Our own Katherine Harris
I haven't really agreed with Bill Shipp on too much as of late, but his latest column is a good effort to take a look at Karen Handel's effort to turn the secretary of state office into a partisan stronghold for the GOP. While I think he tries to tie too many things together - for instance, Keith Gross was rightfully kicked off the ballot - he does touch on three things which are rather distressing ...
- Removing Jim Powell from the ballot in his bid for a spot on the Public Service Commission - despite an administrative law judge ruling in favor of Powell's residency - the day prior to the primary election. Powell wisely fought Handel's absurdly incoherent ruling and earned a stay (and close to 85 percent of the vote the next day), and all he is waiting on now is a final court hearing.
- Blocking Michelle Conlon's bid to get on the ballot to challenge party-switcher Mike Jacobs. After Gross was kicked off, Conlon sought to get on the ballot as an independent and turned in more than enough signatures for the petition. Handel, without explanation, threw out just enough signatures to prevent Conlon from establishing her candidacy. Conlon has mounted a legal challenge to get on the ballot.
- After Joe Carter opted to not seek re-election for the State Senate, his seat was considered open and, as Shipp notes, state law requires that qualifying be reopened ... and Handel did that, but only for Republicans.
Now, these three instances are all some form of inside baseball and have, for the most part, gone unnoticed. And, to make matters worse, the Republicans control pratically all of the statewide political offices meaning they can easily stamp out any sort of opposition or take the immature route and dismiss the rightful objections to these actions as 'sour grapes' on the part of Democrats or independents.
The secretary of state office is supposed to work to make elections fair and open to all, though it appears Handel is all too eager to do the exact opposite during her tenure.
- Removing Jim Powell from the ballot in his bid for a spot on the Public Service Commission - despite an administrative law judge ruling in favor of Powell's residency - the day prior to the primary election. Powell wisely fought Handel's absurdly incoherent ruling and earned a stay (and close to 85 percent of the vote the next day), and all he is waiting on now is a final court hearing.
- Blocking Michelle Conlon's bid to get on the ballot to challenge party-switcher Mike Jacobs. After Gross was kicked off, Conlon sought to get on the ballot as an independent and turned in more than enough signatures for the petition. Handel, without explanation, threw out just enough signatures to prevent Conlon from establishing her candidacy. Conlon has mounted a legal challenge to get on the ballot.
- After Joe Carter opted to not seek re-election for the State Senate, his seat was considered open and, as Shipp notes, state law requires that qualifying be reopened ... and Handel did that, but only for Republicans.
Now, these three instances are all some form of inside baseball and have, for the most part, gone unnoticed. And, to make matters worse, the Republicans control pratically all of the statewide political offices meaning they can easily stamp out any sort of opposition or take the immature route and dismiss the rightful objections to these actions as 'sour grapes' on the part of Democrats or independents.
The secretary of state office is supposed to work to make elections fair and open to all, though it appears Handel is all too eager to do the exact opposite during her tenure.
posted by Jmac at 8:57 AM
7 Comments:
"the day prior to the primary election. Powell wisely fought Handel's absurdly incoherent ruling and earned a stay (and close to 85 percent of the vote the next day), and all he is waiting on now is a final court hearing."
Hmmmmmmmm.
Absurdly incoherent? The statute says residency is established by where homestead is claimed. Which before I get to my next point, can a Democrat please answer a question I've been asking for a month: Why didn't Powell change his homestead a year before qualifying? Any answer which does not include "because obviously taxes are lower in Towns than Cobb" gets bonus points.
The statute also says the Administrative Law Judge the secretary of state MAY consider other factors for residency. The ALJ obviously did, the SOS not so much. You can make an argument all day long this was politically motivated but can we please stop with the overwrought " but but but the judge ruled!" argument.
He wisely appealed but the stay was not some kind of "WOOHOO we won a big one!" moment. Unless it's some kook case anyone gets a stay because its better to take a few minutes and look at everything than not do anything and have a huge mess later.
And just to add on. No one has taken my bet on whether it will be overturned by the superior court. Although I've lowered the odds since apparently you've pulled a crazy judge. I'll still give anyone willing to step up 3-2.
Why didn't Powell change his homestead a year before qualifying? Any answer which does not include "because obviously taxes are lower in Towns than Cobb" gets bonus points.
But isn't that a valid enough reason? Jim Powell would be foolish to remove an exemption on one piece of property that would increase what he owe overall. That alone is all the answer you need.
The ALJ wisely examined the status of the exemption and, taking into consideration what I noted, took a deeper look at the other factors you note are well within the spectrum of consideration. And, in viewing the whole picture, made the right decision.
The SOS ignored logical explanation of the exemption and the judicial opinion she herself sought. Her mind was made up anyway it seems because she restricted herself to a narrow and misguided interpretation of the law.
So "please weigh all this other evidence in a manner that overrules this other part of the statute so I can save some money"? That's an argument that rarely wins.
What Handel did to Conlon is inexcuseable.
I don't get how she is able to make these decisions without some reasoning that is available to the public.
I witnessed Conlon's people getting signatures, I signed the petition.
They were putting forth a legitimate effort.
Why not provide the justification?
What Handel did to Conlon is inexcuseable.
I don't get how she is able to make these decisions without some reasoning that is available to the public.
I witnessed Conlon's people getting signatures, I signed the petition.
They were putting forth a legitimate effort.
Why not provide the justification?
So "please weigh all this other evidence in a manner that overrules this other part of the statute so I can save some money"? That's an argument that rarely wins.
Well, it would if the candidate had an 'R' next to his or her name, but that's another story.
Still, why shouldn't it? You're boiling down the entire residency challenge to one particular test when it's quite clear the administrative law judge said several factors were worthy of consideration. The logical, human choice to save money - something every other single human being in Georgia would do - was the reason. We're faulting Powell for owning property he used to live in and is, to my knowledge, attempting to sell.
His residency was established by a variety of other credible factors that were accepted by the ALJ. Handel ignored those and pursued a narrow interpretation of the law that benefitted her goal.
The homestead exemption is a discrete and separate part of the statute. The law only says the ALJ and the SOS may consider other factors. Homestead is not one part of the whole, its a whole separate thing.
Post a Comment
<< Home