Last year the Georgia State Ethics Commission was newly tasked with all sorts of responsibilities - for example, processing and posting candidates' campaign contribution reports and policing lobbyists.  With these new responsibilities came more money in the budget to make sure the agency had the capacity necessary to carry them out.

Now, however, Governor Sonny Perdue has proposed a 40% budget cut for the next fiscal year.

Lawmakers are saying they'll work hard to restore the funds:

The Georgia primaries are tomorrow. Over the weekend, there were heated exchanges in the debates for governor and secretary of state. The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that the subject of photo IDs for voting has become an integral component of the primary races. Generally, the Republican candidates are for mandatory photo ID cards, while the Democratic nominees are against photo voting IDs.

In the race for the Democratic nomination for governor, the debate was over which candidate was a stronger opponent of mandatory IDs. In the Republican debate for the secretary of state nomination, three of the four candidates support mandatory IDs, with only businessman Paul Martin withholding open support for the measure. In the Democratic race, all six candidates opposed photo IDs and also endorsed a paper trail for voting machines.

Last weeks state supreme court decision suspending the GA legislature's photo ID law prompted the debate, and hopefully Georgia voters have become better educated on the topic. It is a shame that the debate is split by partisanship, with candidates on both sides effectively slinging mud at each other in the final push to Tuesday's vote.

For a list of the current voting requirements in Georgia click here.

Georgia has made changes to its voter ID law. Last year the Georgia legislature passed a law requiring all voters to present a photo ID when voting. Because all Georgians do not possess a driver's license or a passport, the GA legislature amended the law to provide voter ID cards free of charge. However, less than a month before the July 18 primary the voter ID cards still have not been issued.

The initial law was approved by the Department of Justice per the Voting Rights Act. Regardless, the state has yet to determine who gets the cards, and how and where Georgia voters get the cards. This uncertainty has been compounded by yesterday's deadline for voter registration for the July 18 primary. Read the AP story here.

Mandatory photo ID's present problems for the elderly, the poor, and minorities who may not have the means of transportation to obtain voter ID's.

Earlier this week the Atlanta City Council passed legislationthat would roll back Atlanta ethics laws by allowing city employees and elected officials to receive free meals and tickets to entertainment events from lobbyist. The bill also would not have required that these gifts be disclosed. The moment we heard of this bill we spoke out against it in the press, and contacted Mayor Franklin to urge her to veto the bill.

The Mayor has since vetoed the bill and the council has backed down. Clearly the Council underestimated the public's outrage over this, and now the 10 members who voted for the bill are in the awkward position of being forced to explain why they think it is okay to accept freebies from lobbyists. It's not okay and they should know better.

Richardson claims in his own AJC article that Republicans passed "the most sweeping ethics reform in the history of Georgia" last year. The Speaker fails to note that he was personally responsible for taking a very strong bill offered by Governor Perdue and removing the most significant reforms. The Ethics reform bill of 2005 was a good step forward, and we do have stronger laws regulating lobbying as a result. But all of the reform was on the supply side. House Republicans removed almost every attempt in the Governor's bill to enforce more ethical behavior on the part of elected officials. A stronger stance by Senate leaders last year and some last minute arm twisting by the Governor were the only things that gave us any ethics reform at all in 2005.

When Democrats were in control, did House leaders exhibit a similar reluctance to pass laws limiting their own ability to accept money and gifts from lobbyists?  Absolutely, as Common Cause, the press, and others observed at the time.  Our public statements placed the blame for the failure to pass what would have been truly the most significant ethics reform in state history in 2004 squarely where it belonged.

In 2004, the Republican Senate passed Governor Perdue's ethics reform bill.  Under the leadership of Chair Mary Margaret Oliver, the House Judiciary committee endorsed that bill with unanimous bi-partisan support and added campaign finance reform measures.  But that bill got no further.  It was dead on arrival at the Democratic controlled Rules Committee.

 We publicly criticized then Speaker Coleman and his lieutenants Jimmy Skipper and Calvin Smyre for killing the reforms. It was rumored that Skipper counseled his colleagues that passing the bill would result in having them all wearing "orange jumpsuits."  Coleman's quote on the Richardson MMV fund was in keeping with his previous attitudes on reform. "I had a Speaker's PAC... but [Republicans] have developed it into a fine science. My hat's off to them."

The problem isn't with Republican or Democratic leadership, conservative or liberal leadership, black or white leadership, rural, suburban, or urban leadership. The problem is an amazing arrogance of power that makes some leaders forget that they were elected to serve the people of Georgia, not those individuals, corporations, and associations which bring $20,000 checks to the Capitol looking for special treatment in return.

Georgians need to let their legislative leaders past and present know that they work for us, and this blatant courting of special interest money, legal or not, stinks to high heaven and needs to stop.

The bill was introduced on the first day of the session and passed the House by a 110-64 vote on Thursday.  After passage in the House, Senate leaders decided to hold off voting on the bill until the week of January 23rd.  As it currently stands, all signs point to the bill's passage in the Senate in much the same fashion as it did in the House.  

Even though SB 84 improves on current law by making the photo ID card a no-cost item and increases accessibility for those who would need to get it, we cannot endorse the bill as it currently stands. There are two main problems.  The first problem is  that it would go into effect immediately upon signing by the Governor - which would require all affected Georgia voters to react quickly if they were to re-register prior to the July 2006 primaries.  The other key problem we have is that the law would require a photo ID to vote in person, but does nothing to address voter fraud in absentee voting which is where fraud is most likely to occur.

As we have been saying all along, we want to work with the leadership in the General Assembly to craft a bill that satisfies the need for protection against voter fraud but does not disenfranchise any of Georgia's voters.  However, the manner in which this bill proceeded through the House didn't allow for any such discussion.

Our board has decided that we cannot support the new Voter ID bill.  As a non-partisan organization we have conscientiously tried to give this bill a fair assessment. If there is still a chance of slowing this bill down, we would welcome a chance to work with leaders to address the reforms in a more comprehensive manner.

What do you think of the new Voter ID bill?  If you don't support this bill what do you think would be a good compromise solution to prevent voter fraud without disenfranchising voters?  If you do support this bill, tell us why. We welcome an open dialog.

When we were asked last month to comment on a news story regarding Senator Casey Cagle, candidate for Lieutenant Governor (click here to see story), it got us to thinking on the question of how and when we need to guide the behavior of our part-time politicians. The vast majority of elected offices in Georgia are part time jobs. We have ingrained in our culture the concept that we are better off being governed by people who are not professional politicians, but citizens like ourselves who take time out of their lives to serve the people while continuing to pursue their own professions and business interests.

In a perfect world, these two lives would be separate, but of course they never are. Farmers help determine state policy on agriculture, insurance people determine insurance legislation, and so on. Georgia law tells state legislators to recuse themselves when they are too close to a situation. But in reality, those who are knowledgeable on certain aspects are often key players in determining policy that influences their lives outside the legislature. The same thing occurs in City Councils and County Commissions throughout the state.

In Cagle's case, the reporter told us that Cagle had owned a tuxedo rental business when he first came to the Legislature in 1991. In 1999, the same year he became a member of the Senate Banking and Financial Institutions Committee, Cagle helped found a community bank in Hall County which later merged with a larger bank. As a result, Cagle is a much wealthier man today than he was when he entered public office. He continues to sit on key banking committees in the Georgia Senate.

Cagle's story is not that unusual. Public service has no doubt helped many individuals improve their chances at success in life. Is there anything wrong with this? To what extent was Cagle's success in his private life tied to his role as a public servant?

While not begrudging anyone's rise to prosperity, we ask the question as to what limits should be in place to insure that public service is not improperly exploited for private gain?