Published in the Towns County Herald Feb. 5, 2025
Dear Editor,
Our country is at a crossroads, and it will demand that our leaders act from positions of truth and integrity. Illegal immigration must be confronted as well as “kitchen table” issues such as grocery prices, housing costs, childcare costs, medical expenses, utility prices, rising insurance rates, women’s healthcare and climate-caused natural disasters. This is a big agenda that will need bipartisan support and action. We must demand that our representatives work across the aisle. They are in Congress to solve problems, which is far more demanding than pointing fingers.
Jennifer Cordier
Published in the Towns County Herald Jan. 1, 2025
Dear Editor,
I read with interest the statement by Trump sycophant Andrew Clyde that presidents have in Article II of the Constitution a power, known as “impoundment authority,” to refuse spending money appropriated by Congress. (“Rep. Andrew Clyde, Sen. Mike Lee introduce Legislation to Repeal Impoundment Control Act,” Towns Co. Herald, Dec. 25, 2024.) Of course, if that is true, why introduce legislation when the courts, which are never shy of overturning unconstitutional laws, are available?
Let’s ignore the ludicrous idea that the Impoundment Control Act prevents Trump from getting “America’s fiscal house back in order,” as if he is really going to do that. This is the same Trump who demanded recently that Congress get rid of the debt ceiling. Think about that. If I ask the bank to get rid of my credit limit, do you really believe I would do that if I intended to suddenly become fiscally responsible?
But let’s get back to Clyde’s theory of presidential power. The argument he makes turns the Constitution’s command that a president “take care that the laws are faithfully executed” on its head by claiming this encompasses the power to refuse to spend money authorized and appropriated by congress. In Kendall v. United States ex rel. Stokes, the Supreme Court held “To contend that the obligation imposed on the President to see the laws faithfully executed, implies a power to forbid their execution, is a novel construction of the constitution, and entirely inadmissible.” Assistant Attorney General William Rehnquist (later Chief Justice Rehnquist) wrote in 1969 “It is in our view extremely difficult to formulate a constitutional theory to justify a refusal by the President to comply with a congressional directive to spend.”
It is true that presidents in the past exercised what might be considered impoundment authority, but they did so within limited discretionary bounds and not as President Nixon did by abusing his authority and impounding billions in authorized spending simply because he disagreed with the programs Congress enacted. His abuse showed the danger of free-handed impoundment and set the stage for the Impoundment Control Act, as it led to multiple cases brought against his illegal impoundments, one of which, Train v. the City of New York, is often cited as a clear Supreme Court ruling against presidential impoundment authority.
The truth is the Impoundment Control Act provides authority for a president to cut unnecessary or improper spending authorized by Congress through the processes of recission and deferral. What the act does is provide for proper oversight by Congress and preserves the separation of powers, which in the words of Justice Brandeis saves “the people from autocracy.”
Bottom line: Clyde knows or should know his constitutional argument is faulty and that he would likely lose in court. He should tell us the truth about how the Impoundment Control Act works and not use lies to justify his support for the misguided legislation he is now trying to sell. Instead, we get grandstanding and half-baked arguments from him for a bill designed mainly to let him dodge responsibility for making tough decisions.
What Clyde should do is tell us honestly and frankly where he wants cuts to fall or taxes to be raised and then work (as he is being paid to do) to bring those policies to fruition if he believes they are best for the country. Otherwise, why is he even there?
Sincerely,
David W. Plunkett
The signs are everywhere – except when they’re not!
With the 2024 presidential election less than a month away, campaign yard signs seem to be everywhere, but Georgia law stipulates where campaign yard signs can and cannot be posted and protects them from theft and vandalism, notes Towns County Democratic Co-Chair John Bennett of Hiawassee.
The theft of a campaign sign falls under Georgia Code § 16-8-2, or theft by taking, and is a misdemeanor as long as the combined value of the stolen property is $1,500 or less, Bennett said. Defacing a campaign sign falls under Georgia Code § 16-7-21, criminal trespass, if the damage is $500 or less. Both are misdemeanors punishable by a maximum of a year in jail and/or a $1,000 fine.
Violations should be reported to local law enforcement authorities, but Bennett urged anyone who witnesses a violation not to confront the offender. A call to 911 is the best option, he said. Provide the 911 center with descriptions, and if safe to do so, wait for a responding officer to arrive.
Georgia Code § 32-6-51 states campaign signs cannot be placed in the right-of-way of any public road. Municipalities and counties may, however, adopt ordinances that allow campaign signs to be placed in the rights-of-way of municipal/county roads.
City of Hiawassee ordinances prohibit the placement of any sign within the public right of way and any sign which interferes with a driver’s visibility, Bennett stated. The width of the right of way depends on the route, according to the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT). If there are power poles on the right of way, the edge is usually behind the poles.
Bennett also noted that any person wishing to place a campaign sign on private property must have the permission of the property owner if it is not on their own property. That includes rental property, where stipulations in the lease apply.
GDOT has officially stated it will remove “any and all signs” from the state right-of-way. Failure to obey this law could result in a misdemeanor, so GDOT stated that candidates should make sure their signs are placed only in authorized areas. On Election Day, signs are prohibited within 150 feet of any building where voting is taking place as well as within 25 feet of any voter standing in line to vote (Georgia Code § 21-2-414).
J.M. “Jim” Purvis, author of “Democrats 101: A Primer for Us,” will be the guest speaker when Towns County Democrats hold their monthly meeting on Thursday, June 13, at the Democrats’ county headquarters, 2494 Highway 76 West in Hiawassee.
 |
| Jim Purvis |
“Democrats 101” happened because of Purvis’ concern over the vast changes under way in the United States, the challenges, and the role he says the Democratic Party needs — and must — play. This concern has been shared by the wide variety of Democrats — from every wing, status, and philosophy — who helped him with writing the book and then with the campaign to return the party to its core values. The ultimate goal, according to Purvis, is “A just society, as long as it takes.”
Purvis will also be the featured speaker at the Rabun County Democrats’ Big Blue BBQ on Saturday, June 15, in Clayton.
Towns County Democrats will meet Thursday at 5:30 p.m. at the local party headquarters. The office serves as a resource for voters seeking information about the upcoming general election in November. Office hours are 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. Tuesday through Saturday.
Charlotte Sleczkowski, chair of the Towns County Democratic Committee, cuts the ribbon on the Democratic headquarters. The headquarters will be open through the 2024 election with plans to open a permanent headquarters in Hiawassee in 2025.
