Georgia editorial roundup

Recent editorials from Georgia newspapers:

___

Feb. 9

The Marietta Daily Journal on Stacey Abrams:

The suspense builds in Georgia politics after Democrat Stacey Abrams gained new attention by giving her party’s rebuttal to President Trump’s State of the Union address. This may well enhance her chances of running against U.S. Sen. David Perdue or for president.

Abrams, the first black woman to run for governor in the U.S. and the first of her race and gender to deliver a State of the Union response, had a tough assignment following Trump’s speech. He highlighted strong economic growth during his tenure with 5.3 million new jobs created in little more than two years, rising wages, nearly five million Americans lifted off food stamps, unemployment at 4 percent, the lowest rate in more than half a century with African-American, Hispanic-American and Asian-American jobless rates at record lows.

In her response, Abrams ignored the upbeat statistics and sought to identify with working people, the traditional base of the Democrats, stung by widespread defections to Trump in the 2016 election. In trying to recover that ground, national Democrats found in Abrams a way to reach out to the middle class with more “progressive” ideas and Trump bashing.

“In Georgia and around the country,” Abrams asserted, “people are striving for a middle class where a salary truly equals economic security. But instead, families’ hopes are being crushed by Republican leadership that ignores real life or just doesn’t understand it. Under the current administration, far too many hard-working Americans are falling behind, living paycheck to paycheck, most without labor unions to protect them from even worse harm.”

She claimed the Republican tax cuts “rigged the system against working people” and instead of bringing back jobs, “plants are closing, layoffs are looming and wages struggle to keep pace with the actual cost of living.”

Having thus dispensed with the inconvenient truth of the robust economy, Abrams had the chutzpah to declare that bipartisanship - which Democrats have eschewed on every hand in dealing with Trump - “could craft a 21st century immigration plan but this administration chooses to cage children and tear families apart.”

By choosing Abrams for the rebuttal spotlight, Democrats showed they want her to have a prominent role in national politics, hoping she can help keep core supporters hyped up for the 2020 congressional and presidential elections. Abrams knows how to hit the hot button of “voter suppression” and “threats to democracy,” rhetoric that resonates with the Democratic base. She also demonstrated in her race for Georgia governor that she had wide appeal in traditionally Republican suburbs, including Cobb and the other metro counties.

Abrams is being urged by some Democratic chieftains, including Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, to challenge Sen. Perdue in the 2020 election, believing that he might be vulnerable. Trump went on the record in support of his strong ally Perdue, telling reporters: “I think it’s a mistake for her to run against him because I don’t think she can win.” He added: “David Perdue is an incredible senator, if you remember, and will be very hard to beat.”

In the not-too-distant past, Trump’s assessment would have been a foregone conclusion. An incumbent U.S. senator would expect to win re-election handily in Georgia, but this state is changing. If Abrams decides to challenge Perdue - depending on how she reads the tea leaves and the polls - it would make Georgia a national battleground again with Republican control of the Senate at stake. Again, tens of millions of outside dollars would be poured into the race, which most likely would be another nail-biter akin to the 2018 governor’s race.

Abrams has confirmed to supporters that she will run for office again, but “I don’t know for what.” She has set a deadline to make a decision about what office she will seek by the end of March.

So the guessing game continues. But one thing is certain: The days of politics as usual are over in Georgia, due in large measure to Stacey Abrams.

Online: http://www.mdjonline.com/

___

Feb. 11

The Augusta Chronicle on Environmental Protection Agency rules:

A few miles south of Dearing, McCorkle Nurseries grows shrubs, vines, evergreens and perennials for just about any landscaping project you can think of.

But there’s one thing - worse than weeds - that the thriving area business doesn’t ever want to see crop up.

Government red tape.

That’s what could happen if certain federal water regulations are allowed to stand.

Instead, the acting head of the Environmental Protection Agency visited the McCorkle family at their business in McDuffie County last week to support them and countless other farmers in trying to right a serious wrong.

The location for Administrator Andrew Wheeler’s appearance was chosen very deliberately. Growing operations like the McCorkles’ are the ones powerfully affected - a better word is shackled - by poorly shaped, hard-to-understand federal water regulations.

Last December, the Trump administration presented a proposal to pull back many of the EPA’s cumbersome rules - among them, the Waters of the United States, or WOTUS, regulations. Those are rules regarding “navigable waters” that basically tell Americans what they can do with sometimes even the tiniest sprinkling of water on their property.

Under EPA rules set forth by President Obama in 2015, federal protection is extended, for example, to any stream created just by intermittent rainfall, or “wetlands” that really are no more than patches of soggy dirt.

“Putting WOTUS in rough terms,” wrote Burt Rutherford, an editor for the agriculture trade magazine BEEF, “the rule means that if a duck thinks it can land on it, any puddle is considered navigable and falls under jurisdiction of the federal government.”

A stretch? Not by much. Do those rules sound like they make even the tiniest bit of sense?

They don’t make sense to D.E. “Skeeter” McCorkle, either.

“The irrigation ditches here, under the rule that is going away, that could be a water of the U.S.,” McCorkle told The Augusta Chronicle. “If we had to get federal permits to grade out our ditches, to do anything related to our ponds or impoundments, it’s unnecessary, unneeded bureaucracy.”

If growers had to check with the federal government after every rainfall - to make sure a new ditch near a field isn’t a new federal waterway that requires a federal permit to deal with - growers would get hardly any actual work done. They couldn’t fully use their own land.

Under the more commonsense EPA rules being proposed, there are six categories of water considered waters of the United States: navigable waters, tributaries, some ditches - for navigation or affected by tides - certain lakes and ponds, impoundments (often reservoirs) and wetlands connected to the other five categories.

The changes also spell out what is not a water of the U.S.: waters caused solely by rain, groundwater, many roadside and farm ditches, converted cropland and stormwater control features.

These changes would save money, keep the economy humming, encourage business development and protect national waters that actually are navigable.

If there are other environmental aspects of these massive rules that advocates take exception to, then those green groups can address the disputes in court. But telling farmers what they can and can’t do with essentially any random puddle of water on their land? That’s shameful federal overreach.

We wish the Trump administration luck in getting these absurd rules changed.

Online: https://www.augustachronicle.com/

___

Feb. 3

The Valdosta Daily Times on rural broadband:

Who would have thought 25 years ago that high speed internet access would be seen as a basic need?

But it has become just that.

Remember dial-up modems?

Remember ICQ?

…

Need to check your government benefits and there is no local office or the office is closed?

Your insurance provider encourages remote access doctor’s visits?

Yep, you’ll need reliable broadband for those things as well. And if you are taking distance learning classes with a college or university … well, you get the idea.

So, we are not even talking about streaming video of your favorite movies or shows, we are talking about your job, your health and accessing even the most basic information.

That’s the world we live in.

Still many communities lack access and there seems to be little incentive for major internet service providers to run fiber or basic transmission lines into sparsely populated parts of the state because the return on investment is negligible, at best.

So, state lawmakers have an idea.

Rural cooperatives, electric utilities, already have infrastructure in place, right of way, an established customer base, relationships with those customers, billing mechanisms and could provide internet access more quickly and maybe even more affordably.

To be honest, at this point even if it is not quick and inexpensive, anything is better than nothing, or virtually nothing.

But, we do not think the permanent solution to rural high speed internet access is having the electric cooperatives provide exclusive access.

We think competition is good for the consumer, keeps prices down and drives innovation.

Established telecommunications companies do provide the best service and because they are profit driven and face competition can often offer competitive pricing. Yet, they are not incentivized to provide service in more rural areas because of the limited number of potential customers, and just waiting on the big telecoms to expand into our most rural communities is simply not realistic or fair to the public.

So, right now, today, the problem is not a lack of competition, the problem is the lack of internet service.

Statewide, at least 626,070 people live without access to broadband services, according to the Federal Communications Commission.

So, we are on board.

We support Sen. Steve Gooch’s plan to allow EMCs to delve into the internet service provider business and urge our legislative delegation to fast track this piece of business through the General Assembly.

It is not the best solution and probably not the long-term solution, but for now, it seems to be the only solution that will get the job done in a timely manner.

Online: https://www.valdostadailytimes.com/