H.R. 3457: Justice for Victims of Iranian Terrorism Act
To prohibit the lifting of sanctions on Iran until the Government of Iran pays the judgments against it for acts of terrorism, and for other purposes.
9/9/2015--Introduced.Justice for Victims of Iranian Terrorism ActThis bill prohibits the President from waiving, suspending, reducing, providing relief from, or otherwise limiting the application of sanctions against Iran under any provision ... Read more >
Fourteen years ago today, September 11, 2001, It seems like yesterday. #neverforget
"It was my honor to attend this event today along with Senator William Ligon, and Steve Swan, executive director of the JWSC." ~Rep. Jeff Jones
“We are excited about our new home and hope that our customers will be too. This building is made with them in mind,” said Steve Swan, executive director of the JWSC.
Learn more about the new JWSC facilities here: http://www.thebrunswicknews.com/news/local_news/jwsc-new-building-tour/article_9142ec64-6e23-5a91-bb43-0498f8514ca1.html
Pictured: Charles H "Chet" Tisdale, Ret. Partner at King & Spaulding Law, Rep. Jeff Jones, Richard E. Glaze, Jr, Partner at Balch & Bingham Law.Read more
By Congressman Buddy Carter
In case you missed it, the Obama Administration announced an agreement on the Iranian nuclear deal this week and I asked you to let me know your opinion.
An overwhelming 88.4% of respondents said they do not support the deal.Read more
Susette Kelo was minding her own business when the city of New London, Conn., set its sights on her home. The city wanted to take the property and demolish the home, along with her neighbors’ homes, to make way for private economic development.
Kelo decided to fight back. The Institute for Justice led her fight, joined by think tanks around the country, including the Georgia Public Policy Foundation.
Remember the shocked property owners around the nation when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 10, 2005, that the city could take Kelo’s home and land against her will?Read more
As you may recall, I voted NO on HB170 - Transportation Funding Act of 2015.
The Georgia Department of Revenue has posted the following document pertaining to Motor Vehicle changes related to the Transportation Funding Act of 2015, which will become effective July 1, 2015. The bulletin can be found here.
Representative Jeff Jones
By Representative Jeff Jones
One year-ago – Earth Day, April 22, 2014 – the Director of the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) of the Department of Natural Resources, announced that the State of Georgia would no longer enforce a long-standing provision requiring a 25-foot marsh protection buffer. (View EPD Director Jud Turner’s letter) The marsh buffer stipulation, which appears in the Erosion and Sedimentation Act, requires marsh front developments - whether large or small, commercial or residential - to observe a 25-foot buffer. The buffer’s purpose is to protect salt marshes from upland soil erosion, and runoff from construction and from commercial or residential marsh-side developments.
As a resident of coastal Georgia serving my first term in the Georgia House of Representatives, I was extremely concerned about the prospect that our coastal marshes were unprotected by a buffer and the possibility that our environmentally and economically important marsh buffers would continue unprotected.
Throughout the end of 2014, I continued to read, listen and learn more about coastal marsh protection issues. In the process, coastal residents and legislators voiced strong concerns and objections to EPD's decision to cease enforcement of the buffer provision. The EPD Director justified the decision to stop buffer enforcement because he said that language in the Erosion and Sedimentation Act was confusing, EPD's enforcement was inconsistent across the state and that the 2004 letter from ex-EPD Director Carol Couch, which had been acceptable for over 10 years was not enforceable as law (View Carol Couch’s 2004 memorandum). For example, for more than a decade, the agency had been enforcing the buffer on coastal salt marsh, but not on freshwater wetlands, which have their own, separate complexities, issues and challenges. Upon reading the language in the Erosion and Sedimentation Act, I began to better understand the confusion about the Act's applicability to coastal salt marsh and became convinced that we needed a legislative remedy.Read more
This siting of this jellyfish processing factory on the Sapelo River in 2014 shows the changes that could come if loopholes aren't closed in the current marsh buffer bill, environmentalists say. Photocourtesy Megan Desrosiers/ One Hundred Miles.
By Mary Landers
Worried that the current marsh buffer bill is too weak, Rep. Jeff Jones of Brunswick is gathering support for a substitute that would close its major loopholes.
On Friday, Jones emailed his fellow state representatives with his substitute for S.B. 101, the buffer bill introduced by Savannah Republican state Sen. Ben Watson.
“Many of us believe that S.B. 101, as presented, has too many broad exceptions and significantly hampers the Environmental Protection Division of the DNR’s ability to effectively and properly manage and protect Georgia’s coastal marshes,” Jones wrote to house members. “I’ve been working with (Rules Committee) Chairman (John) Meadows, other representatives and members of the environmental community, to craft a substitute bill that tightens up the broad exception language in the original S.B. 101 and effectively returns control and oversight of handling marsh buffer exceptions to the EPD.”
Coastal lawmaker tries to salvage marsh protections
Posted: March 21, 2015 - 11:22pm | Updated: March 23, 2015 - 8:39am