Kevin Drum, in commenting on this entry about zapping the TeleZapper, asked a very reasonable question:
Sarcasm aside, why do they want to defeat devices like the TeleZapper? Surely anyone willing to spend $40 and expend the effort to install such a thing is pissed off enough about telemarketing calls that they are genuinely unlikely to respond to a call. Why would you want to contact such a person?
Now one of his readers has suggested a very reasonable answer:
This, I think, has to do with an old door-to-door salesman's rule of thumb, namely, that the best doors to knock on were those where there were signs saying "No Solicitors." These signs were mostly (at least in the salesmen's worldview) put up by people whose "sales resistance" was nil, people who knew (or whose spouse, perhaps, knew) that any salesman who got them to open the door was pretty well guaranteed a sale. People who could easily growl, "get lost" to a salesman didn't need "No Solicitors" signs. So, anyone who goes to the trouble and expense of buying and installing a Telezapper is quite likely someone who has little to no sales resistance and is probably a pretty good mark.
Very interesting. I still see it Kevin's way, but I can certainly understand this viewpoint.
You know, for all of the crabbing by some conservatives about Martha Burk and her quest to get the Augusta National Golf Club to admit women, I think I'd rather be on her side of the issue than a Ku Klux Klan splinter group.
"This equal rights stuff has gotten out of hand," Joseph J. Harper, imperial wizard of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, said Friday. "We're not concerned with whether they want us there or not. We're concerned with their right to choose who they want to choose" as members.Harper wrote the Richmond County Sheriff's Department on Thursday, requesting a permit to protest during the Masters in April.
I suppose it ruins all the fun to point out that the kind of publicity that a KKKesque protest at an event like the Masters would generate is exactly the sort of thing that gives network executives and corporate sponsors a terminal case of the heebie jeebies, and that their prescription to make it go away is to call Hootie Johnson up and tell him to invite a chick into the club, pronto. Joseph Harper, therefore, is very likely to do exactly what Martha Burk was unable to.
I'm gonna have to buy myself a new Irony-O-Meter, because this story just broke the one I have now.
Mac also picked up on this.
Today's edition of Worst Case Budget Scenarios is what the Children's Health Insurance Program and Medicaid look like after a 12.5% budget cut as mandated by Governor Goodhair. It ain't pretty.
The worst-case-scenario budget that reduces funding 12.5 percent for Health and Human Services would result in the following:· Cutting 251,200, or 51 percent of children served, from the Children's Health Insurance Program.
· Cutting 69,800 needy adults from the Medicaid rolls.
· Cutting Medicaid reimbursement to providers by 33 percent, likely meaning fewer doctors and hospitals would accept Medicaid patients.
This is the guy that Perry himself appointed to oversee these programs saying these things, not some namby-pamby limpwrist liberal who just wants to confiscate your paycheck. As always, the Guv himself is demonstrating genuine leadership:
Perry spokeswoman Kathy Walt refused to offer any specific assurances to increasingly alarmed, affected Texans."The governor is confident that as the Legislature moves through the budgeting process the Legislature will exercise sound judgment distinguishing between wants and needs" she said.
Translation: If y'all can make this work, I'll take the credit. If it goes to hell in a handbasket, it's the Lege's fault.
The figures are too depressing to quote any more. If there's any silver lining, it's that even I can't believe that Perry and the Lege would go this far. Something will have to give, I just don't know what or when.
Man, the last week of February really sucked in 1993, didn't it? Today is the 10th anniversary of the BATF raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, a raid that left four agents and six Davidians dead, and which climaxed 51 days later on April 19 with the fiery deaths of 74 other cultists.
Among the things I didn't know that I do now after reading that article and this one is that there are still followers of David Koresh out there, and that they don't seem to be carrying around much of a grudge against the government for what happened. I can't say much about their theology, but I certainly admire their ability to forgive and move on.
Stray thought: What do you think the threat level will be on April 19? After all the wolf-crying that's been done, will anyone take it seriously? Just curious.
Scott points me to this excellent photo of poker-playing snowmen. Now all they need is someone to paint the whole scene on black velvet.
I feel the need to drive some new Google searches to this site, so I'm happy to point out that Playboy will be photographing the Women of Starbucks later this year. As a dedicated non-drinker of coffee, let me say that this will probably be more tasteful than what usually comes out of Starbucks.
Amusing sidebar: Normally, the Chron's "Newsmakers" section on Page 2 just lifts a paragraph from stories like this without any additional content. Today, though, they added a distinctly Houston spin to it:
Hold on to your travel mugs: Playboy Magazine is planning a "Women of Starbucks" pictorial for late 2003. The monster coffee chain offered a frosty reaction to the brewing controversy on Thursday, saying it doesn't endorse the project. Nonetheless, the magazine -- inspired by the success of similar spreads featuring Enron and 7-Eleven employees -- has given baristas everywhere an April 1 deadline to submit pictures that would make Mr. Coffee blush. With more than 100 stores in Houston -- including one on each side of the intersection at Gray and Shepherd -- it's a good bet Playboy will select a latte lady from the Bayou City. Especially if they used to work at Enron.
Sometimes you just have to sit back and admire the Chron's ability to do Houston boosterism.
The team practice last night was at an indoor batting cage. I'd made the decision to do that instead of work out on the regular field because of the recent nasty weather which forced the cancellation of our last practice. The weather yesterday actually turned out to be pretty decent, but the field would have still been wet and muddy.
We started out with me pitching to the kids. I was behind one of those batting-practice screens you see major leaguers use. It's basically a seven foot square hurricane fence, with a small rectangle cut out in the top left for me to throw through. After everyone had taken a turn, I offered a dollar to anyone who hit a line drive back through that cut-out section. The first kid to do so was the smallest one on the team. He'd swung and missed at most of the pitches before that, so it was really gratifying to see him connect like that. One other kid collected later on.
Eventually we got the manager to set up the Jugs pitching machine to give them a different look. We set the machine for 40 MPH, which was a bit faster than they were used to seeing. All of them started out swinging too late to make contact, but by the time they finished they had the timing down. That was encouraging.
The Jugs machine uses these weird rubber-coated yellow balls that are dimpled like golf balls. I could swear we used to feed the Jugs machine regular baseballs when I was a kid at baseball camp, but maybe that was only in the arm-style machines.
The other major accomplishment was handing off the candy to the parents who had signed up to sell it. They all seemed to know what they were doing, which was a relief to me. They have until March 31 to complete their capitalistic mission.
No practice this Saturday due to a Cub Scout conflict. We'll be back on the field on Tuesday.
Well, the reconstituted Veterans' Committee failed to elect anyone to the Hall of Fame. While I think there were a couple of worthy candidates, I'd rather get this outcome than the enshrinement of a "who's that?" by the former committee, which was a bigger bastion of cronyism and closed-room politics than anything Tammany Hall or Mayor Daley ever conceived of. Jayson Stark also approves of this, and Rob Neyer predicted the outcome when the new Committee was first formed, though given his usual crankiness about the Hall I'm more than a little surprised at how many guys he stumped for.
Personally, I'd have voted for Ron Santo (the only player enshrined by Internet voters), Marvin Miller, and Billy Martin. Yes, Billy Martin, whose record as a manager is criminally overlooked. Anyone who can take four different teams to the postseason is worth consideration, but Joe Torre will get in before Martin ever does (not that Torre's record is anything to sneeze at, especially if you overlook his early years with the Mets).
Finally, I can't believe that people are still stumping for Roger Maris. Look, he had a couple of great seasons, but his career record doesn't come close to Hall standards. For cripes' sake, the players whose career stats are closest to his are as follows:
Bob Allison (946)
Hank Sauer (939)
Jay Buhner (922)
Jesse Barfield (918)
Tony Armas (914)
Dean Palmer (912)
Eric Davis (907)
Danny Tartabull (905)
Bill Nicholson (902)
Raul Mondesi (896)
If there's a Hall of Famer in that bunch, I'm the queen of Romania. Maris was a great guy, but he wasn't a Hall of Famer. Sorry.
The Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority is $20 million poorer than it expected to be due to missed financial projections.
By this time, after the Christmas shopping season, Metro officials expected the transit agency's 1-cent sales tax to have generated $175.3 million.But only $156 million has been collected for this fiscal year, which started Oct. 1. That's $19.3 million or 11 percent less than what Metro predicted in its 2003 budget.
Despite the numbers, which Metro President Shirley DeLibero called "disappointing," officials insist there will be no cuts in service. And if necessary, the agency can fall back on $246 million in reserves.
At least they have reserves, which should avoid any nasty cutbacks. Of course, this sort of thing is a clarion call for political opportunists.
[In November,] Metro will ask voters to approve a multibillion-dollar plan to improve mobility that will include rail and other projects.Financial problems and faulty budget projections could become fodder for transit agency critics long before voters go to the polls. For example, Metro forecast that sales tax revenue would jump 6.1 percent in 2003 -- a prediction made in June, well after the economy started its nose dive.
"This was outrageously overforecasted," said Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt. "There is simply no guess or estimate like this, post-Sept. 11 and during this economic slump, that could be made in good conscience. ... I was shocked at the amount of the increase Metro forecasted, and these numbers show there is simply no basis in financial reality for them."
Bettencourt, a Republican who will decide whether to openly oppose Metro's plan once it's released, said the flawed projections will definitely be an issue with voters.
Such miscalculations could be used to argue that Metro is not a good steward of public money, said Bettencourt, who estimated that Metro's sales tax revenue shortfall could reach $40 million this year.
Hey, Paul, where were you when our state Comptroller fessed up to bigger deficits than she'd originally forecast, forecasts that were derived by wildly optimistic revenue projections? Oh, wait, our Comptroller is a fellow Republican, so no blame attaches there. Move along, nothing to see here.
DeLibero dismisses such talk and said Metro can easily show voters it has been responsible with public money.DeLibero said she has run the agency like a business. There has been zero-based budgeting every year, costs have been held down and officials have spent about $40 million less than budgeted during the past two fiscal years.
"I think the folks out there ought to have seen that," she said. "I feel very confident (voters and any potential critics) should feel comfortable with the way Metro operates and how we look at our fiscal year and how we operate our budget."
To address the sales tax revenue shortfall, DeLibero said the agency will cut administrative costs, such as employee training and enrichment programs and travel. DeLibero has also told administrators to look for other ways to cut their budgets.
Don't forget to stroke Bettencourt's ego while you're at it.
I thought it was pretty clear from the plotline, but just in case there was any doubt, Sarah Michelle Gellar says that this is the last season for Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Well, in its present form, anyway:
But the show may come back to life in some form: Its creator, Joss Whedon, is planning a spin-off that may include some "Buffy" cast members. It will be pitched first to UPN, "Buffy's" home for the past two seasons; for five seasons before that, it was on the WB.
All I can say is that I sincerely hope they don't give us something that resembles After M*A*S*H. Eww.
It's a sad day in the neighborhood:
PITTSBURGH - Fred Rogers, who gently invited millions of children to be his neighbor as host of the public television show "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" for more than 30 years, died of cancer early Thursday. He was 74.Rogers died at his Pittsburgh home, said family spokesman David Newell, who played Mr. McFeely on the show. Rogers had been diagnosed with stomach cancer sometime after the holidays, Newell said.
[...]
Rogers' gentle manner was the butt of some comedian's jokes. Eddie Murphy (news) parodied him on "Saturday Night Live (news - Y! TV)" in the 80's with his "Mister Robinson's Neighborhood," a routine Rogers found funny and affectionate.
All of your Mister Rogers-related questions are answered here. He enjoyed the parodies of himself:
And, all you basketball fans, he doesn't mind at all that San Antonio Spurs star David Robinson is doing his thing in that "Mister Robinson's Neighborhood" Nike ad. "I'm so impressed with David Robinson's spirituality," he said. Mister Rogers even had a kind word for Eddie Murphy, who spoofed him on Saturday Night Live. "When I met him, finally, he was so affectionate and gentle," he said.
I recall reading that Eddie Murphy went into total fanboy mode when he met Fred Rogers, which seems right to me.
Lastly, Salon did a nice retrospective of his career in 1998, to mark the 30th anniversary of Mister Rogers' Neighborhood. USA Today had an equally nice retrospective in 2001 when Mister Rogers hung up his sweater for the last time on the show.
Rest in peace, Mister Rogers.
UPDATE: Sam Heldman notes that Mister Rogers had an impact on a Supreme Court case as well. As one would expect, he was on the right side of the issue.
I don't know how they're going to do it - I'm afraid to even think about it - but Fox is preparing another Joe Millionaire. Not that I'll watch anyway, but I confess the speculation interests me.
One of NBC's top priorities for this summer and next year is to develop a successful relationship-based reality series along the lines of Joe Millionaire and The Bachelor, he said.Meanwhile, ABC announced Thursday it was preparing a fourth edition of The Bachelor that "has the heir to a well-known family, a Dynasty-like family," ABC executive Susan Lyne said.
Fox is about to debut Married by America, a series based on the idea that it can marry off two longing-for-love people who had never met, In April, Fox presents Mr. Personality, a series that "explores how looks effect love," said entertainment President Gail Berman.
Obviously, our interest in disposable celebrities has not yet peaked. Jason Alexander's quote about fame comes to mind:
I once went to speak at a school, and there was a 16-year-old girl... And the girl says to me, 'You know what? I don't care what I do, I just want to be famous.' And I thought, you know, I should really just shoot her in the head because it would serve two things: It would make her famous as the girl that Jason Alexander shot in the head, and it would, you know, spare the world of the banality of the rest of her life.
Indeed.
It's an anti-abortion/pro-tort reform smackdown!
Historically, social conservatives have stood beside business interests pushing what proponents call tort reform -- damage caps and other limitations on lawsuits.Tort reform advocates say ambulance-chasing lawyers have fed a growth in frivolous lawsuits, which have raised the cost of doing business in Texas.
But now, as legislators debate proposals to cap damage awards in medical malpractice lawsuits, some abortion opponents argue that the caps proposed could result in a higher number of abortion providers. They worry that physicians who don't perform abortions now because of malpractice liability might consider the procedure profitable if potential damages were limited.
A bill proposed by state Rep. Joe Nixon, R-Houston, and state Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Addison, would put a $250,000 cap on non-economic damages, such as those sometimes awarded for pain and suffering. Quantifiable economic damages, such as medical expenses and lost earnings, would not be capped.
While proponents of the bill argue that it won't hurt the family values issues dear to social conservatives, some who want Christian values in government promise a holy war to amend the bill. A vote for this brand of tort reform, they warn, is an unintended vote for more abortions in Texas.
"This isn't going to go away," said Houston attorney Mark Lanier, who is leading an effort among social conservatives to have the legislation changed to exempt abortion malpractice cases from the caps, among other amendments. "This bill undervalues human life."
I love a useful idiot. If it takes a bad argument by bad people to beat a bad bill, then so be it.
I should note that this particular bill is unlikely to pass the Senate as is, since Senator Bill Ratliff (R, Mount Pleasant) is the chair of the Senate Affairs Committee, and he opposes a hard cap on non-economic damages. A compromise bill could get through, but these are the kind of opponents who don't believe in compromise.
At the heart of Lanier's argument is the concern that capping damage awards would result in lower insurance rates, which could make abortions more profitable for doctors who provide them.
The great irony, of course, is that now even the insurance industry says that "tort reform" has not lowered rates. Not that he'd let an inconvenient fact slay his logic, mind you.
Anyway, have at it, fellas. We'll be on the sidelines egging you on.
Ten years ago today the World Trade Center was bombed by terrorists who hoped to bring the Towers down. Looking back on it, we never really realized it for what it was: a declaration of war. Pretty easy to see now, unfortunately.
Among the many things that were lost on 9/11 was the memorial to the six people who were killed on February 26, 1993. The artist who designed that memorial writes about it here. I must say, for all of the stories that are supposed to commemorate those six people, the only article I could find that actually mentioned their names is this one, written during the trial of bomber Ramzi Yousef. That's just wrong. Let us never forget Monica Smith, Wilfredo Mercado, Steven Knapp, William Macko, Robert Kirkpatrick, and John DiGiovanni. May they rest in peace.
Looks like the two proposed anti-war resolutions before the Houston City Council will meet the same fate as the slavery reparations resolution did. Though I thought the whole thing was a waste of the Council's time, I do want to thank them for providing me with one shining moment of high comedy:
Most council members who are against the resolutions argue that council should not be discussing issues of international importance.While the argument has been little used, most of them also support the direction President Bush is taking.
On Monday, the executive committee of the Harris County Republican Party passed a resolution in support of Bush and called for council to "reject any efforts to have a municipal government weigh in on international diplomacy."
The executive committee is made up of Republican precinct chairs.
"Rarely do 400 members speak with one voice," Jared Woodfill, the party chairman, said of those in attendance for the vote.
Umm, Jared, how many Republican precinct chairs would you normally expect to oppose a resolution in support of a Republican president? I'm just asking.
"There are more pressing city issues the council needs to deal with. It's anti-American and inappropriate for them to debate a resolution and it's not within the province of council charter and purpose."
You're wrong, Jared. Dissent, no matter how misguided or grandstanding, is not anti-American. Suppressing dissent is anti-American. Shame on you.
Uh oh, telemarketers now have a way to defeat privacy tools like the TeleZapper and SBC's Privacy Manager.
Castel, a maker of automated dialing technology, boasts that its DirectQuest software is immune to the TeleZapper, a $40 gadget designed to thwart sales calls by faking the tones of a disconnected number.Beverly, Mass.-based Castel has been mailing brochures to telemarketers and other prospective customers touting the software, which also includes a feature that lets salesmen transmit any phone number or text message to caller ID displays.
That second component allows DirectQuest to dodge such phone company privacy services as SBC's Privacy Manager and Sprint's Privacy ID, both of which reject calls that don't provide caller ID information.
Castel's software is built for the high-volume "predictive dialers" that use multiple lines to phone residential numbers.
Remember this the next time you hear a flack for the DMA or some other telemarketing organization solemnly swear that they only want to reach people who want to hear from them. And as a public service to you, my faithful readers, if you happen to be one of those people who loves to hear from telemarketers, here's a handy letter you can send to your Congressfolk that tells them to back off on that nasty federal no-call legislation.
(For the rest of you, until said federal legislation kicks in, the DMA is kind enough to provide this list of state no-call-list info. Tough luck if you live in the wrong state and all that.)
I haven't seen anyone blog about this Salon article, which rather surprises me. The article discusses why Big Oil really doesn't want war with Iraq, at least not now. A lot of the points this article makes are quite sensible when you think about it: We don't need to go to war to free up Iraqi oil, we could simply drop our sanctions against Iraq instead. Given that the US is easily the biggest consumer of oil, it hurts Iraq a lot more than it hurts us for their oil to be unavailable to us. Most critically from the point of view of US oil producers, once Iraqi oil is freely available on the world market, the price will go down as the supply has increased.
This doesn't mean that the United States doesn't have a vested interest in securing Iraq's oil. There's a whole lot of oil in Iraq, and it's certainly in our long term economic interests to have that oil be under the control of a government that's not as loony and despotic as the current one. One could say the same about oil in Iran and Saudi Arabia as well, two other countries that the Perle/Wolfowitz crowd is surely thinking about. And it's absolutely in George W. Bush's political interest to bring about a more stable oil supply; if that in turn leads to lower prices at the pump, a happenstance that will surely boost his reelection prospects, so much the better. The point is simply that the long term economic interests of the United States and the short term political interests of President Bush are not necessarily the best interests of ChevronTexaco or ExxonMobil.
Another reason why Big Oil is queasy about invading Iraq is the fact that none of the US-based oil companies have any contracts to drill in Iraq. Guess which country stands to gain the most from opened-up Iraqi oil fields?
The U.S. lost a three-quarter share of Iraq's oil production in 1972, when Iraq nationalized its oil fields. The oil company with the most -- and best -- contracts to extract Iraqi oil is France's TotalFinaElf. Russia's LUKoil runs a close second. Chevron's bluntspoken CEO, Kenneth Derr, supported sanctions against Iraq in 1988 because, he said in a 1998 speech to San Francisco's tony Commonwealth Club, "Iraq possesses huge reserves of oil and gas I'd love Chevron to have access to." Sanctions offered a chance to pressure Saddam into making room for the American companies.But sanctions are different from war. Some analysts say that removing Saddam will make it harder for American oil companies to gain the foothold Chevron covets, rather than easier. France and Russia, recalcitrant Bush allies, may be holding out for promises that the U.S. will require a post-Saddam government to honor the preferential contracts their oil companies enjoy -- starting with commissioning French and Russian oilmen for billions of dollars of restoration work. Ironically, as a political price for winning French and Russian support for war in the U.N. Security Council, American oil companies could be frozen out of postwar Iraq.
"There's absolutely no guarantee that U.S. Big Oil will participate" in post-Saddam Iraq, says Kyle Cooper, an oil-industry analyst at the brokerage Salomon Smith Barney in Houston.
Yes, the one country which will undoubtedly profit from an invasion of Iraq is none other than France, that beacon of Old European obstinacy. One can only wonder if their stubbornness and threatened Security Council veto isn't actually part of an elaborate scheme to strengthen Bush's resolve and possibly whip up American support for an invasion. Since everyone knows that anything the French oppose must be good for America, the best way for them to facilitate an invasion and thus reap the eventual rewards is to appear to be blocking our every step. It's a rope-a-dope strategy that's as brilliant in its audacity as it is in its subtlety. I can't believe Stephen den Beste hasn't already written 50,000 words on it.
While the article goes on to discuss how an influx of Iraqi oil will be bad for several other oil-based economies, especially Russia, it doesn't talk about some of the other costs that US-based oil companies will incur with an invasion. War in Iraq will threaten the security of many American and European expats who are currently based at large drilling sites in Africa and the Middle East. You can be sure that their companies are prepared to evacuate most if not all of their staff in places like Kuwait should the US invade Iraq. Not only is that a large expense for them, it also means their production capacity is reduced. (It's also not just Americans and not just oil workers, too.) I think it's pretty clear why that's bad for business.
The bottom line is that while oil is certainly a component of the rationale for invading Iraq, it's a lot more complicated than "blood for oil".
I cancelled team practice today because of the nasty weather today. We'll try again on Thursday. I'm going to try to find an indoor batting cage that we can use as a backup in case the weather doesn't cooperate then.
We're back down to 11 players. Nia, the one girl on the team, decided to play in a YMCA league instead. She'll be with smaller kids who are also fairly new to playing baseball, which is a better fit for her. Having 11 kids will make it easier to ensure everyone plays, but it means we have less slack if there are no-shows. I don't know what the forfeit rule is, and I hope I don't have to find out.
I've gotten some feedback from parents that the kids are excited about playing. I'm glad I made a good first impression. I hope to build on their enthusiasm.
I'm supposed to pick up some candy from a league volunteer tomorrow. Apparently, candy sales are part of how the league pays for itself. A couple of the parents are signed up to do the selling, which is fine by me because that's something I've never been comfortable with. Better anyone else than me.
Would you believe that one cause of our recent economic downturn is because not enough people are dying?
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Stewart Enterprises Inc., America's No. 3 funeral home and cemetery operator, cut its earnings estimate for the year, partly because, to put it bluntly, not enough people are dying.For an industry that profits from death, the first quarter is not shaping up well. Stewart said Monday there were fewer deaths than expected in the quarter just ended, which is historically a season of harsh weather and flu epidemics.
In addition, more people were choosing cremations over higher-priced burials and also it is becoming more difficult to sell funeral packages in advance to Americans who are focused on near-term problems like the economy and possible war with Iraq, the company said.
The announcement that Stewart was cutting its 2003 earnings estimate sent its stock plummeting.
Via Larry Simon.
Steve Smith has a followup post to his obituary of crooked Michigan booster Ed Martin, which I had commented on here.
Where we disagree, I believe, is on the notion of whether there should be a statute of limitations on NCAA sanctions. It is perfectly reasonable for the NCAA to punish a program for violations that occurred before anyone on the current team was at the university; since the regulations in question are geared towards maintaining competitive balance for the schools, a program that cheats will develop advantages in the area of recruiting, which affects the decisions of student-athletes to attend their chosen schools. In the Ed Martin investigation, it should be relevant that Robert Traylor and Louis Bullock were receiving "gratuities", since the school's success during their careers at Michigan directly impacts whether subsequent players, such as Lavelle Blanchard, would decide to go there.The problem, though, is that Michigan has already been punished for those crimes; the school was on probation several years ago, and Steve Fisher, the coach at the time, was let go. The current investigation, as well as the criminal prosecution of Chris Webber, concerns events that took place going back to 1988. Webber himself left the school in 1993. While it may be appropriate to discredit the accomplishments of the Fab Five teams for what Webber allegedly received from Martin (and the school did forfeit the wins of that team, as well as striking their accomplishments from the record books), it is unfair to punish an individual today for the crimes of someone else a decade ago, when that person has received no advantage from those acts.
Fair point. I have no quibble with any of this, and I think we agree on the larger matter. Thanks, Steve!
BTW, Steve has his own lefty political blog that's worth your time to check out as well.
Last week I chastised the Houston City Council for taking time away from cleaning up its perilous finances (today's cheery news is the possibility of unpaid furloughs for city workers and even fewer services for the city's 100,000+ mentally ill folks) to discuss a resolution opposing an invasion of Iraq. While I am with them on the issue of invasion, I firmly believe that it's not the City Council's purpose to spend time on such questions.
The op-ed pages of today's Chron are chock full of discussion on this topic. There's an unsigned editorial that disagrees with me on the relevance of this issue for the Council:
Houston City Council Wednesday will consider two resolutions opposing precipitous war in Iraq. Foreign policy is not council's bailiwick, but there is no harm and some virtue in using part of one council meeting to debate an issue that has captured most of the world's attention.
The editorial goes on the specifically criticize some portions of Council member Carroll Robinson's resolution. Robinson has his own op-ed piece which defends the Council's position:
Elected officials at the local level must now be aware of the domestic threat level based on events happening all around the world in order to help ensure the safety and security of our residents and community's infrastructure -- from airports to seaports to water and sewer systems to tourist attractions and beyond.[...]
Locally, I believe it is necessary to combine our police, fire, and health and human services departments into a new Public Safety Department to more effectively and efficiently respond to the new threats to our city's safety.
What our nation does abroad now more than ever has life-and-death repercussions and consequences at home.
The discussions and decision about disarming Saddam Hussein are now as much a domestic as foreign affairs matter.
Decisions about the use of U.S. military forces and foreign aid throughout the world are now both domestic as well as foreign affairs matters.
How America is viewed in the world has consequences at home.
How we balance investing in domestic priorities such as funding first responders, universal health care, prescription drugs for seniors and education for our children against maintaining foreign military commitments is an issue that must be addressed by local elected officials. It impacts our constituents, our bottom line and our ability to improve homeland security.
These are just a few of the reasons why I believe that City Council now has a responsibility and obligation to share its thoughts and let its members' voices be heard on what use to be considered solely foreign affairs issues.
His position, implied though not stated, is that the proposed invasion would increase the risk of domestic terrorism, not decrease it. That's a position I share, though I'd argue that we'd get more bang for our buck on this issue by having our city lobbyists harangue the local Congressfolk and our Senators.
(Those of you who favor invasion, by the way, might note that if the focus had been strictly on containing Iraq's nuclear capabilities, instead of getting bogged down in bogus al Qaeda allegations, Robinson's argument would be essentially rendered moot. Another example, in my opinion, of the piss-poor job Team Bush has done in explaining the reason why we're going down this path.)
Finally, there are six (count 'em) letters to the editor trashing the Council, not one in support. Given how far backward the Chron bends to try and present a "balanced" picture of such things, that's a pretty strong statement.
Like many counties around the country, Santa Clara is getting ready to adopt electonic voting machines. Also like many of those counties, Santa Clara is getting warnings from computer security experts who say that machines which do not produce paper ballots are inherently unsecure and potentially subject to undetectable fraud. Unlike those other counties, the experts in Santa Clara may actually be taken seriously.
National experts on computer security have raised alarming questions elsewhere about the validity of elections run on touch-screen machines, which currently don't produce a paper record a voter can use to check that the machine has recorded decisions accurately. But scientists didn't get far until they spoke up late last month in the heart of Silicon Valley, where the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors delayed buying 5,000 ATM-like machines for 730,000 registered voters after hearing their concerns.California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley followed up on the decision by convening a statewide task force on the security of touch-screen voting. And now, three voting machine vendors vying for Santa Clara County's $20 million contract are saying they will install a paper audit system at no extra cost if the county becomes the first jurisdiction nationally to require it.
What the supervisors decide Tuesday, when they're scheduled to adopt a new voting system, will ripple through other California counties and is likely to affect the overall move toward electronic voting, the most popular antidote to the hanging chad debacle of the 2000 presidential election.
"You're at the beginning of what's becoming the modern argument in voting systems,'' said Kimball Brace, president of Washington, D.C.-based Election Data Services political consulting firm and an expert witness in former Vice President Al Gore's court case to get a Florida recount in 2000. "What we have out in your jurisdiction is the first cut of people saying, 'Wait a minute, shouldn't you have a physical ballot in case there is a recount?' It hasn't come up elsewhere because a lot of people haven't thought about it, or comprehended the need for it.''
The article goes on to quote my buddy Dan Wallach, who unsuccessfully raised these issues when the Houston city council was debating the eSlate machines that have since been implemented.
Other blogs such as Seeing the Forest and Ruminate This (see here and here) have been following this story a lot more closely, and I recommend you check them out.
David Pinto points to this Rob Neyer column in which Neyer defends George Steinbrenner from some recent carping. The Yankees' busy winter, along with the Boss' criticisms of Derek Jeter and Joe Torre, have brought out the nattering nabobs, some of whom have implied that the return of a high-profile Steinbrenner could lead to tough times for the Yankees. Neyer demurs, pointing out that the high-turmoil period of 1976-1981 was quite a successful one for the Bombers, while the team's low point from 1989-1992 partly coincided with Steinbrenner's forced absence from the game.
As a lifetime Yankee fan, I'm a bit conflicted here. It's certainly true that the good times were turbulent. There were days when you were afraid to read the sports section for fear of hearing about another fight, pissing contest, personality conflict, and so on. The only thing that allowed you to keep your dignity in the face of snarky Mets fans was the winning. Once that stopped, and the Yankee wurlizter careened out of control amidst disposable pitching coaches and free agent flameouts, it was nearly enough to make you start following the professional bowling tour.
But through it all, you always knew that what Steinbrenner wanted more than anything was to win. So while I view his recent rumblings with more than a tad of trepidation, I'm still comforted by that thought. And let's face it, his latest statements are downright calm compared to some of his prior outbursts. He hasn't fired any coaches, he hasn't personally sent any prospects back to the bush leagues, and he hasn't tried to blackmail a star player. All in all, he seems to have mellowed a bit.
I wish I could have illustrated this piece with a picture of General Von Steingrabber, the caricature drawn by Bill Gallo of the Daily News, but my Googling failed to turn up a picture. I did get this nice feature article about Gallo and the General, which at least gives you a taste of it.
Whatever else you may say about this op-ed piece in the Chron that comes to the shocking conclusion that the recent perjury prosecution of Chief C.O. "BAMF" Bradford may have been a waste of time and/or politically biased, you can't say they rushed to their judgment, since the trial ended a month ago. It mostly recapitulates the points that have been noted here and elsewhere (the best reporting on the case comes from this Houston Press article), though it does contain one nugget to file away the next time you hear an assistant DA insist that they "had" to take this case to trial:
Very few cases of disputed testimony between two or more witnesses testifying under oath in an evidentiary hearing end with a grand jury indictment for perjury, even when those witnesses have completely opposite versions of the facts. For example, a judge referred Anna Nicole Smith to the Harris County district attorney for allegedly lying on the witness stand in the will contest of deceased oil tycoon, E. Pierce Marshall's estate, but the district attorney has not taken any action.
I'd love to hear Chuck Rosenthal's answer to that assertion. Perhaps they didn't want to appear to be grandstanding.
Anyway, the next sounds you'll hear from this case will be when Captain Aguirre goes to trial in a few months.
Jack points me to this ESPN.com article about how to get away with reading the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue without getting your wife or girlfriend mad at you. Well, I have an even better way: Find a wife or girlfriend who'll buy you the subscription in the first place. Thanks, Tiffany!
BTW, the most amazing picture in this issue is that of Debbie Clemens, wife of Yankees pitcher Roger Clemens. She's in her late 30s (I presume, since he's turning 41 this year), has four kids, and appears to be in better shape than pretty much all of the featured professional models.
And of course, the funniest thing written about the whole thing is by Gregg Easterbrook, who estimates how much the swimsuits cost on a per-pound basis.
As April 15 draws near, you will inevitably hear about all kinds of hare-brained tax avoidance schemes. Many of them, like those mentioned in this article, are scams being proffered by con artists. Quite a few of them rest on ridiculous and long-discredited legal arguments. I wish this article had spent a bit more time on that, but since it didn't I will.
I've already discussed one particular case (see here, here, here, and here), and it bears examining because it's representative of many such schemes. Basically, someone comes up with a convoluted argument that says that the federal income tax is illegal, or only applies to "federal" citizens, or is voluntary, or whatever, and for a small but reasonable fee the person peddling this scheme will tell you the secrets of how you, too, can legally not pay your taxes. I highly recommend you read the Tax Protesters FAQ for a thorough discussion of these arguments and what can happen to the poor souls who try using them.
One of the ironies of the tax-avoidance industry is that the people who hold the biggest grudges against the government for its policies are often the easiest marks for this sort of thing, almost always by people who claim to be one of them. For example, the so-called "Patriot" movement of the 1990s was quickly followed by the "Pure Trust" scam, in which supposed "Patriot" sympathizers preyed on the true faithful who really wanted to believe that they could stop paying taxes.
A horse of a different color is the anti-war movement, which has long railed about the percentage of taxes that goes to the military. They continue to advocate partial or complete nonpayment of income taxes as a protest against it. They do at least seem to realize that there are potential legal consequences to this, and I respect them for that. It's still quixotic, but at least it's not a plan to separate some fool from his money.
Finally, a more recent but clearly popular idea is that there's a tax credit for slavery reparations. As with the "Pure Trust" scheme, the scammers target members of their own communities, banking on the trust that people give to friends and neighbors:
Noting that the promoters appear to be targeting church congregations, the IRS has urged churches in the African-American community to be on the alert for the scam. "Good people are getting caught up in this scam," [IRS Commissioner Charles O.] Rossotti said.
Perhaps some of the legal victories that the feds have won against these scammers will help to shut them down, though I doubt it.
Forewarned is forearmed, people. Now get to work on those 1040s.
Not sure how useful this actually is, but this Chron article discusses some alternate scenarios to Tropical Storm Allison, which flooded out most of Houston in 2001. Apparently, we got off lighter than we had to, since the areas that received the most rain were less populated than some others, and the nearest bayous were best equipped to take it. Hard to say if there are any lessons to learn from this, since TS Allison was such a freak occurrance, but it's interesting reading nonetheless.
It's nice to know that in these tough economic times that there are still growth industries. One of them is the beat-the-drug-test business, as a simple Google search would seem to indicate. This article is about the continuous arms race between drug testing companies and companies that try to neuter them, but what I want to talk about is here at the end:
Workplace drug testing pays, supporters say. A study by the Office of National Drug Control Policy estimated that the nation lost $110.5 billion in productivity in 2000 because of drug use, and the Labor Department estimates that 6.5 percent of full-time and 8.6 percent of part-time workers are illicit drug users. Marijuana is the most frequently detected drug, showing up in about 60 percent of the positive tests, followed by cocaine. Critics of the tests say that they pick up more marijuana users because the drug stays in the body longer.
That $110.5 billion figure sure sounds impressive, but I have several questions. How exactly is productivity being measured? What assumptions are being made about weekend drug users, who may show up for work on Monday clean and sober and yet test positively for various toxins? Is alcohol considered a drug for these purposes? What would the costs be of firing all of the marijuana users in the workplace and replacing them with people who are currently unemployed (assuming there are enough non-drug users among the unemployed to do so)? Do you think that a government agency whose existence would be made superfluous by a deemphasis on the perils of drug use might possibly be tempted to make the problem appear as bad as it could? I'm just asking.
Critics fault widespread drug testing as an unnecessary invasion of privacy. While it makes sense to test people in safety-sensitive jobs for drug usage, many of the tests contribute little to improving either workplace safety or productivity, said Graham Boyd, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Drug Policy Litigation Project. Employers test anyway, he said, in an effort to reduce their workers' compensation and insurance costs."The fact that so many people are doing so much to subvert the system" suggests widespread disdain, he said. "You don't see that with laws about embezzlement because there is a shared moral code that embezzlement is bad. If you don't buy into that, you really are an outsider."
One can, of course, make a similar argument about traffic laws. I'm sure I'm not the only person to notice that plenty of people still get pulled over for speeding even after the limit went up on most freeways. That doesn't mean that traffic laws are bad or misguided. I'd go a step further, though, and note that I have a lot less sympathy for people who get caught speeding in a 70 MPH zone than I do for people who get caught in a 55 MPH zone. Perhaps if the business of drug testing were more about catching the flagrant violators than foisting suspicion on all of us, I'd feel the same way about it.
My Little League team (the Twins) had their first practice today. We'd had quite a bit of rain and nastiness in Houston over the past couple of days, so I wasn't sure we'd be able to do much of anything, but in typical Houston fashion the weather today was totally different - bright, sunny, moderate temps. The practive field was even reasonably dry, though with some large puddles scattered around.
There are twelve kids on my team, eleven boys and one girl. Nia has never played before and is the smallest kid on the team. She probably belongs in the 7-8 year old league, but she turns nine during the season, so league rules say she has to be in the 9-10 year old group. I'm going to do what I can to get her up to speed, but it won't surprise me if she drops out. Her parents were at the practice and told Tiffany that they were concerned that she's too little. We'll see how she does.
Ten kids showed up for practice. One had a prior engagement, the other was home sick. The sick kid's dad had agreed to be one of my assistant coaches, so he was there. I know Logan, his son, played last year so I expect he'll be one of the better players. Both he and the other assistant coach would likely have made fine head coaches, but apparently neither could commit to it time-wise. Both will be very helpful to me, though I'm a little concerned about there being a too-many-cooks problem. Not too worried, just a little.
Most of the kids had decent throwing mechanics, though they will definitely benefit from drills. I attended a baseball camp every summer as a kid for eight years, and I can still remember most of the workouts they put us through. The best part of that was playing the games, of course, but that'll have to wait here. Practices are going to be an hour to an hour and a half, which hopefully isn't too long to hold their attention through this sort of thing.
Today we ran an infield/outfield drill. Each kid was at an infield position, and I'd hit them a groundball and have the throw to first. I then moved some kids to the outfield and we went through cutoff man drills. That's a complicated thing to do, and it'll require a lot of repetition. The kids were all pretty rusty as well, and when you toss in the various water hazards on the field, it got a bit comical at times. At least I didn't whiff too often hitting the ball to them.
Next practice is Tuesday evening. A bunch of the boys will be on a Cub Scout campout this weekend, so we'll have a Thursday practice as well instead of next Saturday. I'm going to start auditioning pitchers on Tuesday, and let them get some hitting in also. That ought to get them excited.
I'm still working on matching names to faces. I know all of the names, but I can't tell who's who yet for the most part. Next practice, I'm going to make a point of using names when I can and making the kids say their names when I'm unsure. That ought to do it for me.
Links to the A Few Things About Me and Texas Political Blogs posts have been added to the sidebar for your convenience. There's a total of 36 political blogs listed, though of course some are more political than others. Check 'em out, you might find a few to add to your blogroll. I know I'll be adding a couple to mine when I do my next update.
Off to Little League practice! I'll have a report on how it went later.
There's been a big explosion at an oil storage facility on Staten Island, my hometown. One person is confirmed dead so far, one is missing, and one is in critical condition.
This facility is about as far away as you can get from where I grew up and still be on Staten Island. I'm pretty sure there's no housing around there, but it is close to a major highway and the Outerbridge Crossing, which means it's also close to Woodbridge, New Jersey. Indeed, the blast was strongly felt across the Arthur Kill in Woodbridge.
So far, no indications that it was an act of terrorism. Let's hope it was just a terrible accident.
UPDATE: It's been officially ruled an accident. And in the map of Staten Island that they show in this article, my old neighborhood would be a bit north/northeast of the N in Staten.
I want to take this opportunity to plug the Political State Report, a collaborative effort to monitor political news and events around the country by contributors in each state. There's always something interesting there, stuff you're unlikely to find anywhere else. Check it out.
I should note, by the way, the the PSR is always looking for contributors. I seem to be the only person from Texas to post there, and as obviously wonderful and insightful as I am, that's only one perspective from an awfully big state. A few other states could use some new voices as well, so if you have any interest, drop me a note. Prior blogging experience is not a requirement.
A Chicago teacher has filed a class action lawsuit against Loews Cineplex for all those damn ads they now show before the movie:
[The lawsuit] claims the theater circuit's policy of playing pre-film product commercials amounts to a deceptive business practice because the ads begin at the time advertised as the start of a feature movie.The legal action reflects the reaction of many moviegoers jarred by the increasing prominence of onscreen advertising in theaters industrywide. In fact, the succession of such pre-movie ads now often lasts up to 10 minutes or longer in many venues.
The story notes a solution that's in place in certain European countries that I for one would find to be perfectly acceptable:
[N]ewspaper listings and box office signage stipulate both movie times and times for pre-show ads and trailers.
Admit it - if you knew that the ads started at 1:30 and the movie started at 1:40, would you be in any rush to get there by 1:30?
I should note that I don't consider movie trailers to be advertising. Trailers are fine, since after all they're sometimes better than the feature film. Hell, I went to see Wing Commander in 1999 solely for the purpose of seeing the Phantom Menace trailer. (If I'd had half a brain, I'd have left after the trailer, too.) Making me sit through six or eight commercials beforehand, though, is just torture.
While the City of Houston is $67 million in the hole, the County of Harris has $172 million in cash under its mattress. This, not surprisingly, has led people to grumble that the County takes in too much tax money for its needs:
"The county is so flush with money, it's unreal. They have way too much money," says Bob Lemer, the chairman of Citizens for Public Accountability, a local government watchdog and research group of retired accountants. "They're very flush because they budget like crazy, but then don't spend it by huge amounts."As an example, he cites the county's fiscal 2002 financial report. According to the report, the county budgeted $114 million for road and bridge work, but spent only $44 million.
"I don't buy into the idea that Harris County is efficient," Lemer says. "They've got a revenue stream that is grossly more than they need."
Not surprisingly, county officials disagree. Budget Officer Dick Raycraft and County Judge Robert Eckels point out that Harris County began including a 15 percent reserve in its annual budget in 1998, a goal borne of dismal experience.
"If we were not to budget those reserves, we could do more things, but the reserves are an important part of the fiscal health of the county," Eckels said.
I can see both sides of this. How big a cushion does an entity need? I wish I could give some kind of answer to that question, but I can't make heads or tails out of this thing, which claims to be the County Auditor's Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2002. My non-accountant's take on it says that the assets and liabilities balance out, and if that's the case, then where's the surplus? If this makes any sense to you, feel free to enlighten me in the comments.
Oh, and by the way: It was a bitch finding this thing in the first place. A Google search on +"harris county" +"commissioner's court" takes you to this totally useless page. There are pages for each individual Commissioner linked on the Harris County home page (and am I the only one who finds it amusing that Robert Eckels' page looks more like a campaign site than a government site?), but to find this report I had to find the County Auditor first.
As for the city, it's just all confusing:
Although the city's revenue over the next 17 months is expected to be $67 million less than projected, the city is not actually in the red. City officials still expect to end this fiscal year June 30 with a balance of about $81 million, slightly exceeding the required reserve of 5 percent of its operating expenses.But almost all of that $81 million exists only on paper, in the form of revenue expected later in the year.
As for why the city's finances are a mess compared to the county's, an old bugaboo is cited as a cause:
To city Councilwoman Annise Parker, the difference between the two governments is largely one of philosophy: The city sees its responsibility as providing the best services it can, while the county provides only those services it can afford under its budget."I think there is more long-term thinking at the county," she says.
Parker is not alone. Almost everyone interviewed for this article cited the county's long-term outlook as the key to its current fiscal success. Such a philosophy is easier at the county because, without term limits, county elected officials tend to enjoy more stability. Until Sylvia Garcia took office as Precinct 2 commissioner last month, for example, there had been no change in the makeup of Commissioners Court for eight years.
Moreover, Harris County government is less bureaucratic, with elected commissioners having far more control over projects in their districts than do City Council members.
Because of term limits, city budget planners, mayors and council members come and go at least every six years.
Critics say term limits -- combined with the city's "strong mayor" form of government, which all but guarantees an adversarial relationship with council members -- result in short-term thinking on long-range issues.
"In the city of Houston, everything is political," said George Scott, president of the Tax Research Association of Harris County. "If it's good for politics tomorrow, then it's good. If it makes sense today, we'll worry whether it makes sense next month or next year."
Yes, it's our friend term limits again. Not a single member of city government was in office the last time there was a roster change on the Commissioner's Court in 1994. That has to have some effect. To be fair, you really can't compare how the city works with how the county works. As the articles note, the county is limited by the State Legislature in what it can spend money on. In addition, the individual Commissioners have a lot more direct influence in their precincts, and they operate in a much more collegial environment that's farther out of the limelight. That's probably the biggest factor.
We've been talking about budget cuts as the Only Acceptable Solution for the budget crunch for awhile now, so let's talk a bit about what that's actually going to mean. Two articles from today's Chron give us some insight, starting with this one about the effects of proposed cuts on state universities:
The University of Houston's president told legislators Wednesday the school would need to increase tuition and fees by as much as 50 percent to make up for money lost in proposed state budget cuts.UH President Arthur Smith and other educators also predicted that a lack of funds might lead to staff cuts. Smith didn't provide specific numbers, but University of Texas at Austin President Larry Faulkner said he might be forced to cut as many as 250 faculty positions and 300 administrative and support positions, and Lee Jackson, chancellor of the University of North Texas System, said the Denton campus might have to eliminate 200 faculty and 300 administrative slots.
"Faculty hiring will come to a stop, and staff reductions will begin," Smith told members of the House Appropriations subcommittee on education. "Next year's students will find fewer course sections and larger classes. Marked reductions in retention and graduation rates will come as early as the second year of the biennium (2005). Research productivity will decline significantly within two to three years."
Mark Yudof, chancellor of the UT System, added, "We face one of the most extraordinary budget crises in the history of Texas. ... There will be no free ride."
And one for the law-and-order fans, about how there's no more room in the prisons:
With state prisons nearing capacity and legislators in a belt-tightening mood, Senate leaders announced Wednesday that they are working on an emergency solution to find space for 4,000 more inmates.But some lawmakers warned that the state cannot avoid future prison overcrowding if the Texas Department of Criminal Justice is forced to continue to cut its budget.
The state prison population is at 97.5 percent of capacity with 147,565 inmates. TDCJ spokesman Larry Todd said prisons are receiving an average of about 5,500 new inmates a month while releasing only 5,000.
We are going to stay ahead of this (crowding) problem," Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst vowed.
The powers that be hope to put the problem off for awhile by shuffling people around and shortening the required stay in drug rehab from nine months to six. But other measures, ones that will undoubtedly be unpopular, are also being considered:
Dewhurst also indicated he may support an increase in parole of nonviolent offenders, if it could be done safely.The parole rate, which had been averaging about 25 percent of those eligible, dropped to 17 or 18 percent several months ago.
"That's one of the reasons why we've had an increased pressure on our prison beds," he said.
Gerald Garrett, chairman of the state board of pardons and parole, said the board may accelerate its review of cases already slated for parole consideration and expand the pool to put more cases into the process.
Which is something I support, frankly. I've noted before that the prison industry is the only part of the Texas budget that's above average in per-capita spending, and thus it's the first place we should look for efficiencies. So this doesn't particularly bother me.
Of course, as the story notes at the end, budget cuts will likely reduce the number of parole officers "to 1,100 from 1,600, increasing their caseload from 75 to 100 parolees per officer", meaning that there will be less oversight of parolees and thus very likely a higher recidivism rate. Which just proves that not all cuts actually wind up costing us less.
From Brad DeLong:
Ann Marie, staring at a line on a menu offering kung pao chicken pizza: "I think we can safely say that fusion cuisine has gone too far."I think it's the combination of hoisin sauce, peanuts, and mozzarella cheese that is distressing...
My parents once took some friends of mine and me out for pizza while I was in college. A couple of my buddies wanted to order a "Hawaiian" pizza that had Canadian bacon and pineapple on it. My folks still refer to this as an unspeakable culinary depradation. I shudder to think what their reaction would be to the aforementioned kung pao chicken pizza. I'm feeling a bit queasy myself.
From Yahoo News:
The Bush administration said Tuesday that it expects Iraq to pay for its own reconstruction in the event there is a war to oust Saddam Hussein."Iraq, unlike Afghanistan, is a rather wealthy country. Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi people. And so there are a variety means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for their own reconstruction," said White House Spokesman Ari Fleischer.
"Our advice is to start by cutting taxes on dividends. We find that this allows you to pay for most everything," Fleischer did not add.
Via Body and Soul.
Tim Fleck gives an overview of fat times in the local political consulting industry, thanks to the sure-to-be-a-record-breaker Mayoral race that looms large this November. First up, we see that Bill White is not letting his Democratic credentials keep him from going after Republican voters:
For instance, businessman and former state Democratic chairman Bill White has hired fund-raiser Herb Butrum, a veteran Republican consultant with ties to the Bush family who raised money for both Mosbacher and Sanchez.Butrum predicts he'll have no trouble tapping GOP sources to support his candidate.
"People understand the mess the city is in," says Butrum. "More than anything, people want to see the city fixed, and that will trump most partisan feelings.
"For the city to come out of that, it's going to take real business experience. That resonates with Republicans regardless of party labels. Bill has always been viewed as a real uniter and a very smart guy."
Asked whether he can deliver GOP movers and shakers to White, Butrum says a number of people already on the team are "very, very close to the Bushes and the Perrys of this world." He expects that the White campaign will unveil a high-powered battery of GOP supporters in coming months.
We'll see if the Democrat-who-can-appeal-to-Republicans act works any better for White than it did for Chris Bell and George Greanias. I think it's more likely to annoy Democrats and amuse Republicans, but if you're a guy with a big bankroll, actual credentials, and no obvious base of support, I guess you have to do something.
This bit I'm still trying to understand:
The conservative Republican team of Allen and Elizabeth Blakemore is handling hyperambitious Councilman Michael Berry's mayoral campaign, although a lot of smart money is betting that Berry eventually runs for controller instead. Berry could draw away attention and support from Sanchez in the early going while roughing him up with hardball attacks behind the scenes in the conservative community.Allen Blakemore certainly has the connections to do that, since he is joined at the hip to right-wing activist Steven Hotze and his church-based political network. In any case, the rivalry between Sanchez and Berry for Republican votes also creates a mini-soap opera pitting the Blakemores and the Waldens against each other. (Social note: These two tandems have never been particularly fond of each other and should not be included on the same dinner party list.)
The Waldens are Dave and Sue, mentioned elsewhere in the article. I don't get why the Blakemores have hitched their wagon to Boy Wonder Berry. He's certainly no more conservative than Orlando Sanchez, he's even less experienced in city government, he has no realistic chance of winning, and he could siphon off just enough support from Sanchez to let White and Turner in to the inevitable runoff, an outcome which I'd think would make most GOPers grind their teeth. Maybe it is just a bluff and he really wants to be comptroller, but again, there are other conservative Council members who would seem to be more attractive to the Blakemores (I'm thinking Bruce Tatro especially). Can any of the local Republicans help me out on this one?
No mention in this article of Chief Bradford. The Chron's John Williams had an amusing roundup of what-they-said/what-they-meant from each campaign's main flack regarding a possible Bradford candidacy. If that's accurate, then as a Bill White supporter I ought to start encouraging the Chief to toss his hat in.
Mainly out of simple curiosity, who else is a Texas (political) blogger? Liberal or Conservative, I'm interested in compiling a list.
I think that's an excellent idea, and I hope Aziz doesn't mind if I crib it from him. I'll even put up a link on my sidebar for this.
Here's what I've got so far, from Aziz, his comments, and the bloggers I know of. To qualify, a blog has to be at least somewhat about politics. I don't know what the threshhold is, so this is totally subjective by me. If you're on/not on this list and think you shouldn't/should be, let me know and I'll make the appropriate update. As an Extra Added Bonus, I'm including an Expats section for known former Texans.
1117 Democrats for Truth
A Century of Crap
A.D.'s Rug Gallery and Hotbed of Liberalism
A Little Pollyanna
A Skeptical Blog
A Perfectly Cromulent Blog
A Violently Executed Blog
Aaron Pena
After-Party
Aggro
Alamo City Crossfire
Alan D. Williams
Alice in TV Land
All Things Conservative
alt 7
Amanda Strassner
Amblongus
Annatopia
Antinome
Appalachia Alumni Association
Arvin Hill
Austin Bay
Austin Lowdown
Awnry Young Texan
B and B
Back Roads of San Angelo
Barefoot and Naked
Barnga!
Beast's Belly
Beldar
Ben's World
Betamax Guillotine
Binkley
blogHOUSTON
BlueTexas
Border Ass News
Both Worlds
Brains and Eggs
Brazoria County Democrat
Brazos de Dios Cantina
Brazosport News
Bryan in 22
Buddenblog
But That's Just My Opinion
By the Bayou
Canal Water Review
Capitol Annex
Carefully Selected Garbage
CateyBeth's Corner
Centinel
City of Brass
Civic Dialogues
Clean Up Texas Politics
Coastal Politics
Come and Take It
Common Sense
Corked Bats
Cry Freedom
Dagney's Rant
Daily Jimbo
Daily Texican
DeLayWatch From The District
Denson in 2004
Dos Centavos
Easter Lemming Notebook
Easter Lemming - Liberal News
esoterically dot net
Etc and So On
Ethel the Blog
Ethical Werewolf
Express-News Watch
Eye on Williamson County
Eyes Left
Father John
Firebrand Freedom
Fort Bend Democrats
Frothing at the Mouth
Get Donkey!
Grant Davis
Greg Wythe
Grits for Breakfast
Ground Zero for Tom DeLay
Hanging Fire
Holofernes
Houston's Clear Thinkers
Houston Strategies
Houtopia
HugoZoom
I Blame the Patriarchy
Ill-Sorted Ephemera
In the Pink Texas
Incite
InSane Antonio
Insane Troll Logic
Inside the Texas Capitol
JammerBlog
Jessica's Well
Jim Hightower
Joe Deshotel's Capitol Weekly
Juanita
Junkyard Blog
Just Another Blog
Keath Milligan
Kevin C
Kim du Toit
krazypuppy
Latinos for Texas
Liberty's Blog
Lone Star Rising
Lone Star Times
Lubbock DFA
Michael Hatley
Monkey-Brained Musings
Mouse Words
Musselman For America
mUUsings
NewsHog
No More Apples
No More DeLay
Norbizness
Occasional Markings
Oil Patch Democrats
On the Lege
One Hundred Monkeys Typing
Owen Courreges
Panhandle Truth Squad
Peppermint Tea
Phantom Professor
Pink Dome
Political Asylum
Political News & Analysis
Prairie Point
Publius
Rachel Lucas
Ray in Austin
Real Live Preacher
Rhetoric & Rhythm
Rick Perry Versus The World
Rightward Reasoning
Rio Grande Valley Politics
Rob Booth
Roman Candles
Safety for Dummies
SAGA
San Antonio Election 2005
San Antonio Politics
Save Texas Reps
Saving String
713 State
Shiny Special One
Silence is Consent
Skeptical Notion
Socratic Gadfly
Somervell County Salon
Something's Got To Break
South Texas Law Prof
Southpaw
Stone Bridge
StoutDem
SurlyEdition
Tex Prodigy
Texas' Favorite Prostitutes
Texas Civil Rights Review
Texas Legislature Observed
Texas Politics
Texas Viking
Texas Women's Coalition
The Agonist
The Bayou City Perspective
The Burnt Orange Report
The C-Blog
The Fat Guy
The Fire Ant Gazette
The Gunther Concept
The Key Monk
The People's Republic of Seabrook
The Red State
The Scarlet Left
The Supreme Irony
The Trailing Edge
The View from the Left
The View From The Nest
The View v.2
This Blog is Full of Crap
This Is Not A Compliment
Tholos of Athena
ToT
Trans-Texas Corridor Blog
Trivial Pursuits
Truth Serum
Urban Grounds
Very Opinionated
Virginia Postrel
Voice in the Wilderness
Watchblog
Watching Parking Meters
West Texas Voice
Winding Road in Urban Area
Winter of Discontent
Wood County Issues
Writerrific
Yellow Doggerel Democrat
And, of course, me.
The expats that I know of:
Angry Bear
Arguing with Signposts
Boi from Troi
Boots and Sabers
Bull Moose
Grammar Police
Half the Sins of Mankind
Kesher Talk
Little Red Cookbook
Max Power
Nick Schwellenbach
Ones and Zeros
Path of the Paddle
Perverse Access Memory
RAWbersvations
The Raitt Stuff
RLBTZero
Secure the Blessing
Strategeric Thoughts
The Poor Man
Tres Chicas (Lauri)
Xpatriated Texan
Again, if you are or know of someone I've overlooked, please let me know.
Finally, I would be remiss if I failed to mention that Bevo has a blog. It's about cows.
UPDATE: Removed all of the subsequent update notices because this entry was taking too long to rebuild.
Scientists are trying to figure out why there are a bunch of dead robins in Central Texas. The leading theory is...well, see for yourself:
Pesticides, a common killer, were ruled out. So was West Nile virus because the mosquitoes that transmit the disease have been zapped by cold weather. Tests run by two laboratories were inconclusive.Now scientists are wondering whether the birds succumbed to a junkie's fate -- overdosing on alcohol-spiked berries or hallucinating on fruits plucked from exotic bushes in the back yards of suburbia.
"The bird gets stoned," said Cliff Shackelford, an ornithologist with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, which has been investigating reports of dead robins along the Interstate 35 corridor since mid-January.
[...]
Each year millions of robins born in southern Canada, the Great Lakes and Northeast make the trek to Texas, settling for the winter in areas with the most abundant food.
Die-offs happen periodically, due to bacteria flare-ups and the stresses of migration.
But this particular death spell was more pronounced because of the size of the robin population, which was pushed higher this year by the harsh winter gripping the North, state wildlife biologists said.
With more competition, some robins gorge on foods that in a normal year are not as prevalent in their diet. Some of these plants cause the same side effects that college freshmen get after downing too many tequila shots, Shackelford said.
Unfortunately, there's no way to prove this hypothesis:
There is no equivalent to the blood alcohol test for birds, since their digestive system processes berries and alcohol rapidly."I don't know what other tests we can do," Shackelford added. "When they keep coming up negative, we don't have the resources."
And while it is a common belief that birds get drunk on berries that repeatedly freeze and thaw -- a process called fermentation that converts sugar to alcohol -- some scientists question whether the fruit is a high enough "proof" to kill them.
"The evidence that there is enough alcohol in the berries to kill them is not there," said Jesse Grantham, a biologist and director of bird conservation for Audubon Texas.
"They think grapes, berries, alcohol ... the birds are drunk. I've never seen a study saying birds are dying of alcohol intoxication"
Grantham said the cause is more likely that the birds are feeding on non-native ornamental shrubs that contain toxins that American birds weren't designed to stomach.
Examples include Chinese tallow, fire thorn (Pyrocantha coccinea) and chinaberry, he said.
"Most of the die-off is in suburban areas where people plant ornamental shrubs," Grantham said. "There are some hazards to planting non-native species in your yard."
Where are Grissom and Willows when you really need them?
Despite more pressing matters facing it, the Houston City Council will be considering a resolution to oppose an invasion of Iraq.
Six of the council's 15 members support some form of a resolution on possible U.S. military action and some of them say the body should at least have the conviction to discuss it.Mayor Lee Brown said through his chief of staff, Stephen Tinnermon, that neither of the two councilmen's draft resolutions had enough votes to pass and he did not want to put either on the agenda until they did.
Councilman Gordon Quan's draft called for the council to go on record "opposing unilateral pre-emptive military action against Iraq."
Such action, it said, would cost billions of dollars when the American economy is struggling and cities are suffering fiscal crises.
Councilman Carroll Robinson's draft supported withdrawing U.S. military personnel from the Middle East, Europe and South Korea and redeploying some to nations willing to accept them.
The draft proposed using the savings for domestic priorities, specifically a universal health care plan, prescription drug plan for senior citizens and education.
The Coalition for Justice Not War, working to get an antiwar resolution on the council agenda, supported Quan's draft, said Ken Freeland, coalition spokesman.
"The best support we can give the American armed forces is to keep them out of an unjustifiable war in the Middle East," Freeland said.
Look, I'm not in favor of this invasion, either, but I firmly believe that it's none of the Council's business. Yes, I know, other city councils have adopted similar resolutions. I think they're equally misguided. City councils are about city business. Period.
If individual council members want to speak out on this issue, they're free to do so on their own time. Were any of them at the anti-war protest last weekend? Not as far as I can tell. This just strikes me as posturing, and even though it's for a position I favor, I still don't approve.
Awhile back, Scott suggested I add a bio of some kind to this page. Well, in honor of my birthday, this post is it. If you're curious about some possibly interesting but mostly obscure facts about me, then please click on the More link.
- I was born in Staten Island, New York. My parents and all four of my grandparents were also born there.
- I attended Sacred Heart Elementary School until the sixth grade. My paternal grandmother was my second-grade teacher.
- I've worn glasses since I was 10. I've never worn contact lenses, and have never wanted to. I'm considering Lasik surgery, but I'm not ready to do it yet.
- In sixth grade, I transferred to William A. Morris Intermediate School because they had advanced classes. One of the things I got to do there was to join the band. I learned to play the saxophone, and I still play today.
- I attended Stuyvesant High School in Manhattan. In four years of taking the subway to school (plus two additional summers after high school when I had a job in the city), I never saw any crime. I've been mugged twice in my life, both times within sight of our house on Staten Island. The first time, coming home from school my watch was stolen. The second time, walking home from the local pharmacy, I wasn't carrying any money or wearing a watch, so they let me go.
- One of my schoolmates at Stuyvesant was Lucy Liu. To the best of my recollection, I never knew her then. She doesn't appear in my Class of 1984 yearbook.
- One of my teachers at Stuyvesant was Frank McCourt. He wasn't famous then, but he was a pretty cool English teacher.
- Despite growing up in New York, I've never been to the Statue of Liberty. I did get up to the observation deck at the World Trade Center once, but it was a cloudy day so I couldn't see very far.
- The first baseball game I ever went to was at Shea Stadium in 1974. I saw a lot of games at Yankee Stadium over the years because my dad's law firm had season tickets. I saw the 1977 All Star Game, a few playoff games and one World Series game, and the infamous 1983 Pine Tar Game. I've seen games at the Astrodome, the ballpark formerly known as Enron Field, Qualcomm Stadium, Wrigley Field, and Jingu Stadium in Tokyo, plus minor league games in Oregon, Montana, Wisconsin, and Indiana. I've written up some of these experiences here.
- In 1984, I headed off to college in San Antonio at Trinity University. My Stuy classmates all thought I was crazy to go to Texas. One of them signed my yearbook with the words "Remember, once aboard a Texas filly, no other filly will do." 1984 was also the last time I was completely clean-shaven, on Graduation Day. I've always had at least a mustache since then. The current variation is a goatee, which I've worn for about eight years now.
- Early on in my freshman year, a writer for the now-defunct Houston Post came to campus. She was doing a story on National Merit scholars at Texas universities. The dean of admissions asked about a dozen students, including me, to meet this reporter for lunch and talk to her. I must have made an impression, because I was mentioned in the opening sentence of her article, which ran in the Post's Sunday magazine. Unfortunately, I no longer have a copy of this.
- I joined the Trinity newspaper, The Trinitonian, in my sophomore year as a sportwriter. Midway through the year I was given a sports column, as the previous columnist graduated in December. That column was called "Off the Kuff". I wrote it for two more years at Trinity, then for two years while a grad student at Rice. I won the Texas Collegiate Journalism "Best Sports Column" award for a small-college paper in my senior year. I'm more proud of that than any other academic achievement.
- One of the quirks of being born in 1966 had to do with the drinking age in Texas. It was 19 when I started college, meaning that I became a legal drinker during my freshman year. On September 1, 1986, the drinking age went up to 21. There was no grandfather clause, so after almost 18 months of being legal I once again was not allowed to drink. Fortunately, my roommate's 21st birthday was in early November. We stocked up beforehand, then held on for two months.
- My paternal grandmother, Jessie Kuffner, passed away in October, 1986. When I went home for Christmas that year, I was presented with her green 1969 Nova, the car on which I learned to drive. I drove it down to San Antonio with the help of my roomie Greg, who'd come along with me to New York. It had 53,000 miles on it when I got it, and had 50,000 more when I finally had to get rid of it five years later. It had no air conditioning, an AM/FM radio (an upgrade from my parents, as the car originally only had an AM radio), and most importantly came equipped with Our Lady of Automatic Transmission, still the coolest car accessory I've ever had.
- After graduating Trinity with a BA in math, I came to Houston to attend Rice University as a grad student. Graduate school was not a good choice for me, and I quit after 2.5 years. I did manage to get a job thanks to a couple of classmates who were working for a small software company on the side. That was my entry into the world of information technology.
- I worked for that small company for three years, getting briefly laid off at one point due to their cash flow problems. Eventually, one of my laid-off-coworkers, who was the same former Rice classmate that had helped me get that job to begin with, gave me a lead on another one. That was with an outsourcing company that put me on a consulting gig at the large multinational firm where I now work. I did three years with the outsourcing firm, then jumped to the multinational. I've been here for nearly ten years now.
- In 1996, I attended nine weddings, including weddings in Montana, Ohio, and New York.
- In 1997, I changed jobs (from the outsourcer to the multinational), got a dog, met and got engaged to Tiffany, and bought a house. It was a very busy year.
- Tiffany and I met through a mutual friend, Nicole, whom Tiffany knew in elementary school and whom I knew at Rice. Nicole brought Tiffany to a show at the Mucky Duck by the now-defunct Celtic band Ceili's Muse. Tiffany wound up sitting next to me. I called her first, to invite her along to the Houston International Festival to listen to Marcia Ball. She called me a few days after that to invite me to a movie (we wound up seeing Inventing the Abbotts).
Today is my 37th birthday. I'm exactly the same age as Justine Bateman and exactly one day older than Cindy Crawford. Probably the most famous person to share a birthday with me is Copernicus, who would be 530 years old today, but there's also Eddie Arcaro, Lee Marvin, John Frankenheimer, Smokey Robinson, Jeff Daniels, Falco, and Prince Andrew.
Among other things to happen on this date, on February 19, 1848, rescuers reached the Donner party. There's a fun fact to bring up when someone offers a toast on your birthday.
UPDATE: Thanks to TalkLeft, I see that February 19, 1942 is the day that FDR gave the executive order to round up Japanese-Americans and place them in detention camps. Lovely.
Steve Smith of OffWing Opinion recently wrote of the passing of Michigan booster Ed Martin, whose payola to the Wolverine men's basketball teams of the late 80s have recently come to light:
Although I don't condone lying to a court of law, even if it's about something as trivial as receipt of booster payments or oral sex, the notion that Michigan would even consider sitting out the [NCAA] tournament this year for activities that date back to 1988, when several of the starters on this year's team were toddlers, is madness. Maybe the university thought back in October that the punishment (which also includes forfeiting hundreds of victories from the Fab Five era) might impress the NCAA, so it had nothing to lose. After all, no one expected Michigan to do anything this year, especially after they lost their first six games. Now that Michigan is tied for the conference lead, and the star witness against them is dead, they might reconsider that earlier decision.
The problem that I have with this line of argument is that it basically means you have to catch and punish offenders the same year that they sin, otherwise you are perforce punishing at least some kids who weren't there when the infractions occurred. In my opinion, NCAA sanctions for violations are designed to punish the school and its fans. It's regrettable that innocent players are also affected, but that can't be helped. Perhaps in cases like that the NCAA should allow players to transfer and play immediately, without having to sit out a year. That would not only give them an option, it would be an extra incentive to not cheat. Heck, let 'em transfer to any school that has been free of NCAA violations for at least five years, even if that puts the new school over the scholarship limit for that year. If that means Michigan has to scrounge for walkons or forfeit games because they don't have enough players, so be it. That would be an incentive to keep your nose clean.
It would help, of course, if the NCAA were first and foremost an organization that cared about amateur college athletics instead of the almighty dollar. Quite a few schools have committed infractions that were as severe as SMU did in the 1980s, but none have received the "death penalty" since Mustang football was shut down for two seasons, and it's unlikely any other program ever will. The money involved is too great, the conflicts of interest too inherent.
For what it's worth, I have no qualms about proposals to pay players. The only argument against it is the ideal of amateur athletics. I can't even type those words with a straight face any more. But let's not be naive and think that giving players a stipend will lessen the urge to cheat. Boosters like Ed Martin were about winning at whatever cost. They'll always be with us, and they'll find ways to make their influence felt, both legal (such as "cherry-wood lockers, plush carpets and million-dollar weight rooms") and not.
Anyway, I believe that the University of Michigan should be punished for Ed Martin's infractions, I believe that any Wolverine who feels that this is unfair to him should be allowed to immediately transfer, and I believe that until the Ed Martins of the world begin to fear the price of cheating, cheating will continue to be rampant. The best thing to happen would be for an Ed Martin's fellow fatcat alums to forever shun him for having cost their team an unacceptable loss of scholarships, money, players, postseason appearances, and prestige.
Some pesky Republicans in the Lege have been straying off the ranch lately, calling for an expansion of the state sales tax so that drastic cuts in the education allotment can be avoided:
Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, said the state should expand the sales tax to services, the fastest growing sector in the state's economy and accounting for billions in untapped revenue."The current school system is being funded today on the backs of the local property tax payers. We can no longer continue to do so," Shapiro, Senate Education Committee chairwoman, told educators rallying at the Capitol for increased public education funding.
"I would propose an alternative tax structure by expanding the sales tax base to include the service industry and the exemptions," she said before the crowd of about 300 teachers, parents, students and other supporters.
Shapiro said she would not remove sales tax exemptions for food and medicine, which she conceded account for the lion's share of an estimated $26 billion in sales tax exemptions.
Governor Goodhair, bless his stout heart and singleminded devotion to dogma, is having none of it:
"As I have said on numerous occasions, this is not the time to be talking about raising revenues. I'm focused on the spending side first and foremost," Perry said Monday after speaking to the Combined Law Enforcement Association of Texas.He has asked lawmakers facing a $10 billion budget shortfall to build a state budget from zero and set priorities without exceeding the $54.1 billion in state money available for the next two years.
That means cuts of about 12.5 percent over the current budget, which totals $114 billion when you add in federal and other funds.
"I think we've got to stay focused on the spending side. Once you take your eye off of the focus of spending and start talking about revenues there seems to be a historical pattern of people losing their resolve to pare the budget down to where it needs to be," Perry said.
Let's review again where the budget currently is:
Category .. RankOverall spending per capita .. 50
Mental health .. 47
Cash welfare .. 48
Corrections .. 17
Highways .. 42
Public health .. 45
Parks and Recreation .. 48
State employee wages .. 50
Education .. 37
Public welfare and Medicaid .. 46
We have hit rock bottom (which is to say, worse than Mississippi) and we have started to dig. We have gone long past the point of trimming fat from the budget, and have begun to trim ears, fingers, and internal organs.
Given that we'll make Barbra Streisand the permanent Queen of the Cotton Bowl Parade before we adopt a state income tax, I'll reluctantly endorse Shapiro's idea. At least it still exempts food from the sales tax (unlike Talmadge Heflin's proposal), which alleviates the burden it would put on poor folks. I don't know what it's going to take to make our idiot Governor realize that both sides of the budget equation need examining, but he'd better figure it out quickly.
Salon has a short - almost disappointingly so - interview with Molly Ivins today. Check it out.
Via Mark Evanier, I see that some crazy college kids in Baytown (about 30 miles east of Houston) wanted to set a world record on February 1 by gathering the most people ever wearing Groucho Marx noses and glasses in one place.
The record was originated in the town of Pittsfield, N.H. in summer 2001 when 522 people gathered on a tennis court to don the familiar glasses-and-nose disguise."It was a part of our annual Old Home Day celebrations," related Elsie Morse, editor of the Sun-Cook Sun, the weekly newspaper for the area. "It is sort of a big reunion for the town. We try to do something different each year.
"We all gathered at the court and were given our nose-glasses and we stood there for an hour," she added. "And it rained."
When told the town’s grip on the record was in jeopardy, Morse was genuinely disappointed.
"No, no," she said, "you can’t."
However, upon discovering that Baytown a city of about 70,000 was about to overwhelm the stunt she managed to salvage a degree of pride.
"Well," Morse said, "we are a town of 5,000 people, so I’d say we did pretty well."
The author goes on to note that an awful lot of students at Lee College, which is where this record was to be broken, had no idea who Groucho Marx was. I'm with Evanier - that's just a damn shame. I'll also add that the Baytown Sun is in dire need of a copy editor.
For what it's worth, I nearly took a job teaching math at Lee College when I was leaving grad school. I wound up with a software company instead. Were I there today, I'd probably bring my DVD of Duck Soup to help combat their cinematic ignorance. (For the rest of you, I'll recommend Roger Ebert's review of Duck Soup.)
I have to admit, when the Chron's Cragg Hines gets snarky he can be quite entertaining. Take this piece on Tom DeLay's strongarm tactics to force the Lege into taking up congressional redistricting:
The last time I wrote about Tom DeLay having a "hissy fit," one of his taxpayer-financed henchwomen called in a rage. Well, she or a successor can poise bejeweled fingers atop the nearest touch-tone keypad, because the U.S. House majority leader is on the verge of another hissy fit.DeLay's head, in fact, may explode if he can't cajole-threaten the Republican majorities in the Texas Legislature into reopening the can of worms known as U.S. House redistricting. His erstwhile partisan colleagues in Austin, much to their credit, are stalling, but the nation's best-known bug man will not easily take "no" for an answer.
Heh. Hines then slaps around Rep. Pete Sessions, who's carrying some water for DeLay on this topic:
Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Dallas, took up the cudgels after the Dallas Morning News (in an editorial position it shares with the Chronicle) criticized the idea of revisiting the redistricting issue.Sessions said there was not only a "need" to redraw U.S. House lines but "a constitutional duty" for the Legislature to do so. Hogwash. There's no "need" or "constitutional duty" until after the 2010 federal census. Anything before that is political tinkering.
Sessions crunches some numbers and argues for redistricting because Republicans candidates for the U.S. House in Texas got 2.3 million votes as against 1.9 million for Democratic candidates. Surely Sessions, an ideologically white-as-snow Republican, is not arguing for political quotas.
It's rich that Sessions is brazen enough to stick his head above the parapet at all in this debate. The court-approved district plan established a new seat in northwest Dallas County that is overwhelmingly Republican. In about two nanoseconds, Sessions fled his old, more political iffy seat headquartered in Southeast Dallas to run from the safer territory. In British parliamentary parlance, this is known (with good reason) as a "chicken run."
Bravo!
I'll add that the Dallas Morning News is a dependably conservative paper, so if they aren't too enthusiastic about DeLay's little scheme, no other major paper is likely to be either. I'll keep an eye on this, but I don't expect anything further to happen.
Oooh, this one's gonna sting: The state of Texas may have to renege on promises to pay college tuition for eligible students:
An estimated 5,000 students would be denied free college tuition promised to them by the state because of the projected $10 billion budget shortfall, lawmakers were told today.Texas Higher Education Commissioner Don Brown told members of the House Appropriations Committee that budget cuts would mean the Texas Grant scholarship program would not be able to provide aid to all of the estimated 80,000 students who will be eligible in 2004-05.
[...]
High school graduates who passed a college preparatory curriculum are eligible for the Toward Excellence, Access & Success grants if they attend a Texas institution.
The Legislature created the program in 1999 to cover full tuition and fees at public schools and defray costs at private universities.
Brown said it would take $440 million, up from the current $300 million, to meet the projected demand for the grants in the next two years.
He emphasized that he would rather not slash any of the programs but was required by the governor and lawmakers to identify potential cuts.
Yet another consequence of our state's fetish about spending. We have a growing population, we know that a college degree is an excellent boost to one's future earning potential, yet we spend less on state grants per student than the national average, we have less state support for student aid than the national average, and we have an increase in borrowing by students. And now we're proposing to make it all worse, even though certain high-level politicians were happy to tout this very program this year and in years past. Oops, sorry kids, this sort of thing is only important when there's an election coming up.
I know, I know, this is all preliminary, and we must explore all avenues, and yadda yadda yadda. I just want to know one thing: Does anyone in Austin think that cutting education funding might possibly incur long-term costs that will have a negative impact on future budgets, or is this biennial session all they care about?
I'm still not exactly sure how this happened, but some time over the weekend, I got talked into coaching a Little League baseball team. One of Tiffany's coworkers (John) is a head honcho in a league in his neighborhood (which is not far from ours), and they wound up with too many players in the 9- to 10-year-old group and not enough parents who were willing to don the whistle and clipboard. John had already made inquiries about my availability to umpire, and in a moment of need decided to go for the gusto and see if I'd be willing to coach instead. Somewhere along the line I said Yes.
The last time that I coached anything was as a teenager when my dad and I served as assistant coaches for my brother's Little League team. Though the team went something like 3-7, I like to think that I contributed in a small way to one of those victories. I was in charge of running infield/outfield practice before each game, and one day I decided that I'd give everyone a chance to try something new. So, I put all the regular infielders in the outfield, and vice versa, and ran the drill that way.
Well, the drill was quite a bit sloppier than usual that day, since most of the kids had never played their assigned position before. After we won the game, over an opponent that was objectively more talented than we were, my mom told me that some of the other parents had observed our pregame exercise and concluded that their boys would whip us easily. They were openly talking about it, in fact. Whether this before-the-fall pride was transmitted to their kids or not I couldn't say, but I'll take the credit for it anyway.
Though I have no idea what I'm getting into, I find I'm rather looking forward to it. I've been told by John that I'll have several dads to serve as assistant coaches, and Tiffany has volunteered to help out as well. I'll let you know how we do as the season progresses.
Get ready to start seeing Bill White for Mayor ads on the teevee and radio, as the first announced candidate tries to raise his name recognition:
The Houston lawyer and businessman has purchased enough television commercial time for each Houstonian to see him nine times over a three-week period, based on predicted viewing patterns.His well-financed campaign also will run advertisements on English- and Spanish-language radio stations.
[...]
"Polls I have seen show Bill White has negligible name identification," said Rice University political scientist and pollster Bob Stein. "He needs to overcome that.
"The question is, will this stick?" Stein said, noting that voters might not be paying attention so early in a mayor's race.
It probably can't hurt. White is not starting out with an obvious base of support, so he's going to need to demonstrate viability in order to get money and endorsements.
In the first commercial, called "Traffic," three White supporters talk about their belief that White can solve local traffic problems.The ad includes a Hispanic man, radio executive Tom Castro; a black woman, small-business owner Gail Brown; and a white man, lawyer Daryl Bristow. All three say that White can "get this city moving."
Seems like a savvy move, both in addressing an issue that everyone cares about and in showing a Rainbow Coalition of support. He's going to have to cannibalize the Sanchez and Turner bases if he wants to make it to a runoff.
I'll report my impressions when I come across one of his ads.
Is two-time WNBA MVP Cynthia Cooper about to come out of retirement? Houston Comets owner Les Alexander thinks so:
"These are heady times for the Houston Rockets and Comets," Alexander said to those in attendance at the annual Tux & Tennies Charity Gala. "With Yao Ming, we are the No. 1 focus of sports around the world. With Steve Francis, we have one of the best guards in the NBA, and Cynthia Cooper will be coming back to the Comets."That announcement will made soon, but we'll go for another championship."
Alexander seemed certain there would be no problem finalizing the deal.
"Nothing is done until it's done," Alexander said after breaking the news. "But I'm very optimistic. Cynthia Cooper is the Steve Francis of the WNBA. Her coming back is fabulous."
As a Comets season ticket holder, this is exciting news. I should note, though, that Cooper's retirement was partly the result of her unwillingness to share the spotlight with Sheryl Swoopes and Tina Thompson. A certain level of ego is expected among star players - as Dizzy Dean once said, it ain't bragging if you can really do it - but if this second go-round is going to work, everyone involved will have to agree that there's only one ball, and only so many shots available. We'll see how Coach Chancellor deals with it.
Tiffany and I just had the following conversation:
T: "I'm going to iron the shower curtain."
C: "For the love of God, why?"
T: "I've run it through the washer and dryer, and it still has the folds from the package."
C: "Does this really, cosmically speaking, matter?"
T: "It bothers me."
I should note that the shower curtain is cloth, with a plastic liner for the wet side. But still. My hopes for ever understanding women have taken another hit.
Hmmm. Google has bought Pyra Labs, the company that created Blogger and Blogspot.
"I couldn't be more excited about this," said Evan Williams, founder of Pyra, a company that has had its share of struggles. He wouldn't discuss terms of the deal, which he said was signed on Thursday, when we spoke Saturday. But he did say it gives Pyra the "resources to build on the vision I've been working on for years."Part of that vision, shared by other blogging pioneers, has been to help democratize the creation and flow of news in a world where giant companies control so much of what most people see, hear and read. Weblogs are also becoming a valuable communication tool for groups of people, and have begun to infiltrate the corporate, university and government spheres.
[...]
But now Google will surge to the forefront of what David Krane, the company's director of corporate communications, called "a global self-publishing phenomenon that connects Internet users with dynamic, diverse points of view while also enabling comment and participation."
"We're thrilled about the many synergies and future opportunities between our two companies," he said in a statement on Saturday. He didn't elaborate further on what those synergies and opportunities might be, but said more details would emerge soon. Users of the Blogger software and hosting service won't see any immediate changes, he added.
For Williams and his five co-workers, now Google employees, the immediate impact will be to put their blog-hosting service, called Blog*Spot, on the vast network of server computers Google operates. This will make the service more reliable and robust.
Making Blogger and Blog*Spot more robust can only be a good thing, that's for sure. How many of us Blog*Spot refugees would still be there is it hadn't been so flaky all the time? I think I would've eventually moved, but I can think of some other folks who might not have.
How Google manages the Blogger software and Pyra's hosting service may present some tricky issues. The search side of Google indexes weblogs from all of the major blogging platforms, including Movable Type and Userland Radio. Any hint of proprietary favoritism would meet harsh criticism.
That I'm not worried about. I certainly agree the backlash would be loud and sustained.
Major technology companies are seeing the potential. Tripod, the consumer web-publishing unit of Terra Lycos, recently introduced a "Blog Builder" tool. America Online is expected to do something similar, and no one will be surprised if Yahoo and Microsoft do the same. Are more buyouts of blog toolmakers in the offing?
I sure won't begrudge the Trotts any riches they may get from a sugar daddy buyout, but if that does come to pass I certainly hope that they'd stay on and continue being the vision behind MT. Though she doesn't discuss their own existential future, Mena Trott has some thoughts on this deal on their Six Apart weblog.
Via Gary Farber.
January was my busiest month yet, with just over 6500 visitors, according to the SiteMeter counter. Listed below are the top referrers, according to my webhost's report. As always, thanks to everyone for visiting, reading, and linking.
Aggregators, collections, indices, etc ======================================1140: http://radio.userland.com/newsAggregator
776: http://ranchero.com/software/netnewswire/
162: http://www.weblogs.com/
157: http://www.technorati.com/
138: http://blo.gs/
132: http://radio.xmlstoragesystem.com/rcsPublic/
113: http://blogdex.media.mit.edu/
Weblog referrers
================2326: Atrios
852: Ted Barlow
489: TAPPED
215: The Daily Kos
147: Calpundit
117: Coffee Corner
109: Tacitus
108: PLA
100: Political State Report
73: Owen Courreges
69: Amish Tech Suuport Death Pool
67: Tom Spencer
66: Electrolite
62: Testify!
62: Publius
61: My old Blogspot blog
60: Binkley
54: Greg Wythe
54: MyDD
Top search terms
================#reqs: search term
-----: -----------
340: women of enron
99: enron movie
96: prime number algorithm
80: margaret kidd duncan
80: yao ming song
73: it's a ming thing
72: marnie rose
59: ron kirk
51: women of enron photos
46: mastercard moments
45: wicked weasel
43: gina hoesly
42: amber kulhanek
38: alex michel
38: madelyne toogood
37: brigitte boisselier nude
32: dr marnie rose
31: it's a ming thing download
30: the crooked e
29: it's a ming thing mp3
And here we go again on another well-worn subject. With the budget crisis and the doctrinal unwillingness to examine the state's revenue streams, a bill to legalize casinos is once more making its way through the Lege. The difference is that now more people are considering it:
While most legislators publicly hold the same stance on gambling, privately they share doubts about the governor's plan to resolve the budget crisis without finding new revenue sources.Recently, a spokesman for Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, when asked about the chances of a casino bill reaching the Senate floor, said it was unlikely, but added that the climate may change in the coming months.
"You never say never in politics," said Tom Rodgers, spokesman for the Alabama-Coushatta tribe of Texas, which is lobbying to revive casino gambling on tribal land in the state.
"There will come a point where the citizens of Texas may not be able to support such difficult spending decisions and they will have to look at the revenue side," he said.
The arguments for casino gambling are roughly the same as those that led to the creation of the state Lottery in the early 90s, the last time we had a budget crisis. Basically, the argument goes, other states have casinos/lotteries, and Texans want to play casino games/buy lottery tickets, so why should that money leave the state?
I don't have a problem with the concept of legalized gambling. I'm sufficiently libertarian for that. I do have a problem with the state coming to depend on revenue gleaned from gambling. For one thing, as we've seen with the Lottery, it's not a particularly dependable source of revenue. For another, it's mostly just another way to squeeze money from lower income folks.
I do wonder just how much extra money will be gained by allowing casinos. From what I can tell, people who cross into Louisiana to gamble do so as part of a vacation or day trip. Will those people really prefer to drive to the Astrodome to drop their change into the one-armed bandits? In other words, are casinos a lure because they're destinations, or because they're where you go to scratch your urge to gamble? Has anyone done a study on this? (Answer: Yes, there's been a study done. Read more here.)
If it turns out that people would make trips to the local casino part of their regular leisure routine, wouldn't that just be moving dollars around instead of adding them? I mean, I'd have to cut back or give up on other things if I were to add regular casino visits into my routine. Isn't that just going to mean that fewer of my dollars will be spent at other clubs, restaurants, whatever? There's a fair amount of evidence that this has been the case elsewhere, as well as evidence that casinos increase crime in their areas.
(It should be noted that Atlantic City is finally starting to see some of the promised benefits of casinos, and some other places have had fewer problems than anticipated. That all strikes me as rather faint praise, but take it as you will.)
I was skeptical about the promises made by pro-lottery forces in 1991 (anyone else remember how lottery money was supposed to go towards education?), and twleve years later I'm at least as skeptical of promises being made by pro-casino forces now. I don't see any good coming from this proposal, and I hope it dies in committee.
Emma from The Oregon Blog, Barry Deutsch, and Nathan Newman are arguing about that moldie oldie Nader v. Gore. My sympathies are pretty firmly with Nathan on this one. In particular, I'm right there with him as he goes, for the umpty-millionth time, against the "there's no difference between Democrats and Republicans" canard:
Just false. In last fall's resolution on Iraq, the MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS IN THE HOUSE voted against the war resolution.Let me repeat. A MAJORITY OF HOUSE DEMOCRATS VOTED AGAINST THE WAR RESOLUTION. And it was the new Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi, who led the forces to defeat the war resolution. And the man who would have been President, Al Gore, came out firmly against intervention.
It's not bad arguments on behalf of Nader that bother me most. It's arguments that just flat out don't tell the truth. Maybe the Naderites are so blind that they can't even notice reality, such as actual voting tallies or the position of Gore on intervention, but it's what makes their whole position seem so ridiculous and disconnected from any kind of reality.
Maybe the reason why there are so many dishonest arguments on behalf of Nader is because the man himself starting using them immediately after the election, as chronicled by Matt Welch, who spent several months in 2000 covering the Nader campaign and also voted for Nader. Welch demonstrated just last year that Nader continues to dissemble and fudge. It's no wonder that the same untruthful arguments are recycled by his supporters.
One thing that tends to get overlooked in the whole did-Nader-cost-Gore-the-election debate is that there were other factors in Florida that worked against the Democrats. Putting aside the infamous butterfly ballot, there's the fact that thousands of black voters were improperly removed from the voter rolls before the election. Given that blacks voted for Gore at a 93% clip in Florida, that's a sizeable chunk of support lost.
I'm not a Green voter. They don't support my values nearly as closely as the Democrats do. Sure, I wish the Democrats were more liberal on various issues, but they're a hell of a lot more liberal than the Republicans are.
Finally, I'm not particularly impressed by Green claims that the Democrats can't win without them. I don't think there's enough Green voters to justify expending a lot of effort to woo them. Nader got 1/37th of the vote in 2000. I'd rather have that tiny slice than not, but if I can't get it I'll look elsewhere. There's lots of other fish in the sea. The 2004 election is going to be won by turning out the base and by winning over independents. The Greens can get on board or stay on the sidelines. It's up to them.
Well, not really, but they did print an opinion piece about it. The current GOP Team Leader-inspired turfing has been known for over a month, thanks to the likes of Atrios and Failure Is Impossible, but better late than never, I guess.
School funding in Texas is done from a combination of local property taxes and state funds. It's roughly a 50-50 mix, though right now the state's share is at a low point. In the early 90s, after the inequities of this system were declared unconstitutional, a plan was put into place that shifted funds from richer districts to poorer ones. This was known as the "Robin Hood" plan. Though it has helped to level the playing field somewhat, it has been largely unpopular, especially with those richer districts, and is under another court challenge. Many state legislators ran for office in 2002 pledging to change the school funding system.
A bill by Rep. Kent Gruesendorf (R, Arlington) to eliminate the Robin Hood plan by 2005 has passed out of committee even though it does not mention what the alternative would be. Governor Perry supports this effort, though the only contribution he's made to solving the problem has been to suggest yet another commission to study school financing.
All of this has generated the usual amount of skepticism. The first actual sign that this train may get derailed comes from this story, which suggests that Republican lawmakers from rural districts fear that any such reform will shortchange their constituents.
Texas' 700 rural schools are not all property-poor, but they get equalizing funding under the current system because they are so small, and in some cases, remote.They fear the elimination of that advantage and worry that any new system would force the districts to consolidate, an unpopular idea in rural areas.
"We would lose all that we've gained and have to start all over, and we're worried about what could happen in an urban Legislature," said Don Rogers of the Texas Association of Rural Schools.
Together, the rural and urban lawmakers have enough power and votes in the 150-member House to slow down a bill to repeal Robin Hood by 2005.
Until now, it had been flying through the legislative process. The bill by House Public Education Committee Chairman Kent Grusendorf, R-Arlington, offers no alternative plan.
I'm a bit skeptical of this story, since it never actually mentions any Republican lawmakers who may oppose Robin Hood reform. Still, it's not hard to see why rural legislators might not view reform as favorably as those from the wealthy suburbs.
Some want promises that any new system won't force small and rural schools to consolidate, an idea pushed by some urban and suburban lawmakers who believe it would save the state money.Rogers said in most rural areas, the schools are the center of the community and often the largest employer.
The cost of building a central school and transporting students there would offset savings, he said.
Rep. Pete Laney, D-Hale Center, agreed. "When you consolidate schools, you ruin communities," he said.
Laney, the former House speaker, had been influencial in stopping previous pushes for consolidation, Rogers said.
Let's be blunt here: "Consolidation" means throwing some number of people out of work, an idea that's never popular. I'm even more skeptical of the notion that this would be a net money saver.
I do think a school finance reform bill will at least come up for a vote, but I'll be surprised if Gruesendorf's bill reaches the governor's desk as is. There are too many questions left unanswered for it to pass in its present form. Despite the pressure that many first-term reps are under to Do Something, I think a compromise of some kind will have to be reached first. Stay tuned.
(This post also appears on the Political State Report.)
I've given my share of beatings to Kenny Boy Lay for his role in the Enron implosion. One of the main reasons why people like me have believed in Lay's culpability was his steady selloff of Enron stock in 2001, even while telling employees that it was never a better time to buy. What else could this be but sheer criminality?
Well, it could be utter, pathetic cluelessness, as this NYT article suggests. Ken Lay was selling off Enron stock because it was pretty much the only liquid asset he had, and he was in past his neck:
• When the falling stock price left him with too little collateral for his loans, he took several steps to delay selling Enron shares, like selling other investments and persuading a bank to accept an illiquid investment as collateral.• That summer, Mr. Lay converted more than 200,000 Enron options into stock, but did not sell the shares. A result was a tax liability of several million dollars for an investment that proved worthless.
• That July 31, Mr. Lay stopped daily sales of Enron shares begun the year before under a Securities and Exchange Commission program for corporate insiders. A financial adviser said Mr. Lay believed the stock price was too low.
• In late September, before the crisis hit, Mr. Lay used a $10 million incentive payment to pay down some bank loans, essentially using cash to forestall the further forced sale of Enron shares.
• About the same time, Mr. Lay began to sell and even abandon private equity investments that required him to post additional cash — money he could have raised by selling Enron shares.
All told, experts said, the records indicate that Mr. Lay believed what he said when he told employees the stock was a good buy in August 2001.
"That trading pattern is consistent with Ken Lay sincerely believing that Enron stock had reached a trough and had nowhere to go but up," said Kevin J. Murphy, who specializes in executive compensation at the Marshall School of Business of the University of Southern California.
How did he get himself into this position in the first place? His portfolio had way too much Enron stock:
The records show that in 1997, Enron shares made up more than 90 percent of his liquid assets. Even his largest illiquid asset — a family partnership, in which he owned an interest then valued at $47.9 million — was largely invested in Enron.His advisers said they pressed Mr. Lay to diversify, and in late 1999, he did so, largely with borrowed money.
Virtually all of Mr. Lay's marketable investments were pledged as collateral to back margin loans from institutions like PaineWebber, First Union and Compass Bank, a regional bank. He had multiple lines of credit at Bank of America, including a $40 million line for him and his wife, $10 million for a family partnership and $11.7 million to allow him to buy 2.5 percent of what became the Houston Texans football team.
Throughout 2000, those credit lines underwrote the purchase of new investments. Following his strategists' advice, Mr. Lay placed millions with money managers, including Goldman, Sachs; Cypress Asset Management: the TCW Group; and Fayez Sarofim & Company in Houston. Millions more went to mutual funds and other public investments.
And as Enron's stock price fell, he was subjected to more and more margin calls. To raise the cash to pay them off, he sold more shares of Enron stock.
So Kenny Boy had neverending faith that each day would be the day that Enron's stock price would bounce back, and he and his company would be back in clover. I guess this will ultimately lead to the conclusion that he really was out of touch, and not actively malicious. I'm not sure that this is better for his reputation than a conviction would have been.
By the way, it sure would've been nice to have known some of this while Lay was advising Dick Cheney on energy policy, wouldn't it? Not that we'll ever know what Lay actually advised Cheney to do, other than to keep his head down while addressing the ball and to order the cabernet with the pheasant.
Via Kevin Whited.
I recently introduced you to Justice Sharon Keller of the state Court of Criminal Appeals. She was in the news recently for suggesting that funds earmarked for legal representation of death row inmates be returned to the state to help alleviate the budget crunch. Before that, she was probably best known for her refusal to acccept exculpatory evidence in the case of Roy Criner.
Well, she's back in the news now that three of her court colleagues have criticized the full panel for allowing an inmate to be executed despite clear evidence that his court-appointed attorney was utterly incompetent. From the Chron story:
After upholding [Leonard] Rojas' conviction on his automatic direct appeal, the Court of Criminal Appeals in 1997 appointed a Fort Worth lawyer to file a habeas appeal. A habeas appeal is designed to raise claims not based solely on the trial record, and habeas counsel is required by law to conduct a thorough investigation.The lawyer admitted in an affidavit he did no independent investigation beyond speaking with Rojas one time, reading the trial record and talking to one of the trial attorneys.
The lawyer also failed to take action that might have preserved Rojas' right to federal habeas review and did not even inform Rojas that his state habeas petition had been denied.
The attorney had received two probated suspensions from the State Bar of Texas. Two weeks after the Court of Criminal Appeals appointed him to represent Rojas, he received another probated suspension for failing to take care of his clients.
Last year, in a widely criticized opinion, the court ruled that habeas lawyers must be competent when appointed but need not represent the client competently. Price, Holcomb and Johnson also dissented in that case, with Price writing that competent counsel "ought to require more than a law license and a pulse."
The Austin American-Statesman article notes further that the attorney in question had never handled a capital case before and was having "personal and professional problems" at the time.
You really have to love the logic of "habeas lawyers must be competent when appointed but need not represent the client competently". I guess by that standard if you can drive a new car home, the dealership is off the hook forever, even if the car never starts again.
None of this bothers Keller, who's more upset that her colleagues aired dirty laundry than with the idea that justice is a process rather than a fill-in-the-blank form:
Keller, joined by Judges Mike Keasler and Cathy Cochran, took a swipe at her colleagues for releasing the dissent, noting that "any jurisdiction this Court might have arguably had over (Rojas') claims expired upon his execution."
Yes, God forbid we should ever look back at our actions and reconsider whether they really were the right ones to take. The next time I'm called in for an after-action review of a project at work, I'll just say that any jurisdiction my manager may have over me in this matter expired upon completion of my work. I'm sure they'll understand.
You may note that I haven't mentioned anything about Leonard Rojas or the crimes for which he was executed. Well, if these stories are accurate there's little doubt that he's guilty and unremorseful - in short, someone for whom little sympathy is warranted. That's not the point. The point is that death is, you know, final. If some enterprising law student were to come along and review Leonard Rojas' case, it wouldn't make any difference if she were to find a glaring procedural error, the kind of error that would normally force a new trial or even outright dismissal of the charges. That's because Leonard Rojas is now dead. The Court of Criminal Appeals allowed him to be executed without knowing or apparently caring if he really should be. If we can't be confident that every death row inmate has had a fair and full chance to appeal his verdict, then we can't be confident that only the guilty get executed. The fact that Rojas made it to the gurney without a real review of his case should be cause for consternation, not ass-covering.
The excuses that some of our state judges give as to why an incompetently represented defendant doesn't deserve any better - "Hey, he was competent when we appointed him, it's not my fault if he turned out to be a goober" - "OK, so his lawyer slept through parts of the trial, but how do you know they were important parts of the trial?" - are just pathetic. If we gave half as much consideration to ensuring fair representation as we do to coming up with these excuses, we wouldn't need the excuses.
If there's one good thing to come out of this, it's that some legislators are working to remove the task of appointing attorneys for these cases from the Court of Appeals. They've clearly shown they can't handle the responsibility.
Thanks to reader darms for the tip.
Today is the day that Robert Chambers, the so-called "Preppy Killer", gets out of jail after serving all 15 years of his plea-bargained sentence for the murder of Jennifer Levin in 1986.
Chambers confessed in 1988 to strangling 18-year-old Jennifer Levin two years earlier. He claimed it was an accident while they were allegedly having rough sex; prosecutors said he killed her in a rage.Wearing a red sweater and green pants, Chambers ignored a phalanx of reporters as he walked out of Auburn Correctional Facility at 7:15 a.m., got into a van and rode off.
On the eve of his release, Chambers issued a statement of regret through his lawyer.
"There has not been a day since Jennifer Levin's death that I have not regretted my actions on that day," the one-paragraph statement said. "I know that the Levin family continues to suffer her loss, and I am deeply sorry for the grief I have caused them."
You can take his remorse with a grain of salt, for he clearly felt none in previous years, even when appearing before the parole board:
[H]e has never shown any public remorse for what he has done. At a 1995 parole hearing, he made the curious statement: "I guess I could also give you the party line and say I have learned my lesson, I will never do this again, but that's not how I feel at the moment."
That quote comes from Court TV's Crime Library, which has all of the details of this case. Don't read it if your blood pressure is already elevated. I generally have little use for the victims' rights groups today, but it's useful to remember that there was a need for them in those days. The treatment of Jennifer Levin by the media and Chambers' defense team was nothing short of atrocious. Years later, the New York Post is still using headlines like KINKY SEX, EARLY DEATH and saying things like this:
ON a balmy summer evening in 1986, two boozed-up teens strolled into Central Park for a frenzied sexual tryst.Only one of them left the park alive.
It gets worse from there.
My heart goes out to Jennifer's parents. May they someday find peace.
I'm still under the weather and thus low on blog energy, so this is as good a time as any to rerun My Favorite Valentine's Day Story. Happy reading.
Bill Clinton was in Austin yesterday and gave a speech about current events. I'm a little low on energy today thanks to a cold, so I'll just point out this funny line by Liz Carpenter, the former press secretary to Lady Bird Johnson and sponsor of the lecture series that brought him to town:
"It's great to have a former president with us, and one that didn't need duct tape to hold us together," Carpenter said.
Heh.
Here's yet another report of Enron's evildoing, this one about a variety of questionably legal tactics to skirt tax laws. I could quote large bits of this, but I think the following sums up everything you need to know:
Enron received tax advice that pushed legal boundaries from established companies such as Bankers Trust and from its outside law firm, Vinson & Elkins, the congressional panel said in a report on its yearlong probe of Enron's tax records.The company's tax department became a profit center, with its own annual revenue targets, the report says.
"Show Me the Money!" is emblazoned on an internal Enron document regarding a transaction, one of a trove released by the committee.
Emphasis mine. What more can you say?
The good news is that famed Texas populist Jim Hightower has a blog.
The bad news is that the design sucks, the layout is ugly (and when an "aesthetic retard", as Tiffany lovingly calls me, says something is ugly, you can bet your butt it's U-G-L-Y), he's got no blogroll, and it all appears to be links to news articles with no original content. Oh, and everything is excerpted, with the More link bringing up a new window whether you wanted one or not. But other than that...
Via Ginger, who thinks (and I agree) that all authors should have weblogs.
Governor Goodhair has finally gotten around to admitting that the only way to eradicate the $9.9 billion budget deficit without raising taxes is to cut funding for education and health care, two things he never actually mentioned while on the campaign trail.
The governor's new spending reductions, designed to help bridge a $9.9 billion revenue shortfall, would average 9 percent for most state agencies -- and would be even more for state universities -- during the next two-year budget period beginning Sept. 1.Perry and legislative leaders already have demanded 7 percent cuts from agencies to enable state government to end this fiscal year in the black.
"Texas families don't want, don't need and don't deserve new taxes," Perry said in his State of the State Address, receiving much applause from the Republican-dominated Legislature.
But the governor reiterated his support for a proposal to let university governing boards raise tuition, an item that could add thousands of dollars to college costs.
[...]
In all, Perry -- who last month was criticized for submitting a budgetary proposal that contained zeros rather than specific spending amounts -- outlined $9.1 billion in cuts, money transfers, tightened tax loopholes and other spending reductions on Tuesday. He also sought $390 million in new spending for his economic development fund.
The Legislature, subject to the governor's veto powers, will make the final decision on any spending plan.
The Legislature's budget-drafting arm has told state agencies to draft a starting-point budget that cuts 12.5 percent from state spending. That would cut public education funding by $2.7 billion, health and human services by $1.4 billion and the state criminal justice system by $607 million.
Well, at least there's no more smoke and mirrors to hide behind. It's out in the open, and people can have their say about it. The Chron was typically wishy washy. The Dallas Morning News gave him a mixed review (registration required). I didn't find any other editorials about his State of the State speech in a quick tour of the big city newspapers. Maybe they're waiting for a bigger issue to come along.
Via DC Thornton, I see that Right Wing News recently hosted a Warblogger Awards competition. I find one thing moderately curious about this, which is that there are separate awards for Best Female Blogger and Best Overall Blog. I don't quite understand the distinction here. All of the other categories are about blog characteristics - funniest, original content, most bloodthirsty, best group blog, etc - but this one is the only subcategory that's defined by who the blogger is rather than what's in the blog.
(OK, that's not totally true, since there's also a Best Non-American Blog category. However, I'd argue that non-American blogs are mostly about non-American content and are thus in a genuinely different class, much as non-American films are in a different class than American films. I admit the distinction is a bit hard to pin down, but that's how I see it.)
There is, of course, a Best Overall Blog, which has male and female entries. It seems to me that if you're going to give a separate award for women, you ought to be consistent by eliminating the Best Overall award and simply honor Best Female Blogger and Best Male Blogger. To do it this way feels patronizing to me, as if it's an admission that a woman won't be in contention for Best Overall.
Putting it another way, it's wholly appropriate that the Academy for Motion Picture Arts and Sciences honors the Best Male Actor and Best Female Actor in a given year. It would be wholly inappropriate if they honored Best Overall Actor and Best Female Actor instead.
Like it or not, having a Best Female competition in conjunction with a Best Overall competition eventually degrades and devalues the Best Female competition. This is because everyone knows that being Best Female doesn't mean as much, since after all the field of competition is artificially limited.
An example of this is in the American Contract Bridge League (ACBL). At its national tournaments, there are Open events and Women's events. In every possible metric - coverage, number of participants, buzz - the Open events have tons more prestige. Someone once told me that the only real reason for the Women's events these days is to provide employment opportunities for female professional players (since their clients tend to be women). Even that is changing, since some high-profile female clients have started hiring male pros and winning Open events. I don't expect the Women's events to ever go away, since they also serve as qualifiers for the international Women's championships, but it really doesn't matter since no one pays much attention to them anyway.
(Ironically, it was a lawsuit in the 1980s by a woman named Jillian Blanchard that led to the elimination of Men's events. Of course, those Men's events, in particular the national Men's Pairs championship, were still considered more prestigious. Blanchard and others like her just wanted the chance to test themselves against all competition.)
I'm probably making a needlessly big deal about something that was intended to be lighthearted amusement, and if so I apologize. Lighthearted or not, though, I got a message from that particular choice, and I'm sure it's not what the author intended.
UPDATE: To quote Eric McErlain, who was a judge:
Best Female Blogger: No Vote -- why? Because every female blogger can stand on their own in this competition, they don't need to be "ghettoized."
Indeed.
Hey, Scott! This one's for you - a story of tailgating and trucks leading to business success:
If it weren't for top Toyota executives from Japan going to a Dallas Cowboys home game a few years ago, San Antonio might not be the newly selected hometown for the automaker's sixth North American assembly plant.Toyota Motor Corp. President Fujio Cho of Tokyo said Monday it was the fateful trip to the Cowboys game and an impromptu tour of Texas Stadium's parking lots that opened his company's eyes to the state's significant truck market. The visit convinced the executives to launch the Tundra full-size truck line in 1999.
[...]
"For some time during the 1990s, our product planners in Japan resisted creating a big V-8 pickup for sale in America, but our U.S. colleagues changed this opinion. How? By inviting them to a Dallas Cowboys football game," Cho said.
"On the way to the game, the Americans took the Japanese on an extended tour of the Texas Stadium parking lot. Spread before them were thousands upon thousands of full-size pickup trucks, row after shining row. Our planners realized then that American pickups were not solely commercial vehicles but widely used by everyone for regular transportation. The result was the Toyota Tundra."
I can only presume that there was barbecue and beer involved in this transaction as well, though from the sound of it that would have been icing on the cake.
You all know that I'm not a fan of oversized vehicles, but if they're gonna be on our roads anyway we may as well make 'em here. Kudos all around.
Just when you thought Texas couldn't possibly get any less accomodating to indigent defendants, along comes a proposal to return some money earmarked for post-conviction appeals to the state.
Court of Criminal Appeals Presiding Judge Sharon Keller last week suggested the money could be used to help with a $1.8 billion revenue shortfall this fiscal year.The money was appropriated by the Legislature to pay for lawyers representing death row inmates in their final appeals. Keller said Monday she doesn't think the money will be needed before Aug. 31, when the current fiscal year ends.
The money in question is less than $1 million, which is to say less than 0.06% of the $1.8 billion shortfall that must be made up by August 31. If we all rooted through our couches and cars for spare change and mailed what we found to Rick Perry, it'd have a much bigger impact.
Even though this fund has a little extra cash at this time, it's not like it's a pro-defense bonanza:
Keith Hampton, a lobbyist for the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, said the reason there is unused money is because the Court of Criminal Appeals "drove off virtually all of the good lawyers."The state pays $25,000 for all fees and expenses connected with an appeal. Defense lawyers contend that is not enough to do a thorough job.
A study released last December by the Texas Defender Service concluded that more than a third of the state habeas appeals filed since 1995 have been token efforts, containing none of the investigative work that is customarily expected in such an appeal.
Andrea Keilen, a lawyer who helped write the study, said she's disappointed that the court wants to cut the budget for legal representation.
"What the court should be doing is encouraging the Legislature to increase the fee cap and draw a more qualified class of lawyers to take these cases so Texas is not at risk for executing an innocent person," said Keilen.
If the name Sharon Keller rings a bell, by the way, it should. She has a history of being hostile to defendants, even ones like Roy Criner. See here, here, here, and here for the full story of Criner, who was wrongfully convicted of raping and killing a girl named Kimberly Ogg in 1990. DNA evidence, including semen found in the victim, was not a match for Criner, but he was convicted anyway. When proper DNA testing was finally done and demonstrated the lack of a link to Criner, Judge Keller wrote an opinion for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals which essentially said that this meant nothing:
Even before the DNA test proved conclusively that the semen wasn't Criner's -- and without knowledge of the screwdriver test or other exculpatory evidence -- the state court of appeals based in Beaumont overturned the conviction and freed Criner in 1991. But the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned that ruling a year later, and Criner was jailed again.In 1997 conservative Montgomery County Judge Michael Mayes reviewed the DNA evidence and recommended a new trial. But the Court of Criminal Appeals rejected the judge's findings. "There is overwhelming, direct evidence that establishes that [Criner] sexually assaulted the victim in this case," Judge Keller wrote in her opinion. As for the DNA evidence, Keller told Frontline, "If [the test] had come back positive, it would have been important." But since it was negative, she said, it didn't mean anything: "You're not taking into account the fact that [Ogg] was a promiscuous girl."
Regardless, she told Frontline, the DNA information wouldn't have made any difference to the jury. The documentary then cut to Joel Albrecht, the foreman of that jury. "I don't understand how the court could say what we would do," he said. "I personally think if the DNA came forth stating that it was negative, the verdict would not have been 'guilty.' "
I didn't think Sharon Keller could top that particular disgrace, but give her credit for trying. Hopefully, saner heads will again prevail.
The Enron prosecution team is deciding where they want to go next, now that they've gotten a pretty good picture of how it all went down. The main question at this point is who's next, and who's after that.
"Obviously, the most important thing for a prosecutor is how strong your case is against any one defendant," said Dan Hedges, a defense attorney and the former U.S. attorney in Houston. "The evidence is more important than who the defendant is. The ultimate disaster is to go against a big fish and lose."[...]
The Enron Task Force has been running many parallel investigations, including some that target former chairman Ken Lay -- over his stock trades and loans he repaid to Enron with stock -- and ex-president Jeff Skilling -- over questions about his possible role in exaggerating company finances and the feasibility of Enron's broadband business.
"It's a question of resources. You don't -- and the court doesn't want you to -- bring 50 cases," Hedges said. "You start higher up with the good cases. If there aren't good cases against those higher up, that endangers the people lower down."
Prosecutors must now weigh an individual's culpability, prior crimes and cooperation, along with the seriousness of the offense and how complicated the case will be. They also have to make the caseload manageable.
"The government has to maximize its resources, which is why you often see them charge the most visible people first, hoping others may fall in line," said defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Philip Hilder. He represents several Enron employees, including former vice president Sherron Watkins, who wrote the now-famous memo to Lay warning him of financial improprieties.
Hilder noted that prosecutors may pursue only the cream of the cases now but could charge bit players later. "There are rumblings that they may use obstruction of justice, perjury, making false statement and tax counts against many, but that could be done later," Hilder said.
2003 is shaping up as a banner year for them. I'll be watching and waiting.
Jeff Cooper has a new home for his Cooped Up blog. Update those blogrolls, folks! And leave a word of encouragement about his new look and his (wise) decision to go Movable Typing. Remember, Jeff: the Movable Type Support Forum is your friend. It's saved my bacon any number of times. If I were forced to give only one reason why people should consider abandoning Blogger/Blogspot for MT, that would be it. End commercial.
Anyway. Go visit Jeff when you're done here. It's good to have him back on a regular blogging schedule.
Josh Marshall has been following the story of how the New Hampshire Republican party hired a Northern Virginia telemarketing outfit -- GOP Marketplace -- to jam the phone banks at the offices of the New Hampshire Democratic Coordinated Campaign and the Manchester Firefighters' Union Local on election day last November. Today he reports on one of the men behind GOP Marketplace, a fellow named Chris Cupit. Cupit has ties to former Texas Congressman Steve Stockman. As Marshall says:
Back in the glory days of the Republican Revolution, according to two articles which ran in The Hill in May 1996, Cupit ran a consulting firm called Political Won Stop, which did a lot of work for Stockman and also happened to run out of Stockman's house. (The FEC later meted out a $40,000 fine to Stockman for shenanigans related to the Political Won Stop operation.) During the same campaign, according to an October 30th, 1996 article in The Houston Chronicle Cupit was also Stockman's campaign manager. So clearly he's sort of a jack-of-all-trades.
Boy howdy does that bring up some memories. Not only is Marshall dead on when he refers to Steve Stockman as one of the "loopiest" members of the GOP Class of 1994 (only the immortal Helen Chenoweth of Idaho is in the same league), but the story of his Political Won Stop is itself a beaut which led to failed assault charges on Houston Press reporter Tim Fleck, and a lawsuit by Fleck against Stockman that was dropped after Nick Lampson sent him packing in 1996. Here's an excerpt from Fleck's attempt to visit Political Won Stop in 1996:
Photographer Nicole Fruge and I drove to Friendswood to do some on-the-scene investigation of Political Won Stop, a business registered in Brazoria County that operates out of Stockman's residence and has received $126,000 in payments from the congressman's campaign since January. One of the listed principals of the firm, Chris Cupit, just happens to be the Republican nominee for tax assessor-collector of Jefferson County, a position that has been vacated by Democrat Nick Lampson, who is now running for Congress against Stockman.Cupit apparently has no official campaign office of his own in Jefferson County, raising questions about whether resources from his and Stockman's campaigns are being commingled in the rather cozy spaces of the Whitman Way residence. That would be a violation of federal election law. And The Hill, a D.C.-based weekly that covers Congress and first reported on the Political Won Stop operation, has questioned whether Stockman's campaign keeps the appropriately legal "arms-length" distance from the consultants, whose phone number is the same as Stockman's and who presumably use the facilities available to others in the Stockman household.
Press calls to the house and Cupit and partner Jason Posey (who had identified himself as a Stockman "volunteer" to The Hill) went unreturned, so the only option seemed to be an on-site inspection. After I followed Stallworth into the living room of the Stockman domicile, I met several volunteers who claimed Cupit was not there. But the 1995 Saturn that was reposing in Stockman's driveway at the time is registered to Cupit.
The front of the intensely claustrophobic house, where windows might otherwise be found, is sealed by planking, and the only vista to the street is a pinhole in the worn wooden front door. It hardly seems a residence fitting for a U.S. congressman, even one whose employment history prior to his 1994 election was rather spotty.
The living room, cluttered with campaign signs and literature, opens on the right into a garage office, where Political Won Stop apparently does its work. A hallway on the left presumably leads to some sort of sleeping quarters, where Patti may or may not have been crouching in fear while I was in the front room.
Upon my entry, Stallworth summoned a dark-haired young man from the garage office, who proved far less friendly. "You'll have to leave," he announced in a rather whiny, nasal voice. (The following day, the Press called Chris Cupit at his home in Groves and discovered that he possess a whiny, nasal voice identical to that of the man who ordered me out of Stockman's residence. But perhaps everybody who works for Stevie whines. On the phone, Cupit flatly denied being present at Stockman's house during my visit. Before we could ask what his car was doing in Stockman's driveway, Cupit said he had to go but promised to call us back shortly. He never did, of course.)
At the Stockman compound, the Cupit sound-alike denied that Political Won Stop operated out of the house, but tried to change the subject when I reminded him that Stockman's own campaign finance filings list the company as based there. "I know, but we have rights, too, and you've got to honor our rights," he whined. He seemed especially terrified that photographer Fruge, who was just outside the front door with her camera, might get a shot of his face. He tried to close the front door, and another volunteer then slammed it shut and pressed his back against it, barring any exit. I asked the head whiner what he was so afraid of. "We're not afraid of anything," he insisted, rather unconvincingly.
After being ordered once more to leave, I replied, "Well, fine, open the door. And don't hide too much. You guys are pathetic." And with that, my alleged "invasion" of the congressman's castle was over. Minutes later, several young Stockman volunteers drove up, and I asked them to locate Chris Cupit for me. Once inside the house, they didn't come back out before Fruge and I departed.
Fruge took a few more shots of Fort Stockman from the street while I went to interview neighbors. [Stockman staffer Cory] Birenbaum would later claim she took photos through the windows of the Stockman abode. The problem with that particular lie is that there are no windows accessible from the front yard to take photos through.
Stockman, at least, has continued in the political consulting business since his ouster from Congress. As reported here, he continues to be rather casual about the money involved:
As usual, tracking Stockman's financial trail through Federal Election Commission filings requires the skills of a Wild West scout. His latest liaison is with Houston lawyer Mark Brewer, who is using a $559,846 loan to himself to fund his race for the Seventh [Congressional District, left open in 2000 by Bill Archer's retirement]. Brewer's initial campaign report listed contributions but no expenditures. After the FEC began asking questions, Brewer filed an amended report that offers some tantalizing entries.The filing shows Brewer made two $100,000 payments to General Media Consultants of McLean, Virginia, a firm not listed in the phone directory and unknown to GOP consultants contacted by the Insider. On the same day of those transactions, the Brewer campaign made a $50,000 payment for media consulting to Stockman, who listed an address in Friendswood.
Later, Stockman and his wife, Patti, gave $1,000 each to Brewer's campaign in June. They listed their address as 8180 Greensboro Drive in McLean, the same address as the previously unknown General Media Consulting group. It's all too reminiscent of the mid-'90s, when the former congressman used his home as the base for an equally unknown political consulting firm that received big bucks from his campaign account.
Consultant Allen Blakemore has worked for GOP westside kingmaker Dr. Steven Hotze. Blakemore is no stranger to the fine art of funneling campaign cash through the good doctor's network of companies and political action committees. He finds the cash outlay to Stockman outlandish.
Blakemore cites fees charged by leading GOP consultants, including Herb Butrum, Sue Walden and Karl Rove. None of them remotely compare to payouts for Stockman. "It is beyond the pale -- just the $50,000. And then $200,000? The question is: What the hell is going on?" The question is of more than passing interest to Blakemore, who represents Cathy McConn, former Republican National Committee member and Seventh District candidate.
It would be interesting to see if there's a connection between General Media Consultants and GOP Marketplace, wouldn't it? The contact info for GOP Marketplace is sketchy - a Washington, DC, address is listed as the admin contact in Whois - but that doesn't really mean anything. Some detective work is needed here.
For what it's worth, this new venture of Stockman's is mostly known for causing a big ruckus in that GOP primary for Archer's seat. He's also drawn complaints from Dubya and Rove for some slimy push polling. Guess that if there is a connection to GOP Marketplace it means they're equal-opportunity dirty tricksters.
On a personal note, until this year the one time I ever gave money to a political campaign was to Nick Lampson in 1996 to help him remove Stockman from office. Best money I spent that whole year.
Great. Just what we need.
AUSTIN - Students at the University of Texas are accusing several fraternities of hosting parties in which participants wore racially insensitive costumes.A formal complaint was planned today against at least one of the fraternities.
Dean of Students Teresa Graham Brett told The Daily Texan in today's edition she was informed of the Kappa Alpha Order party as well as Halloween parties thrown by Kappa Alpha and Phi Gamma Delta. She said students approached her with photographs of the parties taken by a local party photographer.
One photograph taken at a Phi Gamma Delta Party on Oct. 31 shows a white man wearing black paint on his face and body, an "afro" wig on his head and a chain with a lock around his neck.
Another photo taken at a Kappa Alpha party on Jan. 31 shows a white man wearing a T-shirt commemorating a Juneteenth event in 2000 while another is shown wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with a large watermelon.
UT economics senior Onaje Barnes said he and other students plan to file a complaint with the Office of Greek Life and Education regarding the "Gin and Juice Party" held by the Kappa Alpha Order fraternity on Jan. 31.
But Kappa Alpha president Tim Weaver said the party's theme was meant to idolize rap music and popular culture icons and he did not realize people were going to be offended.
"It seems there were some people that showed up with extremely offensive T-shirts," Weaver, an undeclared junior, told the newspaper. "I do apologize for that part of it. We do not think it should have been that big of a deal. It came at a bad time, I think."
Barnes said the problem is that people think this behavior is acceptable.
Phil Gamma Delta historian Chris Knox said he did not see anyone wearing such costumes at the fraternity's event.
But Brett said she found the photographed costumes highly offensive, and is reviewing actions that can be taken against the fraternity.
Jesus H. Christ. What century are we in again? Is there anyone over the age of three in the United States of freaking America who can honestly say that they don't think such imagery is offensive? Is there anyone who's led such a sheltered and privileged life that they have no damn clue why people find such things offensive? How many more times does this sort of thing have to happen before people get it?
Gah. I need a beer.
Tom DeLay has been putting pressure on the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature to redraw the congressional district boundaries to make give more seats to the GOP, but given the work that will have to be done balancing the budget this session, state leaders have been resisting his efforts.
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst called congressional redistricting as welcome as a "contagious flu" and did not even bother to appoint a Senate redistricting committee.House Speaker Tom Craddick last year said he did not want to take up congressional redistricting if the issue was dead in the Senate. But when he appointed committees Jan. 30, he named a redistricting committee at the urging of DeLay, Capitol sources told the Houston Chronicle.
Rep. Joe Crabb, R-Houston, appointed to chair the committee, said then that it was "very likely" the Legislature would write a new redistricting bill. He said he hadn't spoken with DeLay.
Crabb said last week, however, that he is unaware of any contemplated legislation on congressional redistricting. He said he believes the committee will be dealing with minor changes in state House lines and a request by Texas Chief Justice Tom Phillips to redraw judicial districts.
The key argument that Democrats and some Republicans make against DeLay's push is that lawmakers do not need a partisan fight over redistricting while they also have to solve a $10 billion state budget shortfall.
"Redistricting is the most partisan matter the Legislature ever takes up," said Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, the Senate redistricting chairman in 2001.
"We've got the toughest session this year in the last 50 years. We don't need the added and unnecessary element of redistricting thrown into the mix," he said.
Getting a new redistricting plan through the House would be easy, but the state Senate requires a two-thirds affirmative vote to bring a bill up for debate. Nineteen of the 31 state Senators are Republican, so at least two Democrats would have to go along with this idea. One of them, Sen. Eddie Lucio, has said he'd consider it if one of the newly drawn districts were conveniently centered in his turf, thus allowing him a shot at ousting fellow Democrat Solomon Ortiz (District 27). I have a feeling that if and when DeLay's call is heeded in the Lege, Senator Lucio will come under some pressure of his own from the national Democratic Party. As such, I'd take his support with a grain of salt.
While no Republican target list is available, political insiders say that the GOP wants to change district lines to cause the defeat of Democratic incumbents Ralph Hall of Rockwall, Charles Stenholm of Abilene, Chet Edwards of Waco and Chris Bell of Houston.They also want to change boundary lines for U.S. Rep. Martin Frost, D-Dallas, the state's Democratic congressional leader, hoping to make him more vulnerable to a Republican or even to a primary challenge from a Hispanic Democrat.
Ralph Hall is one of the most conservative Democrats in the House. He's also retiring after this term, and his seat is considered a lock to be won by a Republican in 2004 anyway. Stenholm and Edwards were reelected by their smallest margins ever in 2002 - Stenholm with 51.33% and Edwards with 51.53% - so you'd think they'd be vulnerable anyway. Freshman Rep. Chris Bell got 55.31%, which is actually the lowest percentage a Democrat has gotten in District 25 in several election cycles. Ken Bentsen, who abandoned the seat to run for Senate last year, won with just over 60% in 2000.
This article also suggests Max Sandlin and Jim Turner as possible targets. They got 56.19% and 60.85%, respectively, in 2002, but are in rural districts and are thus considered susceptible. It also suggests redrawing Gene Green's safe 29th District as well as Martin Frost's to encourage a minority primary opponent. Given that Hispanics have had their eye on the 29th District since it was first created, that could get ugly. The fact that it's considered insufficiently Hispanic due to a Republican lawsuit in 1994 that advocated "colorblind" district lines is an irony that's probably lost on the DeLay crowd.
One last thing to address is Jim Ellis, director of DeLay's Americans for a Republican Majority, who argues that state voting numbers are a good reason for redistricting:
"I went back and added up the votes, and 56.04 percent of Texans voted for a Republican for Congress, and Republicans have 47 percent of the seats. So they're out of line," Ellis said.
One reason for this difference is the fact that four districts had no Democrats running, while only two had no Republican candidate. If you look at the vote totals in this PDF file from the Secretary of State's webpage, you'll see the following:
District 7
John Culberson - Incumbent REP* 93,180 88.96%District 8
Kevin Brady - Incumbent REP* 139,574 93.12%District 10
Lloyd Doggett - Incumbent DEM* 112,612 84.49%District 12
Kay Granger - Incumbent REP* 122,493 91.82%District 19
Larry Combest - Incumbent REP* 117,085 91.64%District 29
Gene Green - Incumbent DEM* 54,619 95.13%
Rep total = 472,332
Dem total = 167,231
That 300,000 vote differential makes up a lot of the margin Ellis cites.
There's one final bit of irony in this whole thing, which is that the plan DeLay favored, a plan that would have given the GOP 20 seats, supposedly would have made DeLay's own district less favorable to him. If his pressure ever bears fruit - and there's no reason to believe this issue couldn't be brought up again in 2005 - there would at least be a small amount of poetic justice for Democrats if one result is DeLay's downfall.
UPDATE: When I first posted this, I somehow managed to overlook two other unopposed Democratic Congressmen, a fact I've just discovered. Thie votes totals:
District 15
Ruben Hinojosa(I) DEM 66,311 100.00%District 16
Silvestre Reyes(I) DEM 72,383 100.00%
That reduces the GOP lead on votes from unopposed Congressmen from about 300,000 to about 170,000 and weakens but does not overturn my point.
I spent several years doing help desk work, first for a small software company, and then here for the large multinational where I now work. I've always been suspicious of supposedly true help desk war stories involving users who asked where the "any" key is or who used their CD-ROM drive as a cup holder because I never encountered anything remotely like that.
This guy, however, apparently did, and he's got some pictures to prove it. I am duly impressed. If you recognize yourself in any of these pictures, do us all a favor and hire a ten-year-old to do all of your computing for you.
Thanks to Matt for the tip.
In case you didn't notice, the GAO dropped its lawsuit against Vice President Dick Cheney over his Top Secret Energy Meetings from 2001, so we'll never get to know if they did in fact play Five Minutes In The Closet With Ken Lay or not. Bummer.
In my last entry, I took a potshot at the Chron's letters page:
When they print a letter that's in response to a news article, editorial or prior letter, would it kill them to link to the original piece? At least news articles are searchable on their site without having to go into the archives, but everything on the op-ed pages disappears the next day unless you bookmark it. This seems like such a no-brainer to me.
This prompted the following response from my buddy Matt in the comments:
As the former head of technology at chron.com, I'll give you the answer.It wouldn't kill them (of course), but it would require a human editor to do by hand and would be too much work to be worth doing.
Let's do some back-of-the-envelope estimates. The editor would have to look up the URL for the original letter, then make the link. This might take a few minutes per letter - say three. The Chron prints perhaps fifteen letters per day. That's 45 minutes of editor time per day, or about 5 1/2 hours per week - about one fourth of a full time employee.
This work could be justified if there were enough additional advertising revenue to support it, and there wasn't something more valuable for those editors to do. With Internet advertising being what it is these days, you can certainly understand why there aren't links there.
That's a fair answer. I admit, I hadn't given any real thought to the logistics. So I retract that criticism.
Now if they'd only let op-ed page stuff be searchable on the main site for as long as the average news story is, I'd be really happy.
In January, John Cornyn took the first step to fulfill a campaign promise to pass a Constitutional amendment banning flag burning. Here's an excerpt from the January 17 Chron article, which is now archived:
"Our flag represents the thousands of brave men and women who have died over the years to protect the freedoms we all cherish," Cornyn said.Joining Cornyn and 42 others backing the amendment was Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Texas Republican who supported previous efforts to pass the measure.
The proposal, introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, is designed to challenge a 1989 Supreme Court decision striking down flag protection statutes in 48 states as a violation of First Amendment free-speech rights.
Lawmakers in Congress for years have struggled to adopt a constitutional amendment protecting the flag from all forms of desecration, including burning.
Last week, the Chron ran an unsigned editorial criticizing Cornyn (also archived):
DISTRACTION When was an American last harmed by a burning flag?Staff
Nine hours before President Bush began to deliver his State of the Union address this week, Sen. John Cornyn released a statement praising the great leadership the president showed when he gave the speech. Cornyn's ability to see into the future is suspect, but his statement makes an important point that Cornyn himself should heed.
Cornyn, a Republican, applauded Bush's priorities: homeland security, health care, jobs and economic growth. The junior senator from Texas predicted that Congress would act decisively to achieve those goals and would avoid partisan games.
Only a few days before, however, Cornyn announced he was taking over the chairmanship of a Senate Judiciary subcommittee with jurisdiction over proposed constitutional amendments and civil rights. Cornyn renewed his commitment to advance an amendment that would allow Congress to outlaw and punish flag-burning and other forms of desecration.
At a time when the nation is on the brink of war with Iraq, when it is vulnerable to stateless terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, when the war on terror is increasing government's intrusion into Americans' lives, Cornyn believes the Senate, its staff and hearing witnesses should spend countless hours debating an amendment to combat a rare occurrence that harms no one. Such an amendment would weaken Americans' First Amendment freedoms already under attack, but it would increase no one's security, give no one health care, stimulate no economic growth and produce no jobs, unless they were for police officers and prosecutors who would be better occupied combating dangerous criminals and terrorists.
Cornyn's press aide, Don Stewart, could not recall a single instance when someone had burned an American flag. He said he once saw people stepping on a flag lying on the ground in the Washington Mall. Although he had a clear view of this alleged atrocity, Stewart said he could not get to the flag to lift it from the ground.
This implausible tale is meant to justify a determined attempt in the Senate to undermine liberty in the name of patriotism. In this petty, partisan pursuit, Sen. Cornyn risks blotting the reputation for intellect and integrity he established as a justice on the Texas Supreme Court and as state attorney general. Worse, Cornyn would deliberately and irresponsibly distract the nation's attention from the grave matters he acknowledged in his prescient praise for the president's leadership.
Cornyn took issue with this editorial and wrote a letter to the editor:
I read with amazement the Chronicle's Feb. 1 editorial ("Distraction / When was an American last harmed by a burning flag?") denouncing my efforts to prevent the desecration of the American flag. I was astonished to learn that the Chronicle feels such efforts are both irresponsible and a distraction. That's not what veterans from across Texas who've asked me to support the flag amendment say.During a week in which men and women in uniform were being deployed overseas to defend the flag , the Chronicle belittled my attempts to honor their service. And in the years of rebuilding after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, the Chronicle dismissed as a "petty, partisan pursuit" my willingness to hold hearings on protecting our nation's most beloved symbol.
Had you researched the bill, you would have seen that so far nearly half the Senate, on a bipartisan basis, co-sponsored this legislation. Patriotism is not a partisan issue. I can't wait to see what you'll write on Flag Day.
John Cornyn , U.S. senator
Today, the Chron published six letters in response to Cornyn. Five of them took him to task, including the following two from veterans:
Rather than address the issues raised in the Chronicle's Feb. 1 editorial about "flag burning," Sen. John Cornyn instead chose to "wave the flag" even higher and faster in his letter to Viewpoints.He stated that men and women in uniform are being deployed overseas to "defend the flag." Really? I thought they were being deployed overseas to protect our country. His inability to distinguish between these two very different things is offensive to this Vietnam veteran.
Why doesn't he work on our country's real problems, instead of using my flag to begin his 2008 reelection campaign.
James Artlip, Sugar Land
[...]
I was worried that Sen. John Cornyn's learning curve as freshman senator would be pretty steep, since he has never been to Washington, D.C., as an elected official.
But as I read his Feb. 5 Viewpoints letter ("Cornyn's defending our flag") responding to the Chronicle's editorial about his amendment to ban flag-burning, I see my fears were unfounded: He has obviously already mastered the conservative modus operandi of whining, attacking those who disagree with you and portraying them as un-American.
I am one veteran who is proud to oppose a constitutional amendment banning desecration of the American flag. I put my life on the line for the powerful things our national symbol represents -- such as the freedoms of speech, expression, association and religion -- rather than the symbol itself.
Look for me on Flag Day. I'll be one of those waving -- not objectifying -- Old Glory.
Jim Krzmarzick, League City
I should note that the one letter that supported Cornyn was also written by a vet, one who made the same mistake as Cornyn in assuming that "other veterans agree with me".
I'm amazed not only at the number of letters the Chron printed, but especially at how many of them opposed the anti-flag burning amendment. Some days your faith gets restored a little, I guess.
I can't let this go completely without one obligatory Chron-bashing remark: When they print a letter that's in response to a news article, editorial or prior letter, would it kill them to link to the original piece? At least news articles are searchable on their site without having to go into the archives, but everything on the op-ed pages disappears the next day unless you bookmark it. This seems like such a no-brainer to me.
Yesterday, I played in the 2003 Houston Regional Bridge Tournament. One tradition of such tournaments is the Midnight Zip Knockouts, which is a team event that takes place after the evening session. As the name implies, it's intended to be played at a faster rate than regular events. Tradition also demands that it be played in a casual, loosey-goosey fashion - I know quite a few people who won't play in a midnight zip event unless alcohol is involved. At one point last night, the director was exhorting slowpokes to get a move on by saying "Faster, people - this is no time to be playing bridge!"
Now, as old age has taken its toll, I've generally given up on playing in midnight events. I need my beauty sleep more than I need a few cheap thrills. Last night I made an exception for two reasons: One, the evening session started and finished earlier than in years past, allowing the Midnight Zip to commence a bit before 11 PM. Two, and more importantly, I was asked to be on a team with Morgan Compton.
Morgan is the not-quite-eight-year-old daughter of Chris and Donna Compton. Chris is a professional player and national champion. Morgan started learning bridge about a year ago. She had just gotten her ACBL membership card, and had been promised the opportunity to play in a real event at this tournament. Since Chris has professional obligations and Donna has returned to work as a tournament director, the zip was the best chance. Chris was to play with Morgan, while my partner (Binkley, as it happens) and I would be at the other table.
Amazingly enough, the first match ended in a dead tie. Normally, that would force overtime, since this is a knockout event, but not in this case because there were a non-power of two number of entries. So we got to play a second match, and this time we lost by one point (that's International Match Point, or IMP, in case you're curious; they're calculated from the difference in scores of each hand at the two tables). I'm pleased to report that Morgan and Chris got to play a number of hands, and she did very well.
Tournament bridge is, sadly, a game played by mostly older folks. It's been fifteen years since I started playing tournaments, and I'm still one of the youngest players at any given event (though not nearly as much at the Nationals). It was really cool to help a member of the next generation get her start, and I look forward to the day when I can say to her what so many others have said to me over the years: "Oh, it's so nice to see young people playing bridge!"
Kevin Drum has an interview with Josh Marshall on his site that's very much worth checking out. Nicely done, Kevin!
I wonder if we'll start seeing more of this in the future. It'd be pretty cool if so.
Earlier this week, Chron political columnist John Williams had this blurb in his weekly piece:
Term limits just too confining?· Add the name of Harris County Judge Robert Eckels to the growing list of term-limit backers who seem to be losing enthusiasm for the idea.
When Eckels campaigned for county judge eight years ago, he promised not to serve more than three four-year terms in the office, which is not term-limited.
"I'm a firm believer in term limits," Eckels said in 1995.
Eckels easily won a third term last November, and since then he has been talking with supporters about seeking a fourth term in 2006.
Eckels said he wants to consider long-term challenges such as homeland security and regional initiatives like transportation.
And his support of terms limits?
"I really haven't changed on them, but some issues need a long-term approach," Eckels said.
Translation: "All that stuff about corrupt career politicians and the need to force them out of office was never supposed to be about me. Term limits are for the other guy."
I'm sure there have been more cynically exploited issues than term limits by Republicans in the 1990s, but I can't think of any other recent examples.
Bill White officially jumped in to the 2003 Mayoral race on Wednesday. He's got a plan for transportation:
In an announcement speech called "Let's Get Houston Moving," White presented a transportation plan that he said would reduce the average commuting time of Houstonians by 25 hours annually.The plan includes:
·Working with the business community to shift 5 percent of commutes to non-peak morning and afternoon hours, when freeways are less congested. That will have the same impact as investing $1 billion in highway improvements, he said.
·Creating a "war room" to make sure city street improvements are completed on time and within budget.
·Using computer technology to better manage traffic.
·Seeking consensus for extension of the light rail system under construction downtown. He said he will have a more specific plan later in the campaign.
You all know where I stand on light rail. I'm very interested in his to-be-released specific plan. The thing is, you can make a good case for extending light rail in pretty much any direction as the next step. North-south takes you to the airports, west takes you out the Katy Freeway, and southwest takes you to the Fort Bend area, where mayors of cities like Sugar Land, Missouri City, and Rosenberg have been vocal in support or rail. I've always been a little worried that once a direction is chosen for the next project, the people who live in the other areas won't be nearly as supportive. Nothing kills a coalition faster than the belief that someone else is getting more benefit than you.
Meanwhile, the candidate who has to be considered the favorite got a boost to his campaign yesterday. Port of Houston Chairman Ned Holmes announced he would support Orlando Sanchez instead of running for mayor himself. Holmes backed Lee Brown in 2001, and support from the business establishment has always been key. If Sanchez can keep the same level of Hispanic support he got in 2001, he will be in very good shape.
On the slightly bizarre side, this Houston Press article highlights an issue that might haunt Bill White. White is the CEO of an international oil-and-gas business called the Wedge Group. It's owned by a Lebanese billionaire named Issam Fares, who is now a member of Lebanon's legislature. He's also voiced some unpopular opinions here:
The candidate's relationship with Deputy Prime Minister Fares of Lebanon could also become a campaign issue. Two years ago, a Fares-endowed fund paid incoming Secretary of State Colin Powell $200,000 for a 30-minute talk at Tufts University. Fares also ponied up a $100,000 contribution for President George W. Bush's inaugural festivities. Media reports focused on allegations that the Lebanese official was trying to buy influence with the new administration.According to the Jerusalem Post, Fares angrily responded in a statement blasting "the Zionist lobby in the United States and its agents" for "distortions and lies." Fares also opposed the U.S. government's decision to add the Lebanese Shiite Muslim militia group Hezbollah to its terrorist list in the wake of 9/11.
"It is a mistake to make a comparison between the [Al Qaeda] network…which Lebanon has condemned, and Hezbollah, which Lebanon considers a resistance party fighting the Israeli occupation," Fares told Agence France-Presse. He claimed the group has never targeted Americans, a position disputed by U.S. officials as well as Fares's own Wedge Group CEO.
"I personally think the Hezbollah militia is a terrorist organization," counters White, who notes that he and Fares rarely talk politics. The candidate says his own position on the Arab-Israeli conflict is clear.
"I think I am the only non-Jew on the board of the American-Israeli public affairs committee," the candidate says. "Regionally, I've been on the board of the Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs out of Washington for six years. I think that Israel has been victimized by terrorism, period."
For what it's worth, Fares is a Christian (he's Greek Orthodox). I can envision some nasty TV ads tying White to Hezbollah, but there's that little matter of Fares' $100,000 donation to GW Bush. President Bush and his parents gave a lot of support to Orlando Sanchez in 2001, including endorsements given in TV ads. I suspect that any mention of Fares' unsavory opinions by the Sanchez campaign will be met with responses linking Fares to Sanchez via the Bushes. One can only hope that we don't go down this road, as the campaign will be ugly and expensive enough without it.
Finally, Greg Wythe has some thoughts about Bill White's chances that are similar to mine, along with some recent examples of unknown candidates who did much better than expected. And everyone's favorite house plant Chronicle columnist Thom Marshall gives some idle speculation about Chief Bradford's theoretical prospects in this race.
A group calling itself the Union of Concerned Scientists - I'm picturing a bunch of white lab coats and deeply furrowed brows here - has released a report of over 100 nonnative plant and animal species which are threatening native flora and fauna.
Included in the 122 harmful invasive species listed by the Union of Concerned Scientists are such exotic critters as the channeled applesnail -- a Filipino gastropod found in a canal in Alvin in 2000 with a voracious appetite for rice -- and bastardcabbage, a noxious weed.
Obligatory Dave Barry reference: "Bastard Cabbage" would make an excellent name for a rock band.
"In Texas, if you saw an exotic shellfish in a local stream, there is nobody in particular you should report that to," said Robert Howells, a fisheries research biologist with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, which restricts the importation and possession of 600 species of fish, shellfish and aquatic plants."That's all we are legally allowed to regulate," he said.
Over the years, he has kept lists. "I do the best I can," he said, "but it is really an unofficial thing."
Obviously, not everyone takes this problem as seriously as the Union of Concerned Scientists.
The Texas Department of Agriculture regulates and oversees species that could harm the state's farms and nurseries.Beverly Boyd, a spokeswoman, took issue with some of the "problem" species on the group's list. She said a few have become so common, they seem almost native.
"There are a lot of lawns with bermudagrass ," Boyd said. "We all grew up with Chinaberries."
Well, yeah, but that doesn't make it a good thing.
Anway, if you want to learn more about native vs. nonnative plants and why the former is better, I recommend the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center, which is also a fine place to visit if you're in Austin.
Barry points to this piece by Dirk Deppey which asks "Where are the pro-war editorial cartoons?". Dirk in turn was inspired by this Indian Express story:
"Empty warheads" is how an American cartoonist recently described Washington’s war planners. The rest of the doodling gang hasn’t been any kinder. In fact, American cartoonists seem to be orchestrating a campaign against their presidential wisdom to attack Iraq. Not a single cartoon even obliquely pro-war has been sighted.What accounts for this unusual herd instinct among the cartooning tribe? Unusual, because cartoonists normally present a variety of views. They are no less divided on politics, economics and ecology than the rest of the media and the readers. Some love to target the Republican elephant and some the Democratic donkey and some gun for the visual hybrid of the two. And many can’t escape the occupational hazard of contradicting themselves over weeks and months of having to combat the newsbreak of the day.
The writer notes that cartoonists are not inherently pacifistic, as the World War II experience clearly demonstrated. He goes on to make a distinction between anti-Saddam cartoons and pro-war ones:
What has changed since [World War II]? The Vietnam simile doesn’t hold either. Saddam is no Ho Chi Minh. He isn’t a much more desirable human specimen than Hitler or Mussolini and is an equally caricaturable target. The cartoonist does attack him but he spares the enemy’s enemy no less. More than war itself it is the collateral damage to a free society that comes with it that bothers the cartoonist.
With all that in mind, and since Dirk says he hasn't seen any such cartoons recently, I spent a little time looking for pro-war editorial cartoons. Mostly, I went to the Cagle Collection at Slate. It was certainly easy enough to find anti-Saddam cartoons here. Many of these have as a theme the uselessness of inspections and/or the UN. Given that this is a major part of the pro-invasion argument, then surely at some point this message becomes more than just a Saddam-is-bad one. We have examples of Saddam resisting inspections (here and here), inspectors being incompetent (here and here), the inspection process itself being a waste of time (here), and Saddam being very tricky about hiding weapons (here, here, and here).
Such cartoons may not seem like they're directly pro-invasion, but if their point is that inspections can't or won't do the job, then what else is there? Of course, the idea is really driven home in cartoons like this one, which would fit right in on the most hawkish of blogs.
As this cartoon by Cagle himself from February 5 attests, there are cartoonists who believe that the administration has made its case. If this isn't a pro-war editorial cartoon, there ain't no such thing.
And of course, no discussion of pro-war cartoonists is complete without mentioning the LA Times' master of subtlety, Michael Ramirez. His Feb 6 cartoon is similar in nature to the one linked in the last paragraph, and there are at least a half-dozen other examples of invasion boosterism since December 15. You can be sure there'll be plenty more in the future.
Brian Linse is back from the wilds of London, and he notes that he was blogging about John Lott before it was cool. Welcome back, Brian!
When I'm in my car, I generally listen to what I call "demographically appropriate" music on the radio. Basically, what that means is that there are only two radio stations that play stuff that I generally like - the All-80s station and the Classic Rock station. I'll sometimes flip to the Oldies station or the mostly-metalhead Album-Oriented Rock station if the other two are both playing commercials, but that's pretty much it. It's the music I'm familiar with, after all.
There are other choices in Houston, as this recent article notes. Some of them are likely to appeal to others in my demographic group. You could look at the variety of different formats on the dial and conclude that corporate radio domination isn't such a bad thing after all:
Since the landmark Telecommunications Act of 1996 eased restrictions on station ownership, a corporation may own as many as eight stations in a single market. With multiple stations, owners are increasingly carving out a unique identity for each one."They don't want their stations competing with each other," says Robert Musburger, associate professor in the University of Houston School of Communication. "They'd rather find another niche someone else isn't doing."
The graying of baby boomers also has shaken up what is heard on the radio as stations target adults with jazz and oldies formats.
"(Radio stations) have ignored us old farts for the past 10 years," says Musburger, 67. "Suddenly they realize that we do have money. We're very careful how we spend it, but when we spend it, we spend it on big things."
The problem that I have with radio nowadays is not that I can't find stations that play music I like. The problem I have is that all of the stations that do play music I like play the same damn music over and over and over again.
Not that this is a surprise, since after all I listen to stations that say up front that they only play certain types of music from certain time frames. But after listening to these types of stations for a decade now, I can honestly say that I pretty much have their entire playlists memorized. I'm bored out of my mind with them.
When KIKK flipped to KHJZ, Cox Radio spotted an opening. It changed its Hot 97.1 format, which aimed hip-hop and pop tunes at teens and young adults, to a "country legends" format geared to an audience over 30.Now Country Legends 97.1 picks from a playlist of 600 songs recorded before 1989 by country greats such as Johnny Cash, Tom T. Hall, Dolly Parton and Loretta Lynn.
Early response has been better than the station expected, says Chris Wegmann, vice president and general manager of Cox Radio Houston.
"We average 100 e-mails a day from people saying it's great. It has brought a lot of people back to radio, because there was no place they could hear that music," Wegmann says. "The passion that people have for this format is incredible."
I'm very happy for them. It was the same reaction that I had when 106.9 became the All-80s station The Point. They started playing stuff I hadn't heard in years, and it was great fun. But a year or so later, it's dry as dust. I don't know if they've narrowed their playlist (it sure feels like it to me) or if the life span of such a station is that limited, but I guarantee that the novelty will wear off. In fact, unless there's a typo in this section, it'll wear off quickly. I mean, 600 songs? That's 50 or 60 CDs. If a radio station plays 50 minutes of music per hour and the average song is about four minutes long, they'll go through their entire collection in two days. Will you still love "Ring of Fire" and "You Ain't Woman Enough" after you've heard them every day for nineteen straight days?
Formats today are just too restrictive. We all know there's plenty of people like me who enjoy Classic Rock. Isn't it likely that what we're enjoying is a style of music rather than a fixed set or bands or a fuzzy reminder of our youth? Why not expand the Classic Rock format to include songs by more recent bands that are similar in nature to the ones that we're already known to like? For example, why wouldn't a Classic Rock station play songs off of Carlos Santana's Supernatural album? It's not like "Smooth" would offend someone who's only heard "Evil Ways" and "Oye Como Va" before. And once you've crossed that line, why not play stuff by newer artists that you think we'll like?
But they don't, and a reason they don't is a fear that they'll cannibalize their own audience. You want variety, you must listen to our Mix station, even if that means sitting through Celine Dion and Ja Rule as well as Barenaked Ladies and Matchbox 20. Segmented markets lead to consumer loyalty, as there's no other choice. Perhaps if there were some real competition, it would be different.
There used to be radio stations like this - 102.7 WNEW in New York was a good example back in the day. Another good example is the best radio station I've encountered in recent years, 100.3 The Q! in Vancouver. Tiffany and I spent hours listening to this station as we were driving around the Pacific Northwest last summer. Here's what they're playing now as I type this:
What's on The Q! right now:
10:44:45 am - Sheryl Crow, Steve McQueen--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's coming up next:
10:51:21 am - Scott James, The Q's New Music Lab -- Juliana Theory (2002)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and what's played recently:
10:03:11 am - Zwan, Honestly (2003)
10:06:51 am - Stevie Ray Vaughan, The House Is Rockin'
10:11:23 am - Coldplay, Clocks (2002)
10:16:31 am - Queen, We Will Rock You / We Are The Champions
10:21:27 am - Shivaree, Goodnight Moon (2000)
10:25:30 am - Crash Test Dummies, Ballad of Peter Pumpkinhead
10:32:21 am - Tragically Hip, The Darkest One (2002)
10:36:42 am - Moist, Underground
10:40:57 am - Gin Blossoms, Hey Jealousy
Stuff I know and like, plus stuff that I don't know but might like if I heard it, and very little (if any) stuff that I surely won't like. What's so outrageous about that? I can tell you their batting average was pretty darned good for the time we were listening.
Which leads me to wonder if tightly formatted radio isn't a factor in the dropoff of new CD sales. I don't ever get exposed to new music on the radio, so how in the world can I know what's out there that I might like? There's no effort to reach me.
So forgive me if I'm not impressed by the "variety" of local radio stations. It still looks like the same old same old to me.
Kos links to this LA Times story about President Bush's continually falling poll number, which contains the usual ambivalence about invading Iraq:
The public remains unconvinced of key elements in Bush's case for war. Nearly three-fifths of respondents said they did not believe the report from U.N. weapons inspectors last week -- it was sharply critical of Iraq -- by itself provided "sufficient cause" to go to war. And just one-third of those surveyed said Bush had presented enough evidence to convince them of his charge that Iraq and Al Qaeda had established links; 56% said they remained unconvinced.Despite those doubts, poll respondents, by 57% to 38%, still said they would support Bush if he decides to "order U.S. troops into a ground attack against Iraqi forces." That's virtually unchanged since December.
But that support is qualified by reluctance to invade without an explicit authorization from the United Nations. Fully 65% of Americans agreed the U.S. "should take military action against Iraq only [with] ... the support of the United Nations Security Council." Just 30% said the U.S. should act without such authorization.
Today there's even more bad news for Team Bush in the polls:
Just 45 percent of registered voters said they are now likely to support Bush for re-election, while 40 percent said they were inclined to back the Democratic nominee, the survey found. Fifteen percent said they don't now lean in either direction.As recently as last December, just more than half of adults in a Times poll said they would likely support Bush for re-election in a question that was phrased slightly differently.
Though opinions are likely to change several times before voters go the polls in 2004, the new results suggest that the close partisan balance that defined U.S. politics before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks is slowly reasserting itself.
The fall in the percentage of voters committing to support Bush's re-election parallels a decline in his job approval rating since last fall and the return of sharp divisions along party lines about his performance and priorities.
This is also from an LAT survey, with the article being written by the same author. Why they chose to separate out this story from the other one is unclear to me, but whatever.
One of the more cynical assumptions that has been made about an Iraq invasion is that it's as much about ensuring Bush's reelection as it is about sound foreign policy. (Really, considering how much the War on Terra was politicized during the 2002 election cycle, it's not even that cynical.) So I've got to wonder: Given the poll numbers, which have consistently shown high levels of doubt about unilateral invasion and our alleged casus belli, is anyone still convinced that an invasion which is done over the objections of the UN will be a political boon to Bush?
Personally, I think his approach has boxed him in, much like he's boxed in with North Korea. Large segments of the public have not bought the rationale for invasion, and the UN inspections have not provided a smoking gun. If after all this, Bush winds up going hat in hand to the UN to start building an international invasion force, I think he'll have a hard time claiming full credit for Saddam's eventual deposement. Surely the Democratic candidates will remind him often that they were the ones who argued for working with the UN in the first place.
It's also possible that Team Bush isn't really paying attention to these numbers. They may sincerely believe that invading Iraq with or without international support is the right thing to do regardless of the possible political fallout. Or, and this is more likely in my opinion, they think that everything will go as planned and they'll be swept to electoral invincibility by the inevitable wave of adulation.
That's a pretty high-stakes game to play, and as Wampum reminds us, other issues may still swamp their boat. I sure hope they know what they're doing, but I'm not counting on it.
Ken and Linda Lay have been sued by Enron's creditors, who allege that they still owe money for loans that they paid back in Enron stock. They were doing this up into November of 2001, just before the Dynegy deal fell through and Enron declared bankruptcy. They're looking to collect over $80 million.
Between May 1999 and November 2001, Lay used company stock to repay more than $94 million in loans from Enron. Under the arrangement, Lay could sell stock -- in the form of options awarded to him as part of his compensation -- to the company without having to report it publicly for up to a year afterward. At the time, most stock sales by insiders had to be disclosed by the 10th day of the following month. A new federal law now requires disclosure within two business days for nearly all transactions.Creditors say Lay, as company chairman and chief executive officer, knew the stock was essentially worthless and should be forced to repay the company.
"The tendering of Enron's own stock to repay loans taken in cash was not a fair exchange for Enron," says the lawsuit, signed by creditors committee lawyer Susheel Kirpalani.
This suit, it seems to me, has the potential to bolster a criminal case against Lay.
The creditors will have to prove Lay was aware of the stock's value and had reason to believe the price would drop considerably in the future, said Nancy Rapoport, dean of the University of Houston Law Center and a bankruptcy expert.The creditors argue that Lay must have known the currency he was using to repay Enron was "overvalued."
On Aug. 14, 2001, he replaced Jeff Skilling as CEO, adding that title to his role as chairman. A day later he received an anonymous memo from vice president Sherron Watkins suggesting the company could "implode in a wave of accounting scandals."
By September, accounting firm Arthur Andersen revealed in an internal memo that it now believed Enron's value was overstated by $999 million in the first half of 2001.
At the time, Lay was continuing to use the open loan agreement. In October, he repaid the company with Enron shares valued then at $2.8 million. And in November, he received cash advances totaling $2.5 million, according to the lawsuit.
At the very least, this will dredge up a lot of unpleasant facts about the President's former bestest buddy. Get some popcorn, this should be fun.
State House Speaker Tom Craddick says there will be no state income tax adopted this year.
"I would not think that there's any chance we'll pass an income tax," said Craddick, noting that a provision in the Texas Constitution requires voters to ratify an income tax. "I just don't see that happening."
Imagine my surprise.
[Rep. Kent Grusendorf, R-Arlington] created a stir in the House after the Associated Press reported Monday that he said a state property tax and state income tax are among options lawmakers might consider to replace the system that relies heavily on local property taxes.Grusendorf said later that he didn't highlight those options but just said that "everything should be on the table."
"Most experts have concluded we cannot get a permanent solution without some type of tax restructuring," said Grusendorf. "Everything should be on the table, and we should have an intellectual debate about the issues."
Gov. Rick Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst have repeatedly said that they would not look to replace local property taxes with an income tax.
He's referring to the so-called "Robin Hood" system of school financing, which is based on local property taxes and which transfers funds from rich districts to poorer ones. It was adopted in the early 90s when Ann Richards was governor, and though it's better than what we had before, it's never been a good solution or a popular one.
I give Grusendorf credit for wanting to take a serious look at all plausible options. Whether or not a state income or property tax would ever be a likely solution, a reasoned discussion of their pros and cons could only help. Too bad Perry and Dewhurst don't agree.
UPDATE: Just saw this story about a study that concludes that Texas' tax system is hopelessly outmoded and should be completely revamped:
Most state tax codes need substantial revision, and tax laws in 11 states -- including Texas, California and Florida -- are so outmoded and inefficient they need to be scrapped and replaced, according to the study released Monday by Governing magazine.Although Texas is one of only a few states without a state personal income tax and has a per capita tax load smaller than many other states, Texans consider themselves "overtaxed" because of high sales and property taxes, the magazine reported.
Despite a $9.9 billion revenue shortfall facing lawmakers, Gov. Rick Perry and legislative leaders insist they can balance a new state budget without raising taxes. They vow to limit spending, reorganize priorities and renew efforts to root out governmental waste.
They already have asked state agencies to cut spending by 7 percent and to freeze hiring and lay off workers, if necessary.
But Governing said its yearlong, national study concluded that there isn't enough fat in most state budgets to cure revenue shortfalls. And, the magazine warned, most citizens won't tolerate losing services they think are important.
[...]
One problem with tax overhauls, Governing admitted, is that "virtually every tax reform means shifting burdens." The study pointed out that the sales tax -- Texas' main source of state revenue -- isn't keeping up with the changing economy because Texas and most states aren't sufficiently taxing services.
The study concluded that an ideal revenue base would be a "balance" among the four primary sources of state revenue -- sales taxes, personal income taxes, property taxes and corporate taxes.
Here's the whole report. I hope to give it a thorough read in the next few days.
From the news wires:
The Vatican is giving two thumbs up to the Harry Potter series.The good vs. evil plot lines of the best-selling books are imbued with Christian morals, the Rev. Don Peter Fleetwood told a Vatican news conference Monday.
"I don't see any, any problems in the Harry Potter series," Fleetwood said.
He was responding to questions following the release of a new Vatican document on the New Age phenomenon, which he helped draft as a member of the Pontifical Council for Culture.
Fleetwood was asked whether the magic embraced by Harry Potter and his pals at the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry was problematic for the Roman Catholic Church. Some evangelical groups have condemned the series for glamorizing magic and the occult.
"I don't think there's anyone in this room who grew up without fairies, magic and angels in their imaginary world," said Fleetwood, who is British. "They aren't bad. They aren't serving as a banner for an anti-Christian ideology.
"If I have understood well the intentions of Harry Potter's author, they help children to see the difference between good and evil," said Fleetwood. "And she is very clear on this."
He said British author J.K. Rowling was "Christian by conviction, is Christian in her mode of living, even in her way of writing."
Not that anyone is likely to change their mind by any of this, but here's a useful overview of the pro- and anti-Harry Potter arguments anyway. If you'll excuse me, I need to pre-order a copy of the new book.
I heartily second Patrick's recommendation of this Texas Observer interview with US Rep. Ron Paul (R, TX). He's a nut, in my humble opinion, but he's a lot less scary than certain other Republican Congressmen from Texas that I could name, and unlike those selfsame scary men he actually lives by his stated principles.
Where have I heard this thought before?
TO: Why haven’t more people seen through this effort to link Hussein to the war on terrorism?RP: It seems that those who advise the president, those who control foreign policy, need another war for various reasons: whether it has to do with the oil or this principle that we are such good people that we know what is best; our views should dominate. I think they believe it almost like a religion. What has happened is that they have been able to control the propaganda. Even if there are some in Washington who have questioned this–and many of them did question it–the propaganda has been so powerful. All [Congress] had to do was look at the polls and say, "Oh, the polls show that we must do this." I have told others, and I am convinced that if Bill Clinton was doing exactly what the president is doing today, I bet I wouldn’t be a lonely Republican. I bet I would have a lot of Republican supporters on my side.... But now it’s a Republican president, and he can do no wrong.
Oh, yeah, I remember: Pretty much everywhere in the left half of the blogiverse. Nice to know someone outside the tribe recognizes it, for all the good it'll do.
You fans of Diane Duane should check out the comments on this old post for an update on the status of her "Door" books. Remember: You heard it here first!
Police Chief C.O. "BAMF" Bradford is back at work amid handsprings and huzzahs from supporters, and he gave them a good demonstration of his political skills:
Asked whether the ordeal caused him to fear for people wrongly charged and without his resources, the chief said, "Clearly, part of the system failed me, but eventually, the system worked."[...]
"I don't know why it was pushed forward," Bradford said of the perjury case against him. "It couldn't have been the evidence they were looking at."
Nevertheless, he said, "I expect (Harris County District Attorney) Chuck Rosenthal and myself to work together professionally" in the future.
Such magnaminity. I'm getting goosebumps.
But seriously, is he a candidate for mayor as some have speculated?
As for rumors that he may run for mayor, Bradford asked the large crowd of well-wishers in his conference room, "What do you think of that?" and received a round of applause."I have not made that decision," he said. "There are people out there who want me to, people who believe this ordeal has put a burning fire in my belly.
"What I'm doing right now is wearing the badge of the Houston police chief," he said. "I will make that decision later."
Tease. I will say that he better make up his mind soon, before all of the downtown power brokers settle on someone else. According to John Williams, they're leaning towards Orlando Sanchez, unless Ned Holmes decides to get into the race. Not that there aren't other avenues of support, but the you-snooze-you-lose risk is high when there are this many candidates sniffing around. Get in or get out of the way, Chief.
A recent Rice University/University of Houston poll shows strong support for light rail in Houston.
"The clear message is that the public’s appetite for a solution to Houston’s traffic problem is extremely strong," said Robert Stein, Rice dean of social sciences, who conducted the survey with Richard Murray, director of the University of Houston Center for Public Policy. "Candidates for public office, particularly the mayor in 2003, will have to address this issue in some way."[...]
Stein was surprised to find that more than half (52 percent) of the registered voters believe that rail is either a "vital" (29 percent) or "important" (23 percent) part of a comprehensive, long-term transportation plan for Houston. Only 10 percent of the interviewees said rail "has no place" in any long-term transportation plan for Houston.
By a margin of more than three to one, 62 percent of voters said they would support approving the next phase of a mass-transit plan if the proposal did not raise taxes and included some additional rail lines to connect with the Main Street line as well as bus improvements and continued spending for street construction. Only 21 percent said they would vote against such a plan, and 17 percent were undecided.
"We could not find a significant demographic group who won’t support such a plan, not even conservative Republicans," Stein said.
Voter support for a no-new-tax, long-term transportation plan dropped to 56 percent when the proposal focused solely on buses, street and road construction and excluded light-rail expansion.
Support for expanded light rail was close to a majority. Forty-nine percent of those taking a position on an expanded rail plan said they were "strongly for" the proposal, and only 15 percent were "strongly against."
Orlando Sanchez was anti-rail in the last election. Though I suspect other issues will dominate this race, I'd love to see that come back and bite him.
Dwight Silverman, the tech writer for the Chron, has a pseudo-weblog on the Columbia disaster. I say "pseudo" because anything without a link each entry isn't really a blog in my universe. But hey, it's a fair sight better than last year's Crawford Weblog, and you gotta start somewhere. Check it out.
Thanks to Larry for tipping me off to this.
Some new developments in the 2003 Mayoral Race Sweepstakes this week. First was the announcement that Ed Wulfe is not a candidate.
Wulfe, an adviser to Mayor Lee Brown who has helped develop a Main Street revitalization program, was considered a long shot in the November race because he lacks political experience.He also appeared unable to peel away enough monied supporters from other candidates to compete in a mayor's race that may break campaign spending records.
No big surprise there. The article notes that Wulfe's departure helps Bill White, who would have competed with Wulfe for the moderate white vote. White has scheduled a formal announcement of his candidacy for later this week. White, who has a Democratic resume and a strong background in finance, is a very attractive candidate to me:
Two years ago, Bill White saw a serious problem brewing for his town.Houston city officials were running short of money at a time White believed neighborhoods desperately needed more parks and libraries to cope with a population boom.
But instead of complaining to City Hall, White volunteered his time, effort and business acumen.
Within several months, White had helped Mayor Lee Brown's administration squeeze an additional $120 million from the city's bond program by restructuring the repayment schedules.
As a result, Houston has $80 million more for parks and $40 million more for libraries, with no tax increase.
That's my kinda guy. I have serious concerns that he'll get squeezed out between the Hispanic/conservative white bloc that will likely support Orlando Sanchez and the black/liberal white bloc that will likely back Sylvester Turner (does the name George Greanias ring a bell, Houstonians?), but he's my man right now.
One possible wild card was mentioned at the end of the Houston Press article on the Bradford trial:
While [District Attorney Chuck] Rosenthal's troops left muttering about Judge Rains's knuckling under to public pressure, Chief Bradford finds himself at the center of a boomlet as a candidate for next year's wide-open mayoral race. There's talk his defense fund supporters may reconstitute themselves into a campaign exploratory committee."I'm going to relax for a few days," the smiling chief said as he and wife Dee faced the media. Asked whether he would consider running for mayor, Bradford deferred to "God's guidance," adding, "At this point I haven't made those decisions."
If the exonerated Bradford does decide to run, he can thank Rosenthal for providing the campaign springboard.
I don't know if anything will come of this, but if Bradford decides to run it will be ugly for Sylvester Turner, who will need the full force of the Lee Brown machine behind him to win. If Bradford does run, either Turner will have to find a face-saving way to drop out, or the two will risk splitting their base and letting someone else (Bill White?) slip in to a runoff with Sanchez.
In a sense, this is the best time for Bradford to run, as his name recognition and public empathy levels will never be higher. On the other hand, it might be wise for him to lay low, hope for a Sanchez victory, then challenge him straight up in 2005 when the field will likely be otherwise empty. I'm not sure which is the better choice - I'm just a blogger, not a highly-paid political consultant - but it will be interesting to see which way he goes.
The Houston Press has weighed in on the perjury trial of Houston Police Chief C.O. "BAMF" Bradford, and it's almost embarrassing how much more detail they have than the Chron did. I could quote large bits of it, but you should really just read it. If you live in Harris County and weren't already convinced that District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal is a clown, this will go a long way towards doing so.
Here's my favorite section, in the Strange Bedfellows Department:
As it was, the chief's trial had already made allies of such unlikely folks as former mayor Bob Lanier, former HPD chief Harry Caldwell, Nation of Islam Minister Robert Muhammad and Quanell X, accompanied by members of his New Black Panther Party done up in uniforms and shades. Caldwell, who gave Bradford his sergeant stripes back in the early '80s, called the charges "a travesty of justice" and "a crying shame." He admitted he was not altogether comfortable with his newfound activist comrades. Quanell X, a schoolkid during Caldwell's tenure as chief, was simply puzzled by this new ally. "Who's Harry Caldwell?" he asked blankly.
Obviously, Quanell X is objectively pro-police, and former Chief Harry Caldwell and former Mayor Bob Lanier are pawns of the Nation of Islam. It sure isn't easy picking sides these days!
As expected, the state Lottery Commission has proposed changes to Lotto Texas which result in longer odds of winning the jackpot. The hope is that this will also result in bigger jackpots and brisker sales, mostly from people who only play when the number gets to a certain size.
The Lottery Commission is banking on the theory that making it harder for players to win will increase the jackpots and boost stagnant sales. The three-member commission voted Friday to take the first step toward introducing the new game in May.Players would have to match five of 44 numbers plus a bonus ball from another set of 44.
"These games have to be looked at and modified from time to time," said commission chairman C. Thomas Clowe of Waco. "There's a very large group of players that likes to see the jackpot at $20 million or more."
The risk, of course, is alienating the people who already play all the time and who think that odds of one-in-47.7 million represents a significant reduction from one-in-25.8 million.
One critic of the game change didn't wait. Dawn Nettles, publisher of a lottery newsletter and Web site, said the long odds make the proposed game "absolutely a scam.""We want a lottery, but we don't want to be robbed," she said.
The new game also would pay out a smaller percentage of revenues to players. Now, 55 percent of lottery dollars goes back to players; under the new game it would be 52 percent.
The game's already a scam and always has been. All forms of gambling where there's a "house" involved is a scam. It's only a question of degree. It's legitimate to question whether you're getting your dollar's worth of fun (or "utility", as the economics types like to say), but complaining about the odds has always been pointless. The lottery is a device to raise funds for the state in a way that doesn't involve the dreaded T-word. Never forget that.
And given the state of our state's finances, this is a big deal:
Lottery officials are predicting a steep decline if the game isn't changed. Sales are projected to drop from $550 million this fiscal year to $400 million in fiscal 2005.With the proposed game change, lottery marketers believe sales would jump to near $600 million in fiscal 2004 and would stay above $500 million for the next four years.
They better hope they're right, because every dollar counts.
Left unsaid in this article is whether the switch to a Powerball-style game means Texas is taking a step closer to joining the national Powerball game. There was some talk about this after the last humongous Powerball jackpot, as there was a flood of Texans driving to Louisiana to buy tickets for it. I fully expect that we will someday join in that national lottery, I just don't know when.
Here's a potential cost of invading Iraq that you probably hadn't given any thought to: Airlines are lobbying for another handout to help them recoup losses that they expect to face as a result of a war.
As the threat of war looms, the industry is seeking tax relief, the relaxing of some antitrust laws and relief on fuel taxes. They also want the federal government to reduce oil prices by releasing crude from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
There's a whole lot of worms in this can. The anti-trust laws they want relaxed are ones that prohibit them from sharing flight schedules with each other. The airlines want to be able to coordinate routes in the event of reduced demand. Even with a guarantee that this would be sunsetted after any invasion, I say this is way too collusional to be allowed.
The airlines also want the government to temporarily suspend a $2.50 security tax implemented by the federal government after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to pay for increased security measures.Bethune has long called for the elimination of that tax, saying it unfairly burdens the airlines and airline passengers.
"We are asking passengers to underwrite the national security," the Continental CEO said in an interview recently. "It is just unprecedented."
Strangely enough, I agree with him. This is precisely the reason I favored federalizing airport security after 9/11. It's nothing but a cost center to airlines and airports, and they have always treated it as any business treats such a thing - as cheaply as possible. We all know what happened. This should be run and funded by an agency that doesn't have stockholders to answer to. Unfortunately, we picked a halfassed way to go about federalizing airport security. It'll take more than just placating Gordon Bethune to fix that.
Companies that service the major airlines already are preparing for war. Texas Pneumatic Systems of Arlington recently developed a contingency plan, company President Bernie Rookey said.The businessman worked for a similar company during the Gulf War in 1991 and said the airlines saw about a 20 percent decrease in business.
"It was pretty poor that year," he said. "I think generally you are going to see the American public is going to be reluctant to fly on airlines. Basic travel is going to cease or be reduced for a period of time."
Yes, an invasion will definitely be a big blow to many companies' bottom lines. Keep that in mind the next time Mitch Daniels starts blowing smoke about the costs of this little excursion.
Sadly, Alex Whitlock has had to make good his promise to take down RAWbservations. He does have a couple of group projects in the works, and will be continuing his fiction writing. I wish you the best of luck, Alex, and I look forwawrd to checking out the No-Lyfe Journal and Disagreement, Inc.
On a happier note, the H-Town Blogs page has moved off of Blogspot and onto Movable Type. Woo hoo! Props to Christine and Elaine for making it happen.
Here, via Greg Wythe, is some more detail about that $10 billion budget deficit and how big cuts will have to be if our elected leaders are serious about no tax increases:
1.) While the Texas budget totals around $113 billion, about $35 billion of that is really pass-through money that comes from the federal government to operate what are essentially federal programs. We can rarely use federal money to reduce state expenditures, and, in fact, usually have to put up some state money to get the federal money. When we talk about being $10 billion short, that is the shortfall in the state portion of the budget.2.) Actually, it’s not even the entire state portion that we are talking about, because some state funds are “dedicated” to specific purposes. For example, 3/4 of the money the state collects from gasoline taxes can be used ONLY for highways and other transportation. Dedicated monies amount to $16 billion, and are essentially “off book” when it comes to the deficit. We don’t have to spend it, but we can’t use it for any other purpose, nor can we use it to balance the budget.
3.) After taking away the federal and dedicated monies, we end up with about $62 billion as the actual state budget. But of that $62 billion, about $22 billion goes directly to local school districts. We don’t have to send them that money, but chances are pretty good that if we don’t send it, they will raise local property taxes to cover the shortfall we create.
4.) So, assuming we don’t cut school district funds, that leaves us finding $10 billion out of the $40 billion that remain. (That is not to say that school district funds could not be cut - but it’s not exactly living up to our responsibility to get out of this by cutting someone else’s budget.)
This is from a mailing by State Rep. Scott Hochberg (D, Houston). I don't believe for a second that we'll be seeing 25% cuts across the board (actually, it'd be more like 20% since $1.8 billion of that must be done before August), so keep your eyes open for all kinds of fuzzy math.
It appears that Governor Goodhair misspoke when he said recently that he didn't want Texas to become "like Mississippi". According to this article in the Chron, Mississippi does better than Texas in several significant categories:
In what radio commentator Jim Hightower calls "an age-old struggle for last," Texas might be starting to win."It's actually a very funny set of statistics," said Eva De Luna Castro, budget analyst at the Center for Public Policy Priorities, an Austin think tank that advocates for the needy.
The data compare Texas and Mississippi on state and local spending combined for the year 2000. Mississippi spent $4,897 per person. Texas spent $4,592.
That might sound like something to brag about if it weren't for one little matter. The data also show the overall tax bill for Mississippians totaled $2,214 per person per year. Texans paid more -- $2,504.
One culprit seems to be the share paid in local property taxes. Texans get hit with a $950 bill. Mississippians pay only $514.
Oh, the indignity. We pay more to get less. And it just gets worse:
Consider a few more categories. One big surprise? Highways. Perhaps it might bolster Perry's push for more highway spending that Mississippi spent $433 per person on highways in 2000, while Texas spent only $345.Parks and natural resources? Mississippi's get $137 per person. Texas' get $107.
And, when it comes to children, Mississippi is no slacker, either. Ninety percent of children there are covered by either public or private health insurance versus only 79 percent in Texas.
Mississippi spends $3,434 per pupil, versus $3,186 in Texas, where local property taxes foot most of the bill.
Both states rank fairly low in the percentage of their populations over 25 holding a high school diploma, but Mississippi ranks 44th with 80.3 percent while Texas comes in 46th with 79.2 percent.
No doubt that Mississippi is a poor state and Texas is a wealthier one, however, with 19.3 percent living in poverty versus 14.9 percent in Texas.
Average personal income in Texas for 2001 is $28,581 versus $21,750 in Mississippi.
Mississippi spends like a poor state because they are a poor state. Texas spends like a poor state because we're cheap.
How does Mississippi do it? Well, it must be noted that they do have a little help:
In 2000, they attracted $1,240 per person from the federal government while Texas got only $890.
If only we had a highly-placed elected federal politician to help us out...
OK, cheap shot, and a poor comparison besides: Texas gets a ton of swag from the Feds, we just have a lot more population to spread it over. But still.
Way to go, Guv. Maybe aspiring to be more like Mississippi isn't so bad after all.
The space shuttle Columbia exploded over Central Texas on its way back to its scheduled landing in Florida. Shuttle commander Rick D. Husband, pilot William C. McCool, payload commander Michael P. Anderson, mission specialists David M. Brown, Kalpana Chawla and Laurel Clark and Israel's first astronaut, Ilan Ramon, were on board. All seven are presumed dead.
Damn. Damn, damn, damn.
Rest in peace.