Did GA house violate Delta’s First Amendment Right to Free Speech?

Sparagmos said:

Lawmakers take aim at Delta over new voting law

Can the Government punish Delta because the CEO criticized them?

Click to expand...

It's certainly a form of overt corruption and lowers the tax breaks that Delta was getting to the level of quid pro quo hush money.

Apparently the price of getting business perks in Georgia is staying quiet about naked partisan voter suppression laws passed to try to get Republicans elected.

variant said:

It's certainly a form of overt corruption and lowers the tax breaks that Delta was getting to the level of quid pro quo hush money.

Apparently the price of getting business perks in Georgia is staying quiet about naked partisan voter suppression laws passed to try to get Republicans elected.

Click to expand...

Or just maybe it would be better to let our representative form of government work instead of corporations using their economic extortion to force people to accept laws that they do not want. It appears that when the facts of this law are reviewed it is not only logical but it is fair.

Didn’t they threaten something similar a couple years ago?

Sure. The legislature granted the tax breaks because Delta was seen as a good representative of the State of Georgia, a promoter of the state, and so on. When she decided instead to denounce the state, it makes sense that the legislature might change its mind.

Sparagmos said:

Lawmakers take aim at Delta over new voting law

Can the Government punish Delta because the CEO criticized them?

Click to expand...

There is no legal action by the State of Georgia against only Delta for a statement they made critical of a law made to restrict the Georgians’ right to vote. A jet fuel tax to pay for airports or other infrastructure is a potential burden to all the airlines. Delta was not singled out.

There is no nation on earth without taxes.

Sparagmos said:

I understand the motive and reasoning. But isn’t retaliation by the government for criticizing them a violation of the First Amendment?

Click to expand...

If so, it happens all the time. And I'm sure the state would argue that the action wasn't taken because Delta's CEO was critical of the legislature.

disciple Clint said:

Or just maybe it would be better to let our representative form of government work instead of corporations using their economic extortion to force people to accept laws that they do not want. It appears that when the facts of this law are reviewed it is not only logical but it is fair.

Click to expand...

It's weird that "you will only get a tax breaks if you tow the line on our worst policies" is economic extortion of the government in your opinion.

To me they are saying basically that the trade is that you will get advantages only if you support the party in power. So, it looks like Delta should do what they can to change the party in power.

And, it looks like the party in power has grown corrupt and unethical so removing it will be a good idea for businesses in the state.

Albion said:

If so, it happens all the time. And I'm sure the state would argue that the action wasn't taken because Delta's CEO was critical of the legislature.

Click to expand...

They can argue whatever they like, if called before court their discussions of the matter would be put into evidence.

Their public statements are pretty clear on the matter. I wonder what their private emails look like.

"They like our public policy when we're doing things that benefit them," Georgia's Republican House Speaker David Ralston said, according to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "You don't feed a dog that bites your hand."

Georgia House threatens Delta tax break after CEO slammed new voting restrictions - CNNPolitics

What the House did (and the Senate adjourned without considering) was to repeal the sales tax exemption for Jet Fuel. So they hit every airline refueling in Georgia.

Now it does hit Delta the hardest as they are the only major airline with a hub in Georgia. Southwest does not use a hub and spoke business model, but Atlanta is one of their major airports, so they will be hit the second hardest.

If it had become law it would have resulted in a shift of flights away from Atlanta and other Georgia airports. And changes in refueling practices. How big is all but imposible to say. But it could prove embarassing to Georgia lawmakers no matter what. If there is a big impact they will rightly be blemed. Since the legislation that would ahve been repealed explicitly says how big an impact it would make in improving the economyy of Georgia if there is little impact to repeal questions would be asked about teh original legislation.

Of course the inaction of the Senate makes any actual economicimpact moot.

OTOH, it appears Georgia is going to be feeling some economic impact based on the voting restrictions they passed, since not only are they being criticized by various corporations, but they also lost this summer's MLB All-Star game. It will be interesting if there are other actions by corporations.

variant said:

It's weird that "you will only get a tax breaks if you tow the line on our worst policies" is economic extortion of the government in your opinion.

To me they are saying basically that the trade is that you will get advantages only if you support the party in power. So, it looks like Delta should do what they can to change the party in power.

And, it looks like the party in power has grown corrupt and unethical so removing it will be a good idea for businesses in the state.

Click to expand...

The counter by the airlines and others will be that unless the law is repealed, the companies won't support these candidates in any way.

mark46 said:

The counter by the airlines and others will be that unless the law is repealed, the companies won't support these candidates in any way.

Click to expand...

Then it comes down to accounting: is it cheaper to fund “replacements” or simply absorb the costs?
95% of the time it’ll be the latter, but here, now?

disciple Clint said:

Or just maybe it would be better to let our representative form of government work instead of corporations using their economic extortion to force people to accept laws that they do not want. It appears that when the facts of this law are reviewed it is not only logical but it is fair.

Click to expand...

So, the “representative form of government” isn’t to work for the people employed with Delta and reside within Georgia? Corporations aren’t brick and mortar. Corporations are comprised of people, essentially, a corporation is a collection of people. People with mortgages,car payments, bills, kids, parents saving for their kid’s education, work for Delta. The threat of a boycott of the company has a risk of jeopardizing jobs, and those employed at the bottom of the ladder will very likely, based on historical practice, be the first to file for unemployment.

So, it makes sense for a carbon based human being from Delta, to denounce the law. Despite the appearance of hypocrisy and the plausibility the derision from Delta was motivated by dollars and cents. The people at Delta, who live in Georgia, some are registered voters and vote in Georgia elections, and the government is there to represent them as much as it is there to represent other groups, such as the NRA, pro-life groups, etcetera.