Mason Rountree Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 (edited) One of the ballot questions in the Republican primary is whether voters support a $100.00 limit on lobbyist gifts. Senator Bill Heath opposes any limit because he claims it is meaningless. He also says that we do not need ethics laws if we elect politicians like him to office. What do you think? Edited July 21, 2012 by Pigpen Link to post Share on other sites
markdavd Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 I'd rather see an iron-clad law on reporting of the gifts by both the lobbyist and recipient. Often, the value of the gift is more in what it is than the cost. Then the voters can decide. Two tickets to a sporting event or a golf outing can easily run more than $100.00, but in the end, it's just a sports event or round of golf. Link to post Share on other sites
LPPT Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 I'd rather see an iron-clad law on reporting of the gifts by both the lobbyist and recipient. Often, the value of the gift is more in what it is than the cost. Then the voters can decide. Two tickets to a sporting event or a golf outing can easily run more than $100.00, but in the end, it's just a sports event or round of golf. I will vote for it in support of the effort, if we don't we send the message that we don't really care or we believe it is a hopeless situation. It was really brave of some of those folks to put their name on the list. It made a lot of them unpopular with their peers under the dome. The Tea party, candidates both Republican and Democrat are coming together to make try to make government more ethical. The only ones not supporting this are lobbyist crying fowl and those that are enjoying the gifts. I would also like to see our State Representatives paid more. For 2 reasons, it lowers the temptation to accept gift, and after researching just a few bills myself I feel it is a full time job to study and understand these bills well enough to vote on them. I think what we see a lot of are lobbyist doing the education on these bills. Link to post Share on other sites
WHITEY Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 One of the ballot questions in the Republican primary is whether voters support a $100.00 limit on lobbyist gifts. Senator Bill Heath opposes any limit because he claims it is meaningless. He also says that we do not need ethics laws if we elect politicians like him to office. What do you think? I support the $100 limit, In fact I do not feel as if there should be any acceptance of any gifts. Our representatives are not elected to receive gifts, They are suppose to be making laws for the people who elected them. Some recent legislation that was passed by Senator Heath and House Rep. Braddock clearly represent those who gave the dollars they received, Instead of the votes they received. Link to post Share on other sites
Wineguy Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 I voted today and I didn't hesitate to put a limit on it. Link to post Share on other sites
Beach Bum Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 (edited) Maybe someone can help me out with this but why are Bill Heath and Paulette Braddock not signing the pledge to limit lobbyist gifts to $100.00? What possibly could be the motivation for Heath and Braddock to not sign this pledge? Heath and Braddock both get paid a salary from the citizens of the State of Georgia AND they get paid a per diem to cover their expenses during the legislative session. Why won't Heath and Braddock sign the pledge to limit lobbyist gifts to $100.00? P. S. I placed a call to Bill Heath yesterday to inquire about this issue as well as the issue of his campaign sending out the "debt collection" letter last Friday which, by the way, scared the living daylights out of some of our elderly residents - Heath has yet to respond. Edited July 21, 2012 by Beach Bum 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Mason Rountree Posted July 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 As it stands today, there are no limits whatsoever to lobbyist gifts. The ballot question also asks whether we should end the unlimited gifts. Sen. Heath wants to continue unlimited gifts. If you disagree with him, tell your neighbors and friends and let folks know on Facebook, twitter, etc. if voters don't say "NO" to politicians like Bill Heath, we have no one to blame but ourselves. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
The Sound Guy Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Heath's argument is it is meaningless since lobbyists will just split the gifts into chunks that are under $100 each. (Take his family out to dinner at a fancy restaurant? Pay for each persons separately) I'd prefer a Annual cap of some kind where each lobbies can only give a certain about per year to anyone. As Whitey said, it's supposed to be about arguing the merits of a bill, not who can buy the most stuff. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
glassdogs Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Well, the simple solution in the D-31 race is to just vote for JK Rogers. He won't take any "gifts". However, that doesn't address the problem statewide. I am in favor of limits, but somehow $100 doesn't seem right. You can't go to a Braves, Falcons, Dawgs, or Tech game for that. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
eym_sirius Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 What is lobbying anyway, but institutionalized bribery? And if giving gifts is "free speech" there should certainly be a cap, if it is allowed at all. Otherwise, the system will degrade to only the very wealthy being able to afford what is supposed to be the right of every American - Free Speech. Link to post Share on other sites
Mason Rountree Posted July 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) Heath's argument is it is meaningless since lobbyists will just split the gifts into chunks that are under $100 each. (Take his family out to dinner at a fancy restaurant? Pay for each persons separately) I'd prefer a Annual cap of some kind where each lobbies can only give a certain about per year... SD: The $100 limit is an annual cap. We can argue whether that is too low or too high, but Heath thinks there should be no cap at all, which is not surprising since he apparently thinks the $2500 limit on campaign contributions shouldn't apply to him either by funneling around $50,000 for the benefit of his campaign through a PAC he helped set up and fund. Edited July 22, 2012 by Pigpen 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Bizmo Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Very interesting article in the MDJ http://mdjonline.com/pages/full_story/push?article-Is+lobbying+reform+on+the+agenda+of+Georgia+House+Republican+leaders-%20&id=19215652&instance=secondary_story_left_column I support ZERO gifts from lobbyists....however, I do realize that that would only happen in a perfect world and I am not naive. I wholeheartedly agree with the statement by ES that lobbying is nothing more than legalized bribery...that was good! I have worked as a Purchasing Agent both in the government and private sector. In taking the courses and training to obtain national certification, there was a heavy emphasis on ethics. I took it very seriously. And in all seriousness, it's not that hard to turn down a "gift" if it in any way makes you or anyone else feel that you are obligated to return the favor in some way. Personal ethics.....business ethics.....they go hand in hand. At least that's how I always operated. But like I said - I am not naive. A $100 limit is better than no limit at all. Although it does mean (as the above article states) that it would be a $100 limit per occurrence and that does not eliminate the potential for abuse of the system. But whatever. I can't help feeling a bit disgusted that this is even an issue. That's right Mr. Heath (and others)....I said DISGUSTED. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Mason Rountree Posted July 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Mo and SG. You are absolutely correct about $100 per occurrence not per year. It is still better than nothing . Both Mr. Rogers and Mr.Carruth have pledged not to take any gifts lobbyists in contrast to Mr. Heath who wants unlimited gifts from lobbyists. We have a real choice in this election. Link to post Share on other sites
The Sound Guy Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Mo and SG. You are absolutely correct about $100 per occurrence not per year. It is still better than nothing . Both Mr. Rogers and Mr.Carruth have pledged not to take any gifts lobbyists in contrast to Mr. Heath who wants unlimited gifts from lobbyists. We have a real choice in this election. Agreed. Heath will be short one vote this election that he got last election... mine. Link to post Share on other sites
mach4 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Well, the simple solution in the D-31 race is to just vote for JK Rogers. He won't take any "gifts". However, that doesn't address the problem statewide. I am in favor of limits, but somehow $100 doesn't seem right. You can't go to a Braves, Falcons, Dawgs, or Tech game for that. Why do they need to go in the first place? Not being a biotch, just asking. Link to post Share on other sites
Ugadawgs98 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Make it $0....politicians should not be bought for any price. 4 Link to post Share on other sites
feelip Posted July 26, 2012 Report Share Posted July 26, 2012 Maybe someone can help me out with this but why are Bill Heath and Paulette Braddock not signing the pledge to limit lobbyist gifts to $100.00? What possibly could be the motivation for Heath and Braddock to not sign this pledge? Heath and Braddock both get paid a salary from the citizens of the State of Georgia AND they get paid a per diem to cover their expenses during the legislative session. Why won't Heath and Braddock sign the pledge to limit lobbyist gifts to $100.00? P. S. I placed a call to Bill Heath yesterday to inquire about this issue as well as the issue of his campaign sending out the "debt collection" letter last Friday which, by the way, scared the living daylights out of some of our elderly residents - Heath has yet to respond. Do you realize how many $100 checks Paulette would need to pay off her debts? She is doing what anyone that has a heart for the environment would do. Look at all the trees she will save. Link to post Share on other sites
swit57 Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 Maybe someone can help me out with this but why are Bill Heath and Paulette Braddock not signing the pledge to limit lobbyist gifts to $100.00? What possibly could be the motivation for Heath and Braddock to not sign this pledge? Heath and Braddock both get paid a salary from the citizens of the State of Georgia AND they get paid a per diem to cover their expenses during the legislative session. Why won't Heath and Braddock sign the pledge to limit lobbyist gifts to $100.00? P. S. I placed a call to Bill Heath yesterday to inquire about this issue as well as the issue of his campaign sending out the "debt collection" letter last Friday which, by the way, scared the living daylights out of some of our elderly residents - Heath has yet to respond. Can you say CROOKS, that's why Link to post Share on other sites
Beach Bum Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 I still just simply don't understand why Bill HEATH and Paulette Braddock will not sign to pledge to limit lobbyist gifts. We in Georgia are only 1 of 3 states in the entire United States that does not have a limit lobbyist gifts. http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=8051367 Are we going to continue this trend? Are we really comfortable having people like Heath and Braddock represent us? As for me and my family.....we are NOT! 3 Link to post Share on other sites
cookies are sweet Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 I have Falcons season tickets and have had them for over 30 years. My seats cost me $6,000.00 for the upcoming season. If I have to pay to go to the games, then someone who works for ME, should DAM well pay for their own tickets. It is real simple; no gifts, no questions on wheither or not they are being bought. Link to post Share on other sites
kelleyofhiram Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 I have Falcons season tickets and have had them for over 30 years. My seats cost me $6,000.00 for the upcoming season. If I have to pay to go to the games, then someone who works for ME, should DAM well pay for their own tickets. It is real simple; no gifts, no questions on wheither or not they are being bought. I certainly have to agree with you! I wish our citizens would wake up and realize that we are in charge of the Politicians, instead of allowing the Politicians to control us. Link to post Share on other sites
Mama Carol Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Wonder if some of those politicians now wish they hadn't been elected since the $100 limit on lobbyist gifts passed? Link to post Share on other sites
surepip Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Wonder if some of those politicians now wish they hadn't been elected since the $100 limit on lobbyist gifts passed? Nothing passed in so far as a law. This was purely a republican straw poll to find out how the voters felt about the possibility of a law limiting lobbyist spending. Same ol...same ol. Nothing has changed except we can expect to see a bill making it mandatory to be a paying card carrying member of the GOP in order to vote in the primaries in the future. This will keep out the Rif-Raf. And I assume we will go through days and weeks of agonizing political grandstanding while they debate at what instant a fertilized egg gets citizenship and civil rights, and then they will probably also waste a bunch of time passing some restrictions on the "A" word procedure, only to see the SCOTUS shoot it down in flames like HB87. But you can for sure bet your sweet butt there will be no limits on lobbyists, or for that matter what the PACs and other candidates can spend on other candidate's campaigns. They are NOT going to turn their backs on all the free money. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts