Thirty years ago Thursday, our forefathers made a monumental decision to hire Jim Elliott as our city’s attorney. For the last 30 years, Jim has served our city diligently. Jim has saved our city thousands of dollars in litigation as well as having foresight in preventing many problems from occurring. I also believe the decisions we make today can impact our city 30 years from now.
Jim, congratulations on a job well done and the job you continue to do for Warner Robins. Your best days are ahead of you.
-- Chuck Shaheen
Never miss a local story.
All of a sudden our justice system has waffled on cases that begged for realistic adjudication. First and foremost, in my opinion, our district attorney, David Cooke, should have sought the death penalty for Stephen McDaniel. The years spent to find McDaniel guilty were a total loss. Hitler would not have been given a plea bargain. Bibb County spent in excess of a $1 million in getting to that end. They are insane to think they are going to rehabilitate that sick animal. What is their rationale? Save money? Nonsense, his incarceration, given his age, will cost far more than lethal injection. The family deserves closure.
-- Joe Hubbard
Editor’s note: The Giddings family agreed to drop the death penalty.
Separation of powers
For several years now, Americans have continued to see a serious abuse of our political process and the U.S. Constitution. From what I understand, we have three branches of the federal government: Legislative, the House and Senate that develops laws. The executive branch with the president who approves/signs/upholds laws via departments. The judicial branch, Supreme Court that reviews/rules on constitutional adherence of laws. All three branches were established by our founding fathers to create a balance of power between them to prevent abuse.
It is apparent to many Americans that we currently lack such a balance as our president continues to invoke law changing powers outside of Congress by executive order, in other words, his dictum. America was created by individuals who fled Europe from such dictatorial and abusive monarchs and dictatorships. They came to America to escape such hardships and for religious freedom.
Our Declaration of Independence later defined our separation from England. Clearly, the Constitution which includes the Bill of Rights and the Preamble to the Constitution have defined America as unique in our world. This model has been extremely effective for over 200 years, albeit slowly eroding due to changes by more progressive/liberal politicians. Many powerful nations in the past have gone through such success and eventual failure: Rome, Greece, Babylon and even Israel. My primary concern at this time is: Who is going to take the steps to stop the overreach of our president? Clearly, both Congress and the Supreme Court have the ability but have not taken aggressive action to do so.
If our president is observed as violating our Constitution, why doesn’t the Supreme Court take the initiative to stop him from doing such? Does the Supreme Court only act upon formal legal action by some entity to force them to act? Why can’t the Supreme Court take overt action when clearly one branch, in this case the president, is acting unilaterally and out of control? This clearly is not what Americans expect of our president nor any other branch of government. If Congress or the Supreme Court will not control and reverse the president’s actions, does it then fall upon the American people?
-- Richard Wilson
Whispering Pines, N.C.