Georgia's ‘DOGE' bill to get full vote in House
Georgia lawmakers are one step closer to forcing most state agencies to audit themselves and report back to the General Assembly.
Supporters say it's necessary to create a more efficient state government.
Critics and advocates, including Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, have called it a Georgia version of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE.
Democrats grilled Forsyth County Republican state Sen. Greg Dolezal during a House committee about his Red Tape Rollback Act, a bill he said would require state agencies to audit themselves and report on the impact their rules have on small businesses and the economy.
'While this looks to decrease administrative burdens, it only adds more burden to agencies that are often underfunded and understaffed,' State Rep. Michelle Au told Channel 2's Richard Elliot.
TRENDING STORIES:
UGA student's smiling mugshot breaks the internet
Murder victim in Cobb had seen the suspect before, brother says
GA mom, boyfriend being held without bond after 4-year-old girl dies
But Republicans defended the bill, insisting it was the best way to make sure state government remains efficient by cleaning out old rules and regulations and requiring legislative approval for any rule that has an impact greater than three-million dollars.
'It creates a strong incentive for agencies to demonstrate their value,' State Rep. Charlice Byrd said.
The bill did pass along party lines though the committee did agree to two Democratic changes.
Afterwards, Powder Springs Democrat state. Rep. David Wilkerson liked the changes but still voted against the bill, insisting it will do the opposite of what it's intended to do.
'Since I've been here, my focus has been on making sure we run effective government, and this is the largest expansion of administrative government I've seen since I've been here,' Wilkerson told Elliot.
Dolezal insists this will remove burdensome rules and regulations on small businesses allowing them to focus on job creation.
He rejects the idea this is just a Georgia version of Elon Musk's DOGE.
'What this bill does not do is create some agency that is going to go and blow up different areas of government,' Dolezal said.
The bill passed that committee and will now move to the full House for a vote.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ben Crump Says Donald Trump's Spending Bill is Terrible Amid Elon Musk Feud
Ben Crump's picked his side in the Elon Musk and Donald Trump beef ... but, he's not backing a personality, he says he's backing the better idea -- and, he doesn't want the "One Big Beautiful Bill" to pass through the Senate. We caught up with the civil rights activist and attorney and asked him about the fight between POTUS and his former advisor ... and, he doesn't directly say he's on Elon's side -- but, he does think this spending bill is terrible. Crump rips the bill for making cuts to Medicaid -- the medical assistance program for people with lower incomes. BC says the world needs more humanity for all people ... instead of making the life of individuals struggling financially more difficult. As you know ... Elon lost his cool about this spending bill earlier this week -- firing off shots at the president and claiming Trump only won reelection because of his efforts. President Trump called BS on that idea ... but, Elon pushed on and claimed the real reason the administration hasn't released the so-called Epstein files is because the president's name is all over them. He's since deleted the post where he wrote that ... but, today Trump warned of serious consequences if Elon decides to support Dems who are running against Republicans who vote for the bill. BTW ... we also asked Crump about Trump potentially pardoning Diddy -- and, it sounds like Crump's staying out of that one, too. Bottom line ... back the idea, not the man -- that's the Ben Crump way!
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Tesla shareholders face staggering new hurdle after company enacts controversial policy: 'A formidable barrier'
Tesla raised the bar for shareholders to sue the company board or executives for breach of fiduciary duties. The change took effect May 15 and requires an investor or group of investors to hold 3% of the electric vehicle maker's stock "to institute or maintain a derivative proceeding," CNBC reported. Tesla's market cap is $1.123 trillion, so a plaintiff would have to own shares worth $33.7 billion. "Obviously, for a company of Tesla's size, that would be a formidable barrier to anyone bringing a lawsuit for breach of fiduciary duty," Tulane Law School's Ann Lipton told CNBC in an email. The change was enabled by a Texas law that "allows corporations to limit shareholder lawsuits against insiders for breach of fiduciary duty," the outlet added. With shareholder approval, Tesla moved its incorporation site from Delaware to the Lone Star State in June 2024. An investor who owned nine shares of Tesla stock sued the company in 2018, and CEO Elon Musk's $56 billion compensation package was revoked in January 2024. Musk is by far the richest person on the planet, and his wealth makes him nearly untouchable. He helped to pioneer the EV movement by becoming an early investor in Tesla in 2003, and the company has been known for innovative technology and industry-leading breakthroughs. Recently, however, the South African has drawn criticism for straying into American and European politics, including spending lavishly on the U.S. presidential election campaign of Donald Trump, leading government spending cuts as the head of the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, and supporting the far-right Alternative for Germany party. Activists have protested these actions, and Tesla charging stations, vehicles, and dealerships have been vandalized. Sales have plummeted, and Tesla stock spiraled downward, too, though it has regained much of its value. This upheaval and the larger perception change of Musk from groundbreaker to villain could stifle the uptake of EVs, which is one of the many things necessary to slow the rapid rise of global temperatures caused by the burning of fossil fuels for energy. It would take a massive coalition of shareholders to fight back against this move by Tesla, though companies are generally amenable to public pressure — especially when it comes to consumers' spending power. Tesla, for example, is shifting its focus from EV manufacturing to a robotaxi service and robotics to stabilize its future. Musk has a history of not delivering on outlandish promises, but it has not significantly slowed the company or deterred its supporters. What do you think of Tesla and Elon Musk? Elon is the man Love the company; hate the CEO I'm not a fan of either I don't have an opinion Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
an hour ago
South Dakota is on track to spend $2 billion on prisons in the next decade
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. -- Two years after approving a tough-on-crime sentencing law, South Dakota is scrambling to deal with the price tag for that legislation: Housing thousands of additional inmates could require up to $2 billion to build new prisons in the next decade. That's a lot of money for a state with one of the lowest populations in the U.S., but a consultant said it's needed to keep pace with an anticipated 34% surge of new inmates in the next decade as a result of South Dakota's tough criminal justice laws. And while officials are grumbling about the cost, they don't seem concerned with the laws that are driving the need even as national crime rates are dropping. 'Crime has been falling everywhere in the country, with historic drops in crime in the last year or two,' said Bob Libal, senior campaign strategist at the criminal justice nonprofit The Sentencing Project. 'It's a particularly unusual time to be investing $2 billion in prisons.' Some Democratic-led states have worked to close prisons and enact changes to lower inmate populations, but that's a tough sell in Republican-majority states such as South Dakota that believe in a tough-on-crime approach, even if that leads to more inmates. For now, state lawmakers have set aside a $600 million fund to replace the overcrowded 144-year-old South Dakota State Penitentiary in Sioux Falls, making it one of the most expensive taxpayer-funded projects in South Dakota history. But South Dakota will likely need more prisons. Phoenix-based Arrington Watkins Architects, which the state hired as a consultant, has said South Dakota will need 3,300 additional beds in coming years, bringing the cost to $2 billion. Driving up costs is the need for facilities with different security levels to accommodate the inmate population. Concerns about South Dakota's prisons first arose four years ago, when the state was flush with COVID-19 relief funds. Lawmakers wanted to replace the penitentiary, but they couldn't agree on where to put the prison and how big it should be. A task force of state lawmakers assembled by Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden is expected to decide that in a plan for prison facilities this July. Many lawmakers have questioned the proposed cost, but few have called for criminal justice changes that would make such a large prison unnecessary. 'One thing I'm trying to do as the chairman of this task force is keep us very focused on our mission,' said Lieutenant Gov. Tony Venhuizen. 'There are people who want to talk about policies in the prisons or the administration or the criminal justice system more broadly, and that would be a much larger project than the fairly narrow scope that we have.' South Dakota's incarceration rate of 370 per 100,000 people is an outlier in the Upper Midwest. Neighbors Minnesota and North Dakota have rates of under 250 per 100,000 people, according to the Sentencing Project, a criminal justice advocacy nonprofit. Nearly half of South Dakota's projected inmate population growth can be attributed to a law approved in 2023 that requires some violent offenders to serve the full-length of their sentences before parole, according to a report by Arrington Watkins. When South Dakota inmates are paroled, about 40% are ordered to return to prison, the majority of those due to technical violations such as failing a drug test or missing a meeting with a parole officer. Those returning inmates made up nearly half of prison admissions in 2024. Sioux Falls criminal justice attorney Ryan Kolbeck blamed the high number of parolees returning in part on the lack of services in prison for people with drug addictions. 'People are being sent to the penitentiary but there's no programs there for them. There's no way it's going to help them become better people,' he said. 'Essentially we're going to put them out there and house them for a little bit, leave them on parole and expect them to do well.' South Dakota also has the second-greatest disparity of Native Americans in its prisons. While Native Americans make up one-tenth of South Dakota's population, they make up 35% of those in state prisons, according to Prison Policy Initiative, a nonprofit public policy group. Though legislators in the state capital, Pierre, have been talking about prison overcrowding for years, they're reluctant to dial back on tough-on-crime laws. For example, it took repeated efforts over six years before South Dakota reduced a controlled substance ingestion law to a misdemeanor from a felony for the first offense, aligning with all other states. 'It was a huge, Herculean task to get ingestion to be a misdemeanor,' Kolbeck said. Former penitentiary warden Darin Young said the state needs to upgrade its prisons, but he also thinks it should spend up to $300 million on addiction and mental illness treatment. 'Until we fix the reasons why people come to prison and address that issue, the numbers are not going to stop,' he said. Without policy changes, the new prisons are sure to fill up, criminal justice experts agreed. 'We might be good for a few years, now that we've got more capacity, but in a couple years it'll be full again,' Kolbeck said. 'Under our policies, you're going to reach capacity again soon.'
