Gov. Perdue needs strategic reserve for his brain

(I know this isn't exactly local .... but the local effects warrant a posting here, I hope)

Traveling through Europe, Governor Perdue took time to offer a recommendation to help Georgia out of its gasoline shortage. He asked President Bush to release oil from the strategic reserve.

Now, I don't know what the Governor drives, but my car doesn't run very well on crude oil. We have a shortage of gasoline in Georgia that is caused by our primary source, refineries in the Gulf (primarily Houston) area, not shipping adequate quantities to us. The supply is reduced because refineries were shut down due to Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, and are slow to restart due to damage and lack of electricity. The system handled the loss of several Louisiana refineries after Gustav, but these were not back to full production when Ike took more than a dozen more refineries off line.

Admittedly, some refineries have asked for, and received shipments from the Stategic Reserve, in the normal process of replacing shipments they were having trouble receiving. All in all though, there is no shortage of crude coming to the US. Crude prices are down almost $20 since Ike hit. Its gasoline we need, and for that, we need the refineries back on line.

We also need better planning and vision from our government. Did nobody notice that so much of our gasoline was single-sourced? There has been no planning (until the past few weeks) for alternative supply chains to feed this state of ours. Nationally, too, the lack of vision to increase refining capacity (or the collusion) with BIG OIL to keep capacity low to keep prices up, contributes to the problem.

But our governor eases our minds: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that Perdue said the gas panic was, in part, “self-induced” and that there was “ample fuel.” That's our governor, right on top of things.

Decision Making is a Process - Part 2

I posted on July 20th about that day's editorial in the ABH about turning off street lights in Athens.

On that day, the paper declined to publish my letter to the editor mirroring this blog posting. Today, they published an updated letter which was motivated by an editorial published on August 15.

The letter was edited, but I am grateful to the ABH for publishing it nonetheless. The text of the original submission follows:

"On Sunday, July 20, you called the ACC Commission’s decision to revisit their decision to turn off street lights “irresponsible.” That editorial was unfair and counterproductive to good government. In it you suggested basically that either the Commissioners a) forestall all decision making until they have weighed every variable and contemplated every impact each decision might have, and b) once coming to a decision, defend it and maintain it despite any new information that may come to their attention.

I think we should all remember and consider that budget cutting is a difficult task in a county that has added more than 12,000 people in the past seven years, and continues to do so. I am certain the commission was aware that turning off street lights would have an impact, just as they were aware that cutting the street lights avoided other negative impacts. Choosing the lights might have meant not cutting several jobs, for instance, or perhaps not cutting police or fire coverage in some neighborhoods. In the final analysis, it may not be the best place to cut, and our government may have to look elsewhere.

Today you write that considering this issue until the September 2, 2008 voting meeting “might be workable.”

I am pleased to have a government that is willing to go back to the difficult budgeting process when presented with good reasons for reconsideration. Whether they end up affirming their decision, or changing it, the decision making process will be strengthened for it."

Choice?

The Athens Banner Herald reported On August 15 that Tom Leach will be placing his name on the ballot in Oconee County to challenge Chairman Melvin Davis. His issue? According to the ABH, "if elected, Leach would work to repeal the alcohol pouring ordinance, he said. 'I am a Christian man, I just want to give the voters a choice.'"

What I cannot get past is the suggestion that this candidate "just wants to give voters a choice," when his plan is to take the choice away from voters, and all other citizens, based upon personal beliefs of some voters and citizens regarding the service of alcohol. One would believe from his statement that the current ordinance mandates all citizens to go to restaurants that serve, and to consume an alcoholic beverage. It does not. It provides choice.

So ... what is it that Mr. Leach wishes to do?

Oconee Politics blogs about this as well.

Personal Gratification at the Enterprise

I was more than a little put off by the comment, almost an aside, but very telling in July 17th's Oconee Enterprise editorial, “Voters make good decisions at polls.” The paper said, “Personally we are gratified that all those restaurants and, let’s face it, bars sitting on go for hooch are in for four dry years.”

The meaning of that statement is, of course, that the paper's editors are somehow gratified that the citizens of Oconee County will be denied an expanded selection of dining opportunities for another four years because the will of the few (17% of the county voted in the Republican primary), but well organized, has been expressed at the polls. Rather than each person exercising his and her prerogative to dine where he/she pleases, and refuse to do so at places that serve things to which they object, there is somehow a gratification at preventing others from exercising that prerogative in their home county.

I grant that the anti-alcohol forces are very well organized, and clearly turn-out well when called upon. Their votes are further amplified by the partisan nature of our local elections, and by the countywide election of our commission. I also know that this time around they found common means with those who had other problems with the current commission, though to completely different ends. But why that is all "personally gratifying" to the editorial board, I cannot divine.

Ethan's Summer

OK ... so its not political. But, aw, shucks...

Decision Making is a Process

The Athens Banner-Herald editorialized today (Sunday, July 20) that the Athens-Clarke County Commission was "irresponsible" for their decision to reconsider their earlier budgeting decision to turn of some 1100 streetlights in the county.

I believe their editorial misses the mark, is unfair, but worst of all is counterproductive to good government. It would seem they suggest that either the Commissioners a) forestall all decision making until they have weighed every variable and contemplated every impact each decision might have, and b) once coming to a decision, defend it and maintain it despite any new information that may come to their attention.

Budget cutting is a difficult task in a county that has added more than 12,000 people in the past seven years, and continues to do so. Cuts have real impacts on this community. I am certain the commission was aware that turning off street lights would have an impact, just as they were aware that cutting the street lights avoided other negative impacts. Choosing the lights might have meant not cutting several jobs, for instance, or perhaps not cutting police or fire coverage in some neighborhoods. In the final analysis, it may not be the best place to cut, and our government may have to look elsewhere.

I am pleased, however, to have a government that is willing to go back to the difficult budgeting process and have another look when presented with good reasons for reconsideration. Whether they end up affirming their decision, or changing it, the decision making process will be strengthened for it.

... and wash their hair with carcinogens.

Am I being nuts about this?  

From the ACC Website, suggestions:

• Collect water drips from air conditioning units or collection buckets on dehumidifiers for use on plants or trees.
• Instead of washing your face, use cleansing facial wipes. The wipes don’t require water and effectively clean your face, even removing makeup.
• Although not as effective as soap & water, antibacterial hand wipes or alcohol-based hand sanitizers containing at least 60% alcohol can give a quick hand cleaning.
• Use environmentally-friendly disposable/compostable plates instead of washable plates during meals. This cuts down on dishwasher runs and save water.
• When drinking beverages other than water, don’t use a cup - drink directly from single-use recyclable bottles or cans. This eliminates the need to wash dirty cups and the use of ice
• Don’t wash your hair every time you shower if it doesn’t need it. You can use talcum powder to dry-wash your hair and then brush it out. 

And this statement:

Athens-Clarke County Mayor Heidi Davison has signed an order modifying local outdoor water use restrictions to allow one day a week outdoor watering in addition to the existing restrictions that have been in effect since April 2, 2008.

Something just doesn't add up.

The government is encouraging us to wash our hair with a known carcinogen, to preserve water (a laudable goal) so that we can spray it on our lawns (less laudable.)  I really feel like I am missing something here.

Let them drink sand

Come on!  We are 2.77 inches behind on rainfall for the month of June (so far), and 9.18 inches below normal for the year (so far).  This, on top of a record drought last year that continues on and on.  So now the ABH reports that restrictions have been loosened again!  I admit, I am no expert on water resource management, but this just doesn't feel like the time to allow more of it to be spilled on lawns!  

I have a lawn.  Its not looking very nice (again) this year.  But I like to have healthy drinking water.  I like to know there is water in the hydrants.  I like very much to preserve this very scarce resource, and this just seems irresponsible.

Bigger jails only mean more prisoners

Here we go again. More clamoring for a new/bigger jail.

At the same time, our local government is struggling with how to reduce the counties budget in these leaner days. Looking at the budget, you might notice the increase to the jail for boarding from $740,000 to $1.2MM? That's half-a-million dollars!

You can bet this also has a strong effect on the fuel bill as these inmates are shuttled back and forth from the boarding facilities to Clarke County for court appearances, etc.

The time is over where the prosecutors and courts can respond to the public's clamor for "safety" by incarcerating so many people who, under our constitution, are presumed innocent.

As an example, on May 22 (the day of the news report), our jail was responsible for 82 inmates with bonds less than $10,000 (meaning they can put up less than $1,000 to get bonded out.) 78 inmates at $5,000 or less. 46 inmates at $3,000 or less, and 18 at $1,000 or less.

On that date we had 113 inmates housed out to other facilities. This includes inmates with $1000 bond, in jail for more than 2 months on a misdemeanor obstruction charge, and others charged with public indecency, suspended license, and drug possession.

I take this information from the jail's data.

I am not sure what purpose shelling out $1,000 in bond money serves to separate the need to pay for incarceration and lodging out of 82 inmates versus the ability to have them at liberty pending trial. Anyone with the means would surely post the bond. Those without, stay in jail, on our dime. It seems a terrible way to allocate liberty. Are we now presumed innocent only as long as we can afford a bond?

When we are looking at "tough choices," we should not treat as a given that the increased jail expenses are necessary, or even acceptable. The sheriff has no control over the numbers, and must ask for the money to house the inmates put in his charge. For this we must look to the prosecutors and the courts for methods to better allocate the dollars being wasted.

Moreover we must support these decision by not witch-hunting the courts and prosecutors when a malfeasor on bond commits a crime. This will happen, I know.

We cannot lock up people presumed innocent under our system of law because that is the only way we can ensure that they do not violate future laws. Incarceration of the innocent as a means of crime prevention is a step down a very dangerous path to the kind of government we claim not to be.

Only when the public, and the press, remember that, and don't immediately seek to castigate those that protect our liberties for their failure to jail the innocent, will the courts and the prosecutors not be driven to err on the side of bond, which means bigger jails, bigger budgets, more joblessness, homelessness, etc.

We don't need a bigger jail. That's just spending money to placate irrational fears of the populace, rather than spending the money where it can help.

Food for thought.

Cramming it down our throats

On Tuesday, April 8, 2008, the Board of Commissioners voted, with a tiebreaker from the chairman, to allow the citizens of Oconee County, and those who would to choose to come visit, to choose to have a glass of wine or beer with our supper. According to the Oconee Enterprise Commissioners Don Norris and Jim Luke voted for the ordinance allowing the sale of wine and beer, while Commissioners Margaret Hale and Chuck Horton voted against it.

People are outraged. Some people anyway. Really, maybe not so many. But they are outraged. "The majority has spoken when they voted against liquor by the drink. The Commission has defied the people," they say. "The commission is forcing this ordinance down our throats."

Now, that's the difference between our sort of government and mob rule. Sometimes, the will of the majority is not allowed to remove choice from the hands of the citizenry. In no way is anyone being forced to have beer or wine with dinner, or even to go to a restaurant that will serve your fellow diners such demon potions. No, Ryan's and Cracker Barrel will likely remain there for all to enjoy.

Instead, the rest of us, who do not wish to foist our ideals on everyone else, may have the choice of some finer establishments. Other individuals and potential businesses who might call Oconee home would like that choice too. We must all learn to live among these differing ideals, and different choices.

So, for the first time in more than a century, those that wish not to have alcohol with their dinner can no longer force that decision down the collective throats of the citizenry, whether they agree or not. We all get to choose.

But please, no white wine with your steak. OK?