They don't call him the Dean for nothing: Big business, having gotten a legislature it bought & paid for & deserved, better heed the Dean's counsel.
Bill Shipp, the Dean of Georgia Politics and Journalism, writes:
Since the recent crashing finish of the 2008 session of the General Assembly, the media have been full of various state leaders lamenting the lack of productivity and the egotistical rancor of various Gold Dome politicians. Prominent among those quoted have been the business leaders of metro Atlanta, decrying the lost opportunity to deal with pressing issues like traffic, health care and water.
Before you feel too sorry for those corporate titans weeping while staring out the windows of their 50th-floor conference rooms, remember this - those same people gave us the state government we have today. Over the last several years, the metro Atlanta business community has gone all in with the state GOP, funding them at such a massive level that Republican bank accounts have been insurance against Georgia's beleaguered Democrats ever regaining power.
In 2001 our business friends knew they had a problem with Georgia's state flag: It prominently featured the Confederate battle emblem, a 1956 design inspired by Dixiecrat resistance to the budding civil rights movement. That issue was causing worsening heartburn for business leaders afraid their companies would be subject to an economic boycott similar to what was happening in South Carolina at the time.
That fear led the corporate boardroom boys down to the Gold Dome to convince Democratic Gov. Roy Barnes and his Democrats in charge of the General Assembly to change the flag. The business crowd promised heavy support for Barnes and the legislative Democrats who walked the plank. Not surprisingly, the promises were empty. The rage among white voters was worse than expected and Barnes and the General Assembly's Democratic majority were gone.
The business boys couldn't have been happier. They got their flag change (something only the Democrats would have done), but the crowd they really wanted in charge took over. The Republicans promptly set about the business of pleasing their big business pals. They repealed Barnes' law cracking down on predatory lending and restricted the right to sue. Gov. Sonny Perdue even did the boardrooms' bidding when it came to his 2002 promise to let Georgians vote whether to put the Confederate emblem back on the state flag. He held the referendum, but he left out the chance to vote for the 1956 version featuring the relevant insignia.
The honeymoon, however, was quickly over. While Georgia companies have been dutifully pouring corporate cash into GOP coffers and starving the Democrats, the Republican masters of the Gold Dome have not returned the favor.
Take the crisis at Grady Hospital. The business community is rightly concerned that a Grady collapse would put health care in jeopardy across the metro region. Not only does Grady have an indispensable trauma center and burn unit, but its closure would also flood hospitals across Georgia with the indigent patients Grady now handles. A shuttered Grady is an unmitigated disaster.
The business community has essentially taken over Grady through its new nonprofit board, wresting control from the governments of Fulton and DeKalb counties. The new board is stacked with Republican business loyalists.
Even with a new board, the General Assembly thumbed its nose at its obligation to provide state support to keep Grady afloat.
On issue after issue, the business community came up short. Their plan to allow regional referendums on sales taxes to fund traffic relief projects was rejected. They failed to get trauma care funding to ensure an adequate statewide network of emergency rooms. Nothing that passed will seriously address the state's water supply crisis. And the GOP majority again shorted the funding formula for our schools and universities, further damaging an education system that once was Georgia's greatest asset in attracting new employers.
Sen. David Adelman, D-Decatur, was quoted a few months ago saying the problem at the Capitol is that the state is "being governed through the prism of a Republican primary." He's right. Jockeying by ambitious pols to win Republican primary votes is the main event under the Gold Dome. That makes for ugly politics and worse policy.
Here's hoping that enough people are aware of this unworkable mess to start supporting two-party government again.
Since the recent crashing finish of the 2008 session of the General Assembly, the media have been full of various state leaders lamenting the lack of productivity and the egotistical rancor of various Gold Dome politicians. Prominent among those quoted have been the business leaders of metro Atlanta, decrying the lost opportunity to deal with pressing issues like traffic, health care and water.
Before you feel too sorry for those corporate titans weeping while staring out the windows of their 50th-floor conference rooms, remember this - those same people gave us the state government we have today. Over the last several years, the metro Atlanta business community has gone all in with the state GOP, funding them at such a massive level that Republican bank accounts have been insurance against Georgia's beleaguered Democrats ever regaining power.
In 2001 our business friends knew they had a problem with Georgia's state flag: It prominently featured the Confederate battle emblem, a 1956 design inspired by Dixiecrat resistance to the budding civil rights movement. That issue was causing worsening heartburn for business leaders afraid their companies would be subject to an economic boycott similar to what was happening in South Carolina at the time.
That fear led the corporate boardroom boys down to the Gold Dome to convince Democratic Gov. Roy Barnes and his Democrats in charge of the General Assembly to change the flag. The business crowd promised heavy support for Barnes and the legislative Democrats who walked the plank. Not surprisingly, the promises were empty. The rage among white voters was worse than expected and Barnes and the General Assembly's Democratic majority were gone.
The business boys couldn't have been happier. They got their flag change (something only the Democrats would have done), but the crowd they really wanted in charge took over. The Republicans promptly set about the business of pleasing their big business pals. They repealed Barnes' law cracking down on predatory lending and restricted the right to sue. Gov. Sonny Perdue even did the boardrooms' bidding when it came to his 2002 promise to let Georgians vote whether to put the Confederate emblem back on the state flag. He held the referendum, but he left out the chance to vote for the 1956 version featuring the relevant insignia.
The honeymoon, however, was quickly over. While Georgia companies have been dutifully pouring corporate cash into GOP coffers and starving the Democrats, the Republican masters of the Gold Dome have not returned the favor.
Take the crisis at Grady Hospital. The business community is rightly concerned that a Grady collapse would put health care in jeopardy across the metro region. Not only does Grady have an indispensable trauma center and burn unit, but its closure would also flood hospitals across Georgia with the indigent patients Grady now handles. A shuttered Grady is an unmitigated disaster.
The business community has essentially taken over Grady through its new nonprofit board, wresting control from the governments of Fulton and DeKalb counties. The new board is stacked with Republican business loyalists.
Even with a new board, the General Assembly thumbed its nose at its obligation to provide state support to keep Grady afloat.
On issue after issue, the business community came up short. Their plan to allow regional referendums on sales taxes to fund traffic relief projects was rejected. They failed to get trauma care funding to ensure an adequate statewide network of emergency rooms. Nothing that passed will seriously address the state's water supply crisis. And the GOP majority again shorted the funding formula for our schools and universities, further damaging an education system that once was Georgia's greatest asset in attracting new employers.
Sen. David Adelman, D-Decatur, was quoted a few months ago saying the problem at the Capitol is that the state is "being governed through the prism of a Republican primary." He's right. Jockeying by ambitious pols to win Republican primary votes is the main event under the Gold Dome. That makes for ugly politics and worse policy.
Here's hoping that enough people are aware of this unworkable mess to start supporting two-party government again.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 8:25 AM
2 Comments:
Billie 'Phulluvv' Shipp was as big a piler-on as any lefty democrat when it came to helping to trash and remove the 1956 flag. Even here he spews the lies about the flag being created for
'segregation' reasons. He just refuses to understand the truth.
As for business and repoobs - it was the 1991 resolution by the the hate group NAACP that called the Confederate Flag an 'Odious blight on the universe' and called for it's removal from everywhere that started the ball rolling.
The infamous secret meeting in the Gov's palace with barnes, smyre, and brooks also included the ceo of ga power and atlanta chamberpot of commerce, as well as rep austin scott.
The final version of HB 360 actually hurt business by adding a tax on tabacco products for removing the 56 flag as a choice.
Ol' Phulluvv Shipp is trying to rewrite history. He pines for the barnes establishment again. I personally wouldn't take a plug nickle for the 98% of morons under the gold dome - from either party.
It's time for another secession and to start all over again.
Facts omitted from your commentary on Georgia's 1956 flag
From: stevescroggins2003@yahoo.com
To: rhyatt@ledger-enquirer.com
CC: soundoff@ledger-enquirer.com
Mr. Hyatt,
This letter is in response to your "Battle over a Symbol" commentary published May 2nd.
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/324/story/25793.html
While some of your commentary had merit----the Barnes flag was unquestionably UGLY--- I wanted to point out some glaring omissions and fallacies in your narrative thrust to "prove" that the 1956 flag change was motivated by "racial malice" or defiance.
For many years now, a number of writers looked into the atmosphere of the time, the controversy surrounding desegregation and federal court orders (Brown v. Board of Education - 1954), and then leaped to the conclusion that the 1956 flag change was sending a signal to Washington, D.C., and all of Georgia's citizens. It's just too much of a coincidence...right?
Think about it. In the 1950s, almost all of Georgia's politicians were open and avowed segregationists. If they wanted to be elected, they said they supported segregation. That's how it was. And they made NO SECRET of it....there was no need for coded messages, no need for cover stories.
IF....again, IF there were some who wanted to make the 1956 flag change a "message" about segregation, don't you think they would have shouted it at the first reporter to come along? Don't you think there would be dozens of quotes and public statements pronouncing that "this flag change sends a message" yada yada yada ???
I challenge you, sir, to find one...just ONE. Go ahead, look. I can tell you that the staff of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has already looked in the early 1970s and again in the early 1990s when Miller raised the question again. They didn't find any linkage between the flag change and racial malice or desire to maintain segregation.
Dang! That's inconvenient, isn't it? But it doesn't stop writers like you and many dozens of others from repeating the Big Lie as if it were the Gospel. Now, let's add some historical CONTEXT, shall we?
The change to the 1956 flag was first proposed by Judge John Sammons Bell. As a boy, he attended Confederate Veterans reunions with his grandfather. He advocated the 1956 change to honor Georgia's Confederate veterans, because the St. Andrews Cross was more recognizable as a Confederate symbol. Bell emphatically denied any motivation other than a desire to honor and memorialize veterans. Judge Bell is quoted as saying, "Anybody who says anything to the contrary is wrong or perpetuating a willful lie."
You, sir, are perpetuating a willful lie with your article published May 2nd.
Was Judge Bell a segregationist? Yes, but you know what? So were the overwhelming majority of the people in Georgia; no, make that America, in 1956. The vaunted ladies of the UDC who opposed the flag change? Segregationist. The 32 assemblymen who voted against changing to the 1956 flag? All segregationists of one type or another. The editorialist of The Macon Telegraph who advised against the 1956 flag change in their 6-Feb-1956 issue? Also, segregationist.
There were varying degrees of segregationist thought from the supremacist White Citizens Council to the more mainstream "separate but equal" and other variations of it. Describing this range of views is really another story.
The point is that the people pushing both sides of the flag issue in 1956 all favored maintaining segregation in one form or another. Segregation was the status quo and very few Americans or Georgians favored ending it in the mid-fifties. They would NOT have used "code words" such as "culture" and "heritage" as so many writers suggest because there was no need for such "codes." If you were an elected official and you wanted to get more votes you would have shouted the fact that you supported segregation (and many did), and if you wanted a special bill to pass with broad public support you would have somehow linked it with support for segregation!
In no instance did any supporter of the Georgia Flag change of 1956 ever associate that change with segregation or link it with defiance to the federal government (another popular election point). Every newspaper article from 1955-1957 from Georgia newspapers kept at the federal archives in Athens, Georgia, has been searched and none ever associate the 1956 State Flag with these issues. Go ahead, look yourself.
Gov. S. Marvin Griffin (1955-1959)----who was a champion of segregation and would support it in any way possible--- never even lifted a finger to help assure that the flag change would be enacted. If the flag was changed for segregation reasons he would have pushed the change with all his might just to show defiance to Washington.
The very fact that no politician of any ilk ever associated the 1956 flag change one way or another to one of the most visible political/social issues of the day that had broad voter support (namely segregation) lends credence to the fact that the State Flag was changed for memorial purposes only.
One did not carry on a "whisper campaign" for segregation in 1956! To argue otherwise is illogical.
DENMARK GROOVER
A whole lot of hay was made over Denmark Groover's AMBIGUOUS public statements in 2001, when he was called from his deathbed to repay some old political debts and make a statement regarding Gov. Barnes' proposed flag change. As noted, the AJC had been looking for this "smoking gun" for decades...and now they had it. Ha!
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) carried a story on Jan.25, 2001 which quoted Groover at length. Groover said that in 1956, the new flag was passed by the Senate 43-1. By the time the bill reached the floor of the House, opposition had developed, primarily from the United Daughters of the Confederacy. The UDC preferred to retain the pre-1956 flag because of its resemblance to the 1st National flag of the Confederacy. As traditionalists, the UDC didn't want the battle flag involved in any official modern government or to be perceived in any way as a symbol in any modern politics.
Groover is then quoted as saying about the 1956 flag change, “I presented the matter to the House, and because of the opposition, I probably used some rhetoric indicating that the new flag was to symbolize our defiance of the action of the federal judiciary on matters of race.”
Emphasis on the word “probably” is mine. Probably.
That's it? That's all you have? A Probably?
These 2001 remarks above pale in comparison to the volume of remarks Groover made over his long career from 1956 to 1994. Groover was quoted extensively thoughout his career on this flag issue. Numerous quotes from the AJC and The Macon Telegraph from 1956, 1972, 1987 and 1993 were unequivocal.
On March 9, 1993, Groover took to the floor of the Georgia House to challenge then Gov. Miller’s proposal to change the 1956 flag. He admitted the obvious that segregation was a heated topic in 1956 and added,
“But those who now say that the legislature was obsessed with the matter of segregation to the exclusion of all other matters know not of what they speak…”
[Groover's March 9, 1993 remarks to the GA House are attached as Exhibiit A to his 1994 deposition quoted below.] Groover listed numerous appropriations made to fund historical markers and the Stone Mountain memorial in preparation for the tourism expected to accompany the 1961 Centennial Observances for the War Between the States.
Groover went on to say,
“To now conclude that the flag was adopted primarily as a symbol of segregation is justified only in the minds of those who, for their own purposes, would teach one segment of our population to hate another because of the faults of their ancestors. How was the flag bill passed? And why? It was designed by John Sammons Bell who was then the Chairman of the state Democratic Party and who now says that the issue of segregation was not in his mind...."
Groover pointed out that some of the most outspoken segregationists in the state at that time voted against the 1956 flag change.
Here’s what Groover said under oath in his deposition in a 1994 federal court case (James Andrew Coleman vs. The State of Georgia and Governor Zell Miller) :
“I have no personal knowledge which would dispute the purely historical motives which were expressed then and since by the sponsors and others involved with the legislation when it was introduced in the Senate. While I cannot say that the Supreme Court's rulings regarding desegregation played absolutely no role in my decision to support the bill in the House, I can say that segregationist sentiment was not the overriding or even a significant factor in my vote concerning the new flag, or, based on personal observation and knowledge, in its ultimate adoption by the House....”
Shouldn’t we believe Groover's decades of public comments that are consistent with his sworn testimony? Shouldn’t we believe Judge Bell, Governor Vandiver and many others who have emphatically stated their motives for the 1956 flag change were honorable? Of course we should.
Want more?
More context is provided by the record of the General Assembly.
Here's a list of appropriations , bills and resolutions on historical markers and related activities to prepare for the centennial observance of the War Between the States.
[NOTE: All references found in the Georgia House Journal.]
1952 -- HR 250-9286 (pp 1250,1331,1689,1815,1828) To Propose and urge the creation of a Condederate Memorial Park at Stone Mountain. Adopted 11Feb.1952
1953 -- HB 160 (pp 12,131,134,171,374,381) To provide pensions for widows of Confederate Veterans Adopted 4 FEB. 1953
1953 -- SR 65 (pp 1251,1260,1481,1491,1689) The Confederate Veterans' Home property was given to the Georgia military department Adopted 1Dec.1953
1955 -- HR 35 (pp114,134,759) A resolution urging the Governor to purchase Stone Mountain because, "the incomplete and unsightly condition of the Stone Mountain Memorial has long weighed upon the pride and civic concience of all Georgians." and the acquisition of Stone Mountain by the State would insure, "a lasting Memorial." Adopted 18Jan.1955
1955 -- HR 48 (pp155,200) Recommended the placing of a bust of General "Stonewall" Jackson in the Hall of Fame in New York City. Project was begun by the UDC and had the, "whole hearted endorsement," by the State. Adopted 20Jan.1955
1955 -- HR 145 (pp513,680,690,759) A resolution designating December 9th of each year as "Uncle Remus Day" Adopted 15Feb.1955
1955 -- HR 195 (p800) A resolution honouring 'Miss Anne Collins as, "Miss Deep South of 1954" Adopted 16Feb. 1955
1955 -- HB 14 (pp32,37,51,81,82) A bill to establish the Georgia State War Veterans' Home Adopted 7June1955
1955 -- HR 22 (p90) "A resolution naming the new bridge across the Wilmington river "Memorial Bridge" in honour of deceased veterans." Adopted 17June1955
1956 -- SR 30 (pp 449,468,1135,1140,1378) a resolution creating the "All-south Centennial Committee of Georgia" Adopted 17Feb.1956
1956 -- SR 48 (pp1068,1174) A resolution to preserve the Confederate Flags at the Capitol. Adopted 15Feb1956
1956 -- HB 188 (pp 236,306,309,431) A bill to abolish the State Division of Confederate Pensions and Records. It was amended to put all records with reference to, "the glorious men of the Confederacy," under control of the Department of Archival History. Adopted 26Jan.1956
1956 -- HB 241 (pp 297,581,587) A bill to dispose of the Confederate Soldiers' Home and to provide for the care of widows now living there. Adopted 2Feb.1956
1956 -- SB 98 (pp 598,602,710,719,856) This is the bill that created the wonderful 1956 State Flag. Adopted9Feb.1956
1957 -- HR 217 (p1027) A resolution to commend the Confederate Veterans' Sons (SCV) for their efforts to preserve our glorious heritage. Adopted 20Feb.1957
1957 -- HB 610 (pp 876,1036) A bill to increase the amount of pension given to widows of Confederate Veterans Adopted 19Feb.1957
1957 -- HR 234 (pp1100,1179) A resolution to commend the formation of the Stone Mountain Confederate Memorial Association and encourage them (it) to finish the monument. Adopted 22Feb.1957
Numerous State funded Historical Markers were placed around Georgia in the following years:
1953-40, 1954-249, 1955-380, 1956-125, 1957-341, 1958-285, 1959-238, 1960-42, 1961-14, 1962-33, 1963-22, 1964-18, 1965-7 . That's a total of 1,794 markers placed between 1953 and 1965. Of those, 1,373 were placed between 1953 and 1959. You might reasonably conclude that history and memorials were "on our minds" during those years.
The upcoming centennial of the war was on the minds of many Americans. In 1957, the U.S. Congress issued a joint resolution creating the Civil War Centennial Commission to "coordinate the nationwide observances." Georgia officials expected a lot of war-related tourism during the observances, so the vast majority of the above historical markers are related to the War for Southern Independence. These markers, the Stone Mountain memorial and the 1956 flag were all efforts to memorialize Georgia's veterans, Georgia's people and to present southern pride to all visitors.
Do you see a picture emerging here? The centennial was a "big deal" across the country and Georgia was preparing for it in many ways. The 1956 state flag was just one of them. Georgians still had a lot of pride in and reverence for their Confederate veterans and the Cause for which they fought.
Now, let's go back to the "Date Argument" for a moment.
In 1956, an effort was also made to change the State tree from the live oak to the pine tree (7Sept.56). The change failed to pass. Does anyone suspect that this attempted change was motivated by racial malice and/or defiance of the federal government? Why not? It happened in the same year as the state flag change!
Following the same twisted logic of the Date Argument, it follows that the state tree change was OBVIOUSLY motivated by racial malice and defiance. Why are the folks who claim to be offended by the 1956 Georgia flag not also claiming to be offended by pine trees? Don't you see the obvious link???
Your numerous quotes of Gov. Miller are questionable since Miller obviously needs some history lessons himself. His statement that abolition depended on the Confederacy's defeat is ridiculous. Your repetition of it makes you an accomplice in ignorance.
By the 1850s, chattel slavery was doomed in western Christian civilization ---thank goodness!--- and WAR was NOT necessary to end it. All the countries of Europe and their colonies ended slavery WITHOUT a war. Brazil, a colony of Portugal, ended it finally in 1888. Of course, we can only speculate on when, I believe that slavery would have been gradually abolished (with compensation but without war) before 1900, probably before 1890, if the Confederate states had been left unmolested. Think about it. The ONLY country in the whole world ----and we are talking about a world-wide practice--- the only to require a war to end slavery was the U.S.A. ??
By the way, we're not yet going to war over the slavery that exists today in African countries, are we? Muslim nations have never been squeamish about slavery like those "evil whites of the Southern United States." 35 million tax-slaves in the U.S. have more than they can pay for now with all our military adventures in the middle east. Our great-grandchildren will be paying for debts we're making now. An honest look at our situation makes it easy to say, "the South was Right." The Party of Lincoln (and the corporations that own it) has us neck deep in a war that may last a generation or more. The insultingly titled Patriot Act stands as a monument to illustrate liberties forfeited for the illusion of security.
In an 1866 letter to Lord Acton, General Robert E. Lee wrote these prophetic words:
"The consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it."
The War for Southern Independence was NOT about slavery. Lincoln, in his 1861 inaugural address, stated emphatically that he had no intention nor any inclination nor any authority to end slavery. He did state---in typical cryptic style--- that he would do ANYTHING (including invasion, looting, pillaging, and total war) to preserve federal revenues. The Southern states were paying 75%-80% of all tax revenues via import and export tariffs. There was no income tax until 1913. The Southern states were tax serfs serving their Northern brethren and they decided to end that, just as the original colonies seceded from the British Empire in 1776--1783. Just like Britain, Lincoln wouldn't let the cash-cow walk away without a fight. In the process, states rights and the federal Republic defined in the Constitution were crushed and ALL Americans are the losers on that score.
Lincoln's 1861 address: http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres31.html
As late as August 1862, Lincoln in his letters to abolitionist editorialist Horace Greeley was denying that ending slavery was the purpose of the war. This is a year and half into the war. Now, "Honest Abe's" tendency to lie and deceive are well-documented, so I suppose you could argue that he was just pandering to racists when he repeatedly said that his illegal invasion and occupation of the Southern states was not about slavery.
I could go on rebutting your words ( and Miller's), but I'm sure I have exhausted your attention span for this subject and I recognize that most folks need their Truth in little sips. I'll now turn off the fire hose.
Respectfully,
Steve Scroggins
Macon, GA
Post a Comment
<< Home