HB 218. - It's time for the Cracker Squire to move onto other topics of more general interest.

As noted in a 2-24-05 post, HB 218 was tabled on Thursday, a parliamentary move that sets the measure aside for later consideration. Had it come to a vote, it would have been defeated.

Jim Galloway has a story on the Thursday action concerning the bill in a 2-25-05 article in the ajc, and there is also an informative story on the status and maneuvering on the bill in a story by Sonji Jacobs in Saturday's ajc.

Short of some major development with regard to HB 218, I am going to quit doing so many posts about it.

I recognize that it is something near and dear to my heart because so much of my adult life has been involved -- and continues to be involved -- in industry recruitment. And I didn't limit the following sentence to my legal career.

I became actively involved in recruiting industry in Douglas and Coffee County several years before I became the attorney for the Douglas-Coffee County Economic Development Authority, and I assist other authorities and their counsel in South Georgia in doing the same without compensation.

But I also recognize that this topic is not something that folks talk about at the water cooler and coffee pot at work each morning. And it is for this reason that I am going to cease future posts until and if a major development occurs.

But it hopefully what will not be a concluding post, I must say that I appreciate Jim Galloway of the ajc helping define the issue as many of us involved in industry recruitment perceive that it has come down to. In his 2-25-05 article linked above he notes:

"The measure is seen by those involved in recruiting industry for their state and communities as 'a contest between jobs and the right to monitor growth in Georgia communities . . . .'"

If a community does not want jobs, anything that facilitates job creation and levels the playing field with other states ipso facto must be bad.