Andre Walker of Georgia Politics Unfiltered has been digging into the Congressional Record of one Nathan Deal to investigate claims from the Barnes camp that “Nathan Deal voted to increase his Congressional pay six times.” Indeed, this claim is on the roy2010.com website, as you can see from the screen capture at the bottom of this post.
His results:
Prior to Deal’s election, Congress passed the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, which included a provision that automatically raised the salaries of Representatives and Senators unless they specifically vote to reject the pay increase. President George H.W. Bush signed the bill into law November 30, 1989.
A report from the Congressional Research Service said that between 1990 and 2009, Congress voted to reject its automatic pay raise six times [Brudnick, Ida A. (2009-1-9). Salaries of Members of Congress: Congressional Votes, 1990-2009. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved on 2010-10-22.]. Nathan Deal was among those lawmakers voting against a congressional salary increase between 1993 and 1998 [H.R. 920 (1993), Vote #54; H.R. 4539 (1994), Vote #247; H.R. 2020 (1995), Vote #534; H.R. 3610 (1996), Vote #455; H.R. 2378 (1997), Vote #474; H.R. 4104 (1998), Vote #293 & #494; H.R. 4328 (1998), Vote #538].
From 1999 until 2007, Congress did not vote on language rejecting their automatic raise. Under the provisions of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, since Congress did not reject their pay increase, they received it automatically.
In 2007, Congress voted to delay its pay increase until February of that year. Nathan Deal voted against that legislation [H.J.Res. 102 (2006), Vote #540].
However, Deal introduced the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2007 (H.R. 500), which included language that would cut the pay of members of Congress every year the federal government runs a budget deficit. Deal’s Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2007 languished in committee.
Links to much of the above are on Andre’s site.
What it boils down to is that Nathan Deal actually voted AGAINST a Congressional pay increase SEVEN times – and simply failed to vote against the automatic increase TEN times. But he never actively voted FOR a pay increase.
So Roy Barnes was, in fact, caught LYING -even though Nathan’s Congressional pay increased more times than Barnes said it did, it wasn’t because Deal voted on it, either way.
Wendesday, Atlanta’s 11 Alive reported that Roy Barnes was using some edited footage in a campaign commercial. The video was from the Temple Debate, where Roy, Nathan Deal, and John Monds had a very spirited debate. After the debate, Nathan Deal made a hasty exit, with a handful of reporters – and a Democratic Party videographer – hot on his heels.
The situation alone was bad enough, but someone in the Barnes campaign decided it would be a smart idea to embellish the video adding extra voices with unrelated questions. All of the actual questions shouted at Deal seemed to revolve around one of his latest controversies – that he used his Congressional office to lobby the Attorney General for a favorable ruling related to his business at Gainesville Salvage and Disposal. While this is the same company as the long-known story of his using his good buddy Lt Governor Casey Cagle to strong arm Revenue Commissioner Bart Graham into trying to keep his no-bid State contract, the lobbying of the Attorney General was for a separate business venture – a landfill adjacent to the GSD property.
The Barnes camp, in their edit, added a narrator – no problem there – and at least one to two new voices asking unrelated questions such as “What are you hiding?” – more of a problem there. The added voices make it seem much more frenzied than the situation actually was – after all, these reporters are professionals. They also emphasize points from Roy campaign, which is one reason they immediately draw suspicion. (Another reason is, as many have noted, that they are clearly dubbed in.)
As expected, the GOP is calling for Barnes’ head over this – and yet giving themselves and Nathan a pass when they embellish things to make ROY look worse than he is. No surprise that the GOP would be hypocrites. None at all. But neither am I downplaying that Barnes made an error here – as I noted above, the original video was bad enough, and I have no problem with the narration making it worse. I DO have a problem with the extra “reporter” voices, I simply feel that this is no worse than the embellishments Nathan Deal is just as guilty of using against Roy Barnes.
At the end of the day, there is one way to send a STRONG message that you are tired of this kind of politics – vote for the one man in this race who hasn’t engaged in it: John Monds.
For your viewing pleasure, here is both the original video and the Barnes ad in question: [See the Videos]
A lot has beendiscussedrecentlyabout Nathan Deal’s 1991 SB 51, which per multiple media reports would have weakened Georgia’s rape shield laws and forced rape victims to testify about their sexual histories and clothing choices.
Over the past couple of days, a rape victim whose rapist Nathan Deal did his job as a prosecutor 30 years ago and put in jail has come forward and defended him.
And how does Nathan Deal return the favor?
He tries to profit from her story, as seen in this screen capture from his Facebook page:
Now, to be fair, this could be simply a very poor choice of thumbnail image to go along with this particular story. After all, as many of us know, when you post a link to Facebook, it scans the page for images and lets you select a number of them to use as a thumbnail. I’ve personally seen as many as two dozen images offered as thumbnail choices on some pages I’ve linked to, and there is always the ‘no thumbnail’ checkbox, which will result in no thumbnail being attached.
Here’s the problem: I went to the page on Deal’s site, copied the url, and tested posting it in my own feed, just to see how many thumbnails were available. After all, the donate image could have been the only one available, and maybe – for whatever reason – the Deal camp doesn’t like using the ‘no thumbnail’ option. However, the ‘donate’ image in question was the SECOND choice, meaning it had to be ACTIVELY CHOSEN as the thumbnail on that post.
The first image is a “HELP OUT” image, the third and fourth images are slightly resized versions of Deal’s “Deal. Real.” red and white logo. Please tell me how anyone could consider the “donate” image more appropriate on a story about RAPE than the other three? Heck, the “Help Out” image could have sent a subliminal message that Deal was trying to HELP rape victims, as the story it linked to says.
But no, someone on Nathan Deal’s campaign ACTIVELY CHOSE TO SEEK TO PROFIT FROM A RAPE VICTIM.
How sick, twisted, and pathetic can you get?
For comparison purposes, here are the other three thumbnails that could have been chosen:
JD Sumner of the Herald has this story this morning, of Mike Keown doing something I never remember seeing Sanford Bishop doing: banning the media from an event.
Keown Campaign Manager Andrew O’Shea said that it was at the request of the special guest at the event, House Minority Leader John Boehner.
Yet Keown has also said that “I won’t let the Republican Party push me around and tell me to do something I don’t want to do, or something that’s not good for the 2nd Congressional District”.
In other words, either Mike Keown lied or he genuinely wants secrecy and believes it is “good for the 2nd Congressional District”.
Tell me, Mike, how is secrecy from our elected officials good for the 2nd District? Clearly, you clearly do not want transparency, and unless we’re talking genuine National Security issues here – which you couldn’t talk about at a campaign event to begin with – there is NO REASON to ban reporters from any event you do as a public official.
But hey, if this letter to the editor is accurate, perhaps you have much more to hide than we ever thought?
One thing I find interesting about this Governor election is that I have YET to see ANYONE take a serious look at one of the things that should be the best source of both things to promote about Roy Barnes and things to attack him on – his record while in the Georgia General Assembly and as Governor.
Sure, you hear Republicans talk about how “bad” he was – even though Republicrat Sonny Perdue was ranked WORSE than Roy Barnes by the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute with regards to their fiscal policies. But when you ask a Republican for specifics, typically the only thing they can actually name is the Flag issue.
It is now 15 days from when polls close in this race, and I really don’t have time to go into this with the depth that it truly deserves, but for anyone who is interested, here is The Record of The King, as far back as LEGIS is able to give it (beginning in January 1995, at the beginning of his second term as a State Representative after having spent 8 terms in the State Senate and having lost the Democratic Primary for Governor in 1990 to Zell Miller). [Show the links!]
Note from Jeff: The following is from Ray Boyd, who earlier this year was planning to use $2 million of his own money to run as a Republican for Governor but was blocked because he refused to sign the GOP’s Soviet-style Party Over Principle oath. I’m on my Blackberry right now and will add the links in a few minutes.
October 18, 2010
To my fellow Georgians:
There is one attribute that is interwoven in every action that every individual undertakes in life: ethics. To expect positive ethical conduct from every human being is a utopian dream, but to expect positive ethical conduct from our elected and appointed public servants should be a standard.
We the people of this great nation and state have the power to implement, fix, or amend any law, rule, or regulation that exist– including the Constitution of the United States of America. We the people are to blame for the ethical depravity in our government by not holding our public officers accountable. Too many of my fellow Americans do not realize the magnitude of our individual power. I will not continue to sit idly by as Georgia is plagued with the infectious affliction of unethical conduct, and I ask that you do not sit idly by, either.
Below this letter is a link to the Comprehensive Ethics Reform Act. This could be the most important piece of legislation that has ever been introduced in the Georgia General Assembly. It will be one of the strongest ethics laws, if not the strongest, in the nation. Georgia has the opportunity to set the standard for other states, our US Congress, and the nation as this proposed law moves us forward and upward. This bill is being sent to every member of the Georgia General Assembly and every person holding or seeking state wide offices. It will be made available to as many Georgia voters as possible.
I respectfully request that you read the attached bill or its brief summary. I then request that you ask every elected representative or person seeking office to the General Assembly to answer the following four questions:
1. Will you pledge to introduce this bill or sign on as a co-sponsor of this bill?
2. Will you pledge to aggressively support this bill?
3. Will you pledge to vote for the passage of this bill, without modification?
4. Will you pledge to pass this bill as the first order of business in January 2011?
This Comprehensive Ethics Reform Act was drafted by a lawyer with an abundance of experience in ethics legislation that knows all the tricks and loopholes of existing laws. We know we cannot trust David Ralston or his colleagues to pass a decent bill. The fact of the matter is they have no interest in requiring their ethical conduct unless we make them. In fact, they recently passed a law abolishing the “State Ethics Commission” and replacing it with the “Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Commission” because they thought being sanctioned by the ethics commission sounded too harsh. This is deception at its finest. The attached bill will fix this, along with many other changes that are long overdue.
We the people can achieve this objective. I beg you to do your part for your own welfare, your children’s welfare, our state’s welfare, and our country’s welfare.
God Bless You, Our State, and Our Country
Ray Boyd
We The People Advocate
Click here to view the summary of The Comprehensive Ethics Reform Act. (PDF)
Click here to view full version of The Comprehensive Ethics Reform Act. (PDF)
Earlier today, Roy Barnes released an ad accusing Nathan Deal of working to dismantle Georgia’s rape shield law, which would have forced women in Georgia to defend their clothing and sexual histories in rape trials, had it been successful.
The bill in question was 1991′s SB 51, which Barnes claims was written by Nathan Deal while he was President Pro Tem of the Georgia Senate.
Now, the Georgia General Assembly is notorious for their record keeping. Virtually anything you need can be found online on LEGIS – but only if it happened in 1995 or later, when Deal was already in Congress.
That said, just because it isn’t online doesn’t mean the documents don’t exist – and I am actively on the case of getting them. These are serious allegations, and either Deal or Barnes is innocent here, but not both. Once we get the LEGIS level history of this bill, we will know one way or the other.
For now, the target is 1991′s SB 51. That will tell all in this case.
Jim Galloway has a brief post last night showing that King Roy certainly has a bit of a humorous side.
In it, he writes that apparently the King ran into Austin Scott last night in Perry before both were debating in their respective races. Barnes proceeded to “grab Scott and turn him to mug for a photographer” saying “Turn around here. We’ll ruin your reputation.”
There’s two ways to take this, and I’m sure the Republicans will seize it to try to use as some kind of attack on Roy. As the title of this post says, I see it as the King having a little fun with a man who was a junior member of the minority Party when the King was on the throne.
Given the animosity and on-edge emotions that are prevalent among most in these last three weeks before the election, I thought this was a brief bit of levity that I’d share to lighten the mood. I LIKE people with a bit of humor – it helps keep us (somewhat) sane.
But because they WERE there to work, here’s a news article from the host of the debate, Macon’s 13WMAZ. I may watch it this weekend, or I may spend most of the weekend playing Fallout 3. We’ll see.
The following comes from Dan Barber, the Libertarian candidate for Lt Governor.
Neal Boortz recently made the statement that a vote for a Libertarian is a vote taken away from a Republican. He claims this is tantamount to handing victory to any Democrat in the race. He claims, therefore, that voting Libertarian is in effect the same thing as voting Democrat. He?s wrong. Here?s why.
