I fully understand the need to plug the hole in the state’s
Medicaid funding and the desire to leverage federal matching funds (of course,
the latter puts states in the pathetic position of raising their own taxes so
as to get back some of the money those states have sent to Washington, but that
is another argument). Besides, readers
should remember that one of the central tenets of Obamacare is to slough more
Medicaid spending off onto the states.
Even so, as discussed in the column, my gripe is with the manner in
which the General Assembly is abdicating its responsibilities.
In order to secure such quick passage of SB 24, the Senate
suspended one of its own Rules (3.129(a)) so that it could be read and referred
to committee on the first day of the session.
This was done by voice vote as opposed to a roll call. Also, the bill was referred to the Regulated
Industries and Utilities Committee, somewhat curiously in that the web site of
the Committee notes that it has jurisdiction over “gas, telecommunications,
electric and other related industrial areas,” even before a chairman had been
named to the Committee or any of its meetings had been scheduled.
Be that as it may, SB 24 went into the Senate hopper, had a
first reading, and was referred to committee on 14 January. The bill had its second reading and was
favorably reported by the Regulated Industries and Utilities committee on 16
January (by an 11-3 vote, the Committee approved a substitute that shortened
the length of the scheme from 5 years to 4 and added a stipulation that if the
trust fund created by the bill was abolished any fees left in it could not be
spent without the General Assembly’s approval).
I could not find a roll call vote for the Committee’s action; note that Frank
Ginn serves as vice-chairman of the Committee.
The bill had its third reading and was adopted by the full Senate on 17
January (by a 46-9 vote with 1 vacancy), both Bill Cowsert and Frank Ginn voted
in favor of the amended bill.
Over in the House, SB 24 had its first reading on 28
January, its second reading on 29 January, and was favorably reported by the
Governmental Affairs Committee on 30 January (I could not find the margin by
which the measure passed, much less a roll call vote). SB 24 had its third reading and passed the
full House on 01 February (by a 147-18 vote with 5 not voting and 10 excused);
Spencer Fry and Chuck Williams voted in favor of the bill while, much to her
credit, Regina Quick dissented.
With respect to my left-leaning friends, the Democrats are
hardly blameless; they governed the Peach State via the smoke-and-mirrors
stratagem for 130 years. I focused on the GOP because: 1) they are currently in
the majority in both chambers of the General Assembly; and 2) I am one myself
and, quite frankly, I expect better from them.
Besides which, the Democrats seem perfectly content to go
along with this taxation via proxy thing. If you don't believe it, pull up the
roll call votes on both T-SPLOST and the "bed tax" for yourselves;
while it appears that Democrats voted for the measures by smaller percentages
than did the Republicans, the majority of former still voted in favor of both.
For the text and legislative history of the Transportation
Investment Act of 2010, see:
For the text and legislative history of SB 24, see:
Sphere: Related Content
