A Resolution on Republican Principles Divides the GOP
Photo: Jon Richards
Debate over a resolution entitled “A Resolution On Getting Back to the Basics of Republican Principles” at this past weekend’s Georgia Republican Convention showed some differences of opinion among the convention delegates. The first part of the resolution chides the Georgia legislature for not overriding Governor Nathan Deal’s veto of House Bill 757, the Free Exercise Protection Act, and House Bill 859, the campus carry bill.
The resolution points out that the 2015 GOP convention passed resolutions supporting a constitutional amendment making English the official language of Georgia, and prohibiting the issuing of drivers licenses to undocumented immigrants. Despite that support, both measures passed the Senate in the 2016 session, bu did not receive votes in the House.
Another portion of the resolution faults Georgia’s government for not reducing its budget, but instead, in House Bill 170, raising close to $1 billion annually for transportation funding. During the 2015 legislative session, an alternative proposal was presented by some representatives and senators that would have used a portion of the increase in tax revenue each year to pay for transportation improvements. That proposal never got a hearing.
Before the convention voted on the resolution, it was debated by delegates. Kent Kingsley of Lamar County was one of the delegates who spoke in support of the resolution.
This resolution is very simple. This has been an idea, and ideas that we have had as a Republican Party for years and years. Unfortunately, too many of our elected officials have ignored it. And it’s time that we start holding these elected officials accountable for not meeting the will of the people, the will of the Republicans that make up the majority in the state of Georgia.
And I commend people like Josh McKoon and other like-minded constitutional conservatives for bringing this up over and over again. And this will become law in Georgia.
Forsyth County delegate Will Kremer had a different opinion:
First of all, we have two types of politicians. There are the politicians that fundraise, and they make problems their base, and they use that to build a coalition. We have politicians that work towards solutions. This resolution is complete and utter garbage. It’s garbage.
…
To say that we need to get back to the basics because we passed funding for transportation and because we oppose, at times, some bill that could potentially discriminate? That’s ridiculous. And I think that we are better than passing a resolution that justifies that. We need to unite together and go along with the conservative principles that we have and thank our leaders for passing solutions.
The resolution was introduced by committee member Josh McKoon, and was much less contentious than resolutions introduced at the GOP district conventions in April, including one in the Third District that censured Governor Deal for his veto of the religious liberty bill shortly after the end of the legislative session. Deal did not attend the convention, citing a scheduling conflict with an event honoring high school valedictorians.
With many delegates waiting in line to speak, the question was called and the measure was put up for a vote. The resolution passed. While there was no count taken of votes cast for either side, a reasonable minority voted against it. While Republican conventions are dominated by the party’s grassroots base as opposed to its more business friendly supporters, some of those attending this convention had a different definition of basic Republican principles than did others.
The text of the resolution is below.
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab About Author
Jon Richards
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I find it disturbing that the GAGOP passed a resolution that essentially mirrors the legislative agenda of the resolution’s author over the past few sessions. I was unaware that the Resolutions Committee had become a campaign apparatus for aspiring politicians to advance their pet projects.
Will, Well said!
………….First of all, we have two types of politicians. There are the politicians that fundraise, and they make problems their base, and they use that to build a coalition. We have politicians that work towards solutions. This resolution is complete and utter garbage. It’s garbage.
…
To say that we need to get back to the basics because we passed funding for transportation and because we oppose, at times, some bill that could potentially discriminate? That’s ridiculous. And I think that we are better than passing a resolution that justifies that. We need to unite together and go along with the conservative principles that we have and thank our leaders for passing solutions………
Sen McKoon is no being honest about this tax. The tax was designed as a user fee years ago based on MPG. Obviously the concept was simple, the more you drive, the more damage you do to the roads. If you paid as you fill up, the people doing more damage, pay more ie user fee. Cars and trucks now get 2 to 3 times better gas millage, which has left us short on repair money. Can Sen McKoon please tell us how we would make up this shortfall? Real details….not what people want to hear, not the free lunch program you have been selling….
Why We’re Getting Less Mileage From Georgia’s Gas Tax
http://www.peachpundit.com/2015/03/31/why-were-getting-less-mileage-from-georgias-gas-tax/
Another day and another Konop thread jack to attack Josh McKoon. What else is new?
It is an attack asking a politician to defend his position with math? HUH? LOL……Do you want to ban math in schools? LOL…..In your mid, Sen McKoon can propose resolutions and bills, and us sheep should never challenge their math…..If we do we are attacking them? LOL
It’s an attack when you go off on a tangent that is only marginally related to the post topic in order to make your point. That’s a threadjack, and I wish you would stop it.
Update: I deleted your most recent comment because I asked you to stop making off-topic comments, and you continued. I will continue to delete off-topic comments.
John, had you read this post, you would have seen the alternative proposal from Senator McKoon and others. That proposal would have taken a portion of the state’s revenue growth each year and used it for transportation, until the amount reached $1 billion annually.
We can argue whether the alternative proposal was good or not, but don’t say Sen. McKoon didn’t have a proposal. And let’s not turn comments on the thread into the merits of HB 170.
At the risk of also being told to stifle I must point out that Sen. McKoon referenced HB170 in his manifesto as you did in your post. I’m failing to see the thread jack but of course do not have access to the deleted comments. If anything it is Sen. McKoon who is still wanting to reheat HB170. I take it by your censorship that you have bought into his definition of conservatism. I do share the sentiment of returning to Republican principles with the Senator though not much else. Mine go a bit further back to many of Goldwater’s definitions of Conservatism. This is one I cherish:
“There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in ‘A,’ ‘B,’ ‘C,’ and ‘D.’ Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of ‘conservatism.’ ”
US Senator Barry Goldwater (R-Arizona), Congressional Record, September 16, 1981.