Farewell to the Talkmaster

Today was the farewell show for one ofAtlanta’s national celebrities. WSB talk showNeal Boortz bade farewell to his fans in the last regular edition of his morning radio show.

Boortz, who styled himself as the “Talkmaster” and the “High Priest of the Church of the Painful Truth,” took calls from fans for much today’s show. Recurring guests such as former Republican presidential candidateHerman Cain and Washington correspondent Jamie Dupree also made appearances. Callers and guests were forbidden to mention the name of “the Destroyer,” a reference to Barack Obama, during the final show.

A lawyer originally, Boortz has hosted a radio show on WSB since 1993. The show has been nationally syndicated since 1999. He has also written several books, including “the Fair Tax Book,” which he coauthored with Rep. John Linder.

Boortz is different from most political talk show hosts in that he is a libertarian, not a conservative. He regular criticized Republicans as well as Democrats in the rants on his show. Boortz often said things on his show that no one else dared to say with politically incorrect jabs at many groups. Muslims, Christians, public schools, smokers, fat people, and social conservatives were frequent targets in addition to liberals.

Boortz said that he plans to tour the country in a recreational vehicle during his retirement. He also plans to return to radio as an occasional guest host and to spend more time promoting the Fair Tax, a national consumption tax that would replace all other federal taxes. Fans will be able to follow Boortz in his retirement via his “@talkmaster” account on Twitter.

Originally published on Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-talkmaster-retires

Fair Tax flaws

Recently an Alert Reader commented on the article “Fair Tax basics” on this site.  The reader noted in part that the “Fairtax sounds great but check out the fine print http://fairtaxfineprint.blogspot.com/.”  The link is to a blog critical of the notion that the Fair Tax will also tax governments.

The text of the Fair Tax bill does confirm that the definition of the word “person” does include governments, which means that local, state, and even the federal government will be taxed if the Fair Tax becomes law.  This is counter-intuitive.  It seems nonsensical that the government will be forced to pay a consumption tax to itself. 

Only people pay taxes.  Corporations and governments have no money that they don’t get from people, so when a corporation or government is taxed, the money it uses to pay that tax comes from real people.  In the case of the government, it comes from taxpayers.  Therefore, it seems that the Fair Tax would merely shift the tax burden to local and state governments as they increased taxes to pay the Fair Tax.

To get an answer to this question, the Atlanta Conservative Examiner called the expert.  Neal Boortz is the coauthor of two Fair Tax books and host of the Neal Boortz Show, a syndicated radio talk show based on Atlanta’s WSB AM-750 on Tuesday, April 12.  Boortz pointed out that the problem with the Fine Print blog’s argument is that the government already pays taxes.  Governments directly pay sales taxes on goods and services that they buy as well as Social Security and Medicare taxes on payroll.  There are also indirectly pay embedded taxes on the goods and services that governments buy.  These include payroll taxes of the workers that make the product being purchased. 

The Fair Tax would eliminate many of these taxes that governments already pay indirectly (although not the sales taxes levied by local and state governments).  By specifically and directly taxing governments, the Fair Tax simply takes the money that governments have paid indirectly in the past and makes it a direct payment.  Theoretically at least, the change is a wash.  Because prices of goods and services would fall without embedded taxes, the total paid out should remain approximately the same with the Fair Tax making up the difference.  Additionally, Boortz stated that he was working on a position paper to answer the charges from the Fine Print blog.

More than a new sales tax

A second objection to the Fair Tax it is simply a sales tax that would cause prices to rise by 23%.  This does not consider the fact that the Fair Tax replaces other federal taxes.  As those embedded taxes are removed, the price of goods and services should fall to an equilibrium point.  The Fair Tax would be added to the lower price so that the actual final price paid on new items would be approximately the same as it is today.  Used items would not be taxed and would therefore be cheaper than they are today.

The critics who claim that the Fair Tax would raise current prices by 23% more accurately describe the Value Added Tax proposed by some Democrats.  A VAT is a European-style consumption tax in which a tax is added at each stage of production of a good.  Unlike the Fair Tax, a VAT would be in addition to current taxes.

Crunching Numbers

Rep. Rob Woodall

There is also some dispute over the actual Fair Tax rate.  The answer depends on how the rate is figured.  Depending on whether the rate is being quoted as tax-inclusive or tax exclusive, the rate can be as high as 30%.  The amount of the tax is the same regardless of the percentage of the rate. 

The Fair Tax website acknowledges that the rate charged at the point of sale would be 30%.  For example given on the site, if a person bought an item for $77, they would pay $23 of tax for a total of $100 ($77 x 1.3).  The tax-inclusive price is $100.10. 

When figured the other way, the rate is different.  If one begins at the total price of $100 and multiplies by 23 percent, the result is $23 of tax and $77 for the product.  The tax-exclusive price is $77.  This is akin to how income tax rates are quoted. 

Proponents of the Fair Tax say they use the tax-exclusive rate because the Fair Tax would replace the income tax.  Critics say that the lower rate is misleading.  In either example, the tax is virtually the same.

Who will pay more?

Factcheck.org reports that a Treasury Department comparison of the Fair Tax and income tax shows that the middle class would pay more.  Factcheck’s own analysis shows that those earning less than $24,156 per year would benefit when all taxes replaced by the Fair Tax are considered. Further, Factcheck says that David Burton of Americans for Fair Taxation acknowledges that high earners would probably pay a smaller share while “probably those earning between $40[thousand] and $100,000” would pay a larger share.

The important thing to remember here is that each American would control the amount of tax that they pay.  Since the Fair Tax is only levied on new goods and services, a taxpayer can reduce their tax bill by buying fewer new products.  If middle class consumption of new products decreases, that would make more money available for saving and investing as well.

An economic boon

Fairtax.org claims that the Fair Tax would entice expatriate companies to return to the US, flooding the country with capital.  The group claims that GDP would increase by more than 10 percent in the first year alone while the increasing money supply would keep interest rates low.  

Even the left-leaning Annenberg Factcheck.org’s analysis agrees that the size of the economy would grow by 5 to 7 percent, and possibly as much as 10 percent, over a period of time.  A growing economy would lead more profits, higher wages, a better standard of living, and, ultimately, higher tax revenues.

Could there be a Fair Tax and income tax?

A last major challenge to the Fair Tax is the charge that it will not be possible to pass.  To ensure that the country does not end up with a sales tax and income tax, the Fair Tax would be passed along with an amendment to the Constitution that repeals the 16^th amendment, which established the income tax.  Needless to say, it is much easier to pass a law than a constitutional amendment, which requires approval by three-fourths of the states. 

The authors of the Fair Tax have written the repeal of the income tax, the payroll tax, the gift tax, and the estate tax into the bill.  However, since the sixteenth amendment would have to be repealed separately, the possibility of having both an income tax and the Fair Tax remains a distinct possibility.  This is especially true if the Democrats took control of the government, or of a majority of the states, after the Fair Tax is enacted. 

Thus far it has been difficult for the Fair Tax to gain traction in mainstream circles.  With the current budgetary crisis, both parties can agree that major tax reform is needed.  Unfortunately, there is little agreement on what sort of reform that should be.  If it is difficult to enact the Fair Tax, it would likely be more so to repeal the constitutional income tax.

Most support for the Fair Tax seems to be among conservatives and libertarians.  Most independent voters are not aware of the Fair Tax.  Those who know about it probably do not completely understand it.  Even assuming the Republicans complete their takeover of Congress in 2012, it is unlikely that they will be able to muster the votes to pass the Fair Tax unless there is a major political realignment.  Given the dire financial state of the federal government, the current crisis may spur that realignment.

Currently, Georgia is a center for Fair Tax activism.  The Fair Tax bill is sponsored in the House by Rep. Rob Woodall (GA-7).  He is joined by sixty cosponsors including Paul Broun (GA-10), Phil Gingrey (GA-11), Tom Graves (GA-9), Jack Kingston, (GA-1), Tom Price (GA-6), and Lynn Westmoreland (GA-3).  Notably absent is Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), author of the Path to Prosperity.  In the Senate, the bill is sponsored by Georgia’s Saxby Chambliss and has six cosponsors, including Georgia’s other senator, Johnny Isakson.

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-atlanta/fair-tax-flaws"> 

The Fair Tax

The 2008 presidential campaign brought the Fair Tax proposal to national prominence.  The radical tax reform proposal was endorsed by candidate Mike Huckabee in the Republican presidential primaries that year and was subsequently granted even more publicity by the advent of the grass roots Tea Party movement.

Many conservatives believe that the current tax system is broken.  The income tax takes away the incentive to produce because, as a person makes more money, they are taxed at higher and higher rates.  Filing tax returns costs Americans millions of dollars and untold hours of work.  The system is so complex that many taxpayers pay more than they have to, while many others, like Obama supporter General Electric, pay nothing at all.  Fraud is rampant and enforcement is expensive.  The IRS has a budget of more than $13 billion.

The Fair Tax aims to solve these problems by scrapping the current tax code and abolishing the IRS.  The proposal is perhaps most associated with Georgians John Linder and Neal Boortz, but was actually created by the group Americans for Fair Taxation.  John Linder is the Republican representing Georgia’s seventh district in the U.S. House of Representatives.  Boortz is the libertarian-leaning “Talkmaster,” a radio talk show host of Atlanta’s WSB AM-750.

The Fair Tax has been around as an idea since 1999 when the Fair Tax bill was first introduced in Congress.  The bill has never emerged from committee for a vote.  In 2005, the proposal got a boost when Linder and Boortz authored The Fair Tax Book.  The two also collaborated on a second book, Fair Tax:  The Truth:  Answering the Critics.

The centerpiece of the Fair Tax is the replacement of the federal income tax (as well as Social Security, estate, capital gains, Medicare, gift and corporate taxes) with a flat rate consumption tax.  The tax would be a sales tax levied on the final purchase of new goods and services for personal consumption.  There would be no tax on the sale of used items or business-to-business transactions.  Since there would be no withholding, workers would be able to keep their entire paychecks.

Neal Boortz (Wikimedia Commons/ eltonsaulsberry/)

Because a sales tax would be regressive, it would place an undue burden on the poor, the Fair Tax would include a prebate.  Every American with a valid Social Security number who resides in the U.S. would receive a reimbursement, paid in advance each month, which would equal the tax paid on goods and services up to the poverty level.  Prebate levels are posted on the Fair Tax website’s FAQ page.  For example, a two-parent household with two children would receive a prebate of $559 per month.

The Fair Tax is designed to be revenue neutral, that is, it would bring in the same amount of tax revenues as the taxes it would replace.  To do that, economists estimate that the Fair Tax rate would have to be approximately 23%.  That means that the tax on a $10 item would be $2.30.  Similarly the tax on a $100,000 house would be $23,000. 

The 23% rate seems high at first, but in reality is offset by several factors.  First and most obvious, people would have more money in their pockets to start with because there would be no withholding of taxes from their paychecks.  Second, the base price of goods and services would be less because the embedded taxes that we pay now since currently taxes (for example, payroll and capital gains taxes) are collected at every level of production.  Third, no one would be forced to pay the Fair Tax.  People who do not want to pay taxes could simply buy used products and avoid the tax.

The Fair Tax is a progressive tax because it falls most heavily on the biggest consumers.  The wealthy who consume the most goods and services will pay the most in taxes.  The poorest of society will have to pay very few or no taxes and much of what they do pay will be reimbursed by the prebate.  The poor will also benefit because if they choose to buy secondhand items, they will not be taxed at all.

There are other advantages to the Fair Tax as well.  By removing the embedded taxes in American products, American companies will become more competitive and will be able to boost their sales.  The elimination of the corporate tax will discourage outsourcing and will actually encourage companies to move to the U.S.    

The Fair Tax will also expand the U.S. tax base.  Currently, only U.S. citizens and residents pay the income tax.  However, since the Fair Tax is paid at the point of sale, the tax burden will be shared by anyone who buys new goods or services in the U.S.  This would include tourists, foreigners on work or student visas, and even illegal aliens.

Finally, the Fair Tax would encourage people to work harder and save more.  Unlike an income tax, which takes more as you earn more, the Fair Tax would allow workers to keep their entire paycheck, no matter how much they earn.  Under the current system, there is also little incentive to save.  In fact, there are actually disincentives for saving in the form of taxes on capital gains, gifts, and estates.  Since the Fair Tax is levied as money is spent, it would encourage people not to spend as much money and save or invest it instead. 

Election myth: Does the GOP favor a 23% sales tax?

In the absence of being able to brag about their own accomplishments since 2006 when they took over Congress, the Democrats have taken to attacking their Republican opponents. When possible, these attacks focus on personal issues in an attempt to distract voters from the failures of the Democratic economic policies. When personal issues are not in evidence, there are three common charges made by Democrats (and cited by Dick Morris in a blog a few weeks ago). In my next few articles, I plan to address these charges individually.

The first common Democratic charge is that Republican candidates favor creating a new national sales tax at a 23% rate. Many Georgians will recognize the basis of this charge immediately since it is rooted in the Fair Tax proposed by Georgia congressman John Linder and radio talk show host Neal Boortz.

What the Democrats don’t tell you is that while the Fair Tax would impose a national consumption tax, it would totally eliminate the federal income tax, the IRS, and repeal the current tax code. In other words, the Fair Tax would replace the current tax system with a system that lets workers keep their entire paychecks and decide how much to pay in taxes.

Because the Fair Tax taxes consumption rather than income, it encourages productivity, investment, and savings. These are positive things that the government should encourage in order to help heal the economy.

The Fair Tax would be a boon to the poor. Since only consumption is taxed, if you did not buy new goods and services you would pay no tax. There would be no tax on used items or on business-to-business sales. Additionally, each Social Security cardholder would receive a monthly “prebate” from the government that would be equivalent to the Fair Tax paid up to the poverty level. This means that earners up to the poverty level would pay no taxes. According to the schedule on the Fair Tax website, my family of two adults and two children would receive a monthly payment of $6,702 in addition to not having any federal taxes withheld from our paychecks.

The flip side to this payment is that that when we bought new (remember used items are not taxed), we would pay more at the cash register. The actual total cost of the item would likely be the same as what it is today since there would be no embedded taxes in its cost. Today’s prices include many built-in taxes from taxes on employee wages to business-to-business sales taxes. Furthermore, estimates show that the Fair Tax would be revenue neutral to government, that is, it would generate as much revenue as our current income tax system.

It is an open question whether the Fair Tax would actually work. It is a new concept that has never been tried. There are many complexities that I have not discussed here, but you can view the FAQs on Fairtax.org or read one of the Fair Tax books.

The dishonesty of the Democratic charge is self-evident. It omits so much that it is not even enough to call it a half-truth. The charge is especially hypocritical in light of the fact that only a few short months ago, the Democrats were floating the idea of imposing a European-style Value Added Tax (VAT) to help pay for their deficit spending. The VAT would have been a multilayered consumption tax that would have been levied in addition to, not in place of, a federal income tax. In essence, the Democrats were accusing Republicans of advocating a Democratic position.

Candidate profile: Chuck Donovan for senator *updated*

Chuck Donovan is a political newcomer and a career pilot. He was born in Boston, but has lived in Georgia for 14 years. He served as a fighter pilot in the US Marine Corps from 1980 through 1986. After leaving the Marines, he was hired by a major airline based in Atlanta, where he has been an pilot for the past twenty-three years. He is currently a Captain flying international routes.

Donovan says that he is not and did not intend to become a professional politician. As a student of the Austrian school of economics (http://mises.org/etexts/austrian.asp) which advocates laissez faire, or “hands off,” economic policy on the grounds that economics and human behavior are too complex to accurately model. Donovan says that he is a believer in both economic and social freedom.

Issues:

Spending: Donovan believes that the federal debt is the greatest threat that the US faces. He believes that we must make tough, unpopular decisions to balance the budget.

Taxes: Donovan believes that the federal tax system must be fundamentally changed. He says that there should be a direct link between federal tax receipts and money spent by the federal government.

Health Care: Donovan believes that the rising cost of health care is the main problem with what is a “great health care system.” He believes that the answer is to increase competition and innovation and to stop the government from tampering with the health care markets. He believes that freedom of choice should apply in health care.

National Security: Donovan believes that we should take steps toward ending “entangling alliances.” He says that we should focus on achieving “set goals” in our current conflicts and then bring our troops home quickly and safely.

Immigration: Donovan supports a guest worker program and would use federal agents, not soldiers, to patrol the border. He also says that we should go to the source of the illegal immigrant problem by reconsidering our support for corrupt governments and attack drug cartels that prompt people to flee their homes. He opposes a national ID program.

Energy: Donovan believes that the federal government should “get out of the way of energy exploration, experimentation, and expansion.”

Cap-and-Trade: Donovan calls cap-and-trade a “tax program that will weaken industry and strengthen government.” He says that if the government is serious about the environment, it should fix the nation’s roads, which would reduce traffic and auto emissions and help to stimulate the economy. He believes that American industry can better help the world by innovating.

Guns: Donovan believes in the right to self-defense as a moral absolute. He opposes all gun control measures.

Life: Donovan states that he wants a world with no unwanted pregnancies or children. He opposes taxpayer funded abortions, but does not want to change abortion law. He wants to reduce abortions through other means.

Drug War: Donovan believes the drug war has been a failure. He would like to decriminalize drugs and focus on addiction treatment. He would incarcerate violent criminals and release nonviolent offenders.

Gay Marriage: Donovan believes that if government marriage is available for some, it should be available for all. He would prefer to remove the government from marriage entirely.

Sources:
http://www.donovanforsenate.com/
http://www.peachpundit.com/2010/03/31/podcast-with-chuck-donovan-candidate-for-us-senate/
http://www.votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=126663
Personal correspondence with the Donovan campaign.


Photo courtesy of Chuck Donovan

Candidate profile: Karen Handel for governor

Karen Handel is a native of Washington, DC and grew up in Maryland. According to her website, she left home at 17 due to a “deteriorating family situation.” She was able to finish high school and began taking college courses at night while working for Hallmark Cards.

She worked as Deputy Chief of Staff to Vice President Dan Quayle’s wife, Marilyn, during the first Bush Administration. While working for Mrs. Quayle, she was involved in the breast cancer awareness campaign that ultimately became the Susan G. Komen “Race for the Cure.” Later, she held executive positions at Ciba Vision and KPMG, an international accounting firm. She also led the Greater Fulton County Chamber of Commerce during a period when an employee had recently embezzled all but $10 from the organization. Handel led the group through troubled times and back to solvency.

In 2002, she returned to politics as Chief of Staff for Governor Sonny Perdue. In 2003, she was asked to run as a Republican in a special election for Chairman of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners. She won handily, even though Atlanta is heavily Democratic, after campaigning on property tax and ethics reform. She inherited a $100 million deficit, but was able to balance the budget without raising taxes thanks to sharp spending cuts. She also passed one of the strongest ethics laws in Georgia. Her ethics reforms eventually led to dismissal of Fulton County Sheriff Jackie Barrett on corruption charges.

In 2006, Handel was elected Secretary of State. Her duties in that office included overseeing elections and professional licensing boards. She also formed an office to combat election and consumer fraud. Handel also launched a Transparency in Government initiative which shows state spending data on the Secretary of State website, along with Handel’s political and financial disclosures.

As Secretary of State, Handel was at the center of Georgia’s voter ID controversy. In 2005, Georgia passed a law requiring voters to show photo identification at their polling place. The law was challenged as unconstitutional, but was ultimately upheld. The Supreme Court upheld a similar Indiana law.

In 2009, Handel also made news when her biographical entry on Wikipedia was altered to claim that she did not have a high school diploma, but had received a GED. She actually does have a high school diploma. One of her supporters, Erick Erickson, blogger on peachpundit.com, claimed that the alteration was traced to a state computer in a building where John Oxendine’s staffers have offices. Erickson also says that the same computer was used to make positive changes to Oxendine’s Wikipedia entry. The Oxendine campaign denies any role in the affair.

Handel made a controversial stand at the Republican debate in April 2010. At the end of the debate, she stated that she would not appear with fellow candidate Ray McBerry again. Her statement included an indirect reference to accusations that McBerry had an inappropriate relationship with female student (http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-34858-Carroll-County-Elections-2010-Examiner~y2010m6d8-Candidate-Profile-Ray-McBerry-for-Governor). She was the only candidate to take such a stand.

An astute reader pointed out that I had missed something about Karen Handel when I first posted this profile. There have been claims that Handel was a dues-paying member of the Log Cabin Republicans from 2002 through 2004. This was presumably to become more friendly to gay voters in the Atlanta area. Handel denies the claim, but politifact.com rates it as being probably true (http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2010/jun/16/karen-handel/did-handel-ever-joing-log-cabin-republicans/).


Handel resigned her position as Secretary of State in January 2010 in order to campaign for governor.

Here are her positions on some important issues:

Jobs: Handel believes that Georgia’s location, work force, and low taxes are the keys to creating jobs. She also believes that Georgia’s infrastructure and educational system are limiting factors due to population growth.

Education: Handel wants to coordinate programs with teachers, parents and community leaders to cut the drop-out rate. She wants to expand the number of charter schools and make sure that children graduate with the knowledge and skills to succeed in college or in the workplace.

Transportation: Handel favors a comprehensive, rather than regional, approach to transportation funding.

Health: Handel favors health technology and market solutions that will cut costs while preserving quality. She opposes single-payer health systems.

Life: Handel believes in the sanctity of life. She opposes embryonic stem cell research and abortion. She is the only major Republican candidate not receive an endorsement from Georgia Right to Life because she supports an exception that would allow abortion in cases of rape, incest, or when the mother’s life is threatened.

Marriage: Handel believes that marriage is between a man and a woman only.

Gun Rights: Handel is a supporter of individual second amendment rights. She opposes further bans on “assault weapons” and supports the right of law-abiding citizens to carry a concealed weapon.

Taxes: Handel believes that high tax rates, whether on citizens or businesses, inhibit job creation and economic growth. She would like to review Georgia’s entire tax code and enact comprehensive reform (to include income, property, business and corporate taxes). Handel is a supporter of the Fair Tax.

Immigration: Handel believes that we should welcome legal immigrants. She believes that it is the federal government’s job to protect the borders, but that due to federal inaction the states must “fill the void.” As Secretary of State, she enacted a program to verify immigration status of applicants for professional licenses.

If she is elected, Karen Handel would be Georgia’s first female governor.

Sources:
www.karenhandel.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Handel
http://www.reformelections.org/feature.asp?menuid={6DF33DE1-9946-4D3F-B57E-01FB1FB59FBD}
http://www.peachpundit.com/2010/04/21/georgia-voter-id-law-upheld-again/
http://www.lifenews.com/state5154.html
http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2009/07/03/karen-handel-yes-i-have-a-high-school-diploma/
http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2010/05/01/karen-handel-no-more-appearances-with-ray-mcberry/
http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2010/05/04/karen-handel-gets-a-ray-mcberry-less-debate/?cxntfid=blogs_political_insider_jim_galloway


Photo credit:
Simon Howden
http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/view_photog.php?photogid=404

Candidate profile: Eric Johnson for governor

Eric Johnson is a native of Savannah. He attended college at Tulane University in New Orleans, majoring in architecture. Professionally, he was a managing partner for the architecture and engineering firm Hussey, Gay, Bell, and DeYoung in Savannah until 2004. He worked for North Point Realty, a Savannah developer, until his resignation from the senate in 2009. He then returned to HGBD where he is currently director of business development.

Johnson got his start in politics campaigning for Mack Mattingly and served as Senator Mattingly’s Regional Director from 1981 to 1983. From 1987 to 1989, Johnson served as the Chairman of Chatham County’s Republican Party. In 1992, he was elected to Georgia’s House of Representatives where he served one term. In 1994, he was elected to the Georgia state Senate. Johnson served in the senate until 2009 when he resigned to run for governor. During his time in the senate, he also chaired the state Ethics Commission.

During his time in the senate, Johnson served in several leadership positions. He became Minority Whip, the second-in-command of the minority party, in 1997. In 1999, he assumed the role of Minority Leader. When the Republicans took control of the senate, he became President Pro Tempore of the senate in 2003, a position he held until his resignation.

In 2010, when Johnson released his tax returns amid his campaign for governor (he and Roy Barnes are the only candidates to do so), it was revealed that he had failed to report more than $280,000 that his firm had earned from state contracts. Under Georgia law, he was required to report any business conducted with the state valued at more than $20,000 since he held more than 10% interest in his architecture firm at the time (http://savannahnow.com/news/2010-05-26/eric-johnson-ethics-fix).

In total, Johnson’s firm earned more than $850,000 from nine separate state contracts between 1999 and 2004. $578,953 of these revenues was reported on hi financial disclosures. One job, valued at just over $400,000 was underreported. Johnson’s disclosures show earnings of only $111,188. This was $289,375 short of the actual amount. The contract in question was for the renovation of a library at Dalton State College and was commissioned by the Georgia Financing and Investment Commission. Johnson calls the omission “inadvertent” (http://savannahnow.com/news/2010-05-26/eric-johnson-ethics-fix).




Here are Eric Johnson’s positions on some important issues of the campaign:

Taxes: Johnson would cut taxes for property owners, teachers, retirees, veterans, military personnel, farmers and small businesses. He would eliminate the sales tax on energy used in manufacturing, and favors a consumption tax such as the Fair Tax. He favors legislation to require a 2/3 majority to raise taxes and zero based budgeting. Johnson wants government to get back to the basics and privatize unnecessary services.

Jobs: Johnson favors a complete rewrite of all regulations for every state agency to eliminate needlessly burdensome and “silly” regulations. He opposes legislation like the Democratic “card check” bill that would make it easier to unionize. He would like to consolidate and streamline Georgia’s programs for business loans, grants, and tax credits to make them easier to get. He would also streamline professional licensing and expand Georgia’s Work Ready program with a Workbook internet site (modeled on Facebook) to match workers with jobs. Johnson also favors tax credits for job creation and promoting Georgia’s tourist industry. He also wants to allow a small percentage of the Employees Retirement System to be utilized for alternative investments to help provide capital to lure businesses to our state (Georgia is currently the only state to prohibit this).

Immigration: Johnson will require state agencies to enforce current Georgia law and verify citizenship status of applicants for state benefits. He would increase the per diem paid to counties to house illegal alien prisoners and require all law enforcement agencies to establish citizenship status of prisoners. He would collect citizenship data in schools, colleges, and emergency rooms, as well as holding employers responsible when they repeatedly hire illegal aliens.

Energy: Calling Georgia “the Saudi Arabia of pine trees,” Johnson supports research to use Georgia pines to replace coal in power plants and as a source of ethanol. He also supports expansion of the nuclear Plant Vogtle to help meet Georgia’s electricity needs in coming decades. He would like to open Georgia’s coastal waters to environmentally safe drilling and oil exploration.

Transportation: Johnson would like to make transportation a priority for funding from state bond revenues. He would like to build a western bypass around Atlanta (through LaGrange) to relieve congestion. He favors public-private partnerships to provide additional money for transportation. He also supports county or regional taxes that stay in that region for transportation projects. Johnson would like to expand Georgia’s rail network for freight. He supports tolls for out-of-state vehicles and tax credits for companies that encourage telecommuting.

Life: Johnson is endorsed by Georgia Right to Life.

Gun Rights: Johnson supports the second amendment.

Ethics: Johnson strongly supports transparency in government and says that there is no ethics bill to strong for him to sign. He has a record in the senate of supporting ethics reform legislation.

Property rights: Johnson helped amend Georgia’s constitution to uphold private property rights.

Marriage: Johnson helped amend Georgia’s constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Johnson was Georgia’s first Republican senate majority leader since Reconstruction.






Sources:
http://www.johnsonforgeorgians.com/
http://www.ballotpedia.info/wiki/index.php/Eric_Johnson,_Georgia_Senator
http://savannahnow.com/news/2010-05-26/eric-johnson-ethics-fix

photo credit: Eric Johnson