Will the South Stay Republican?

[newsjunky]

In the 2010 election and since that election the Republicans made gains that were devastating to Democrats. The South was the epicenter. Will the Republicans throw away that advantage or will they live up to promises and work for less taxes, better schools, and protection of liberties for the citizens? 1/3 of the seats lost by the Democrats were in 11 traditional states. I am watching. I suspect a lot of those who voted for the folks they consider to be conservative are watching too. Georgia is set to pick up a seat. Are the Republicans conservative?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/06/AR2011030602929.html

 

[Guard Dad]

Interesting article.

Generally speaking, the south is politically conservative. There are pockets and groups that are the exception to that (inside 285, for example), but a heavy majority have conservative values.

The problem dynamic is that politicians have moved to the left. Not just the Dems, but many Republicans too. The typical Republican elected official these days is no more conservative that Hubert Humphrey was back in the 60's, and he was a liberal in his day. And the Dems have moved so far to the left they are now squarely in socialist or Marxist territory.

So many voters are put out with both parties, hence the popularity of the Tea Party because they are exposing more of a true conservative platform. Problem is; our political system puts a 3rd party at a huge disadvantage.

So I'm going to opine that for now, the south stays Republican. But Republicans take heed; you could easily find yourselves out of power again if you don't return to conservative principles like the people want and demand.

 

[Foxmeister]

My concern is we have too many Republicans who appear to be more to the left than the right of center and this will eventually hurt the party.

 

[lotstodo]

Great article. Mr. Anzlone's statement at the end of the article points out the problems facing the Republicans. In order to to do what needs to be done, the house and senate must tackle the problem of entitlements. This puts the Democrats in the enviable position of saying that the republicans "want to take food off of your table". The dilemma is to explain the cuts, and to make sure that the Republican's traditional economic base feels the same pain as the welfare mothers and the retirees. If not, the Democrats will regain control, and just continue to kick the can down the block until the economy completely collapses like the house of cards it is.

N J, I know that you and I both have been watchdogging the Republican majority in both the federal and state government. So far, I must say that I am disappointed. It appears to be far too much business as usual and far too little serious change. I don't blame the "new" members, but the old guard (Boehner, Ralston, et.al.) are still far more interested in collecting votes and campaign contributions than doing the people's work.

Socially, I don't think that birther bills and continued attempts to sneak abortion or ten commandment and prayer legislation into the mix do the party any good. It is viewed by 80% of the population as pandering to one relatively small but politically powerful group within the party, particularly when there is so much important work to do. Locally it could cost the state jobs as businesses view blue laws, stem cell legislation, and anti-abortion attempts as negatives.

 

[Foxmeister]

I agree with you LTD. I was at the last Paulding GOP party and said the same thing during our precinct meeting. They need to take abortion off the table as there has been a Supreme Court ruling and I don't see them hearing the issue again or turning over the prior ruling. It's only going to appear as you say, political pandering. I oppose abortion, but those who oppose abortion will never win this fight.

We need to get rid of the career politicians because they appear more concerned with retaining "power" instead of the issues the rest of us are facing every day i.e. the economy.

 

[newsjunky]

Great article. Mr. Anzlone's statement at the end of the article points out the problems facing the Republicans. In order to to do what needs to be done, the house and senate must tackle the problem of entitlements. This puts the Democrats in the enviable position of saying that the republicans "want to take food off of your table". The dilemma is to explain the cuts, and to make sure that the Republican's traditional economic base feels the same pain as the welfare mothers and the retirees. If not, the Democrats will regain control, and just continue to kick the can down the block until the economy completely collapses like the house of cards it is.

N J, I know that you and I both have been watchdogging the Republican majority in both the federal and state government. So far, I must say that I am disappointed. It appears to be far too much business as usual and far too little serious change. I don't blame the "new" members, but the old guard (Boehner, Ralston, et.al.) are still far more interested in collecting votes and campaign contributions than doing the people's work.

Socially, I don't think that birther bills and continued attempts to sneak abortion or ten commandment and prayer legislation into the mix do the party any good. It is viewed by 80% of the population as pandering to one relatively small but politically powerful group within the party, particularly when there is so much important work to do. Locally it could cost the state jobs as businesses view blue laws, stem cell legislation, and anti-abortion attempts as negatives.

I agree with you. I know that sponsors have jumped ship on the Birther Bill. They discovered it was not going to help Georgia get the funds they need for projects like the Savannah River harbor. Silly to have signed on to it. Sen. Bill Heath is holding up the bill to give choice to Counties about the sale of alcohol on Sunday. They need to start living up to campaign promises and stop pandering. JMO

 

[lotstodo]

Great article. Mr. Anzlone's statement at the end of the article points out the problems facing the Republicans. In order to to do what needs to be done, the house and senate must tackle the problem of entitlements. This puts the Democrats in the enviable position of saying that the republicans "want to take food off of your table". The dilemma is to explain the cuts, and to make sure that the Republican's traditional economic base feels the same pain as the welfare mothers and the retirees. If not, the Democrats will regain control, and just continue to kick the can down the block until the economy completely collapses like the house of cards it is.

N J, I know that you and I both have been watchdogging the Republican majority in both the federal and state government. So far, I must say that I am disappointed. It appears to be far too much business as usual and far too little serious change. I don't blame the "new" members, but the old guard (Boehner, Ralston, et.al.) are still far more interested in collecting votes and campaign contributions than doing the people's work.

Socially, I don't think that birther bills and continued attempts to sneak abortion or ten commandment and prayer legislation into the mix do the party any good. It is viewed by 80% of the population as pandering to one relatively small but politically powerful group within the party, particularly when there is so much important work to do. Locally it could cost the state jobs as businesses view blue laws, stem cell legislation, and anti-abortion attempts as negatives.

I agree with you. I know that sponsors have jumped ship on the Birther Bill. They discovered it was not going to help Georgia get the funds they need for projects like the Savannah River harbor. Silly to have signed on to it. Sen. Bill Heath is holding up the bill to give choice to Counties about the sale of alcohol on Sunday. They need to start living up to campaign promises and stop pandering. JMO

Do you think heath and his ilk will face a Tea Party opponent in the primary? I think that while having the (R) behind your name might still beat the (D) in Georgia, the (I) doesn't mean what it used to in the primary.

 

[Foxmeister]

Great article. Mr. Anzlone's statement at the end of the article points out the problems facing the Republicans. In order to to do what needs to be done, the house and senate must tackle the problem of entitlements. This puts the Democrats in the enviable position of saying that the republicans "want to take food off of your table". The dilemma is to explain the cuts, and to make sure that the Republican's traditional economic base feels the same pain as the welfare mothers and the retirees. If not, the Democrats will regain control, and just continue to kick the can down the block until the economy completely collapses like the house of cards it is.

N J, I know that you and I both have been watchdogging the Republican majority in both the federal and state government. So far, I must say that I am disappointed. It appears to be far too much business as usual and far too little serious change. I don't blame the "new" members, but the old guard (Boehner, Ralston, et.al.) are still far more interested in collecting votes and campaign contributions than doing the people's work.

Socially, I don't think that birther bills and continued attempts to sneak abortion or ten commandment and prayer legislation into the mix do the party any good. It is viewed by 80% of the population as pandering to one relatively small but politically powerful group within the party, particularly when there is so much important work to do. Locally it could cost the state jobs as businesses view blue laws, stem cell legislation, and anti-abortion attempts as negatives.

I agree with you. I know that sponsors have jumped ship on the Birther Bill. They discovered it was not going to help Georgia get the funds they need for projects like the Savannah River harbor. Silly to have signed on to it. Sen. Bill Heath is holding up the bill to give choice to Counties about the sale of alcohol on Sunday. They need to start living up to campaign promises and stop pandering. JMO

I want elected officials with some guts who will stand on principle and not worry about offending small groups here and there, fearing to lose their votes. The ones who pander are the ones who plan on holding that seat for decades. More reason to have term limits.

I hate it when they tell us one thing and then do something entirely different. These are the ones we need to get rid of. When we voted for them, we took them for their word. Well, they need to show us they have the integrity to live up to what they promised they would do. If they can't get the support then fight hard to get it. They need to grow a large pair.

 

[Foxmeister]

Great article. Mr. Anzlone's statement at the end of the article points out the problems facing the Republicans. In order to to do what needs to be done, the house and senate must tackle the problem of entitlements. This puts the Democrats in the enviable position of saying that the republicans "want to take food off of your table". The dilemma is to explain the cuts, and to make sure that the Republican's traditional economic base feels the same pain as the welfare mothers and the retirees. If not, the Democrats will regain control, and just continue to kick the can down the block until the economy completely collapses like the house of cards it is.

N J, I know that you and I both have been watchdogging the Republican majority in both the federal and state government. So far, I must say that I am disappointed. It appears to be far too much business as usual and far too little serious change. I don't blame the "new" members, but the old guard (Boehner, Ralston, et.al.) are still far more interested in collecting votes and campaign contributions than doing the people's work.

Socially, I don't think that birther bills and continued attempts to sneak abortion or ten commandment and prayer legislation into the mix do the party any good. It is viewed by 80% of the population as pandering to one relatively small but politically powerful group within the party, particularly when there is so much important work to do. Locally it could cost the state jobs as businesses view blue laws, stem cell legislation, and anti-abortion attempts as negatives.

I agree with you. I know that sponsors have jumped ship on the Birther Bill. They discovered it was not going to help Georgia get the funds they need for projects like the Savannah River harbor. Silly to have signed on to it. Sen. Bill Heath is holding up the bill to give choice to Counties about the sale of alcohol on Sunday. They need to start living up to campaign promises and stop pandering. JMO

Do you think heath and his ilk will face a Tea Party opponent in the primary? I think that while having the (R) behind your name might still beat the (D) in Georgia, the (I) doesn't mean what it used to in the primary.

If Heath backs down on this, I would like to see someone run against him in the Republican Primary. That would force him to campaign earlier than he wanted to and he wouldn't like that.

 

[newsjunky]

Great article. Mr. Anzlone's statement at the end of the article points out the problems facing the Republicans. In order to to do what needs to be done, the house and senate must tackle the problem of entitlements. This puts the Democrats in the enviable position of saying that the republicans "want to take food off of your table". The dilemma is to explain the cuts, and to make sure that the Republican's traditional economic base feels the same pain as the welfare mothers and the retirees. If not, the Democrats will regain control, and just continue to kick the can down the block until the economy completely collapses like the house of cards it is.

N J, I know that you and I both have been watchdogging the Republican majority in both the federal and state government. So far, I must say that I am disappointed. It appears to be far too much business as usual and far too little serious change. I don't blame the "new" members, but the old guard (Boehner, Ralston, et.al.) are still far more interested in collecting votes and campaign contributions than doing the people's work.

Socially, I don't think that birther bills and continued attempts to sneak abortion or ten commandment and prayer legislation into the mix do the party any good. It is viewed by 80% of the population as pandering to one relatively small but politically powerful group within the party, particularly when there is so much important work to do. Locally it could cost the state jobs as businesses view blue laws, stem cell legislation, and anti-abortion attempts as negatives.

I agree with you. I know that sponsors have jumped ship on the Birther Bill. They discovered it was not going to help Georgia get the funds they need for projects like the Savannah River harbor. Silly to have signed on to it. Sen. Bill Heath is holding up the bill to give choice to Counties about the sale of alcohol on Sunday. They need to start living up to campaign promises and stop pandering. JMO

Do you think heath and his ilk will face a Tea Party opponent in the primary? I think that while having the (R) behind your name might still beat the (D) in Georgia, the (I) doesn't mean what it used to in the primary.

You will have a long wait to find out. He was voted in again in November 2010.

 

[lotstodo]

Great article. Mr. Anzlone's statement at the end of the article points out the problems facing the Republicans. In order to to do what needs to be done, the house and senate must tackle the problem of entitlements. This puts the Democrats in the enviable position of saying that the republicans "want to take food off of your table". The dilemma is to explain the cuts, and to make sure that the Republican's traditional economic base feels the same pain as the welfare mothers and the retirees. If not, the Democrats will regain control, and just continue to kick the can down the block until the economy completely collapses like the house of cards it is.

N J, I know that you and I both have been watchdogging the Republican majority in both the federal and state government. So far, I must say that I am disappointed. It appears to be far too much business as usual and far too little serious change. I don't blame the "new" members, but the old guard (Boehner, Ralston, et.al.) are still far more interested in collecting votes and campaign contributions than doing the people's work.

Socially, I don't think that birther bills and continued attempts to sneak abortion or ten commandment and prayer legislation into the mix do the party any good. It is viewed by 80% of the population as pandering to one relatively small but politically powerful group within the party, particularly when there is so much important work to do. Locally it could cost the state jobs as businesses view blue laws, stem cell legislation, and anti-abortion attempts as negatives.

I agree with you. I know that sponsors have jumped ship on the Birther Bill. They discovered it was not going to help Georgia get the funds they need for projects like the Savannah River harbor. Silly to have signed on to it. Sen. Bill Heath is holding up the bill to give choice to Counties about the sale of alcohol on Sunday. They need to start living up to campaign promises and stop pandering. JMO

Do you think heath and his ilk will face a Tea Party opponent in the primary? I think that while having the (R) behind your name might still beat the (D) in Georgia, the (I) doesn't mean what it used to in the primary.

You will have a long wait to find out. He was voted in again in November 2010.

2 years is not too long to wait. I have one of those elephant memories when a politician has done me wrong. :0

 

[PCGOPExaminer]

Great article. Mr. Anzlone's statement at the end of the article points out the problems facing the Republicans. In order to to do what needs to be done, the house and senate must tackle the problem of entitlements. This puts the Democrats in the enviable position of saying that the republicans "want to take food off of your table". The dilemma is to explain the cuts, and to make sure that the Republican's traditional economic base feels the same pain as the welfare mothers and the retirees. If not, the Democrats will regain control, and just continue to kick the can down the block until the economy completely collapses like the house of cards it is.

N J, I know that you and I both have been watchdogging the Republican majority in both the federal and state government. So far, I must say that I am disappointed. It appears to be far too much business as usual and far too little serious change. I don't blame the "new" members, but the old guard (Boehner, Ralston, et.al.) are still far more interested in collecting votes and campaign contributions than doing the people's work.

Socially, I don't think that birther bills and continued attempts to sneak abortion or ten commandment and prayer legislation into the mix do the party any good. It is viewed by 80% of the population as pandering to one relatively small but politically powerful group within the party, particularly when there is so much important work to do. Locally it could cost the state jobs as businesses view blue laws, stem cell legislation, and anti-abortion attempts as negatives.

I agree with you. I know that sponsors have jumped ship on the Birther Bill. They discovered it was not going to help Georgia get the funds they need for projects like the Savannah River harbor. Silly to have signed on to it. Sen. Bill Heath is holding up the bill to give choice to Counties about the sale of alcohol on Sunday. They need to start living up to campaign promises and stop pandering. JMO

I want elected officials with some guts who will stand on principle and not worry about offending small groups here and there, fearing to lose their votes. The ones who pander are the ones who plan on holding that seat for decades. More reason to have term limits.

I hate it when they tell us one thing and then do something entirely different. These are the ones we need to get rid of. When we voted for them, we took them for their word. Well, they need to show us they have the integrity to live up to what they promised they would do. If they can't get the support then fight hard to get it. They need to grow a large pair.

I agree, Fox, I want as you said: "I want elected officials with some guts who will stand on principle and not worry about offending small groups here and there, fearing to lose their votes." If I were elected, that is exactly what I would do...screw the offending and honor the Constitution.

 

[mei lan]

Two points: a) The GOP has the MOST MAGNIFICENT ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory at every turn. 2) State and national Capitols are wretched hives of scum and villainy, and when I see someone doing what they said they'd do vis a vis smaller government, personal responsibility, lower taxes, stronger defense, I am truly shocked. I really like Jim DeMint. He's one of the very few I can tolerate.

I will also say this - I don't think they get the big picture yet of just HOW FED UP taxpayers are with this ludicrous situation we are in. But they will. Might be another election or three, but they will get it. :BH

 

[Grey Colson]

I don't know about the entire state, but I've seen the change in Cobb County over the last 27+ years. Now, it being a metro county has a lot to do with it, but I can sure tell you that the demographics are changing quickly. I'm happy to be living in Paulding because in another 10 years, Cobb will be just like Fulton County in many ways.

Time to look for land further west me thinks... :'(

 

[Foxmeister]

Paulding is overwhelmingly Republican. The quickest way right now for Paulding County voters to vote in a member of the Democratic Party is for the Republicans currently serving in elected office is to not live up to their campaign promises of conservatism. It would make the conservative voters apathetic to the election process and keep them from the polls. How many times have you heard lately that all politicians are the same regardless of what party they belong to?

We are not only suffering high unemployment numbers in the state, but this county as well. The high unemployment numbers are resulting in reduced tax revenue to the state by a large amount. The Republicans in our state legislature are proposing tax reform claiming it will raise tax revenue while reducing our taxes. The way I understand the proposal is, it will increase the sales tax immediately: while gradually reducing the income tax to no less than 4%, but no greater than 5%. However, the reduction in state income tax will be gradual and won't begin until I believe 2013.

If this bill passes, it means we would start out by paying higher taxes than we are now. Quite simply, we would be paying a higher sales tax with and no immediate reduction in state income tax. Here are the current tax levels for the state:

If your income range is between $0 and $750, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 1%.
If your income range is between $751 and $2,250, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 2%.
If your income range is between $2,251 and $3,750, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 3%.
If your income range is between $3,751 and $5,250, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 4%.
If your income range is between $5,251 and $7,000, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 5%.
If your income range is $7,001 and over, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 6%.

If you get paid bi-monthly and your gross income is $1,500, you are taxed at 2%. Under this proposal recommended by Republicans in the Gold Dome, you’re going to pay more taxes because the sales tax will increase, but your state income tax will not. The only people this plan will benefit are those who are currently in the 6% bracket. Remember, the plan says to reduce the plan to 4%, but no higher than 5%. It’s quite possible those currently in the 5% bracket, will not see an income tax reduction. We’re being told this plan would raise additional tax revenue by $1B. I’m hearing Paulette Braddock thinks this is a good plan. If so, how conservative is she really? I also understand they want to eliminate the sales tax exemption on grocery items. If I’m wrong in my interpretation of how these reforms are to work, please tell me.

Another issue is the tolls on 400. From my understanding, the tolls were put into place to reimburse the expenditures for creating this highway and the tolls were to be eliminated once those reimbursements were to be completed. Now there are Republicans at the Gold Dome who want to keep the tolls in place because they are a good source of revenue for the state. Where is the fiscal conservatism the Republicans promised?
I see problems for Republicans in the next state elections.

 

[mei lan]

Another issue is the tolls on 400. From my understanding, the tolls were put into place to reimburse the expenditures for creating this highway and the tolls were to be eliminated once those reimbursements were to be completed. Now there are Republicans at the Gold Dome who want to keep the tolls in place because they are a good source of revenue for the state. Where is the fiscal conservatism the Republicans promised?
I see problems for Republicans in the next state elections.

I think you are CORRECT, sir. That toll thing just hacks me right off. "Oh, yeah, sure it's been paid for, but now we need some money for other things, so y'all just keep shelling it out." ARGH!!! And I don't even drive on the toll portion of 400!

Honestly, I really am so irked at Republicans who call themselves conservative, but behave another way once they get into office. I think you are exactly right that Republicans are going to have trouble next go-'round. Some of us have looooooooooooooong memories.

 

[Foxmeister]

I'm praying they get their act together and start performing like fiscal conservatives. The state does have a budget problem because of the results of this recession, but instead of looking at ways to increase revenue through tax and fees increases, they need to look at what fat they can trim from the budget. They can't keep going to the well for more.

If my income drops today, my debt isn't going to drop with it; it's going to remain the same. That would mean I would have no choice but to look at what I can quickly eliminate from my expenditures. Let's say I eliminate the lawn service and cut the grass myself; take my lunch to work instead of going out for lunch; quit going to the movies; reduce my cable package and eliminate other things I can do without. After all of that, my remaining debt still exceeds my income, then I have no choice but to sell things I can do without.

This is what our elected officials must do at the state capitol; look at ways of reducing the budget to balance it out. They also need to learn to keep the promises they made to get elected.

 

[newsjunky]

Paulding is overwhelmingly Republican. The quickest way right now for Paulding County voters to vote in a member of the Democratic Party is for the Republicans currently serving in elected office is to not live up to their campaign promises of conservatism. It would make the conservative voters apathetic to the election process and keep them from the polls. How many times have you heard lately that all politicians are the same regardless of what party they belong to?

We are not only suffering high unemployment numbers in the state, but this county as well. The high unemployment numbers are resulting in reduced tax revenue to the state by a large amount. The Republicans in our state legislature are proposing tax reform claiming it will raise tax revenue while reducing our taxes. The way I understand the proposal is, it will increase the sales tax immediately: while gradually reducing the income tax to no less than 4%, but no greater than 5%. However, the reduction in state income tax will be gradual and won't begin until I believe 2013.

If this bill passes, it means we would start out by paying higher taxes than we are now. Quite simply, we would be paying a higher sales tax with and no immediate reduction in state income tax. Here are the current tax levels for the state:

If your income range is between $0 and $750, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 1%.
If your income range is between $751 and $2,250, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 2%.
If your income range is between $2,251 and $3,750, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 3%.
If your income range is between $3,751 and $5,250, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 4%.
If your income range is between $5,251 and $7,000, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 5%.
If your income range is $7,001 and over, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 6%.

If you get paid bi-monthly and your gross income is $1,500, you are taxed at 2%. Under this proposal recommended by Republicans in the Gold Dome, you’re going to pay more taxes because the sales tax will increase, but your state income tax will not. The only people this plan will benefit are those who are currently in the 6% bracket. Remember, the plan says to reduce the plan to 4%, but no higher than 5%. It’s quite possible those currently in the 5% bracket, will not see an income tax reduction. We’re being told this plan would raise additional tax revenue by $1B. I’m hearing Paulette Braddock thinks this is a good plan. If so, how conservative is she really? I also understand they want to eliminate the sales tax exemption on grocery items. If I’m wrong in my interpretation of how these reforms are to work, please tell me.

Another issue is the tolls on 400. From my understanding, the tolls were put into place to reimburse the expenditures for creating this highway and the tolls were to be eliminated once those reimbursements were to be completed. Now there are Republicans at the Gold Dome who want to keep the tolls in place because they are a good source of revenue for the state. Where is the fiscal conservatism the Republicans promised?
I see problems for Republicans in the next state elections.

Mind if I ask these questions for you?

 

[Foxmeister]

Be my

Paulding is overwhelmingly Republican. The quickest way right now for Paulding County voters to vote in a member of the Democratic Party is for the Republicans currently serving in elected office is to not live up to their campaign promises of conservatism. It would make the conservative voters apathetic to the election process and keep them from the polls. How many times have you heard lately that all politicians are the same regardless of what party they belong to?

We are not only suffering high unemployment numbers in the state, but this county as well. The high unemployment numbers are resulting in reduced tax revenue to the state by a large amount. The Republicans in our state legislature are proposing tax reform claiming it will raise tax revenue while reducing our taxes. The way I understand the proposal is, it will increase the sales tax immediately: while gradually reducing the income tax to no less than 4%, but no greater than 5%. However, the reduction in state income tax will be gradual and won't begin until I believe 2013.

If this bill passes, it means we would start out by paying higher taxes than we are now. Quite simply, we would be paying a higher sales tax with and no immediate reduction in state income tax. Here are the current tax levels for the state:

If your income range is between $0 and $750, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 1%.
If your income range is between $751 and $2,250, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 2%.
If your income range is between $2,251 and $3,750, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 3%.
If your income range is between $3,751 and $5,250, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 4%.
If your income range is between $5,251 and $7,000, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 5%.
If your income range is $7,001 and over, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 6%.

If you get paid bi-monthly and your gross income is $1,500, you are taxed at 2%. Under this proposal recommended by Republicans in the Gold Dome, you’re going to pay more taxes because the sales tax will increase, but your state income tax will not. The only people this plan will benefit are those who are currently in the 6% bracket. Remember, the plan says to reduce the plan to 4%, but no higher than 5%. It’s quite possible those currently in the 5% bracket, will not see an income tax reduction. We’re being told this plan would raise additional tax revenue by $1B. I’m hearing Paulette Braddock thinks this is a good plan. If so, how conservative is she really? I also understand they want to eliminate the sales tax exemption on grocery items. If I’m wrong in my interpretation of how these reforms are to work, please tell me.

Another issue is the tolls on 400. From my understanding, the tolls were put into place to reimburse the expenditures for creating this highway and the tolls were to be eliminated once those reimbursements were to be completed. Now there are Republicans at the Gold Dome who want to keep the tolls in place because they are a good source of revenue for the state. Where is the fiscal conservatism the Republicans promised?
I see problems for Republicans in the next state elections.

Mind if I ask these questions for you?

Be my guest, but when and where will you be asking them? I'll be at the County GOP convention Saturday.