The flag: What lawmakers say

Published 3:04 pm Tuesday, December 6, 2005

MOULTRIE — Colquitt County’s six state legislators want to have three choices on the proposed flag referendum to defuse tensions among Georgia’s citizenry.

Wire reports Tuesday said Gov. Sonny Perdue favors a yes-no question regarding keeping the current flag on a proposed referendum, and many are interpreting his remarks to mean voters won’t have the pre-2001 as an option.

Republicans assured reporters there would be choices.

Staffers for the new Republican governor say the public will be told details of a referendum on Wednesday. Monday, Perdue said he favors a series of public meetings across the state about the flag and race. Later that night, he talked about the referendum on a WSB radio call-in program, an Associated Press article said.

“I think we ought to first have an up or down vote on the current flag,” Perdue said. “Should we retain it or should we change it? Sometimes that will give us an answer there. I frankly don’t know how that’s going to go.”

All of the county’s legislators, with the exception of Rep. Austin Scott, R-Tifton, said they welcome a referendum. Scott said he thinks a referendum is a bad idea, suggesting instead that the Legislature should simply vote in the pre-1956 flag with the seal on one side and three bars to its side.

“It’s a good looking flag. It is not going to satisfy all the people, but it will satisfy the vast majority of people,” he said.

Scott voted to change the flag in 2001.

As a state representative, Sen. John Bulloch, R-Ochlocknee, voted not to change the flag in 2001 but sees that the issue has divided the state and will continue to do so until the people are “given some opportunity to express their feelings about the symbol that represents this state.”

Bulloch said he respects the stance of citizens who find the pre-2001 flag offensive.

“We want this to be an opportunity to heal and move forward and not something that will be a more divisive issue,” he said.

The new senator doesn’t perceive the flag as a party issue.

“The vote to change the flag didn’t follow party lines. A lot of people make this a party issue, but if you look back at the vote, this thing did not follow party lines at all in the vote to change it,” he said.

Rep. Richard Royal, D-Camilla, said some of his constituents have been very plain-spoken about their feelings and will settle for nothing less than to have the pre-2001 flag fly again, but he “would be the most surprised person in the world if we have the opportunity to vote to bring back the flag we just took out.”

“I don’t think you’ll ever see a referendum on the 1956 flag,” he said.

Royal, who took a lot of heat for voting to change the flag in 2001, said the president doesn’t want a nonbinding referendum during the 2004 general election and the governor doesn’t want another referendum in 2006 to get it passed as prescribed by Georgia law.

Royal thinks partisan politics are at work, but he will vote for any type of referendum if the opportunity arises.

“We’ve beat this one long enough. We need to move on. There are more pressing issues in the State of Georgia. We need to resolve it one way or another,” he said, adding he will abide by the people’s decision.

Royal agrees with Scott, saying in retrospect, the General Assembly should have changed the flag back to the pre-1956 flag, he said.

Sen. Rooney Bowen, R-Cordele, hopes to see three choices on a referendum, he’s betting there will only be two. Bowen voted to change the flag in 2001 when he was a Democrat.

Rep. Penny Houston, D-Nashville, who voted to keep the old flag in 2001, wants a third option on the referendum.

As for a vote, Houston said, “I’m going to do what is right and what the people of my district want me to do.”

Houston doesn’t think the issue is divided along partisan lines, she said.

Freshman Rep. Ed Rynders, R-Leesburg, sees three flag camps of Georgia legislators: the flaggers, those who recognize the pre-2001 as damaging to race relations and those who hated the way the current flag was rushed through the Legislature without public





input.

“If it’s partisan, it’s because of the pressure put on by party leadership,” Rynders said. “Vote your conscience. There have been plenty of Democrats that said they didn’t like the process (in 2001) either. I’ve been a little annoyed at the Democrats who said they really didn’t like the process but voted for it anyway.”

Rynders said that no one at the capitol talks about the frustration that an either-or vote will leave a large number of unhappy citizens whichever way the vote leans.

He is reserving comment until after Perdue makes his announcement.