Rather, blame should be placed on governmental regulations that hamper the health care industry overall.  Citizens opting to purchase personal health insurance instead of employer-based plans are taxed for their decision, often doubling the cost of their insurance. Further, the Health Insurance and Portability Act allows any small business to obtain insurance, regardless of the health of its employees.Thus, a small company can remain uninsured until an employee gets sick, driving up premiums for all the insured.

President Obama’s intentions may be noble but his consistent insistence on government takeover is deeply flawed. Intervention drives costs higher and quality of care lower.

This is hilarious.

Is this guy serious? I’ll give him some chicken if that’s what this is about.

The suit calls the tactic “bait and switch” and said customers incurred “travel costs, paper and printing costs, postage, the money they spent on other food items at KFC on visits when they had intended to redeem the coupon … and the loss of the value of the promised meal,” TMZ reported.

The suit seeks unspecified damages.

A lawsuit over promised grilled chicken? Wow.

I think we’re going to see some real change this year in the way the state handles teenage “prostitutes.” I use this term lightly, knowing that most of these girls, not women, are trafficked by men and women aiming to make a profit off of the sale of another human being. Sex trafficking in Georgia is a huge issue, one that has been widely publicized at my school, Mercer University.

The topic will now reach Georgia legislators at the next session, as more than forty advocates against sex trafficking turned out at a committee hearing, an astronomical number for a summer meeting.  We need to decriminalize child prostitutes, arrest the (insert expletive here)s that are selling these girls, and publicize the “johns” who are demanding this “product.” Only then will this terrible crime against humanity be stopped.

Teenage prostitutes need help, not jail time, said coalition member Colleen Rouse of Norcross.

But Rep. Bobby Franklin (R-Marietta), a member of the committee, opposes the bill.

“It will encourage child prostitution, because it will no longer be a crime,” he said.

Atlanta is a U.S. center for the child sex-trafficking trade, the FBI has said.

We do not need people opposing this issue on some moral ground that prostitution is wrong. No matter what you think about prostitution as a lifestyle, you can all agree that coercion is definitely wrong. These girls are not choosing to be child prostitutes. Who would want a lifestyle like that? They are forced into it, either from another country, or even from the inner city streets of towns in America. They are raped, dehumanized and torn down until they feel like nothing, sometimes being forced to be with over eighty men a day.

No, Rep. Franklin, this bill does not encourage child prostitution. What it will do is discourage the people that own these despicable businesses from ever stepping foot in Georgia again. While not a final step, I believe it is a great first step.

Read more about this story here:

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2009/06/17/teen_prostitute_sextrade.html

Read the bill here:

http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/2009_10/sum/hb582.htm

Contact your legislator and tell him/her to support it by finding his/her contact information here:

http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/2009_10/house/district.htm

This is the type of positive change that Georgia needs.

A poll released this morning by Strategic Vision, LLC shows John Oxendine with a fairly comfortable lead for the Republicans and Roy Barnes doing well among the Dems:

If the Republican primary for Governor were held today, for whom would you vote, Nathan Deal, Karen Handel, Eric Johnson, Ray McBerry, John Oxendeine, or Austin Scott? (Republicans Only)
John Oxendine 35%
Karen Handel 13%
Nathan Deal 12%
Eric Johnson 4%
Ray McBerry 2%
Austin Scott 2%
Undecided 32%

If the Democratic primary for Governor was held today, for whom would you vote, Thurbert Baker, Roy Barnes, Dubose Porter, or David Poythress? (Democrats Only)
Roy Barnes 49%
Thurbert Baker 30%
David Poythress 5%
Dubose Porter 2%
Undecided 14%

I think it’s fairly obvious that Barnes will take the Democratic party. By convincing some of these other folks to drop out, he could maybe even avoid a runoff. On the GOP side, things are a little more hazy. Oxendine’s considerable lead does say something (namely, no one reads the news or cares about ethics), but it also says something that 32% of respondents have not made a decision (I am one of those.) I think the candidates are going to have to start canvassing more areas in Georgia, diversifying their platforms or just trashing each other if they want to move around in the polls at all. In my opinion, the poll is not representative of the merit of the candidates, but then again, they rarely are.

The question I must ask, however, involves the numbers of respondents who identified themselves as Republicans and the number who identified themselves as Democrats. While the sample was only 800 folks, this could definitely say something about the outcome of a race in a year. The margin of error of this poll, by the way, is three percentage points.

You can read more about this poll here:

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/Oxendine_Barnes_Top_Picks_For_Governor_061609

Just an hour away from Macon, in Muscogee County, graduation rates in local high schools are higher, on average, than those in Bibb County. School site spending in local high schools is lower than in Bibb County. With a comparable poverty rate, median income level, and population, the difference in school systems for these two counties is surprising; however, a closer look reveals that Muscogee County offers a broader array of options for students attending their schools, including school choice and charter schools.

Easy excuses like parental involvement, poverty level and funding per student are no longer acceptable in the debate on school performance. Instead, Macon must look towards schools like Rigdon Road Elementary School in Muscogee County. This past year, the Georgia Public Policy Foundation ranked Rigdon Road as a “No Excuses School” for its performance. The school’s second graders rank second in the state, while the fifth graders rank thirteenth among Georgia’s elementary schools, an impressive feat for a school with a poverty rate of up to ninety-two percent.

Offering a year round schedule, after school programs and stricter disciplinary action, Rigdon Road competes with other schools in its district to maintain excellence. A charter school in Muscogee County also performs better than the majority of schools in Bibb with comparable characteristics. This example, among others, makes it clear: school choice creates an environment that allows schools to compete, benefiting students, parents and teachers.

(This is a letter to the editor to the Macon Telegraph, written in response to this editorial: http://www.macon.com/203/story/746657.html)

This week, President Obama appointed a “pay czar” to determine the salaries of the top executives at all of these government-owned companies. This happened after last week’s decision to allow all of us to have a hand in 60% of General Motors.

First of all, let me just say that all this takeover is doing is delaying the inevitable fact that a company that has made sub-par cars for years is destined to fail. Milton Friedman showed that this was the case and we’ve seen it happen on numerous occasions throughout history. All this bailout is doing is putting this country further in debt, increasing the size of government intervention, and painting a false facade over General Motors that causes people to think things are going to be okay. As Friedman said, if you believe in freedom, you must believe in the power of individuals [and firms] to succeed and to fail.

That being said, what has the House passed this week? The “Cash for Clunkers” bill! What a great idea, right? Wrong.

The House just approved a proposal that would allow the government to reach into your pocket, take your money, and give it to your neighbor so he can buy a fuel-efficient car just like yours. Seem fair? No, I didn’t think so, but that’s exactly what the “Cash for Clunkers” program does.

The House vote was 298-119 along party lines, but with 59 Republicans voting YES and 9 Democrats voting NO.

Why are we letting “Republicans” vote yes on bills like this? Fiscal Conservatism has been replaced with political expediency. We have to speak out against these guys. The Georgia Delegation voted as would be predicted, with Marshall voting against the bill; however, as Jason Pye points out, Nathan Deal merely voted “Present” at the vote. I think in a crowded Gubernatorial race, we need to hear a reason why our candidates are doing things like this.

Our government, especially in D.C. (which is where I am right now), must be held accountable for the things it is doing. Where is an argument for this incentive program? Please point me towards an economist that empirically believes that this is a good idea or show me a philosopher that believes that this doesn’t create a moral conflict of wealth redistribution. Washington, take a chill pill.

House Minority Leader and candidate for Governor for the Democrats, Dubose Porter, released a statement on some complaints he has with the Perdue administration and water restrictions:

What happened to the “culture of 
conservation” he promised a few months ago? 

The hallmark of the Perdue Administration is always the same:
 when confronted with any problem, first, deny it. Then, when denying won’t
 work any longer, claim that you are solving it.

Then just forget all about it, and
 wait until your term ends.

Georgia is going to have another drought. Sonny Perdue is leaving us no more
 prepared for the next drought than he prepared us for the drought that has 
just mercifully ended.

Porter was looking great during the session when he had some clout among his party; however, I’m hearing now that Barnes is trying to get both Thurbert Baker and Dubose Porter to drop out. I think Porter’s frustration with Perdue, coupled with his frustrations with our other previous Governor are causing him to talk about issues like water restrictions and droughts and not whether he should stay in this race or not.