"It's My Party And I'll Cry If I Want To"
by Bob Barr,
Special to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Wednesday, June 21, 2006 at 9:00 AM

At a point in the not-too-distant past, party labels meant something in local government. Democrats believed in raising taxes to pay for an ever-expanding network of social services, from schools and libraries to parks and community centers. The same logic motivated Democratic local governments to dramatically restrict individual freedom with draconian building codes, restrictive municipal ordinances and numerous roadblocks to economic growth.

Republican-led governments, on the other hand, worked to lower government spending and maximize individual freedom. Republican municipal leaders kept taxes low and focused on providing only the basic services citizens expected, such as police, fire, trash pickup and basic school systems.

To individual citizens, this clear difference in governing philosophies led to real choices at the ballot box. Voters wanting nanny government and the bill to pay for it had only to vote Democrat for mayor, city council, school board and county commission. On the other hand, citizens wanting to mostly fend for themselves - and pay much lower taxes in return - had only to go to the polls and elect Republicans.

In metro Atlanta, this partisan difference led to geographic divides, where citizens who wanted conservative government chose to live in counties such as Cobb and Gwinnett, while their more liberal-leaning counterparts moved to DeKalb and Atlanta. This system may have worked well, but those days have rapidly vanished. And the reason is not that Democratic elected officials have started behaving more conservatively. Instead, exactly the opposite trend has taken hold, with Republican elected officials becoming increasingly liberal.

Don't believe me? Try taking a look at "conservative" Forsyth County. The school board there has drawn national attention for its consideration of A "cupcake ban" that would prevent kids from bringing in homemade treats For their classmates or teachers. In other words, of all the grave threats facing America's kids, the Republicans in Forsyth have singled out cupcakes and brownies for a draconian ban.

Or drive a few miles west to Roswell. The Republican-led government there has become a national laughingstock for courageously moving to ban the horrid menace resulting from kids with BB guns. In other suburbs, policies from extreme watering bans to warrantless, unannounced inspections of rental properties have stuck the government's nose into thousands of homes.

When it comes to fiscal responsibility, Republican municipal leaders aren't doing much better. From one end of metro Atlanta to the other, tax assessments are rising, and the number of new parks, libraries, community centers, sidewalks and government employees continues to skyrocket. Of course, in the final analysis, the problem isn't even the elected officials themselves as much as the citizens who put them in office. My fellow suburbanites have become so collectively obsessed with eliminating every danger and nuisance from their lives that they are willing to turn over previously unthinkable amounts of power to local government leaders.

My neighbors have become unwilling to vote for Republican candidates who will cut taxes and build fewer taxpayer-funded amenities. In short, we have been enticed by the easy appeal of party labels and the false promise that government can replace personal responsibility and individual freedom in making our lives safe and happy.

Maybe I'm being unreasonable, but is it too much to expect Republicans to actually stand for less government? We would be well advised to remember that these local officials are the farm team for tomorrow's national leaders. If you think federal spending and legal restrictions are out of control now, just wait until a few of these folks get elected to Congress. Just imagine what a congressional majority of so-called Republicans bent on expanding government power, raising taxes, and increasing federal government could do in a few short years.

Come to think of it, isn't that pretty much what we have in both the Congress and the White House right now? Republicans, by and large, spend The same as Democrats, but on slightly different priorities. It's hard to tell whether national Republicans are following the lead of local Republicans or vice versa, but the result is the same - it doesn't seem to matter much anymore whether one sports an "R" or a "D" after their name.

In many respects, it might even make for more honest campaigning and voting if more rather than fewer of our elections were held in a nonpartisan framework.