DawsonTimes.com

home > local news > opinion

Opinion: Harrell Wants to Subvert the Will of 14,000 Voters

By Dale Wheeler

Originally Published Mar 24, 2009, 9:47am (Updated Mar 28, 2011, 1:43pm)

24 comment(s)

E-mail this page

Print this page

At the county commission work session on Tuesday (March 24), Commissioner Jim Harrell will try to subvert the will of the voters ofForsyth County.

On July15,2008, voters were asked in a non-binding referendum if they want to change the county's charter to allow commissioners to be elected by district rather than the current system of election at-large. Over 14,000 voters (73% of Republicans and 86% of Democrats) responded by saying they do want that change.

Rep. Mark Hamilton -- with the backing of the entire state delegation-- then introduced the a bill in the House of Representatives that would facilitate that change. The bill received unanimous support in both chambers of the General Assembly and now awaits the governor's signature.

But Commissioner Jim Harrell is determined to subvert the will of the voters of Forsyth County. Two weeks ago, he made a motion to have the Board of Commissioners draft a letter to the governor asking him not to sign the bill.

Comm. Patrick Bell argued successfully for a postponement of Harrell's motion. Comm. Jim Boff and Comm. Brian Tam agreed. Only Harrell and Laughinghouse opposed it. Bell said the voters have spoken and that the change should take place. He was hopeful the governor would have signed the bill by now.

In asking for the resolution, Harrell floated two bogus reasons for his motion:

First, he argues, there was a low voter turnout, therefore, the results, overwhelming though they may be, do not represent the truedesire of our voters.

Second, Forsyth County voters are not smart enough to understand the referendum question.

Reason No. 1 is fatally flawed because Harrell himself was elected by fewer voters than those who voted in favor of the referendum. To my knowledge Harrell hasn't asked the governor to disregard the results of that election.

Reason No. 2 is so ridiculous it collapses under its own weight. Forsyth County voters have achieved a higher educational level than just about any county in the entire state. So, it is reasonable to assume the voters clearly understood the question. Or, to steal a phrase that Harrell used frequently during his own campaign, “the voters get it.”

So why are Mr. Harrell -- and Comm. Laughinghouse who supports the resolution -- so desperate to subvert the will of our voters? For two reasons that will impact both their political futures.

Reason No. 1 is the two joined-at-the-hip commissioners are shrewd politicos. They know Laughinghouse will lose -- and lose badly -- in an election by district. He's popular with the special interests in South Forsyth, but has never won his own district in North Forsyth. And,

Comm. Laughinghouse is up for re-election next year. Should he not win re-election, Harrell would wind up in the voting minority.

Reason No. 2 is that Harrell wouldn't know what to do without Laughinghouse. The rocket scientist, who allegedly represents Dist. 3 but who in reality is a puppet for Laughinghouse, hasn't had an original thought or cast a vote independent of Laughinghouse on any major issue since being elected in 2006.

So, now it's Hail Mary time and Harrell isn't above throwing out the expressed will of over 14,000 voters to serve his own political ambition. Hopefully, voters will remember this when Harrell seeks re-election in 2010.

A key vote to watch Tuesday will be that of Comm. Jim Boff. Harrell and Laughinghouse have staked out their position. They are fully prepared to subvert the will of the voters. Comm. Bell and Tam say the voters have spoken.

So Boff will be the swing vote.

It is worth noting that Harrell and Laughinghouse supported Boff in last year's election. Will Boff, who has been something of an independent thinker during his first 90 days in office, pay homage to his supporters by voting to subvert the will of the voters, or will he establish himself as a strong independent by doing the right thing?

Time will tell.

Comments

24 comment(s) on this page. Add your own comment below.

JerryB

Mar 24, 2009 11:31am [ 1 ]

Did anyone notice the "anonymous" resolution that was put forward at the County GOP Convention? It is eerily similar to Harrell's county resolution. I wonder if it was the puppet, Harrell, or the the Master Puppeteer, Laughinghouse, that was behind it? Or should I say, we know who was behind it but in the words of the discredited former commissioner, which one will man-up and accept responsibility?

Harrell is the same Commissioner that spent $100,000 of taxpayer money for a private-private business deal I suspect was to pander for votes in the upcoming election. Come on, Harrell...you are working it hard but let's not sacrifice the citizens in the meantime. Next thing we know you will try to sell us on a golf course!

As to being the swing vote, I will be watching to see if the Master Puppeteer has attached the strings to Mr. Boff yet. He seems like a nice guy but I think good ole Charlie owns him. OR...will Boff go along with Harrell to get a vote for that stinking golf course...my, my it's an interesting day.

After consideration, my money says Boff will support Harrell on this resolution and then Harrell will surface as Boff's team mate on peddling the golf course to us. Any takers?

Dale

Mar 24, 2009 1:56pm [ 2 ]

I don't think there's much doubt about who submitted that "anonymous" resolution. Harrell was in attendance at last Saturday's meeting. He was sitting at the front of the room until that resolution was offered. He then fled to the back to be a little less conspicuous.

To attempt to override the will of the voters for your own political gain is far too common among elected officials today.

Hopefully, Commissioner Boff will seize the opportunity to be an independent-minded, swing voter and say no to Harrell and Laughinghouse and yes to the voters of Forsyth County.

David Richard

Mar 24, 2009 3:23pm [ 3 ]

You two have about as much knowledge of Forsyth County politics as you do the purpose of liquid soap.

The referendum question was the brain-child of a power mad mayor and chamber of commerce, foisted on the naivete of an inexperienced GOP chairman.

I'll lay this out so simply that even you two will understand it.

The city's water contracts are coming due in 2012, as is a renewal of LOST and SPLOST in 2013. The city is cash poor unless they continue to rape Forsyth County on the finished and raw water contracts now in place, and hope to get them renewed in place, or improved for them.

The city already has two commissioners bought and paid for on the commission until 2012 - Brian Tam and Patrick Bell. Their only way to ensure that they get at least one more vote between now and then is to change the rules of the game, something Democrats and liberals firmly understand. Now, I don't think that Charlie Laughinghouse is going to run for a third term anyway, so this really doesn't involve him.

What this does involve is getting that all-important third vote on the county commission that is bought and paid for by the city of Cumming (since the 1st district is largely in the city). This is what will happen on the first meeting in January, 2013. The new three vote majority will immediately change the super majority requirement for intergovernmental agreements to a simple majority vote, and your county commission will become a three member extension of the Cumming City Council.

Bank on it.

Then, every contract that favors the city over the county will be voted in on a simple majority, and that isn't good for Forsyth County. The damage will be done through at least 2015.

Forsyth County LOSES it's voice with this legislation. The question was not every well worded, and the voters should have a better worded referendum question given to them before this is implemented, but Mark Hamilton and Jack Murphy dance to the mayor's and chamber's tune better than anyone else, so there is little chance of this happening while they take up space in Atlanta.

Commissioners no longer have to care about the wishes of folks in District 2. If they don't like a sewer plant next to them, tough. As long as it doesn't impact (fill in your district number here).

I hope another, better-worded referendum get placed on the NEXT election, so that this mess can be cleaned up before it gets too costly for Forsyth County.

Charles I. Smith

Mar 24, 2009 3:45pm [ 4 ]

District versus at-large voting was somewhat of a debate point during last summer’s commission race, and I spent some time looking into some facts that ultimately led me to feel that our county should remain able to vote for all 5 commissioners. I’ll present my personal reasons why after I enumerate some facts.

First, some data. As you can see the distribution of registered voters throughout the county is just about right; shifting some from District 2 to District 1 would even things out. This is from the November 2008 general election.

DISTRICT 1 REGISTERED VOTERS 17%

DISTRICT 2 REGISTERED VOTERS 22%

DISTRICT 3 REGISTERED VOTERS 21%

DISTRICT 4 REGISTERED VOTERS 20%

DISTRICT 5 REGISTERED VOTERS 20%

What the above information does not portray however is the overall impact of each district, with impact being measured as percent turnout multiplied times the number of registered voters. The Districts fall out like this, for the 2008 July primary:

District 4 & 5 Tied for highest impact

District 1 Next highest impact

District 2 Next to lowest impact

District 3 Lowest impact

The conclusion here is that for those concerned that the more populous District 2 runs the show around this county, well, that concern is not grounded in fact, since District 2 is second from the bottom in overall voter impact.

Second, there may be a potential legal challenge to changing the way we vote from At Large to District, and this goes back to the Voter Rights Act of 1965 and something funnily named the Gingles Requirements. Briefly, one of two situations must be shown to change voting methods, voter dilution or voter denial, and the Gingles Requirements are the test for that. Since we don’t have either situation here in Forsyth County (see point #1 above), a case could be made to Governor Purdue not to sign this bill since there could be a federal lawsuit filed for violation of the Voter Rights Act. I am not further discursive on this topic, not being an attorney, but it does give me reason for concern. Not to beat this point to death, but Georgia lost on appeal at the Federal level and was found to be gerrymandering with regard to reapportionment; go here to read the appellate court’s ruling: http://www.columbia.edu/~de11/lariosvcox.pdf .

For me, our county commission is my first level of government (yes, I live in a subdivision with an HOA, so there’s that for some of us). Since this level of governance has as much or more impact on my day to day life than our state legislature or our federal government, I strongly feel that I should be able to elect all of the commissioners.

As to the referendum that some people feel represents the will of the 100,000+ voters, I agree with Commissioner Harrell that the wording was imprecise. Consider many voters’ answer to this proposed referendum: “Do you agree to give up your vote to select all county commissioners even though they vote on issues that affect the whole county?” If the question last summer were phrased in this manner, I suspect the outcome would have been different.

Next, in mid February I emailed Representative Knox, Amerson and Hamilton asking for “…any position statement you may have that would support this change.” I received no reply from either of them.

Finally, realize that for a Legislator to achieve unanimous support for a bill that impacts his or her county only is hardly difficult, since other Legislators will expect the same courtesy. Presumably Governor Purdue is aware of this when he sees that something passed by unanimous support in the House or Senate.

In conclusion, the headline declaring that Jim Harrell wants to subvert the will of the voters is miscast. It is readily apparent that he is of a position that would protect the right and ability of 100,000 + voters in our county to choose all of their local representatives.

Dale

Mar 24, 2009 4:37pm [ 5 ]

Charles, with all due respect, you miss the point.

The question is no longer which method of electing commissioners is best. The question is do we just casually cast aside 14,000 votes. That is what Harrell wants to do with this resolution. The question was asked and voters answered loud and clear.

Harrell and Laughinghouse had ample opportunity to convince voters to keep the status quo prior to the July election. They failed to do so.

So now they challenge the voting results on two ridiculous grounds: First, that there was a low voter turnout. And second, Forsyth County voters are not smart enough to understand the question.

Both claims are ridiculous. Harrell received less than 14,000 votes. Should we give Jack Conway a Mulligan? As I recall, there was a fairly low vote count on the new justice center referendum. Do we do that one over?

As for Forsyth County voters not being smart enough to understand the question, I can't wait to see him try to defend that claim during his re-election bid.

And your point about a significant legal challenge is pure poppycock. Check the Gainesville Times and you will see that their state delegation is doing exactly the same thing. Rep. Carl Rogers introduced a bill last week that will change the way the Mayor of Gainesville and the Chairman of the Board of Education are elected. Bottom line, Gov. Perdue will not cast aside the votes of 14,000 Forsyth Countians nor ignore a solidly united state delegation.

As for the headline, it is exactly on point. It says Jim Harrell wants to subvert the will of 14,000 voters.

Steve Carter

Mar 24, 2009 5:42pm [ 6 ]

Dale, just curious about the headline...was it really 14,000 voters who voted for this change, or was it a simple majority of 14,000 total voters?

David Richard

Mar 24, 2009 6:07pm [ 7 ]

Here's a simple way to fix this. Have another referendum where the question is as follows:

Do you want to change the way Forsyth County elects their county commissioners?

A. Yes, I want to change and elect my county commissioner by district only.

B. No, I don't want to change and want a vote for every commission district.

Now, why can't we have something as simple as that? I guarantee you, the results would be very, very different.

Joshua Jones

Mar 24, 2009 7:01pm [ 8 ]

Steve,

Regardless of the total number of voters, more than 72 percent voiced their desire to amend the county charter to allow for voting by district. No county commissioner was victorious in the primary with an approval that high.

dale

Mar 24, 2009 7:22pm [ 9 ]

Steve,

Just got home and saw your question.

The total vote count was 14,248. Of that number, 10,367 (72.8%) voted for the change and 3,891 (27.2%) voted no. But if the governor were to go along with the Harrell resolution, all 14,248 would be essentially lost.

I understand it's a moot point now, however, as Harrell asked that the issue be tabled. So it won't have time to resurface before the governor signs the bill. And I'm assured by several members of the state delegation that the governor is on board with the change.

Walter Baron

Mar 24, 2009 7:28pm [ 10 ]

So, let me get this straight, those that support this "vote for only your commissioner" initiative have no issue with four commissioners they neither voted for, nor considered, having a say on issues in districts not theirs? Commissioners vote on issues that affect the entire county .. or sometimes not. Are we to ignore the votes of the 4 commissioners outside the district where an issue is to be decided? If that's the case, then please send District 5 its $20Million, the one fifth of the $100Million Park and Recreation bond money - from which district 5 hasn't seen a penny of that money. The last commissioner was totally out of touch with my district's needs. At least give me a fighting chance at reasonable governance with 5 Commissioners -- perhaps something logical and relevant to my needs will be addressed at some point. And I want to have a say in anyone's position who has a say in mine. Bottom line, if 5 commissioners can vote on issues of importance to me ... I get to vote on who those 5 commissioners might be.

Charles I Smith

Mar 24, 2009 7:37pm [ 11 ]

Dale & Josh:

Dale, I don’t think this discussion pivots only upon the single fact of a questionably written referendum question; that is not the only thing to consider here, as I expressed in my earlier comments. Yes, 73% of those who came to the polls for a primary election did respond to a somewhat leading question (in my opinion) affirming their desire to elect commissioners from their own districts. But look at the larger picture please…if there were somewhere around 87,000 registered voters, and we had a 16% turnout, 73% of that is hardly the overwhelming will of the county, is it? What do you think would be the outcome if that question were on the November general election ballot, especially if it were worded neutrally?

To allow 73% of 16% of the county to decry our will is really questionable in my opinion, but then you and I differ, and that’s OK and certainly not disrespectful.

On to your assessment of the legal challenge as being “poppycock”, I already said I cannot delve too much further into this issue since I’m not a lawyer steeped in this type of law. I merely mention this as something the powers that be should consider. I stand by my observation and caution however.

Now, Josh, I know you are just waiting with ‘bated breath to explain the relationship between the percentage of commissioners who won an election and the voters who cast a vote to amend, or not, their ability to vote at large. How exactly do these two things relate to each other?

Thanks guys, this is a good discussion.

For readers interested, and to answer Steve Carter’s question, here are the referendum questions and results, by party:

From the Democratic Ballot:

Question 1. Should the county charter be revised to provide that County Commissioners and School Board members be elected by the voters in their respective districts?

Results: 1,228 YES, 208 NO, 1,436 Total Respondents.

From the Republican Ballot:

Question 2. Should the county charter be revised to provide that County Commissioners and School Board members be elected by the voters in the respective districts?

Results: 9,289 YES, 3,524 NO, 12,812 Total Respondents

Summary of both ballots:

10,517 YES, 3,732 NO, 14,248 Total Respondents, 87,254 Registered Voters for the July Primary

73% YES, 26 % NO, WITH A 16% VOTER TURNOUT

Does anyone see a mandate here?

JerryB

Mar 24, 2009 7:43pm [ 12 ]

Walter,

The reason this issue became a concern is because the south end of the county, as well as the special interest groups, ended up controlling the board. With district voting, each district will have the say so about who represents them on the Board. The Board, of course, still will have to vote for each and every item and it will still take a majority to pass.

I suggest that those that want to get things done need to look for candidates that can be open minded, business-like and be able to see the big picture. Understand that decisions affect the entire county and truly want to do the right thing. A Commissioner is going to have to be a team player and more professional in the new dawn of Forsyth County. Activists and pandering for votes will not be successful in the new Forsyth County and need not apply.

I believe district voting will mean the end of groups like (NO)Growth Forsyth County, Lanier Lifestyle (at your expense), Bethel Park NIMBYs and all the other single minded, selfish activists out there.

I truly think that the public has realized that the last 4 to 6 years have been a disaster with nothing of significance getting accomplished and that we are worse off today than we have ever been.

JerryB

Mar 24, 2009 7:59pm [ 13 ]

Mr. Smith,

You certainly have studied the issue and for that I cannot fault you. You also present your case and stick to the issue at hand. It is refreshing even if we do not agree on the answer to the question. What I stand by though is that the questions were on a legal ballot that had been published and promoted. Everyone had the opportunity to read the sample ballots, ask questions, rally the troops and more.

As people that do vote and do care about Forsyth County, we cannot go into homes and march people to the polls at gun point. I respectfully offer that they should have gone to the polls if it was of concern. Voting is easy enough and there are many, many opportunities to get out and vote. More so today than ever before in history!

If they are upset, then they better get off their butts and go vote next time. This time they have nobody to blame but themselves and there should not be any do-overs. It's called accountability and it's something the USA is short on these days.

More important and very concerning to me is that Commissioner Harrell saying that he does not repect the desires of the 14,000 voters that took the time to go vote. Then to have the nerve to say we did not know what we were voting on is insult to injury.

David Richard

Mar 24, 2009 8:00pm [ 14 ]

Boutweasel, This is where your entire premise is wrong!

The south part of the county didn't get me re-elected. Bell won District 4. So, why should we change things? Special interests got this on the ballot; you just think special interests you don't agree with shouldn't have a say while letting special interests you do agree with run the county.

As to your assessment of the voters, they re-elected Charlie Laughinghouse in the last 2 years, they elected Jim Harrell in the last 2 years and they re-elected Brian Tam in the last year. So your assessment that they think the last 4-6 years have been a disaster is functionally moronic.

You're just a chronic whiner who never researches anything you complain about, never gets your facts right, and ignores the reality around you.

Your premise that candidates will have to be more open-minded is a joke. They will have to pander to one area and one area only. They will have to support one area and one area only, and to hell with the other 4 districts, because their votes don't count. With voting the way it is today, commissioners HAVE to look at the big picture and consider all sides. That goes away because of the sour grapes of the city and the chamber not having the power to sway elections over the past 6 years.

Watch your tax bills in 4 years following this disaster of a change if we don't get it changed back. Watch your water bills. Watch the wholly-owned subsidiary of the city of Cumming give away the store to the slave master.

You are truly clueless.

JerryB

Mar 24, 2009 8:01pm [ 15 ]

Mr. Baron...I meant nothing by referring to you as "Walter" and Mr. Smith by his last name. Please forgive me as I meant nothing by it.

Dale

Mar 25, 2009 4:39am [ 16 ]

Charles,

You're right about one thing. This is a good discussion. Finally, we have citizens debating an issue in a thoughtful, respectful manner. These forums are infinitely more productive when that happens. I followed your campaign and have a great deal of respect for you and your ideas. We just happen to disagree on this particular issue.

Sadly, there is one bad apple in this discussion who communication level remains at the grade school level and who has never been able to control his nasty rhetoric. I won't mention his name, but it's one of the main reasons the voters removed him from office.

JerryB

Mar 25, 2009 6:23am [ 17 ]

Dale, I could not agree more. I truly like debating the issues we face and care a great deal about Forsyth County. Charles Smith has done a great deal of studying the issue and while I don't agree with all his assessments I can appreciate his side of the equation and even more so, his respectful attitude.

I am old school and think that no matter the numbers, formulas or justification, a vote is a vote. I would stick by those that cared enough to voice their opinion. Which ever way it had gone. To try and justify a reason for nullifying the result is not what our system is based on and is not a position of accountability.

Dale, when that bad apple finally rots it will then be gone. In the meantime, the best remedy is to just remove it from the barrel (done) and then go on about your business like that bad apple did not exist. We all know there is no use for a bad, rotten apple.

David Richard

Mar 25, 2009 7:36am [ 18 ]

Yet, for some strange reason, neither of you can refute my premise or my conclusions.

Color me shocked.

concerned

Mar 25, 2009 8:55am [ 19 ]

A question. Would district elections allow a recall by the district voters?

Charles I Smith

Mar 25, 2009 9:17am [ 20 ]

"concerned" brings up an interesting perspective I had not thought of, and that is that it may be easier to recall a commissioner if elected only within a District. My limited understanding of the applicable election law is that

No recall can take place within the first or last 6 months of the term of office.
10% of the eligible voters must sign a petition to merely file an application for a recall.
Then, the elections supertintendent will issue petition forms which must then be signed by 30% of the electors, and this is what generates a recall election.
Then, within some specified time period, 45 days maybe, a special election shall be held with only a YES or NO vote for recall on the ballot. I suppose a simple majority would prevail for or against.

Jim Callihan

Mar 25, 2009 10:26am [ 21 ]

Same ol same ol. The citizens of Forsyth County NEVER ASKED to be "divided" into "districts"; This was imposed upon us by laws beyond our County. Now a "have your cake and eat it too" agenda sets to ignore the end result of such "divisions" and refute a public vote. HOGWASH!

Many arguments have been made here that are completely valid. I especially appreciate the "due-dilligence" of data included. However...IT'S AFTER THE FACT (votes counted).

I think that a sound resolution to be considered going forward, rather than discarding legitimate votes of the past, is to have an "At-Large" Commissioner who sits among the other "District" (formerly a misnomer) Commissioners.

What's done is done and I suspect that any attempt to rescind it will be met with strong opposition...possibly even outrage and recall petitions; I hope this point becomes moot and democracy prevails.

I should disclose that I live in District 5, even though there is no "conflict of interest" on my part - quite the contrary.

Forsyth Republican

Mar 25, 2009 10:27am [ 22 ]

It's interesting, and ironic, that it is so difficult for the people to initiate a recall effort, yet a single commissioner wants to usurp the will of 14,000 voters with a couple of resolutions and a press release.

Maybe Commissioner Harrell should have to wait 6 months, get 10% of the people to sign a petition to file an application for reversal of this decision, get 30% of the electors to sign a petition to generate a reversal election, and then have a special referendum to decide if the expressed will of the voters should be reversed.

It sure seems like if the people were required to do all of that that to reverse and election, the commissioner should have to follow the same process.

Lynn

Mar 25, 2009 11:47am [ 23 ]

I also don't like the power grab to circumvent the voters in order to build a new jail. Forsyth County needs a new jail. It is wrong to house county inmates in crowded, dangerous and inhumane conditions.

That being said, the county commissioners purchased 7 million dollars worth of land? But, the voters voted NO. I harped about putting the jail on SPLOST. But no, Roads to nowhere are more important to this selfish county. (Talbolt mall that will never materialize)due to the failure of the US ecomomy.

Voting is one of our most important rights in this country, if not THE most.

Jim Callihan

Mar 27, 2009 9:19am [ 24 ]

These discussions bring me back to several key components that plague our so-called democracy: 1)A very low percent of Americans who would be otherwise known as "qualified voters" (nationally) are actually registered to do so. 2)Of those that do take the time to register, as mentioned several times previously herein, a dismal turnout (by percent) is often the result.

Which brings me to my third point, which I contend is the greatest factor effecting points "1 & 2": 3)When public servants are duly elected, ranging from "dog catcher to President", as they say, the "will of the people" is all too often, ignored. And I concede that there are times when "the majority" is wrong by failing to see the "end result" of their wishes. These times call for genuine Statesmen.

By stating "the people", I am not only referring to those that do participate by way of voting, but the general public - the "common man"; the one(s) addressed in the Preamble to the US Constitution - the recipients of a policy to "promote the general welfare".

Every single national crisis can be directly traced to this policy of preferring "one man over another". And this is not some fault of character or government structure that is uniquely "American". In the days of Christ, He too warned His followers about entertaining the presence of "rich men" or giving them special seating at the table. And of course, our Savior led by example with only a couple of the "Twelve Disciples" being more than "commoners".

While we may call ourselves a "Christian Nation" and seek to place those of such character as public servants, the "fruit" from "that tree" is too-often bitter and/or rotten, yet they are re-elected.

Unlike the great Republican, Charles A. Lindbergh who is often quoted with his "A radical is one who speaks the truth" comment (he openly challenged the judgment of a member of his "party" - no less than the President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson) - we, as Americans, fall into the trap of "label and dismiss" politics..."never embarrass the party".

As a result, we all suffer as a whole..."bi-partisan" misery. As a result, the most unconstitutional and vile laws are enacted that do not promote liberty or the general welfare, but rather, the financial and civil enslavement of "the common man".

While discontent, disillusion and apathy grow rampant, the reigns of power are handed to fewer and fewer. The question yet to be answered - the most obvious problem of all, is re-engaging those who no longer take part in (potentially) the greatest civil act upon planet Earth: the right to vote...the right to be represented.

Until that problem is solved, "foxes" will continue deciding the fate of the "chickens".

http://publiccentralbank.com/

May His wisdom come down and His strength rise up...