This is what happens when reacting takes precedence over thinking.
The Dean of Library Services at University of the Incarnate Word canceled the library's subscription to the New York Times Wednesday to protest recent stories exposing a secret government program that monitors international financial transactions in the hunt for terrorists."Since no one elected the New York Times to determine national security policy, the only action I know to register protest for their irresponsible action (treason?) is to withdraw support of their operations by canceling our subscription as many others are doing," Mendell D. Morgan, Jr. wrote in a June 28 email to library staff. "If enough do, perhaps they will get the point."
Notice how the fact that the LA Times and the Wall Street Journal also printed this story plays no role in Morgan's actions. Who needs consistency when you're making a point?
Morgan did not return a call for comment this morning. The university released a statement saying that Morgan had the authority to remove the newspaper."The University of the Incarnate Word does not take an official position on the recent decision to cancel the subscription of the New York Times at the university's library" the statement said. " This decision was made by the administrator in charge of the library whose authority extends to the contents of the library, and thus it was within his purview to make this decision. The University is supportive of the First Amendment, a free press and of the presentation of diverse points of view."
Boy, they sure don't have his back on this one, do they? We'll see if that's enough to get him to back off.
Staff member Jennifer Romo said she and her coworkers were shocked when they received Morgan's email."The censorship is just unspeakable," Romo said. "There is no reason, no matter what your beliefs, to deny a source of information to students."
The removal also runs counter to the American Library Association's Bill of Rights, which states: "Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval."
Who cares? It's just a library. Now that we've settled what's important, Dean Morgan can start going through the stacks to see what else offends him enough to merit removal. It's a whole new world out there.
At least one media-watcher said she doubts Morgan's move will have much impact."In the real world, it's an almost futile act on many levels," said Kelly McBride, ethics group leader at the Poynter Institute, a journalism think tank in St. Petersburg, Fla. "From what we know about the reading habits of college students, it will not make a difference because they read online."
That can be dealt with, too, you know. Does Dean Morgan have any sway with UIW's IT department?
In all seriousness, I don't expect this decision to stand. University presidents don't much like it when underlings bring negative publicity to their schools. Head coaches have gotten forced out for similar things. If you want to help the process along to its natural conclusion, The Agonist has some contact information for you. I'll second his call to be polite to UIW's President. He didn't do this, and there's no point in yelling at him. If you get a response, let me know.
Despite the Chron's archives being unavailable, I did a little Googling and was able to find enough information about the 1996 Supreme Court decision on Texas' Congressional districts to make a determination about when the new map was in place for the November open primary that followed. I've written about it at Kuff's World.
Here's some more information on the timetable to fix CD23 as announced yesterday by the three-judge panel.
U.S. District Judge John T. Ward of Marshall set oral arguments in the case for Aug. 3. Other judges on the panel include U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Patrick Higginbotham of Dallas and U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal of Houston.Those eligible to submit maps include 14 individuals, the state of Texas and 15 local governments and organizations.
The groups include the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the American GI Forum, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the Texas NAACP, the Texas Democratic Party and the Republican Party of Texas.
However, it's unlikely that each party will submit a different map. Some individuals who are parties in the lawsuit are citizen representatives of the groups involved. Also, some groups may cooperate to produce a single map to present to the court.
It'll be interesting to see who works together on this, and what their final products will look like. Bear in mind that not everyone who was an ally in the lawsuit will necessarily be an ally in the redrawing process. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson and former Rep. Martin Frost, both Dallas Dems, were famously at odds over the 1991 effort, which eventually led to the 1996 court-ordered do-over. Everyone has their own interests in this sort of thing, and people you wouldn't expect can get crosswise with each other.
When a three-judge panel drew the state's congressional districts in 2001 after the Legislature failed to do so, about 20 days elapsed between the end of the trial and the time the court ordered new districts.
That makes the ETA for a new map about August 23. Perry is skeptical that this leaves enough time to have an open primary in November, but I think it can work. If you set a short filing deadline - say, September 5 - that gives two full months for the campaign, which is no less than what we have now for regular primaries. You can have such a deadline for filing because by August 3, everyone will at least know what maps are in play, and can make whatever contingency plans they need to based on that. So, I continue to think this can be made to work, and I continue to think that however imperfect it may be, it's better than having another election for the illegal CD23.
I wanted to do a Chron archive search to see what the time frame was for the 1996 situation, but as I write this their 1985-2000 stuff is unavailable. Anyone remember when the new map was put into place back then?
(UPDATE: August 6, 1996. See Kuff's World for more.)
Dallas Blog has a copy of Judge Ward's order (PDF), if anyone is interested in that.
One more thing:
Gov. Rick Perry declined to say whether he would call the Legislature into special session to change the congressional districts."It's always been my preference that the Legislature take care of these issues," Perry told reporters Thursday before learning of the panel's order.
Except of course when he thinks it suits his purposes, as was the case in 2001. I'm going to repeat that every time Governor Perry opens his self-serving mouth on this point. It's my fond hope that some time between now and (say) July 14, some enterprising reporter brings it up.
UPDATE: Valley Politico makes an interesting observation:
If the congressional changes are in place by November, a member of the Texas Legislature could be on their regular ballot for re-election, and they can also be on the special election ballot for Congress.Hmm… I wonder who from the Valley legislative delegation would run…
The Lloyd Bentsen Rule rides again! I think we already know one such rep with an itch to run (see the end of this post if you're not sure who I mean). Does anyone else have that itch? We may get to see.
A state district judge has thrown out one of the four indictments against the Texas Association of Business for activities related to the 2002 election.
District Judge Mike Lynch ruled that 2002 pre-election ads produced by the group did not expressly advocate the election or defeat of Texas legislative candidates. Travis County prosecutors had said the group broke state election law by using corporate money to support candidates.Lynch's ruling put in doubt two other similar indictments pending against the organization by also discounting prosecutors' alternative theory that the ads became illegal when the association coordinated them with other political groups. Lynch called the prosecutors' argument "innovative" but concluded that state law does not cover it.
Austin lawyer Roy Minton, who represents the business association, predicted that Lynch's decision ultimately would be the end of the lengthy prosecution: "I believe the basic position the court has taken is going to make it very difficult, if not impossible, for the state to prosecute TAB."
Even as critics warned that the ruling would open the floodgates to more secret money in state politics, District Attorney Ronnie Earle said he would pursue prosecution of a fourth indictment accusing the association of making an illegal contribution to its own political action committee. He also will probably appeal Lynch's ruling.
Here's the original story, from last September. The indictments that were handed down were for the following:
14 counts of prohibited political contributions by a corporation (TAB) for paying Hammond and staffer Jack Campbell to do political work.28 additional counts for fraudulently soliciting money from corporations to use in the 2002 election..
83 additional counts of prohibited political contributions by a corporation for paying for political mailers and TV commercials.
Three counts of prohibited political expenditures by a corporation for spending money in connection with 23 legislative campaigns.
It's a little confusing, but I believe the "fourth indictment" that Earle will still be pursuing is the one listed first here, the 14 counts of "prohibited political contributions by a corporation". I believe the tossed indictment is the last one, for "prohibited political expenditures by a corporation". If anyone knows better, please say so in the comments.
In his four-page order, Lynch acknowledged that many people would read the ads as campaign material."The advertisements . . . irrespective of political philosophy, are troublesome because they engage in what most non-technical, common-sense people (i.e. non-lawyers) would think of as clear support for specific candidates," Lynch wrote. The judge called some of the ads "patently offensive" - they attacked candidates based on actions they took as defense lawyers representing the accused.
However, Lynch concluded that the ads did not expressly advocate the election or defeat of candidates under the Texas Election Code, which he called "an archaic, cumbersome, confusing, poorly written document in need of serious legislative overhaul."
The judge wrote that the prosecution's legal theory on coordination between political groups is a "convoluted maze" that would not give a defendant adequate warning about what they are charged with.
Lynch noted that Earle eloquently argued that the association unfairly attempted to subvert the electoral process. But citing the deficiencies of the indictment and state law, he concluded:
"You simply cannot make a silk purse out of this sow's ear."
I can't say this surprises me. Like Vince, I think the intent of these ads is clearcut, and I'm disappointed that the judge didn't follow that instinct to its logical conclusion. But I've never doubted the need to make the election code clearer and more relevant on these points. I continue to have hope this will happen, but frankly until it's a priority among the state's leadership, it will be very much an uphill fight.
Lawyers defending the association and its corporate donors in several civil lawsuits applauded Lynch's decision.Austin lawyer Terry Scarborough, who represents AT&T Inc., which donated money to the 2002 ad campaign, said the decision will have a broad effect: "Judge Lynch agrees with what we have argued for three years: The Texas election code is unconstitutionally vague. The only way the district attorney or the plaintiffs in the civil suits can win is if the election code is unconstitutionally applied."
Austin lawyer Cris Feldman, who is suing the business group on behalf of Democrats, won a similar lawsuit against its ally Texans for a Republican Majority last year.
He noted that the legal standards for criminal cases are much higher than for civil lawsuits.
"Our case is as strong as it was Day One," Feldman said. "We will continue to pursue enforcement of the election code and upholding the 100-year-old doctrine that corporate money has no place in Texas elections."
Although Lynch's decision does not relate directly to the money-laundering charges pending against DeLay and two associates, DeLay lawyer Dick DeGuerin said it helps his arguments that Earle's prosecution is based on political philosophy.
"The judges that will have some say-so read the newspapers like ordinary people do," DeGuerin said. "They will see the opinion. It certainly can't hurt us."
It can't hurt, but I doubt it will matter much. Certainly, Dick DeGuerin didn't need this to make his case effectively. And if you really want to press the matter, it's clear that Judge Lynch thought the ads were bad and the prosecution's cause was good. He just didn't think the laws applied to TAB in this case. It's not a stretch to argue that Tom DeLay isn't TAB, and that the situation is different in his case.
But we'll see. Earle is likely to appeal this ruling, and there are still other appeals in other matters pending. Lord only knows when all this will get wrapped up.
I'm a little surprised to realize that the prosecution has already rested its case against Andrea Yates in the retrial. I don't remember it being this quick last time, and I'm not sure how it could be virtually the same evidence when they also presented testimony from a former cellmate of Yates'. On that score, I don't think the prosecution landed a solid blow.
[Felicia] Doe told jurors that Yates initiated a conversation about her children's deaths while the women shared a cell at the Harris County Jail's psychiatric unit for several days in May 2002."She talked about the baby, Mary, being easy (to drown)," Doe said, as she took a deep breath and fought back tears. Noah, she said, "was crying really hard and throwing up and it made her mad. ... Once he was in the water, it took a long time for him to stop moving."
She said Yates described chasing Noah through the house and how the boy pulled on some window blinds, breaking them, during their struggle.
Yates' attorneys tried to cast doubt on Doe's testimony, noting that the children were clad in pajamas and play clothes, not their "Sunday best," as Doe said Yates had told her.
The defense spotlighted Doe's criminal and mental health history, and her capacity for truthfulness, during cross-examination.
"Did you tell (one) doctor you have a problem with being honest?" defense attorney Wendell Odom asked.
"Yes," Doe said.
She said she once thought she suffered from bipolar disorder, but actually was just extremely depressed when she was placed in the County Jail's psychiatric unit. Doe confirmed that she had been sent to prison after failing to comply with the terms of her probation for failure to stop and render aid, but said she has since been released.
As Odom grabbed a photo of the clothes the children wore when they died, Doe broke into tears.
"What does this appear to be to you?" Odom asked, holding the large picture in front of her.
Doe turned her head away and said, "All the boys' clothes." She refused to look at a photo of four of the children's bodies, side by side on a bed, where Yates had placed them.
"Do they appear to be wearing their Sunday best to you?" Odom asked.
"No sir, they don't," Doe said, weeping.
My I-wasn't-there impression of this is that she doesn't seem too credible. Maybe you could say she was just embellishing a bit, but if you're going to do that, what else might you add?
A bit of irony there, too, in bringing up mental health issues for Doe. Since Yates will probably not testify, that shouldn't boomerang on the defense. I of course don't know what the jury thought of her, and I have my own perspective on things, but I'm not impressed. We'll see.
Doe has alleged that Yates described how to feign mental illness, but prosecutors did not ask about that claim.
That can't be a factor in their eventual deliberations, but I wonder what the jury would have made of that. And I wonder what George Parnham would have made of it had it come up on direct.
Meanwhile, it looks like the defense got off to a compelling start.
Jurors in Yates' capital murder trial listened closely this morning as [Dr. Melissa] Ferguson, the first psychiatrist to assess Yates in the jail's Mental Health and Mental Retardation unit, recounted their discussions. Ferguson was the jail's medical director of psychiatric services at the time.[...]
Ferguson said that, after their first meeting, she concluded that Yates "had major depressive disorder, severe, with psychotic features with onset in (her) postpartum period."
After lead defense attorney George Parnham asked if Ferguson considered Yates psychotic, she replied, "Yes, she was."
[...]
Yates told her that "she was hearing a message from the TV while the children were watching cartoons," Ferguson said.
"She said that the message had something to do with the children and herself. It was sometime in the weeks leading up to the drownings."
In addition to telling Yates that she was a bad mother, they delivered messages to the children, Yates told Ferguson.
She said she could hear the cartoons telling the youngsters, "Don't eat so much candy. Your mother is feeding you too much cereal."
[...]
Jurors leaned forward in their seats and listened closely, even when Ferguson was defining psychiatric terms as psychosis and delusion, and clarifying issues such as whether someone could still believe a delusion is real, even after being told that it isn't.
As we know, being mentally ill is not grounds for being acquitted on grounds of insanity. Insanity is a legal term, not a psychiatric one. The reason the prosecution mostly focused on things like how Yates called 911 and complied with instructions given to her by the police is because they have to prove she knew what she was doing. Since proving that for a specific time and incident is tough, the defense wants to show that she was so out of touch with reality as a general rule that you pretty much have to assume she was always out of it.
You all know my opinion on this, so I'll just leave it at that. I expect there will be a lot more to the defense case, and I'll be interested to see how the prosecution handles cross examination of their witnesses.
What do you think of when you think of Houston? I can name many things, but being a top ten speed trap would not have crossed my mind.
Houston is one of the top speed-trap cities in America, according to the National Motorists Association.In its Top 10, Houston is fifth. Detroit's suburbs lead the list, followed by Washington D.C.; Orlando, Fla.; Colorado Springs, Colo.; Houston, Virginia Beach, Va.; Austin, Texas; Baton Rouge, La.; Nashville, Tenn.; and Fresno Calif.
The grassroots group that says it represents the rights and interests of of U.S. drivers is warning people ahead of the Fourth of July weekend, one of the heaviest travel times of the year, to be aware of heavy traffic-law enforcement.
The Waunakee, Wisc.-based group blames speed traps on bureaucracies trying to boost their budgets with fines from traffic tickets given in situations that are not fair to drivers, such as roads with no posted speed limit, the targeting of out-of-town drivers, and the like.
This list was created from the NMA's SpeedTrap Exchange, a site devoted to identifying the location of speed traps.
Um, okay. You sure you're not thinking of West University Place, or maybe Bellaire?
The page lists a bunch of locations, apparently entered by residents who have encountered them. Many have 2004 and 2005 dates on the entries, so make of that what you will. I'll stipulate to this one, as I got nailed there once a couple of years ago. I've since realized that you can see the cops pretty clearly as soon as you hit the off-ramp, and as such I've not had any problems getting down to the posted speed in time. For what it's worth, they're not there very often - offhand, I can't recall the last time.
Beyond that, I don't know how to respond to this. Yes, there are speed traps in Houston. If anyone wants to claim we're by and large a city that respects speed limits, you go right ahead and make that case. Everyone knows that traffic enforcement is basically a crapshoot, and that being just a little bit over the speed limit is no excuse and no guarantee. You pay your money and you take your chances. What else is there to say?
OK, this is officially the last time I'll pester you about the Straight Ticket Texan vote for Mapchangers. Voting closes in four hours, at 2 AM CDT. The standings as I write this:
1. MT-Sen Jon Tester2. CO-06 Bill Winter
3. TX-Gov Chris Bell
4. CA-11 Jerry McNerney
5. TX-Sen Barbara Radnofsky
John Courage has been in the top five and can get there again with a late push. He's already a winner, as he's about to be named a national netroots candidate, but that doesn't mean you can't sweeten the pot a bit. If you haven't voted yet, put Courage first, Bell and Radnofsky in the #2 and 3 slots, and don't forget Mary Beth Harrell and Ted Ankrum. Four hours to go, and that's all there is.
Some breaking news from the Lone Star Project:
The three-judge Federal District Court has issued an order and provided a schedule for determining a remedy in response to the recently released opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court on Texas redistricting.You can view the Court's order here (PDF)
The Schedule is below
July 14, 2006 - All parties (plaintiffs and defendants) required to file remedial proposals including briefs and proposed maps.
July 21, 2006 - responses to remedial proposals must be filed.
August 3, 2006 - 9:00 a.m. - Oral arguments on proposals before the three-judge panel in Austin, Texas
Assuming it doesn't take more than a couple of weeks for the court to render a decision, I believe there would be sufficient time to declare an open primary for November and set a filing deadline for some time in September. Needless to say, this would be a ridiculously short campaign, and would heavily favor incumbents. As all other options include allowing the illegal CD23 to remain intact for this election, it's the best of a bad lot. At least a November open primary would have a normal level of turnout. We'll see how it goes.
Capitol Inside offers its perspective on the Democratic lawsuit over the GOP's attempt to replace Tom DeLay on the ballot in CD22 and how both sides' arguments played for Judge Sam Sparks.
Democrats suggested in a hearing in Sparks' court on their request for a permanent injunction that they'd prefer to beat DeLay at the polls in a full-fledged race than have him take an easier way out that allows him to keep his winning record intact and minimizes the GOP's odds of losing the seat. The last thing the Democrats want is for CD 22 nominee Nick Lampson to have to switch gears to run against a replacement Republican candidate who isn't out on bail with the burden of a radioactive reputation and other baggage like DeLay would have to lug down the campaign trail. Democrats who had roles as lawyers and witnesses in Sparks' court hearing agreed that fundraising, volunteer efforts and turnout for the CD 22 battle will suffer without a lightening rod like DeLay in the race for motivational value. Despite the tough talk about ousting their chief nemesis from a Republican House he helped build, the Democrats should be hoping that the GOP can't replace DeLay and that he officially withdraws from the race or refuses to campaign even if he's listed as a candidate on the ballot this fall.While the two sides highly disagree on whether DeLay withdrew from the congressional race or simply became ineligible to run as a result of his move to George Washington's home state, the Republicans seem to want to replace DeLay as the CD 22 nominee as badly as Democrats want to prevent them from doing so. A lawyer for the Democrats called DeLay's dropping out of the race "a constructive withdrawal," but Republicans in the courtroom seemed to be saying that such a scenario had never really entered their minds. After being told by DeLay that he wouldn't be eligible to run in the general election because he planned to give up his House seat after moving to Virginia, Republican officials left the impression that they'd been following a technical instructions manual on election procedures when initiating the replacement process.
Sparks, who was appointed to the bench 15 years ago by the original President George Bush, didn't seem to have much sympathy for the Democrats. But the judge indicated during the hearing that he found State GOP Chairwoman Tina Benkiser's testimony "somewhat amazing" when she suggested that there'd been no discussion about the conflicting consequences of a candidate withdrawing from a race as opposed to being deemed ineligible to run. Sparks seemed to be able to find the Democrats more believable because they made no bones about admitting that their motivations for being there were purely self-serving while Republicans were suggesting that were simply trying to abide by election law without any agenda at hand. Sparks didn't appear to buy that. While the judge seemed to be hinting that he wouldn't be blessing the GOP's move to replace DeLay on the ballot, he indicated that an official ruling would not be issued before next week.
[...]
The Democrats appear to have a fair chance at prevailing in Sparks' court after agreeing with the state GOP's request to move it there from a state district court that issued a temporary restraining order that put the replacement process on hold this month. Republicans may have helped the Democrats' case when they seemed to have no problem with DeLay remaining in Congress, casting votes and sponsoring legislation for almost two months between the time he moved to Virginia and resigned from the House. But winning the ballot battle doesn't assure Democrats that they will win the election in CD 22 if DeLay stays on the ballot. It's a calculated risk at best that could backfire. On the other hand, DeLay could return to Texas and make a gallant effort to win back the seat that he gave up this month because he's too proud, too mad or too determined to keep his old seat from being turned over to Democrats on a silver platter.
Couple of points here:
- I still think it was an error for Democrats to mention fundraising and turnout in any context in this case. It's irrelevant, it's self-serving (even if the Dems' nakedness on that score was less offensive than the Republicans' we're-just-following-procedure malarkey was to Judge Sparks), and frankly it looks bad. This case is about the circumstances under which a candidate who has already won his or her party's primary can withdraw, which Sparks said is what DeLay did, and be replaced on the ballot. As Rick Casey noted, you've got your choice of death, "a catastrophic illness that was diagnosed after the 62nd day before general primary election day" that would "permanently and continuously incapacitate the candidate and prevent the candidate from performing the duties of the office sought", and being appointed to or nominated for another office. DeLay meets none of these criteria, and the "ineligibility" fig leaf is laughable. Pound those points until your fists hurt.
- On the issue of Republicans not having any problems with DeLay's continued activities as a Congressman, I wonder if they have any problem with this?
Not even retirement can keep former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) from the game he loves so much.Since his resignation from the House this month, DeLay has held at least two meetings with his old friend and political ally House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).
The two met yesterday afternoon in Hastert’s office, and last week DeLay attended a regular gathering of former House leaders in the Speaker’s Capitol suite.
Hastert and his former majority leader held weekly lunch meetings when DeLay was in the leadership and kept them up after the Texan was forced to resign his post.
The Speaker declined to say what the two old colleagues discussed during their afternoon chat but later joked, "It was a nonpolitical, non-legislative discussion, as much as that can be with DeLay."
When is a Congressman not a Congressman? Link via MyDD.
- Remember, the Republicans wanted this case moved to federal court. They crowed about getting the case moved there. If Judge Sparks rules against them, what will their excuse be?
- Having said all of this, I'm still not convinced that I want the Dems to prevail here. Forcing the GOP to put DeLay back on the ballot may work brilliantly, but it may also be the clearest example of "be careful what you wish for" you'll ever see. You know how sometimes when you're undecided on something it's best to flip a coin, because you find yourself rooting for one side or the other to come up? I'm rooting for the coin to roll under the couch and get lost.
One more thing:
If DeLay resurrected his campaign three things could happen. He could win. He could lose. Or he could lose badly enough to hurt the entire Republican ticket because he's been villainized more than any candidate ever. DeLay would have to juggle a campaign with the distraction of a criminal case that came about as part an investigation into the 2002 state House elections that made possible the redistricting effort that he masterminded. There's also the potential problem of probes on the federal level into lobbyists and other former DeLay staffers and associates.
Despite DeLay's predictions when he first announced his resignation, Ronnie Earle has not dropped the charges against him. I've lost track of where we are in the process, but for sure the trial will be in the news between now and November. Just another thing to keep in mind.
Time to go through the news and see what we've learned since yesterday's SCOTUS ruling on Texas redistricting. Before I get into that, let me start by endorsing what Matt wrote about the Voting Rights Act. It was important in 2003, it's important now, and renewing it needs to be a top priority. Where do you think we'd be now if the staffers in the Justice Department who understood and respected the VRA had not been overruled by the appointed hacks when this Congressional map was up for preclearance? I don't believe there would have been time to redo CD23 for the 2004 elections.
I should note that Rick Hasen and Amy Howe note a shift in the interpretation of the VRA by Justice Kennedy in his majority opinion. Expect to read a lot more about that in the coming weeks. (Links via Political Wire and Tom Kirkendall, respectively.)
One last thing before I hit the news stories: The one place where mid-decade redistricting is not likely to occur any time soon is Colorado. That's because in their Legislature's attempt to redo the lines in 2003, their State Supreme Court ruled that once-a-decade redistricting was a part of their state constitution. The US Supreme Court refused to grant cert on an appeal of that ruling in 2004. It's possible other attempts at mid-decade do-overs will run into the same sort of roadblock, though at this time I have no idea where or even if other such restrictions may be in place.
OK then. Let's start with the Chron, which dives right into the question of what happens to CD23 and Rep. Henry Bonilla.
Bonilla's district cannot be redrawn without making changes to District 28, held by U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, and District 25, held by U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin.The reconfiguration of Doggett's district also may result in a three-way trade of Travis County voters between Doggett and 10th District U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Austin, and 21st District U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio.
McCaul also represents western Harris County. Such a trade of voters would put the Republican district's power base in Travis County and make it unlikely that a Harris County politician would win the district in a future election.
For the record, in 2004 the Travis County portion of CD10 went Democratic by an average 58-42 margin in countywide races and 55-45 at the statewide level, despite the lack of a Democratic nominee for CD10 on the ballot. It's the Harris County portion of this district that makes it Republican. I'm skeptical that this district would change much, but I suppose you never know.
The Supreme Court sent the congressional district maps back to a three-judge panel made up of 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Patrick Higginbotham of Dallas and U.S. District Judges Lee Rosenthal of Houston and John T. Ward of Marshall.That court likely will redraw the maps before the November election and set special elections in any districts where changes occur. However, it is possible that Gov. Rick Perry could call a special session of the Legislature to redraw the maps, but he indicated in a statement that he will be willing to let the court take the lead.
"We expect the panel to hold a hearing in the near future to address the timeline for the process," Perry said. "I will work with Attorney General (Greg) Abbott in our state's efforts to resolve this legal issue."
While the Legislature could be asked to redraw the maps, that's unlikely because of legal hurdles that would have to be cleared before the November elections, several redistricting experts said.
"It would be very difficult for the Legislature to do it in the time available," said State Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, who sponsored the redistricting plan in 2003.
They can always redo it later if they don't like what the court does. That's what this all boils down to, doesn't it? And just so we're all clear on that, I refer you to this statement in the Star Telegram:
Gov. Rick Perry, declaring the decision a victory for the state, said the next step will probably be a hearing by the three-judge panel that had upheld the plan. A spokeswoman, Rachael Novier, left open the possibility that the Republican governor would summon lawmakers back to Austin to remedy the court's concerns.Asked whether Perry adheres to past statements that redistricting should be left to the Legislature and not the courts, Novier said, "Absolutely."
Except of course when he thinks it suits his purposes, as was the case in 2001. Those were the days, huh?
Back to the Chron:
Bonilla said the Supreme Court's decision about his district is "more of a nuisance than anything else" because instead of concentrating on re-election he will have to worry about what the three-judge court will do. He said the Legislature should be in charge of redrawing the map."People aren't clamoring in neighborhoods to count how many brown faces are in this polling area or how many black faces or whatever," Bonilla said. "This is a cause driven more by what I call the professional minorities."
Bonilla said he also thought Cuellar would want to avoid going head-to-head with him in a special election.
"He has a scot-free election," Bonilla said. "I don't know that he would be interested in getting involved in a titanic battle."
Cuellar said he was talking to lawyers to determine the impact of the court's decision.
"I've always been able to land on my feet. I think we are going to be fine," he said.
I'm sure Bonilla feels confident that his homeboys will protect him again as they did in 2003 after his little scare against Cuellar. The Statesman picks up on that.
The crucial decision for Republicans will be how to redraw Bonilla's district.If they suggest putting Laredo wholly in his district, then a senior member of the GOP delegation will face a tough battle against Cuellar in a majority Latino district. But GOP advisers said Bonilla might be saved by pinching off Latinos from the edges of other districts so he would not be pitted against Cuellar.
Neither Bonilla or Cuellar would welcome a showdown.
"I think you can fashion a remedy without necessarily pairing Bonilla and myself together," Cuellar said. "The knee-jerk reaction is to get them from Webb County. . . . Laredo is not the only magical place to get Hispanics. The court didn't say, 'Get Hispanics from Laredo.' The court said, 'Get Hispanics.' "
I took a look at the Teaxs redistricting page to see what happened in the old 23rd District in 2004. The Republican index went from 47.5% in 2002 to 56.4% in 2004 there. That almost undoubtedly reflects the difference between having Tony Sanchez on the ballot, and having George Bush on it. Nonetheless, it reinforces what I said yesterday about Cuellar's choice. Even if Laredo/Webb County is moved wholesale back into CD23, Cuellar would need a huge performance there, and he'd still need to overcome Bonilla's advantages elsewhere. And he'd have to do it without a local turnout enhancer like Sanchez at the top of the ticket. Cuellar proved that he's a pretty good draw by himself in the 2004 and 2006 primaries, but this is a tall order.
Bonilla, whose support among Latinos has dropped over the years, said he would prefer that state lawmakers, not judges, make the fix. He added that he saw no need to hurry toward a solution."Logistically it would be so difficult now to make a huge change before the November elections, that it would probably be wise to wait for the Legislature to do it when they convene next year," Bonilla said. "The clock's ticking between now and November - why not just let this election go?"
Doggett disagreed, saying that to wait would mean holding an election under an illegal map: "I don't know if that has ever happened before."
The judicial panel has not announced a timeline for reacting to the Supreme Court's decision, but most Capitol observers don't expect the judges to allow the issue drag out beyond the November elections.
If either the judicial panel or the Legislature acted quickly, another round of primaries could be required this fall for districts that are changed.
Or, as happened in a similar redistricting scenario in 1996, there might be an open ballot for congressional candidates. Under that plan, the number of candidates would not be limited by political affiliation, and the winner would have to get a majority.
The reality, however, is that there are few opponents who would have the money or name identification to challenge incumbents, including Doggett, on such short notice.
I still don't see anything definitive as to timing, but I agree with Doggett in that I think there will be a new plan in place for November. And I agree with Nathan Persily when he says that if it's the three-judge panel doing the dirty work, they'll aim for as narrow a fix as they can. It's not out of the question at all that Bonilla and Cuellar could be back in CDs 23 and 28 without much more than token opposition this time. Next time, though, who knows?
Once more on Bonilla from the Express News:
Redistricting experts said the districts most likely affected by the ruling, in addition to Bonilla's, include those now represented by Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo; Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio; Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin; Ruben Hinojosa, D-Mercedes; and Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi.Perales and others want new boundaries drawn before the fall election.
"There's ample precedent for it to be done in a timely manner," said Ed Martin, a Democrat consultant and redistricting expert. "The people whose rights have been trampled from one election cycle shouldn't be denied those rights again. They should not be asked to wait and have their rights denied for two more years."
Redrawing Bonilla's district could mean changes in Cuellar's neighboring District 28, which includes half of Laredo and Webb County that once was part of District 23.
"That's going to be the question: How do we fix Henry Bonilla's unconstitutional district?" said Webb County Democratic Chairman Javier Montemayor, who favors leaving District 28 alone. "One of the attempts probably will be to take Hispanic voters out of Webb County and give them to Bonilla. I don't think that's a solution."
What about CD25? The Laredo Morning Times looks at it from the local perspective.
District 23's proximity to the Rio Grande Valleys District 25, and possibly Rep. Ruben Hinojosa's District 15 to the east, means remapped congressional lines inevitably will have an effect on the Valley.Several Democrats praised the Supreme Courts recognition of what they perceive as partisan mischief and envisioned the growing Valley as its own congressional district.
"We have nothing in common with the people of Travis County," said state Rep. Ismael "Kino" Flores, D-Mission, who serves on the House redistricting committee. He was referring to the 300-mile-long, north-south stretch of land from the Rio Grande to Austin that [Rep. Lloyd] Doggett now represents.
"I think everything south of Falfurrias and as far as Zapata (County) and the Hidalgo County line would be District 25," he said.
The ruling could affect all of Texas and align similar communities within a district, said state Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa, a McAllen Democrat and one of the leaders of the Democratic challenge to the Republican map.
"Its going to have a domino effect, and you will see more compact districts and not the fajita strips we have from McAllen to Austin," he said.
"It is a sweet victory, especially after all the criticism we received fighting (former U.S. House Majority Leader) Tom DeLay."
[...]
"Latinos were dealt a bad hand," said Juan Maldonado, chairman of the Hidalgo County Democratic Party. "(Rep. Henry) Bonilla is not our congressman, not our party and doesnt represent our interests."
Doggett said he is waiting for the three-judge panel to determine the remapping procedure.
"LULAC and I would be ready to go (on redistricting) next week," he said.
LULAC is the League of United Latin American Citizens, an advocacy organization that had filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court stating that the Republican redistricting plan eroded minority voting power in Texas and thus was illegal and unconstitutional.
"The sooner these lines can be drawn legally, the better off everyone will be," Doggett said.
As far as that goes, the LMT observed elsewhere:
A clerk for the federal judges in Marshall said Wednesday that the judges had not yet received the official mandate from the Supreme Court.The time it takes to get the formal paperwork, coupled with the fact that the judges dont have a set meeting schedule, means it could take a few weeks before things start rolling.
Finally, two other matters to discuss. One, in the Express News, is the idea of nonpartisan redistricting, which inevitably pops up whenever this subject arises:
Rep. Robert Puente, D-San Antonio said he favors a plan long advocated by Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, that would take redistricting out of the hands of self-interested politicians and empower the public to redraw political lines.Wentworth has been pushing the idea since 1993 and plans to do so again next year.
And from the Morning News, what about mid-decade redistricting as a concept?
Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, one of the few targets of redistricting to survive, said Wednesday he will introduce legislation barring states from redrawing congressional lines more than once each decade.
I have more faith in the Wentworth bill finally passing than I do in Edwards' bill, and I have very little faith in Wentworth's bill. Not that I don't think either effort isn't worthwhile - I do - I just don't believe that enough legislators share that sentiment.
On the opinion side, both the Statesman and the Chron have their say. Larry Stallings has the State House Democrats' response, while Vince reminds us all of the phone number for the Ardmore Holiday Inn. (He's kidding, I hope.) I have some longer statements from the Lone Star Project beneath the fold. And last but not least, Strange Bedfellows takes a fond look at the street in Austin where three Congressional districts meet.
UPDATE: Rick Bolanos, the current candidate against Bonilla, weighs in:
In spite of the furtive attempts by Mr. Bonilla and his cohorts to violate the constitutional rights of our nation, I will continue my campaign to give all the voters of the 23rd congressional district the type of ethical, fervent and passionate representation that they have so long been denied and that they so dearly deserve. I want to personally thank LULAC for their relentless pursuit of justice for those Hispanics who were oppressed by the misguided, avaricious actions of the present administration.
Full statement at Dos Centavos.
Statement of J. Gerald Hebert
Executive Director of the Campaign Legal Center & Counsel for the Texas Congressional Democrats in the Texas Redistricting Lawsuits
Today’s decision shows this was a challenge worth bringing. The fact that nine Justices filed six different opinions, each with subparts, says a lot about how splintered and difficult these issues were for the Court. Ultimately, justice and fairness is always a goal worth pursuing, and the fact that the Court found the map violated the rights of Latino voters in South Texas shows the fight was worth it.
This case was never about officeholders or incumbents, it wasn’t even about Democrats and Republicans. It was about protecting the voting rights of all Texans, particularly minority voters.
While I am disappointed the Court did not find a mid-decade redistricting done solely for partisan gain was unconstitutional, today’s decision does leave open the possibility that in some future case a claim of partisan gerrymandering might prevail. Five Justices still believe a partisan gerrymandering challenge to a redistricting map may still be brought and they have left open the possibility that a standard could emerge in some future case that would give legs to such a claim.
This case was an extreme example of a partisan gerrymander, and the Court says today that replacing a perfectly valid map in mid-decade solely for partisan gain is not impermissible under the Constitution. In doing so, the decision could open the floodgates for partisan re-redistricting. Today’s decision points to the very serious need for meaningful redistricting reform so that independent commissions, and not partisan gerrymandering politicians, get to draw the lines.
From the Desk of Martin Frost
June 28, 2006
Contact: (202) 547-7610
Former Congressman Martin Frost released the following statement today:
The challenge to Tom DeLay’s map was never about Democrats or Republicans or any politician. It was about protecting voting rights and reigning in blind political greed. It has been an important fight, and I am proud of the Texans who were willing to stand up to Tom Delay, Rick Perry, and the partisan Justice Department to protect voting rights.
I am disappointed the Court allowed mid-decade redistricting solely for partisan gain to stand, and it saddens me that the Court did not protect the voting rights of African Americans and other minorities in North Texas. However, I am pleased that the Court recognized that the voting rights of South Texas Hispanics had been trampled upon.
I hope that the District Court will quickly provide a remedy that restores voting rights to South Texas Hispanics and requires that their remedy be enforced for the 2006 elections.
The Right to Vote is Worth Fighting For
By Texas Senator Leticia Van de Putte
I do not know anybody who does not love the 4th of July. Independence Day is the most important civic holiday of the year, and for many Americans it means family, friends, and fireworks.
But Independence Day means so much more than that. It honors the birth of democracy. It is a day to celebrate our hard-fought freedoms. It is a time to remember how precious our American rights are, and how much it cost those who came before us to ensure that we have them.
But the fighting is not over. History shows that those who stop fighting for their rights lose them. Even now, the most fundamental right of participatory democracy, the right to vote, is under constant attack. Of course, nobody will admit that their goal is to take away your right to vote, or to ensure that your vote does not count. It is far more subtle and sophisticated than that. But nevertheless that is exactly what is happening.
It started with the mid-decade redistricting, which architects have admitted was designed to make Congressional districts so overwhelmingly Republican or Democratic that politicians would never again have to compete for your support in November elections. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court just overturned some of the map, and agreed that the state ran roughshod over the rights of South Texas minority voters when they drew it. This illegal power-grab was an attempt to leave out minority voters from any meaningful decision-making at the polls, and a scathing attempt for politicians to choose their voters, instead of voters choosing their politicians. Americans are being left behind.
It has continued through efforts in over 20 states, including Texas, to pass a law that would force voters to produce multiple forms of identification, including photo ID, at polling sites before being allowed to cast a ballot. Proponents of the legislation claim that it is to prevent voter fraud, but they have failed to produce a single case of fraud that this measure would prevent. Meanwhile, it would create insurmountable barriers to voting for low-income and elderly voters who do not drive, and thus do not have licenses. In Georgia, which has already passed the law, analysts estimate that about 675,000 voters there lack the required photo ID. Americans will be left behind.
Most recently, a small group of Republicans in Congress has even stopped, at least temporarily, the re-authorization of the Voting Rights Act, surprising their own Republican leadership. First passed in the 1960’s as literacy tests, poll taxes, and other disdainful methods of preventing minorities from voting prevailed, the Voting Rights Act is among the most important pieces of civil rights legislation ever to pass the United States Congress, and is crucial to the continuation of free and fair elections in which all legitimate voters are welcome. One of those blocking the legislation even claimed that racial bias no longer exists in Texas, then suggested that voters who can’t read, write, and speak English shouldn’t be allowed to participate. This is nonsense. More Americans would be left behind.
There are those who want to chip away at our absolute right to vote, and if we stop fighting for it they will prevail. We must have zero tolerance for this. There is no better time than Independence Day to remind ourselves and our lawmakers that nothing is more important in a democracy than preserving the right to vote.
UPDATE: As this post is no longer accurate, and is apparently causing Ryan some harm, I have removed it.
Two more wonky economics analyses of toll road selloffs from PGL at Angry Bear:
1. In which a local columnist takes Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels to task for being condescending towards the voters over their opposition to this deal.
2. In which noted economists Richard Posner and Gary Becker make the case for privatization.
From the I-45 Coalition mailing list:
METRO has just announced 2 meetings:Saturday, July 22nd; from 10 am - 12 pm (noon); Jeff Davis High School, 1101 Quitman
METRO will conduct an open house to provide members of the community an opportunity prior to its public meeting to ask questions regarding information in it’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed North Corridor.
Then 2 weeks later…
Saturday, August 5th; an open house from 1 pm to 2 pm; then a Public Hearing starting at 2 pm; Jeff Davis High School, 1101 Quitman
METRO will conduct an open house to provide members of the community an opportunity to ask questions. Then at 2 pm the PUBLIC HEARING will begin regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed North Corridor. The FTA (Federal Transit Administration) will solicit comments relating to environmental issues addressed in the DEIS. They say comments will be accepted through August 14th.
What is this?
METRO has been working on the alignment of how they are going to extend the existing rail line North of the current termination/start point at University of Houston-Downtown. This rail is for the LRT (Light Rail Transit) which has since changed to BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) and will be changing to GRT (Guided Rapid Transit) soon. This line will be going up Fulton (more or less) from the University of Houston to past Crosstimbers.
This is the Public Hearing that is mandated by the federal government in order to receive federal funding. The "environmental issues" deal with how the line placement will affect homes and neighborhoods. As I understand it, the "environmental issues" DO NOT address air pollution, noise pollution, etc. Why not? Good question! Ask that at the meeting.
You can get more information at www.ridemetro.org and go to Metro Solutions and North Corridor. Here are some more links.
http://metrosolutions.org/go/doc/1068/119672/
http://metrosolutions.org/go/doc/1068/112135/
Please remember, this is NOT TxDOT's (Texas Department of Transportation) meeting and does not directly affect I-45.
TxDOT is still working on their Environmental Studies and Schematic Drawings for I-45. They will be having a similar type meeting in probably 3 to 6 months.
I'm sure I'll have reminders of these meetings as the dates draw nearer.
Orlando Sanchez gets at the real reason why Commissioners' Court wants to abolish the office of Harris County Treasurer now: They all hate him.
Sanchez said Tuesday that eliminating the post would kill the immediate prospect of a Hispanic for the first time holding a countywide elected administrative office. Some Hispanics previously have won countywide judicial races.Since commissioners didn't consider abolishing the office after the March primary when Cato was nominated, Sanchez also said the attempt now may be personal.
"It is interesting that up to Mr. Cato's death, they were supporting Mr. Cato and obviously keeping the office. After Mr. Cato died, they adopted a resolution to abolish the office," said Sanchez.
"It makes you wonder, especially since I could become the first Hispanic and the first immigrant elected countywide." Sanchez's family moved from Cuba when he was a child.
Orlando. Please, stop. You're embarrassing yourself. Now put the press releases down and slowly back away.
I mean, I really don't have to point out that Orlando's opponent in this race is named Richard Garcia, right? He's been running on a platform of abolishing the office since 2002. And as noted before, the effort to do away with the Treasurer predates Jack Cato.
Democratic Commissioners Sylvia Garcia and El Franco Lee were the first to suggest abolishing the seat, [Republican Commissioner Steve] Radack said."The point is, we have a situation where you have a Democrat who wants to abolish the office and you have a Republican who has said he wants to use it as a sounding board," he said.
"It's the perfect opportunity to eliminate the office."
[...]
"It has no auditing authority, does not issue official financial reports, and, in fact, no longer even writes checks. It is an antiquated office which duplicates other functions for no reason or benefit," said Garcia, who served as Houston controller before she was elected commissioner. "The citizens of Harris County should have the right to abolish the office, just as voters in other Texas counties have."
This was a matter of timing and opportunity. There should have been a continual push to do away with this office all through Cato's tenure, but that's the way things work in politics - being the right idea isn't enough if it isn't the right time for it. Maybe if Orlando Sanchez could make a case for what the Treasurer's office does and what he would do with it other than gad about and spout off on issues that have nothing to do with the office's official functions he could convince people of the position's merits instead of making it abundantly clear that what he really wants is a cushy do-nothing job. And if not, then he can watch as Richard Garcia, who unlike him has a clear and compelling vision for this office, becomes the first Hispanic countywide elected official (non-judicial).
By the way, Orlando's outburst did very little to convince his fellow travellers that he deserves this position. One comment, for David Benzion:
As far as I’m concerned, the Harris County GOP should have figured out a way to call the Democrat’s bluff. Get [Richard] Garcia on record supporting abolishment of the office, refuse to nominate ANYONE, and then work cooperatively with Treasurer Garcia to eliminate his job.
Garcia's advocacy of abolishing the office is not a bluff. Neither, I expect, are Sylvia Garcia and El Franco Lee bluffing, as they voted to support abolishing the office. I'll admit that this was likely an easier call for them given the current climate, but who's to say Richard Garcia can't or won't win? It's not like he won't pick up some Republican support, given how this race has gone. How much would you wager on Orlando Sanchez right now? Republicans may have an overall partisan edge in Harris County (for now, anyway), but candidates still matter. Especially when Orlando Sanchez is your candidate.
(Would have posted this earlier, but was too busy with redistricting stuff. Sorry about that.)
The long-awaited Supreme Court ruling on Texas' re-redistricting of 2003 is in.
The U.S. Supreme Court today upheld almost all of Texas' Republican-friendly U.S. House election district map.By a 5-4 vote, the court said the 23rd District in Southwest Texas, represented by Republican Henry Bonilla, was unconstitutional because its design violated the rights of some Hispanic voters. Reshaping the district, a task that apparently now is assigned to federal court in Texas, would force a change in at least one other neighboring district.
But the high court ruling preserved the other districts in the Houston area and elsewhere that were created by the Texas Legislature in 2003. This includes a Dallas-area district whose constitutionality was challenged by black voters.
The Supreme Court today also upheld the right of states to change their congressional district boundaries more frequently than the traditional every 10 years following each U.S. Census.
I wrote about this yesterday at Kuff's World. This is more or less what I thought was most likely. After all that's been said and done, at this point what I like the least is that the concept of redistricting whenever the mood strikes a state legislature has been upheld. I see very little good that can come out of that, even if in the short term Democrats could use it to extract a little revenge against Republicans.
State Rep. Richard Raymond, D-Laredo, a member of the House Redistricting Committee, said he believes the only way to fix the map is to put Laredo in one congressional district. The Republicans had split it between Bonilla's 23rd District and Democratic U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar's 28th District."There isn't an easy repair. Any time you've got to move 100,000 people, there's a domino effect," Raymond said. "The easiest fix is you put Laredo back together
I'm not sure at this point if the three-judge panel that originally upheld the new map will be tasked with putting a replacement in place, or if the Legislature has to do it; neither am I sure if this needs to be done for 2006, or if a special election will be required for some point in the future - this could include an open primary in November, as we had in 1996.
What I do think will happen is that at the very least CD28 will be redrawn as well. If it's possible to swap the CD23 portion of Webb County for an equivalent piece of CD28, that could work. What happens after that is a decision for CD28's Rep. Henry Cuellar. He nearly toppled CD23 incumbent Henry Bonilla in 2002 thanks in part to getting 80% of the vote in Webb County. He did knock off fellow Democrat Ciro Rodriguez in the 2004 primary on a similar show of strength in Webb, and he won again in the same fashion in 2006. Without Webb, Cuellar probably can't beat Rodriguez or someone like him with a strong base in Bexar County. With Webb, Cuellar would have a shot at Bonilla, but I don't know that it would be better than a coin flip. Either way, it's a tough call.
And yes, before anyone asks, I'll happily support Cuellar against Bonilla even though I was an enthusiastic proponent of Ciro Rodriguez this past March. It's a simple matter of mathematics, to wit:
Ciro > Cuellar > Bonilla
I'm sure I'll have plenty more to say after I see some answers to the questions I raised above. Stay tuned - this already crazy election season just took another big turn for the weird.
SCOTUS Blog has more, including a link to the opinion (PDF).
UPDATE: From the Statesman:
Redrawing [CD23] will force nearby District 25, the Austin-to-Mexico district held by Democrat Lloyd Doggett of Austin, to be redrawn, according to the court opinion.Experts were still poring over the complicated 100-page opinion to determine how Texas will have to remedy the deficiencies.
And from BOR:
The three-judge panel will have the responsibility of deciding what to do with the redistricting map. The first decision is when they redraw the map for -- this election cycle, or the next. The second decision, then, is whether they will redraw the map themselves, and accept three maps from both Democrats and Republicans, OR whether they kick it back to the Texas Legislature for them to redraw the lines during the 80th Regular Session starting in January.Exactly how far the dominoes fall, we'll have to wait and see. I'd imagine that CD 23, 28, 21, and 25 will have to be redrawn. As we wait to get more analysis, you can play around with an interactive Congressional map of Texas. Click on the "U.S. Congressional Districts" link to get to the map.
More to come soon.
UPDATE: I've put a statement by State Rep. Richard Raymond beneath the fold. Raymond was a plaintiff in the lawsuit, briefly a primary opponent to Henry Cuellar for this year, and a sure bet to run for Congress again in a Laredo-based district.
AUSTIN -- The United States Supreme Court ruled that the mid-decade Texas Republican plan to redistrict congressional boundaries "rode roughshod" over the rights of Hispanics in South Texas, and it must be remedied, State Rep. Richard Raymond (D-Laredo) said today.The Court's ruling means Laredo will once again be unified in one congressional district and that other districts must be changed to accommodate the Court's ruling.
Raymond, who led the opposition to the plan in the Legislature, was the only state legislator who was a plaintiff in the lawsuit that challenged the redistricting plan engineered by former Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.
"I felt very strongly about this. The Court proved we were right to argue that Laredo and Hispanics in Texas were unfairly targeted," Raymond said. "This means that adjusting the districts to make them valid will affect several other districts, and that will make those districts more representative of the people of Texas."
The Court ruled specifically that splitting up Laredo and Webb County into Districts 23 and 28 was a violation of the Voting Rights Act, and that the adjoining District 25, represented by Congressman Lloyd Doggett of Austin, was also not in compliance. The Court said that the district court must now make changes that will make the districts lawful.
"From the very beginning, common sense told us that Laredo is one community of interest, and the only reason it was split up was to give the Republicans an unfair advantage so that they could elect another Republican to Congress from Texas -- at the expense of Hispanics, Laredo and South Texas," Raymond said.
At the heart of the Court's ruling was the importance of the Voting Rights Act, which is now also in danger in a Republican-dominated Congress. The Act must be reauthorized this year to prevent it from expiring next year.
"We have to keep on fighting for the Act. It is clearly an important tool to how we protect minorities in this state and how we make sure that the entire process of redistricting remains fair, transparent, open and democratic," Raymond said.
"I always had faith that the Supreme Court understood that the blatant power grab that DeLay carried out here in Texas was illegal, unconstitutional, unfair and un-American," Raymond said. "This ruling reconstitutes the civil and voting rights of millions of Americans in Texas and provides for more orderly change when change is required. But the Court should have gone further and invalidated the whole map and prohibited mid-decade redistricting."
The win was forged by an alliance of the League of United Latin American Citizens, the American GI Forum and the Washington, D,C. - based Lone Star Project, headed by Matt Angle, a native of Euless, Texas.
"Matt and his group did an exceptional job of coordinating information, the attorneys and the presentations. This shows the kind of victory that can be achieved when people work together, " said Raymond.
The state's population grew 23 percent from 1990-2000 and is projected to grow by an estimated 18 percent in 2000-2010. The ramifications of this decision should be self-evident: Texas faces a serious redistricting session in 2011.
"This is a huge state with many problems and challenges that need to be addressed by a government that represents all of the people, not just one political party. Education, water resources, transportation, the protection of the environment -- these issues cannot be left to the province of one party that marches lockstep to a philosophy that will hurt Texas in the long-run by excluding people and limiting the influence of others."
U.S. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens said on Tuesday he does not yet have the necessary votes to get legislation to overhaul communications laws through the full Senate. . . .Stevens told reporters he had not yet secured the 60 votes needed to end debate on the Senate floor, known as cloture, and set the measure for a final vote by the lawmakers.
"We have to get 60 votes, we don't have them right now," the Alaska Republican said after a daylong committee session for amending his proposed legislation. He has predicted the panel would pass the bill.
Stevens said he would not likely get a commitment from Senate leaders to bring the measure to the floor until there was greater support and that the toughest issue facing senators was Internet service, known as Net neutrality.
"They're not going to take a month on the floor on this bill," Stevens said. "Unless we can define a period of time that we get it done, we'll not get it up (on the Senate floor) and that's defined by 60 votes."
It would be nice to put this one to bed in committee. According to Save the Internet, one of the Commerce Committee members that has not yet stated a position on Net Neutrality is our own Kay Bailey Hutchison. I'd not given any thought to the idea of calling her on this before because frankly I expect so little from her. But maybe this one time I can be pleasantly surprised. Give her office a ring this morning at 202-224-5922 and urge her to support the bipartisan Snowe-Dorgan Internet Freedom amendment in the Commerce Committee. If you do, please leave a comment here with the response that you get.
Oh, and I don't need to tell you that Barbara Radnofsky supports net neutrality, right? As we expect to be disappointed in KBH, we expect the best from BAR.
UPDATE: I spoke to a gentleman in KBH's office this morning and expressed my support for the Snowe-Dorgan amendment. When I asked if KBH had announced a position on Net Neutrality, he said that she had not yet done so, and was waiting on feedback from constituents. I asked if her office had taken many calls on this and he laughed and said "more than you can count". He would not say which way they had been going, however, as it was a "private poll".
So. Why not give KBH a few more data points for her "private poll"? Call now - 202-224-5922 - and urge her to support the bipartisan Snowe-Dorgan Internet Freedom amendment in the Commerce Committee.
Tomorrow is the last day to vote for the Forward Together PAC Mapchangers. The good news is that we've now got two Texans in the top five - Chris Bell and Barbara Radnofsky. The better news is that we can still get at least one more in there with a little strategic voting. I quote from the email by Glen Maxey that's making the rounds:
John Courage (TX-21) is sitting RIGHT OUTSIDE of the Top 5. We have an opportunity to bring another $5,000 to Texas if we can get him into that 5th slot. We also want to ensure that Chris and Barbara stay where they are. If John gets into the Top 5, we will have a unique "Texas Triple Crown" with not only having three candidates in the Top 5 of THIS contest, but it will make John Courage the Democracy for America Grassroots All-Star, the Feingold Progressive Patriot, and a Warner Mapchanger.NOTE: This is instant runoff voting. If you don't put these candidates in this order, you can actually push John further down the list instead of into the top five. We are very confident from the rumors we've heard that Bell and Radnofsky are secure in the top five and that John is just below the bar.
The ideal ballot would be in this order (it only takes a second to vote) to show the country that Texas is more purple than it is red:
1st Vote: John Courage TX-21
2nd Vote: Ted Ankrum TX-10
3rd Vote: Mary Beth Harrell TX-31
4th Vote: Chris Bell TX-GOV
5th Vote: Barbara Radnofsky TX-SENPlease take a minute out of your day and vote THIS all-Texan ballot by clicking here.
Please vote while you still can. Thanks!
Greg in TX22 notes Tom DeLay's shifting rationales for why he cut and run in CD22. I'm sure if someone were to ask him again in a couple of months, he'd have another explanation for it.
Eye on Williamson has been all over Rep. John Carter's embarrassing statements regarding the Voting Rights Act. There's too many posts to link, so go here and take your pick. And also read the editorials by the Statesman, the Chron, and Clay Robison, plus this letter to President Bush (PDF) from the Texas Legislative Black Caucus.
I must say, I always knew Rep. Carter was not exactly a deep thinker, but I'm impressed at the depth and breadth of his clownishness lately. Beyond this, there's his unnecessary fitness center earmark, his predictable demagoguery on immigration, his shoddy caretaking of Fort Hood - the list goes on. I find myself wondering if I'm just noticing his foolishness more this year thanks to the presence of a tough and well-qualified candidate opposing him and a dedicated blog keeping an eye on his shenanigans, or if he's just ratcheted up the hijinx recently. Whatever the cause, he's certainly made a spectacle of himself, and not in the good way.
Catching up from the weekend - Remember that list of intersections where the red light cameras were going to be installed? Well, forget it. Things have changed, thanks to a ruling by AG Greg Abbott that red light cameras can be installed on roads owned by TxDOT.
"Now we can truly impact safety, because now we're going to be using the (more dangerous) locations instead of having to work around" them, said Houston Police Department Executive Assistant Chief Martha Montalvo.About half of the most dangerous intersections in the city belong to TxDOT, Montalvo said. Those locations can now be monitored by cameras intended to catch drivers who run red lights, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said in an opinion issued late Friday.
"(TxDOT) may permit local entities to install camera equipment to monitor compliance with traffic-control signals for the purpose of enforcing traffic laws," Abbott's opinion reads.
HPD likely will scrap the list of 10 sites it released earlier this month as the first camera locations and come up with a new one that includes TxDOT intersections, Montalvo said. That new list could be released as soon as this afternoon, she said.
I haven't seen that list yet (this story is from Monday). Have I missed it?
Many of the highways and other major roads in the city are owned by TxDOT, as are some smaller but busy roads, such as Westheimer outside the loop.The city had gone ahead with the project, which has been in the works since City Council approved it in 2004, despite waiting on Abbott's opinion.
Again, whatever the merits of these cameras are, it makes sense to deploy them where they ought to have the greatest effect. Now if we'd only promise to measure that effect and take appropriate action based on what we learn from those measurements, I'd be happy.
Orlando Sanchez is ready for his closeup.
Harris County Republicans nominated Orlando Sanchez Monday to represent their party on the November ballot in the race for county treasurer.The winner of the fall race will replace Jack Cato, who died May 22, but the office is somewhat uncertain since Harris County Commissioner's Court voted last week to abolish it.
Sanchez won 66 percent of 321 votes. Precinct chairs selected Sanchez during a special meeting at a Houston Community College campus, said Jared Woodfill, Harris County Republican Party Chair. "He has a lot of support among precinct chairmen and Republicans in general," Woodfill said.
"Most importantly, Orlando really, really needs the job," Woodfill did not add.
Sanchez will be opposed in November by Richard Garcia, a Democrat, who advocates abolishing the office. Abolishing the office would require a statewide vote on a constitutional amendment, which first must be approved by the state Legislature.
You know where I stand on this. Do you want to subsidize Orlando Sanchez, or do you want to save Harris County some money? The choice is yours.
Looks like Federal Judge Sam Sparks is a little skeptical of the scheme to replace Tom DeLay on the November ballot.
"He is not going to participate in the election and he withdrew," said U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks, who did not issue an official ruling after a daylong trial regarding DeLay's status as the GOP nominee for the 22nd Congressional District.Jim Bopp, a lawyer for the Republican Party of Texas, disagreed, telling Sparks "there's been no withdrawal." Bopp said that instead, DeLay moved to Virginia, making him ineligible and triggering a state law that allows the party to select a new nominee.
Sparks also said that if political parties are allowed to replace primary election winners with more popular candidates, "the abuse would be incredible."
"It can happen in every race in this state for every office," Sparks said. The Republican judge said a ruling could come as early as next week.
That's what this is about, isn't it? Either Tom DeLay chose not to run in November, in which case the law says that no replacement can be selected at this late date, or circumstances made him ineligible to be on the ballot, in which case the process for what happens when a candidate dies kicks in. Sparks hasn't made any decisions yet, but it seems he understands what DeLay is up to.
And why shouldn't Judge Sparks be skeptical when there's stuff like this to consider?
The Democrats argued that DeLay's move is a sham to circumvent state election laws.Under the law, the Republican Party could not have replaced DeLay if he had simply withdrawn from the campaign after winning the party's nomination. But state GOP Chairwoman Tina Benkiser testified that she ruled DeLay ineligible after he wrote her a letter saying he was moving to Virginia and she was presented with copies of his Virginia driver's license, voter registration and state tax documents.
Judge Sparks seemed skeptical.
He noted that the Constitution establishes no residency requirement for a candidate of Congress. He questioned how a state party official can rule a candidate ineligible because they moved during the campaign when there is no residency requirement until a person is elected.
The judge also said he considered DeLay's actions a "de facto withdrawal."
Sparks questioned why DeLay's staff, which prepared the letter stating his plans to move to Virginia, sent a draft to Benkiser several days before sending a final version.
The judge suggested that lawyers for DeLay and the Republican Party could have taken weeks to prepare a rationale that would allow the GOP to replace DeLay on the ballot.
I really don't see how anyone can look at the facts and conclude that DeLay's actions were anything but a deliberate choice, and that he made that choice after studying the law and finding a loophole that he then proceeded to drive a truck through. I mean, what motivated him to leave at this time? I've not seen any suggestion that his decision to retire and move to Virginia was in any way time-dependent. Was there a job opening that wouldn't wait until next year?
I suppose Sparks has to decide if DeLay's intentions matter in interpreting the law. If they don't, then either he's ineligible or not, and given that Texas law is generally pretty forgiving in terms of where one says one resides for voting purposes, he'll probably be forced to rule that what DeLay did was in bounds. For what it's worth, I tend to agree with DeLayVsWorld. For better or worse, I think the GOP is likely to prevail in this case.
Putting it another way, from the Quorum Report:
The judge said the evidence showed that DeLay simply decided that he would not complete the race. Lawyers working for DeLay then took time to figure out the best way "to manipulate the Republican Party, which he had a right to do," Sparks said.However, Sparks seemed troubled by the precedent set by the action, saying he was worried it could lead to widespread candidate swapping. "If (DeLay) is allowed to do this [...] it can happen in every race in the state for any office".
James Bopp Jr., Benkiser’s attorney, disagreed with Sparks' conclusions, saying that only twice in 15 years has a candidate who won a primary been declared ineligible by the party and a replacement been named for the general election. He pointed out the other time was in 2004 when Democrats replaced a state House candidate who moved out of the district.
As for Sparks' concerns about the damage to the political process, "it is not the job of the federal court to decide if this is good public policy or not," Bopp said.
That's a good thing for DeLay, since much of his legacy would be imperiled if courts did have that task.
Speaking of the courts and DeLay's legacy, Houtopia raises an interesting point concerning another big court case on which a ruling is immiment, namely the Supreme Court and Texas redistricting:
Hey, if the court invalidates the whole Texas plan (unlikely but possible), we would revert to the 2001 apportionment lines, and candidates would all run in open primaries. Thus, Tom DeLay would get his wish to escape the ballot. There's a tasty bit of irony to ponder -- could DeLay secretly be hoping for the undoing of his own crowning political oeuvre? It's fun to think about, isn't it?
Indeed.
Finally, from Capitol Inside, I think this is a little Too Much Information from the Texas Democratic Party:
Texas Democratic Party employee Ken Bailey testified that DeLay had been a "lightening rod" for contributions and a prime target in light of the criminal case pending against him. Bailey said that the Democrats' volunteer efforts and turnout would be adversely affected if the GOP was allowed to replace DeLay on the ballot.
Geez, why not complain about him stealing your lunch money while you're at it? Didn't we all come away from Fort Worth talking about energy and commitment for November? This case is about whether or not Tom DeLay is following the law, and what the remedy is if it can be shown that he's not. Questions about volunteers and turnout (and fundraising - see the end of the Chron story) are irrelevant and frankly a bit insulting to the people who've been working their tails off both before and since DeLay's resignation announcement. Stay focused, okay?
Karl-T reports on a poll commissioned by John Courage.
In a poll conducted by Lake Research Partners of 500 likely general election voters June 18-21, 2006, only 31% said that they would vote to re-elect Lamar Smith.(MoE +-4.4%)This is an anemic number for a (20-year!) incumbent, as that number should on average be closer to 45-55%. The voters want change, and we’ve got a man of the people that is a teacher and a veteran who wants to be their representative.
I don't doubt the statement about how anemic his re-elect number is, but let's bear in mind that Smith is only a one-term incumbent for much of CD21, and the last time around he ran against a nutball perennial candidate, meaning he probably didn't do a whole lot of campaigning. Going by the Redistricting Reports page, the population of Bexar and Travis Counties in CD21 in 2002 was about 356,000. In 2004, those two counties had 538,000 people in the district. That's a lot of map-induced change. Smith's tenure in government may be long, but to a lot of people in CD21, he's a newbie.
Smith is below average in personal approval ratings as well, while President Bush clocked in at 44 approve/55 disapprove, and Congress itself was at a remarkable 21/78. As with Shane Sklar, the opportunity is there if Courage can get a message out. If you haven't voted for Courage yet as part of the Straight Ticket Texan slate of Mapchangers, now would be a good time.
The Baytown Sun picks up on funny business by Rep. Ron Paul after it was pointed out by Shane Sklar.
A Sklar release stated that Paul "triumphantly announced that Congress had passed hurricane relief funding and that (Paul) had worked to have 90 percent reimbursement for Texas communities affected by Hurricane Rita" included in the bill, called The Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery.Among the provisions of the bill, HR 4939, cited in the press release as "important for Texas' Gulf Coast families" are: $26 million for rural development; $235 million in additional assistance for displaced elementary and secondary school students for the 2005-2006 school year; and $6 billion for the federal Disaster Relief Fund.
But while Paul took credit in a press release for the Texas funding in the bill, "the release fails to mention, however, that Paul voted against the bill."
"We get zero leadership out of Congressman Ron Paul on hurricane relief," Sklar stated.
"It's hypocritical and dishonest for Ron Paul to vote against this important hurricane relief effort and claim credit for it's passing," he said. "Ron Paul has been in Washington too long. Only in Washington D.C. would it make sense to take credit for something you voted against."
But Jeff Deist, a spokesman for Paul, said hurricane relief was only a small portion of the bill, an emergency supplemental bill which is not considered part of the federal budget or the deficit because of a "procedural trick."
"Congressman Paul always makes sure, in any of the appropriations bills, whether they're a supplemental, a regular bill, or a hurricane bill, he always takes whatever steps he can to make sure that some of the spending in that bill goes to the district. That's part of his job," Deist said.
But, Deist said, Paul has a longstanding objection to increased federal spending that increases the deficit. "He runs on that promise. He wants Congress to spend less, and he won't vote for bills that do the opposite, that raise the amount of spending. He's committed to doing that, he's done that throughout his career here," he said.
Got that? He'll fight to bring home the bacon, then vote against it because bacon is bad for you. You should be happy to know that this way he can sleep better at night.
This is Ron Paul in a nutshell. Given a choice between representing his district, and keeping his ideological purity intact, he'll choose the latter every time. Kind of a bummer for him that in a year where his district really needs him, he's got an opponent around to make noise over the contradictions inherent in his actions.
And this is what I mean when I say Paul is a nonentity, a boutique Congressman. He can write all the articles he wants for LewRockwell.com about government minimalism, and it will have no effect on how his party behaves. He has no influence, and in the end all he can do is argue that at least his purpose was noble. Sad, really.
There's more in this BOR diary by Sklar.
I'm glad to see that nothing important happened while my family and I were on the plane home today. I wouldn't have had the energy to do anything about it. See you all tomorrow.
Continuing in my series of interviews with local candidates, I bring you a Q&A with J. Goodwille Pierre, who is the Democratic candidate for County Clerk in Harris County.
1. Who are you and what are you running for?
My name is James Goodwille Pierre and I'm running for Harris County Clerk.
Demonstrated by my accomplishments, I believe in hands-on community partnerships through service, education and outreach.
2. What exactly does the County Clerk do?
Primarily, the Harris County Clerk's office is our county's chief record keeper and oversees the election process.
The office has three primary roles: 1) maintain the records of the Commissioners' Court, County Probate Courts and County Civil Courts at Law, 2) maintain real property records including state and federal tax liens; vital statistics records such as marriage licenses and assumed names; and uniform commercial code records, and 3) administer county and state elections.
3. What are your professional qualifications for this job?
I believe in active, hands-on community partnerships. I believe in the human rights of all people and am ready to be Harris County's hard working, committed and concerned County Clerk.
My educational, professional, and public and community service backgrounds qualify me for this job:
- My education background includes being a graduate of Brooklyn Technical High School. I attended Morehouse College in Atlanta from 1983-1986 and George State University from 1987-1989 where I earned a Bachelors Degree in Chemistry with a Minor in Physics. I received a Masters in Education from the University of Central Florida and a Doctor of Jurisprudence from South Texas College of Law in 2000. I am licensed in the Supreme Court of Texas, Federal Southern District of Texas and the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
- Currently, I am employed as Adjunct Professor at the Thurgood Marshall School of Law, and Manager of Small Business Development and Contract Compliance for the Houston Airport System.
- From 2003 until the end of 2004, I served as the Texas Deputy Director for People for The American Way. In this capacity, I was the State Coordinator for the Texas Unlock Your Vote! Campaign. With the help of coalition partners, the Unlock Your Vote! Campaign registered over 20,000 new voters.
- I also served as the Texas Legal Director and African American Outreach Coordinator for Election Protection 2004, the nation's most far-reaching effort to protect voter rights. In this capacity, I was responsible for organizing civil rights lawyers and advocates to represent voters in lawsuits, preserve access to the polls, expose and prevent voter intimidation, solve problems with new voting machines, technology and ballot forms, and protect voter rights. I recruited the legal assistance needed and was co-counsel on the 2004 Federal Southern District of Texas Lawsuit, NAACP Prairie View Chapter vs. Waller County District Attorney. This successful lawsuit protected the rights of Prairie View students to vote in the local elections without being intimidated.
- Previously, I served as the District Director for Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee (D-18th TX) where I was responsible for managing the overall operation of the 18th Congressional District while developing synergy between the District Office and the D.C. Office. In addition, I represented the Congresswoman at various meetings and events in the district, and nurtured and established constituent relationships throughout the district, while working with elected officials at the city, county and state levels to help with all community needs.
- From 2003-2005, I served as Chairman of Houston's Government Procurement Connections (GPC) Planning Committee. The GPC is an annual conference, which draws more than 3,000 small business owners seeking government contracting opportunities, and more than 500 representatives from various government entities. At the GPC conference, attendees have an opportunity to meet face-to-face with city, county, state, and federal representatives involved in purchasing decisions for their agencies. I am dedicated to helping small and minority owned businesses, and the conference has enjoyed outstanding growth and produced tangible benefits for small and minority owned businesses.
- Finally, I am an elected director on the Board of the State Bar of Texas, Commissioner on the City of Houston's Building and Standards Commission, and a Sustaining Member of the Harris County Democratic Party. I am also active as Chair of Region V of the National Bar Association, Chair of the African American Lawyers Section of the State Bar of Texas, Immediate Past President of the Houston Lawyers Association, and a subscribing life member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. I'm a Deacon at The Community of Faith Baptist Church and currently sit on the Board of Directors of The Dominion Community Development Corporation as well as The Robert F. Tinsley Scholarship Fund.
4. Incumbent Clerk Beverly Kaufman was responsible for the implementation of the eSlate voting machines. What is your opinion of the eSlates?
The eSlate machine itself is viable technology and was implemented at a time when an upgrade in voting efficiencies was greatly needed. The challenge lies in effective implementation of the eSlate system. I do not believe the system has been properly instituted.
eSlate was implemented in Harris County in November 2001. Even with over a year of experience, in November 2003 an investigation revealed a serious error - poll workers assigned the wrong ballots to voters.
We must build voter confidence in order to preserve the foundation of our democracy - the citizen's right to vote.
5. What could be done to make the voting experience in Harris County better?
We should have an electoral system where registering to vote is convenient, voting is efficient and pleasant, voting machines work properly, fraud is deterred, and disputes are handled fairly and expeditiously.
The measures taken to accomplish this should be transparently communicated to our citizens to begin building voter confidence.
We also need to properly allocate voting machines and personnel to high volume voting sites to avoid long lines. And, personnel need to be trained to assure accuracy and efficiency in service.
6. Much has been written about the integrity and security of electronic voting machines. How secure are the eSlates?
Proponents of the eSlate machines will point to studies of voting problems where eSlates were used that revealed operator error rather than a malfunction of the technology itself. Without the source code being made available, however, voters have no assurances that their votes are secure. In addition, the accuracy and verification tests are not administered properly. The eSlate machines are a long way from the level of security needed to instill confidence in the voting public.
7. What can be done to improve their security?
I believe a task force should be created to look at the procedural and technological safeguards of the eSlate technology. This task force should research, develop and implement security and integrity measures that detect modification of software and parallel testing to detect intrusion software codes.
Secondly, I believe in implementation of a voter-verifiable paper audit trail. This is an important step to increase our citizens' confidence that their votes will be counted accurately and can be verified should the technology fail.
8. Do you believe that the eSlates should print a paper receipt of each vote? If so, should these receipts be the official ballots or just serve as backups? If not, why not?
Yes, as indicated above, I believe in implementation of a voter-verifiable paper audit trail or back-up.
9. What is your opinion of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA)?
First, I want to ensure everyone knows what HAVA is. The Help America Vote Act of 2002, H.R. 3295, signed into law by President George W. Bush in October 2002, provides $3.9 billion in federal funds to states from 2003 through 2006 to replace outdated voting machines, improve voter education and train precinct workers.
Under the law, states must:
- Implement a uniform, centralized statewide voter registration computer database;
- Provide provisional ballots to ensure no individual is turned away at the polls; and
- Provide at least one voting machine that is accessible to the disabled per precinct.
I believe HAVA elevates the importance of an efficient and effective electoral system.
10. How good a job has Harris County done in fulfilling the requirements of HAVA?
Harris County complied with HAVA early. Areas for improvement in Harris County are 1) properly trained personnel, 2) proper implementation and use of a paper audit trail, and 3) incorporation and public communication of eSlate security mechanisms.
11. What is your opinion of the concept of "voting centers", where the early voting model of a small number of centralized locations would extend to Election Day?
The voting center model came about in response to implementing the new requirements of HAVA. Voting centers ideally would be more cost-effective (voting centers save taxpayer money because they require fewer workers than do precincts), and provide an efficient and consistent voting system. Under this model, citizens may vote at any designated voting center rather than their precinct.
In Harris County, we use this model for early voting, which works well. It is prudent that Harris County fully evaluates the effectiveness of voting centers after a trial period. The upsides of using voter centers could outweigh the challenges as long as voters have proper information regarding the location of and access to voting centers.
12. What areas for improvement do you see in how the Harris County Clerk's office is now run?
An education regarding the responsibilities of our County Clerk should not be needed. I want to make the office more visible, helpful and accessible to the public. Additionally, my goal is to be an advocate and resource for our citizens rather than simply a clerk. And, I will place particular weight on elevating the importance of voting for all citizens.
My promise is to:
- Provide greater emphasis on voter participation.
- Guarantee your vote is recorded as intended through verifiable paper trail ballots.
- Increase confidence in our voting systems through testing and expert oversight of procedures and technology.
- Be a leader with high visibility in the community.
- Properly allocate voting machines and personnel to high volume voting sites.
- Improve training of poll workers to assure your voting rights and efficient service.
- Increase security of all records maintained by the County Clerk.
- Better and timelier communication of voting location changes.
- Expedite protection measures to assure your voting rights are not compromised and swift administration of justice when infractions occur.
- Give you an updated and user-friendly Web site for the County Clerk's office.
- Create task forces of lawyers and grassroots community leaders to improve services provided by the County Clerk's office.
- Improved Neighborhood Center administration.
13. Why do you believe you will be a better County Clerk than Beverly Kaufman?
I want to advocate for the people of Harris County. I have always been about hands-on community partnerships through service, education and outreach - I will bring this tenacity, energy and passion to the County Clerk position.
14. What else do we need to know about you?
I am grateful and humbled by my many supporters and organizational endorsements within all communities in Harris County. However, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention my biggest supporters - my beautiful wife of 11 years Jacquelyn Tinsley, a native Houstonian, and my two lovely daughters, Joi Candace, nine years old, and Jada Elaine, who is three.
Postscript: Since I first emailed these questions to Pierre, a group of activists filed a lawsuit to "prevent the State of Texas from using unreliable electronic voting machines in the November elections". I asked Pierre for a statement regarding this suit. His statement is as follows:
The voters must feel confident that their votes are counted. I applaud David Van Os, Sonia Santana, the NAACP of Austin and its president Nelson Linder for forcing the State of Texas to listen and, hopefully, use common sense.As someone who teaches and practices intellectual property law, I can tell you that it encourages and protects companies like Hart InterCivic in the production of proprietary technology such as source code. I believe, however, the law must give way to greater societal concerns. It is vitally important that our voting rights be protected from even the mere appearance of impropriety. We need to explore all available legal avenues to have the source codes made available for inspection and security.
Thank you, James Goodwille Pierre. You can read my earlier Q&As with Chuck Silverman here, and with Bill Connolly here.
Scott writes about Pretrial Services, which is a way to let low-risk defendants out on bail at a lower cost than using bail bondsmen, and Tarrant County is being pennywise but pound foolish by not using them. It's a followup to an earlier piece, and a question he raised then sparked a reporter from Fort Worth Weekly to do a little digging. Now that's synergy! And since this issue has to do with county jail populations, you know there's a connection to Harris County as well. Check it all out.
UPDATE: HTML booboo fixed. Thanks, Greg!
As we come down to the June 30 quarterly deadline for filing financial statements, you'll be seeing a lot of efforts by candidates and their advocates to make their totals look as good as possible. Vince is kicking off such an effort for Juan Garcia, who is running for a very winnable seat against a very undistinguished Craddick disciple (Gene Seamon) in HD32. Take a look, and if you can give Vince a hand as he gives a hand to Juan Garcia.
Following up on this story of students arrested in Round Rock for breaking a daytiem curfew law during a protest about immigration, a municipal court judge has dismissed more charges for lack of evidence.
Like two cases dismissed earlier this month, the recent actions were based on insufficient evidence to prove the students weren't exercising their First Amendment rights when they skipped school.A city ordinance that required the students to be in school provides an exception for exercising free speech rights, but prosecutors said they wanted to judge each case individually because they thought some students had skipped school for the fun of it.
Prosecutors are going ahead with one of the first six cases, but City Attorney Steve Sheets wouldn't discuss details. The trial is scheduled for July 7, he said.
About half of the 204 students cited for breaking curfew in the Austin suburb pleaded not guilty and requested jury trials. The citations are a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by a maximum $500 fine.
Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, which is representing 82 students, said last week that the dismissals show the students shouldn't have been cited in the first place.
Harrington questions why prosecutors don't just dismiss the remaining cases. He said any students who skipped school to goof off probably already have pleaded guilty and accepted a fine or community service.
"I think it makes the other kids hopeful," Harrington said of the dismissals. "But you know, this incremental thing kind of keeps people on edge until they get to the point where their case is dismissed. There's no reason to keep the rest of these kids in suspense."
Harrington's group is awaiting a hearing Thursday on a motion to dismiss all the cases based on the free-speech exception.
"The more they dismiss, the more they're recognizing this is the right thing to do," Harrington said.
The DA is determined to drag this out to the end. I suppose it's possible that some actual miscreants have not pled out yet and are now hoping to see their charges dismissed along with all of the First Amendment exercisers, but that seems like a small prize for the prosecution to be expending all these resources on. We'll see what happens at the trial on July 7.
There's a couple of public meetings coming up next week on the Universities light rail line:
Scoping Meeting
Date: Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Time: 4 - 7 p.m.
Location: Third Ward Multi-Service CenterAddress: 3611 Ennis
The meeting is being held in a wheelchair-accessible location. Any persons requiring translation or other special communication accommodations should contact METRO Community Outreach at 713-739-4018 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. Every reasonable effort will be made to accommodate these needs.
Meeting Two
Scoping MeetingTo accommodate a larger audience, we have relocated this scoping meeting from the San Jacinto Girl Scout Headquarters to the following location:
Date: Thursday, June 29, 2006
Time: 4 - 7 p.m.
New Location: Holiday Inn SelectAddress: 2712 Southwest Freeway
We apologize for any inconvenience this relocation may cause.
Please note that the June 27 meeting reamains as originally scheduled.
The meeting is being held in a wheelchair-accessible location. Any persons requiring translation or other special communication accommodations should contact METRO Community Outreach at 713-739-4018 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. Every reasonable effort will be made to accommodate these needs.
Here's how they define a scoping meeting, and here's what to expect at these events.
The Chet Edwards campaign is running a little fundraising drive for the end of the quarter called "Pass the Hat" for Chet. This was an expensive race in 2004, and with fewer takeover targets for the national and state GOP this year, it's sure to be another multimillion dollar affair. Edwards is in the 21st most Republican district in the US, and he's easily the holder of the most Republican district by a Democrat.
Edwards' opponent is a newcomer to the area and a millionaire in his own right. I've said before that I'm not as worried about Edwards as I thought I'd be at this time, but I could stand to be a little less worried. So check out "Pass the Hat" for Chet and toss in a few coins if you can.
First Astroworld, now, well, see for yourself.
Theme park owner Six Flags said it could sell or even close six of its 30 properties across North America, although the company's flagship operation in Arlington was not on the list.[...]
The six properties being examined for possible changes include Six Flags Darien Lake outside Buffalo, New York; Six Flags Waterworld in Concord, California; Six Flags Elitch Gardens in Denver; Wild Waves and Enchanted Village outside Seattle; Six Flags Splashtown in Houston; and Six Flags Magic Mountain and Hurricane Harbor near Los Angeles.
The company said it can't predict for certain whether any transactions will occur. It could sell the properties outright or dismantle the parks and sell the land for its real estate value.
Sorry about that, Splashtown fans. I figure the new Schlitterbahn park down in Galveston is doing them no favors. We'll see what happens. Thanks to Kimberly for the heads-up.
Some good reading on toll roads for the weekend:
1. Kimberly Reeves (of A Little Pollyanna) has a nice article in the AusChron about the fight over tolling and/or expanding the western stretch of US290 in Austin. One point to highlight:
With the deployment of regional mobility authorities, however, the agency has had to redirect itself, from the traditional pattern of securing the funds to enact its designs into poured concrete to one of working with communities to buy into the concept, and continuing funding, of toll roads. In terms of its plans for Oak Hill, the agency's estimated traffic counts indicate that US 290 West could see up to 157,000 cars per day by 2030, a figure more comparable with MoPac beneath US 183 than a peaceful Hill Country road. As is always the case with highways, it's never clear how much projected development drives the highway, or vice versa. Nevertheless, Fix290 wants to see if they can find a middle ground, between a redesigned area roadway and TxDOT's superimposed regional superhighway.Richardson says TxDOT's massive transportation goals are simply not compatible with the goals of the neighborhood plan: a better collector street system; a smarter placement of retail; the creation of infrastructure and transit that will increase the work-live density in the area as one of the city's prime residential nodes; and even the creation of an actual, walkable "downtown" Oak Hill. TxDOT's superhighway, which structurally mandates a high-speed thruway primarily serving outward-bound and commuter traffic, simply doesn't allow that.
More than a year ago, the city of Austin's Neighborhood Planning and Zoning Department pledged to make transportation planning a more integral part of the neighborhood-planning process. That included negotiations with transit agencies. City planner Adam Smith says the city has made some progress with neighborhood/transit planning - most specifically, with Capital Metro - but still has a long way to go when it comes to working with TxDOT. "We've had meetings with TxDOT, but what it really comes down to is trying to get the buy-in from these other agencies into our plans," Smith said. "We may address what our desires are for a particular corridor with them, but TxDOT is not always as receptive as we would like for them to be. That's a problem."
The one common theme in every fight over highway expansion - be it I-45, the Grand Parkway, or 290 West - is the conflict between the needs of the people who want to get from Point A to Point B faster and easier, and the people who live in between who don't want their neighborhoods destroyed for the convenience of others. As someone who's an in-betweener, my sympathies obviously lie with those folks, but I do recognize the value in making it easy to get around a major metropolitan area. My frustration is that I feel like the commuter group is often given a higher value than the affected homeowner group. I sincerely believe that if the people who live in the affected areas were given more of a voice in the process, it would make things go more smoothly, not more contentiously. I wish the Fix290 group much luck in having their voices heard.
2. Via Eye on Williamson, Fort Worth Mayor (and former State Senator) Mike Moncrief testifies about the Trans Texas Corridor.
Speaking for my fellow elected officials in North Texas, we applaud and welcome the Trans-Texas Corridor.However, we are opposed to TxDOT's vision for the North Texas portion, and we are disheartened by TxDOT's refusal to partner with local government.
[...]
TxDOT's proposal does not provide optimal truck flow through our region, which is the intended purpose of the Trans-Texas Corridor.
Seventy percent of trucks which pass through North Texas need to make at least one stop within the heart of D-FW and do business. The vast majority of the trucks will not take advantage of the bypass.
Thus, a complete bypass would do little to: One, increase the speed and efficiency of the flow of goods to the rest of the country; and, Two, decrease the amount of traffic and congestion in the D-FW region.
In fact, it may actually make traffic worse by adding stress on our East-West thoroughfares. Remember, under TxDOT's proposal, the vast majority of trucks are going to have to make a left and drive west into the D-FW Metroplex.
[...]
By far, however, the worst consequence of the TxDOT's approach to the TTC is their radical departure from the traditional partnership with the Legislature and with local government.
You just heard Commissioner Whitley describe the extent to which local government has attempted to express their concerns to no avail.
TxDOT's understanding of the new CDA [Comprehensive Development Agreement] approach to road building is that local branches of government and the Legislature are no longer part of the process.
According to the TxDOT view, once an agreement is made with a private partner, TxDOT and the provider alone are empowered to makes decisions concerning road alignments.
This is a staggering change from the way we have historically made these decisions.
He has more to say about sprawl, bad air, and other issues. Read the whole thing, it's worth it.
3. PGL at Angry Bear is still working the Indiana toll road selloff beat (see here and this explanation (PDF) of why separating the depreciation rights to public assets from control of them makes more sense than selling off control of those assets does. Check it out.
So according to this story, one of the motivating factors in the petition drive to force a vote on HPD's policy on checking immigration status is the meaning of the phrase "sanctuary city". I think the whole thing is a stunt being pushed by people who need something to do now that gay marriage can't be made any more illegal, but you can read the story and decide for yourself. I just want to note this:
Many localities don't have a written policy at all.That's the case in Katy, where police are forbidden from enforcing immigration laws but do not have a written policy to follow, according to Assistant Police Chief Bill Hastings. The policy was mandated by a court in 1994 after a federal lawsuit was filed when police picked up day laborers.
So. When will the petition drive to change the city charter of Katy begin? That's even more hands-off than Houston. Where's the outrage over that?
I was sent a statement by City Council member Carol Alvarado about this, which I've got beneath the fold. Click on for more.
What this petition drive is not is a serious attempt to address the issues surrounding illegal immigration. The city of Houston does not have a sanctuary policy, and our Houston Police Officers should not be used as political pawns.If the people behind this petition drive had sincere concerns about the impact of illegal immigration on our community, they would be reaching out to our Mayor, our Police Chief, our civic groups and our business community to discuss their concerns and share ideas. But that would be asking them to put the public interest above their self-interest, and I suspect it will not happen.
Tackling the issue of illegal immigration and its impact on our city takes hard work. Despite what you might hear on right-wing radio, turning our Houston Police Officers into de facto border patrol agents will not address it and, in fact, will distract those men and women from the important work of protecting all of us."
This petition drive should be rejected for the ugly stunt that it is.
I found this story about the voir dire for Andrea Yates retrial jury fascinating.
The seven women and eight men chosen for the new jury Thursday each had to agree they could set aside what they previously heard or learned about the case so they can give Yates a fair and impartial hearing."You'd have to be living in a cave not to have heard of this case," defense attorney Wendell Odom said outside the courthouse after the jury had been seated. "We've got a good mix of people - a diverse group with a lot of independent thinkers on it. And they're intelligent."
[...]
Attorneys asked the 120 panelists questions including their views of the insanity defense and their opinions of police officers and psychiatrists, as well as how they felt about not being able to assess Yates' punishment. A key difference for the new jury is that Yates automatically faces a life sentence if she is convicted of capital murder. The death penalty cannot be considered since jurors rejected that option in her last trial.
As we discussed before, the exclusion of the death penalty tends to make jury pools more amenable to the defense. Every jury is different, of course, and you never know what can happen. But it's a potential factor, so let's keep it in mind.
About one-fourth - 37 people - told [Judge Belinda] Hill they had already reached a conclusion on Yates' guilt or innocence because of pretrial publicity and suspected that would influence their verdict. Many of those on the panel openly discussed prejudices or viewpoints as attorneys tried to assess whether those would hinder their ability to be fair and impartial jurors."I just don't understand why a mother kills her babies when they're her blood," said one man, as Yates stared down at the table in front of her. "Maybe one - but five?"
"Mainly, it's that I don't understand - not why (it happened), but how could she?" a woman asked the attorneys.
Several panelists said they do not consider the insanity argument to be a credible and valid defense. One of them referred to it as a "defense of convenience." But others said they would consider any mother who killed her children to be insane, regardless of what evidence might be presented.
[...]
Defense attorneys said they found the jury panel's lively discussion refreshing.
"I can't remember a time when people discussed mental illness in voir dire," [defense attorney George] Parnham said. "Five years ago, we would've been laughed out of the courtroom."
I don't know if this will have any effect in the end on Yates, but it does look like the defense team is pretty optimistic going into the trial. We'll see.
I'm not at all surprised that Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman qualified for the ballot. Given the number of signatures they collected, the only question was how many of those sigs would be validated. What is a surprise is this:
In other races, former congressman Steve Stockman failed to qualify as an independent candidate for the 22nd Congressional District seat vacated by former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay of Sugar Land. Stockman turned in about 600 signatures but fewer than the 500 valid signatures that he needed, Haywood said.
I always knew Steve Stockman was an idiot, but good grief. Has he never heard the rule of thumb that you need twice as many sigs as the minimum to be reasonably sure of getting enough valid ones? And how hard is it to get five hundred signatures in five weeks? What a maroon.
So. Governor's race, complicated. CD22, simple. That's about it.
If you haven't done so already, please go to the Forward Together PAC Map Changers page and give your support to the straight Texan ticket. Right now, Chris Bell is #2, and rumor has it that John Courage is just outside the top five. We can do better than that, right? Please go vote to bring $25K to Texas. Thanks!
I'll be tied up with family business through the weekend, and will have limited time for any blog-related program activities. Fortunately, I have activated the Emergency Guest Blogger network, so there should be some new stuff here whether or not I can contribute on a given day. I'm sure as soon as I step away from the keyboard something big is going to happen (aren't we due for a SCOTUS ruling on the Texas redistricting lawsuit this week?), but c'est la vie. I'll be back at my usual pace on Monday. If I don't see you before then, have a good weekend.
Only perpetually booming Phoenix added more people than San Antonio and Fort Worth in the year ending in July 2005, according to the Census Bureau's annual city population estimates released Tuesday. However, the figures don't reflect the demographic chaos caused weeks later by the Gulf Coast hurricanes.San Antonio, which replaced San Diego as the seventh-largest city in the United States, and Fort Worth added about 21,000 people each, based on government estimates using housing statistics. Phoenix tacked nearly 44,500 people onto its tally.
[...]
"What is clearly a change is that San Antonio historically had been among the slower-growing of the major cities," said Steve Murdock, the state demographer based at the University of Texas at San Antonio. "It's become San Antonio's turn, so to speak."
When I was at Trinity in the 80s, San Antonio was the biggest sleepy little town I've ever been in. You could drive from the airport, which is just north of US281/Loop 410, the busiest interchange in the city, and see practically no development between there and the TU campus just north of downtown. It's definitely grown since then, and I'm glad to see it get a little positive attention for it. If I couldn't live in Houston, San Antonio would be high on my list of second choices.
A future stumbling block for San Antonio could be water. The area depends on the drought-sensitive Edwards Aquifer, and a recent engineering report prepared for the Texas Water Development Board indicates the area could lose 50,000 people by 2030 if water-supply needs go unmet."The San Antonio area is going to have to make some hard decisions, here and throughout the aquifer region," said Annalisa Peace, executive director of the Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance. "If we pave over the recharge zone, we'll reduce the amount of available water."
Peace supports stronger limits on how much "impervious cover" - typically concrete slabs or pavement - can be built onto land that acts as a rainwater sponge to replenish the underground lake.
The good news is that the citizens of San Antonio seem to take that responsibility seriously. They'll need to keep doing that.
The Red State has more.
I don't really have much to say about this ugly plan to turn the Houston Police into an arm of the INS. Let's put aside the question of why the movers behind this idea want to turn a federal problem into a local one. It's always splashier to go for the cheap political stunt than it is to ask why Texas's Senators and Congressfolk have been unable to provide sufficient funding for immigration enforcement in their home state, after all. And let's ignore the question of where HPD will get the manpower and funding to pick up these new responsibilities, since those are tacky questions. And of course, we can just let the issue of how HPD can tell a citizen or legal immigrant from an illegal immigrant slide on past, since that opens a can of worms no one really wants to deal with.
But we can't let this little exhibit of political fortitude slip away without comment. Here's City Council member turned Congressional hopeful Shelley Sekula-Gibbs explaining her support for the movement:
"This has gone on long enough," Sekula-Gibbs said. "It is time for Houston to stand up and assist the federal government in enforcing immigration laws."Sekula-Gibbs, who recently has tried to raise her profile on the border-security issue as she seeks to replace former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, told the Houston Chronicle in November that she didn't have a "strong opinion" on a similar measure posed by then-Councilman Mark Ellis. He tried to force a council vote on the issue when he was seeking a Republican state Senate nomination in a conservative district.
"It's a political stunt," she said then of Ellis' measure, which would have similarly changed the police policy but also required people to show proof of U.S. citizenship to get "taxpayer-provided social services."
Sekula-Gibbs said it would be impossible to verify someone's immigration status before, for example, putting out a fire. She said she also disapproved of Ellis' tactic of trying to force a council vote on a nonbinding resolution.
A charter referendum, by contrast, would be binding on city policy.
"The city's sanctuary policy was wrong then, and it's wrong now," Sekula-Gibbs said Tuesday. "What he was trying to do was just political posturing."
I hope you didn't get whiplash from that turnabout on her part. Note that last November, Sekula-Gibbs lacked the huevos to sign on to a similar stunt by Mark Ellis, even though she clearly agreed with the sentiment. Of course, back then she needed the support of the entire city of Houston, even though she was running against a no-name crackpot perennial candidate. Now that it's in her interest to whip up the nativists, and in particular now that she won't be in a position to have to account for HPD's financial and personnel needs when the bill for this travesty comes due, it's anything goes. I think if I stayed up all night thinking about it, I couldn't come up with a more fitting way to describe Sekula-Gibbs' tenure on City Council. So congratulations, Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. You really did yourself proud.
Here's my nominee for Quote Of The Year, Unexpected Source division.
Despite her protestations now, Bell said, Strayhorn once advocated privatizing the children's Medicaid-eligibility system and changing rules for the Children's Health Insurance Program, changes at least partly blamed for thousands of children losing health coverage.Strayhorn announced last month that she would investigate the state's $899 million contract with Accenture LLP, the company hired to screen applicants for children's health insurance and other welfare programs.
Accenture has been criticized by legislators and health care advocates for inadequate staffing and training at private call centers.
Strayhorn called the Accenture contract a "perfect storm of wasted tax dollars" and blamed Perry, who appointed the health and human services commissioner, for the problem.
Strayhorn's spokesman, Mark Sanders, said Tuesday that the health insurance privatization approved by the Legislature and the Health and Human Services Commission was much broader than the comptroller had recommended as a cost-cutting measure in 2003.
"That's sort of like an arsonist offering to help put out the fire that he started," Bell responded. "I mean, this was part of her recommendation, and obviously she wants to run from it now."
Former state Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth of Burleson, who sponsored the health and human services reorganization in 2003, said Strayhorn's office was "very helpful" in getting the legislation passed.
"In a way, she was the grandma of House Bill 2292," the reorganization act, said Wohlgemuth, who backs Perry.
(Emphasis mine.) Arlene Wohlgemuth, ladies and gentlemen. Be sure to check yourself for stiletto wounds after you shake hands with her.
Oh, and I'd totally accept "Carole Keeton 'Grandma of House Bill 2292' Strayhorn" as a compromise solution to how she should be listed on the ballot. I'm just saying.
From the "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" files, we have a new contender for the GOP nomination for Harris County Treasurer: Former Harris County Treasurer Don Sumners.
"It's going to be a fight, but I'm up to it," said Sumners, who filed paperwork Tuesday indicating his intent to seek the position."Commissioners Court has robbed the office of its functions. Now they say it's not needed."
[...]
Sumners, who held the office for one term and fended off an effort to abolish the position , lost to Cato in the 1998 GOP primary. He now works as the director of quality assurance for Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt.
[...]
Sumners promoted his candidacy in a letter Tuesday to Republican precinct chairs, declaring "war on those who want to abolish the office."
As the taxpayers' only independent voice on financial matters, the treasurer is in the unique position to provide a second opinion about the county's financial health, he wrote.
Commissioners who want to get rid of the office fear accountability and transparency, he charged.
"Jack, although a congenial person, did exactly what he was put into office to do, nothing," Sumner wrote.
Commissioner Steve Radack, a staunch supporter of Cato, dismissed Sumners.
"This is the same Don Sumners the voters turned out of office after four years," Radack said. "The problem with Mr. Sumners is he can say it, but he just can't sell it."
Sumners admits he doesn't have any visible support.
"I have myself. That's all I've ever had," he said.
True enough. For example, he doesn't have the support of Gary Polland, who's firmly in the Orlandomania camp. You'll note, however, that nowhere in that mash note does Polland ever make the case for why we need a Treasurer's office, nor does he connect any of Orlando Sanchez's past glories to any purported function of the Treasurer's office. Apparently, the principle of smaller government is less important than the principle of rewarding your buddies. Not that this surprises me, mind you.
Interestingly enough, in the exchange between Sumners and Radack, Sumners got it right. In the seven-plus years that he was County Treasurer, Jack Cato did exactly nothing in his official capacity that was notable enough to make the newspaper. I've now extended that archive search to all years, and there's just nothing. Try it yourself and see what I mean. Maybe Sumners, and for that matter Orlando Sanchez, are correct in saying that the Treasurer is supposed to be a watchdog/advocate of some kind. If so, then my question to them would be what did Jack Cato's non-advocacy cost Harris County during his tenure? If you can't identify anything that we missed by not having an activist Treasurer, then tell me again why we need a Treasurer.
By the way, here's a blast from the past for you from that extended archive search:
Incumbent Don Sumners told a gathering of about 50 downtown Republicans that he sees his role as a "taxpayer watchdog," fighting against tax increases and unnecessary county spending.But Sumner's opponent, former television reporter Jack Cato, said the treasurer has no say in the county's property-tax rates and said Sumners spends too much time working on issues unrelated to the office.
Sumners and Cato appeared before the Downtown Pachyderm Club trying to drum up support before the March 10 primary. About half the crowd appeared solidly in one camp or the other, and several in the gathering took the opportunity to question their candidate's opponent.
Much of the discussion focused on Sumners' rocky relationship with other county officials. While Sumners said those problems were the result of his opposition to several high-profile county issues in the past several years, Cato painted him as a county gadfly of sorts, "spending all your time `speaking out,' and not doing the job you're supposed to do."
Sumners' relationship with other county officials - most notably County Commissioner Steve Radack - is considerably less than friendly. Sumners irritated Radack in 1996 by criticizing an unexpected property-tax increase Radack proposed.
"It's no secret that Steve Radack has been after me for a long time. And it really got going when he brought out the sneak tax increase," Sumners said. He said Radack had been looking for someone to run against him and, turning toward Cato, he said: "And I think he found one."
Nice to see that Sumners and Radack have not kissed and made up.
Look, I don't care if county officials get along or not, and I certainly don't object to someone pissing off the Commissioners' Court. But if the Treasurer's office has no actual power to provide a check and balance on what the Commissioners can do, then I ask again why we need to pay for such an office. Let Sumners and Orlando Sanchez do their watchdog thing on their own dime. It'll have as much effect, and it'll save the taxpayers a couple hundred grand a year in salary, benefits, and overhead.
I was sent the following from Capitol Inside, which I pass along for your enlightenment:
Republicans reaped the lion's share of headlines but Democrats raised the most cash for Texas House and Senate campaigns during the special session on schools and taxes this spring.With about two-thirds of the special session fundraising reports posted by the Texas Ethics Commission late Friday, eight of the 10 Texas House candidates who raised the most money during the spring gathering are Democrats. Nine of the 10 candidates who reported the most contributions during the special session are challenging incumbents or running for open seats. Only one - State Rep. Yvonne Gonzalez Toureilles - is a current House member.
Toureilles - an Alice Democrat who's being targeted by Republicans in her quest for a third House term - reported contributions of almost $46,000 during the special session that got under way in April and ended 29 days later in May. Toureilles, who represents one out of 150 state House districts, raised one-eighth as much during the special session as Republican Governor Rick Perry did for a statewide re-election race. Toureilles' two biggest donations came from attorneys who represent plaintiffs in civil lawsuits - $10,000 from the Texas Trial Lawyers Association and $10,000 from Houston litigator Michael Gallagher.
I discussed Toureilles here, as her seat is one of only a few that the Republicans are targeting this year.
The rest of the article is beneath the fold. Be sure to read the bit about how Ellen Cohen did in comparison to Martha Wong.
With contributions of more than $36,000, Democratic challenger Ellen Cohen of Houston was the second most successful fundraiser among House candidates while legislators were meeting in special session. Cohen, who's a fundraiser by trade as the chief executive officer of the non-profit Houston Area Women's Center, will use the money that she raised during the special session for a fall race against Republican State Rep. Martha Wong, who reported special session donations of $900. While Wong's special session report paled in comparison to Cohen's, the incumbent is a proven fundraiser as well and will be expected to have a well-stocked war chest for one of the hottest House races on the general election card this year.Texas House hopeful Juan Garcia, who's taking on Republican State Rep. Gene Seaman of Corpus Christi in another one of the most competitive battles for the Legislature in 2006, reported the heftiest bottom-line total on his special session report with overall contributions of more than $71,000. But almost $60,000 of that amount came courtesy of an in-kind contribution from Los Angeles film producer Richard Salazar, who produced a videography for Garcia and designed his campaign web site. The two were good friends at Harvard University where Garcia attended law school before beginning a career as an aviator in the Navy.
Republican Jim Murphy of Houston raised more during the special session than any of the other GOP candidates whose reports have been made public this week. Murphy - a Houston Community College board member who manages a major commercial development district - received almost $27,000 in contributions in his bid for an open state House seat while lawmakers were in session this spring. Murphy reported the largest single contribution made to a House candidate during the special session with a $20,000 from Houston home builder Bob Perry.
Murphy's opponent - Democrat Kristi Thibaut - was eighth on the special session fundraising list with contributions of more than $14,000 during that time. Thibaut and Murphy are battling for the seat that Republican State Rep. Joe Nixon decided to give up in order to run for the state Senate.
Thibaut is one of four House candidates who received $5,000 contributions from the national women's group Annie's List while the Texas Legislature was meeting this spring. Democratic contenders Harriet Miller of Dallas, Paula Hightower-Pierson of Arlington and Valinda Bolton of Austin had the fifth, seventh and ninth most successful special session fundraising efforts respectively with the help they received from Annie's List. Miller, who's dueling Republican State Rep. Tony Goolsby in a rematch of their battle two years ago, reported contributions of almost $16,000 during the special session. Hightower-Pierson, a former city council member who's challenging Republican State Rep. Toby Goodman, received donations of more than $14,500 during the special session while Bolton reported about $13,800 in contributions during the same time frame.
Bolton is running against Austin developer Bill Welch for a state House seat that outgoing Republican State Rep. Terry Keel has represented for the past 10 years. Welch was 15th on the special session fundraising list with contributions of slightly more than $10,000.
Republican George Antuna of San Antonio ranked 10th in special session donations after taking in more than $13,000 for a race for a seat that Democratic State Rep. Carlos Uresti decided to give up so he could run for the state Senate instead. While Antuna reported the second highest amount for a Republican, his Democratic opponent, former Harlandale school trustee Joe Farias, was sixth overall with contributions of more than $15,000 while the Legislature was meeting this spring.
Antuna was one of several Republican contenders who received $3,000 contributions from the Associated Republicans of Texas. ART gave that amount to House hopefuls Larry Durrett of Jacksonville, Jim Landtroop of Planview and Tom Kleinschmidt of Lexington while the special session was under way. Durrett and Kleinschmidt are gunning for incumbent Democratic State Reps. Chuck Hopson and Robby Cook respectively while Landtroop duels Democrat Joe Heflin for the West Texas seat that former House Speaker Pete Laney isn't seeking again in 2006.
Some of the largest donations given to candidates during the special session included $10,000 that Republican Brandon Creighton of Conroe picked up from James Leininger's Future of Texas Alliance PAC and $10,000 contributions that the TTLA made to both Toureilles and Farias. TTLA's donation to Farias was used to pay consultant James Aldrete's retainer. Cohen accepted a $10,000 contribution from retired Houston resident Sara Morgan.
Anna has a long post about the Texas Democratic Party charging candidates for access to its voter database file. I'm not as convinced as she that this is a bad thing, and I don't think the prices they ask are excessive, but I do agree that the way they've gone about implementing this new policy is not good. I also agree that on the heels of the generally positive convention in Fort Worth, a better approach might have been to solicit support from the TDP membership to cover the costs of this service so they could keep it free for candidates. Finally, if it really is the case that data from the 2005 Constitutional amendment referendum and the 2006 primary are not available in the database, then whoever made the decision not to include them needs to be removed from oversight of this data. There's no excuse for that.
Anyway. Read what she says and see what you think.
UPDATE: From Phillip in the comments:
Charles -- don't know if you want to make an update or not, but the 2005 Constitutional amendment referendum and the 2006 primary data are in the voter file for over 80% of the counties, including all the ones that submit that information electronically. The TDP is constantly updating the other information (which is submitted in hard copies). Just an FYI.
Good to hear. Thanks, Phillip!
One less dumb idea for me to worry about.
Rejecting the temptation of a multibillion windfall, Harris County Commissioners Court voted unanimously today to continue running the county's lucrative toll road system rather than selling or leasing it to a private entity."Now we can erect a sign on the toll roads: 'Not for sale, not for lease,'" said Commissioner Steve Radack, who had never been enthusiastic about the idea, even as the county conducted studies of the leasing and selling options.
The action means the system, which comprises the Hardy, Sam Houston and Westpark toll roads, will continue to be operated by the Harris County Toll Road Authority.
You'll never hear me say this again, so write down today's date: Thank goodness for the HCTRA. I just hope they didn't spend too much money studying this lemon.
I've mentioned the Mapchangers competition before. They're on to Round Two, in which you can select up to five candidates from the East and West regions for the $5000 contribution from Forward Together PAC and a chance to have a fundraiser with Gov. Mark Warner. Five's perfect, because there are five Texans in the round:
The Straight Ticket Texan lineup:
TX GOV - Chris Bell
TX SEN - Barbara Ann Radnofsky
TX CD 10 - Ted Ankrum
TX CD 21 - John Courage
TX CD 31 - Mary Beth Harrell
As you can see from the published ballots, the Texas Five are doing pretty well. (Not all ballots are published - I chose not to publish mine.) This one's the easy choice - the hard one will be who to pick if more than one Texas Democrat makes it to the Top Ten. I say that's a good problem to have, though, so go do what you can to get them there.
The first trial connected to the Jack Abramoff scandals has ended with a conviction.
Former White House official David Safavian was convicted of hiding his aid to lobbyist Jack Abramoff and obstructing an inquiry into their trip to Scotland, in the first trial stemming from an influence-peddling probe.A federal jury in Washington today found Safavian, 38, guilty of three counts of making false statements and one count of obstructing justice. He was acquitted of another obstruction charge. Each count carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Safavian plans to appeal.
The verdict is a victory for the Justice Department's strategy of relying on e-mail messages between Abramoff and Safavian to prove guilt. Without calling Abramoff to the witness stand, prosecutors Peter Zeidenberg and Nathaniel Edmonds painted Safavian as a public servant led astray by lavish gifts.
"The e-mails certainly played a very large, maybe more important, role than they should have in this case,'' Safavian's attorney, Barbara Van Gelder, told reporters outside the federal courthouse after the verdict. "Mr. Abramoff loomed large, and his absence loomed larger than his presence.''
[...]"Abramoff is at the heart of this thing,'' said Greg Wallance, a former federal prosecutor and now a lawyer at the New York firm Kaye Scholer. Safavian "is one of the spokes,'' he said prior to the verdict.
Where might those spokes lead?
The Safavian case stems from an August 2002 trip Abramoff arranged for a group to visit Scotland's famed St. Andrews golf course. Abramoff added on three nights in London, where guests stayed in $500-a-night rooms at the Mandarin Oriental hotel.Abramoff chartered a private jet at a cost of more than $91,000 for the nine-person outing. Besides Abramoff, his son, two fellow lobbyists and Safavian, the group included Christian activist Ralph Reed, Ohio Republican Representative Bob Ney and two Ney aides, Will Heaton and Paul Vinovich.
Ralph Reed and Bob Ney. Couldn't happen to a finer pair. Enjoy reading the papers today, fellas.
Safavian's attorney is upset about an aspect of this case, which I don't quite understand.
Van Gelder had fought the introduction of hundreds of e- mails into evidence, arguing that Abramoff should appear on the witness stand to show whether they were valid. The decision by U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman to allow the e-mails into evidence without any testimony by Abramoff will play a role in the fight to overturn the verdict, she said.
Why is this even an issue? You don't need Jack Abramoff to establish that emails were sent from his account to David Safavian. Is Van Gelder saying that unless Abramoff testifies that he himself really did write those emails, we can't be sure that he did? Yes, it's possible someone could hijack his account, but c'mon. And did Safavian testify that he didn't receive these emails, or that they couldn't have come from Abramoff? If not, why not? I'm confused.
At the time, Safavian served as chief of staff at the U.S. General Services Administration, which oversees government land. Before the trip, he sent an e-mail to a GSA ethics official asking how he should treat the offer from Abramoff of a free ride on the jet. He told the ethics official that Abramoff "has no business before GSA.''Prosecutors said that statement was untrue because Safavian and Abramoff had discussed how to acquire rights to GSA properties in a series of e-mails shown to the jury. Safavian said his statement was true because Abramoff, who worked for Greenberg Traurig LLP, didn't have any GSA contracts or bids and wasn't likely to have any.
"It's the e-mail that has given the Justice Department its cases,'' Melanie Sloan, a former federal prosecutor, said before the verdict. "E-mail really is around forever.''
Yes, it is. Ask Ollie North, who was tripped up in part by backup tapes of the ancient mainframe system PROFs. I'll bet those tapes still exist somewhere, too.
I still don't understand why Van Gelder insisted that Abramoff had to testify about the emails. I just don't see the relevance. Any lawyers want to address this?
Elsewhere, TPMuckrakers Paul Kiel and Justin Rood report on the trial, while the Hotline Blog gives us this interesting side effect:
A small marvel of the enormous media attention played to the Abramoff/Cunningham corruption scandals is the degree to which local newspapers -- especially those serving communities represented by members of Congress on district-flattering committees -- are strengthening their investigative coverage and have adopted a come-hell-or-high-water fearlessness about challenging pillars of their community.The latest example: The Press-Enterprise in Riverside, California.
It joins the San Bernadino Sun in creating a special section of its website to deal with Reps. Ken Calvert and Jerry Lewis.
All to the good, if you ask me. If only some of the bigger papers would show such initiative.
We may know as soon as Wednesday if the Texas Secretary of State has validated the petition signatures of Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman, thus giving them each a slot on the November gubernatorial ballot.
Spokesman Scott Haywood said Monday that Secretary of State Roger Williams, Texas' chief elections officer, was in the final stages of checking the validity of petition signatures that Strayhorn and Friedman submitted last month."Hopefully, that will be completed by Wednesday," he said.
Each needs the signatures of 45,540 registered voters who didn't cast ballots in either major party primary or runoff.
Strayhorn submitted more than 220,000 signatures and Friedman turned in about 169,000. Both campaigns admitted some signatures probably would be struck during the verification process but contended they had more than enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.
"We turned in five times the number of signatures that were required. So we're very confident," Strayhorn spokesman Mark Sanders said.
If certified, Friedman and Strayhorn will join Democrat Chris Bell and Libertarian James Werner in challenging Republican Gov. Rick Perry's re-election.
Haywood said the secretary of state's office also was checking the validity of petition signatures submitted by the Green Party for a statewide ballot spot. That party has to meet the same requirements as the independent candidates.
I will be utterly flabbergasted if either Strayhorn or Friedman fails to make the ballot. I always assumed they would, and I have a hard time imagining that they'd fall short after the number of signatures they turned in.
Not mentioned in this story is the status of Steve Stockman, the independent hopeful in CD22. I presume that the SOS will have something to say about that as well. I still think it's ridiculous to have taken the same amount of time to verify 500 signatures as it did 45,000, but whatever.
Speaking of baloney:
Also pending is Strayhorn's attempt to use the nickname "Grandma," which she has used in political advertising, on the ballot.Haywood said Williams also may decide that issue this week.
If Haywood and Williams can manage to keep straight faces when they announce that decision, I'll be impressed.
Best comment on the process goes to the Pink Lady.
A spokesman for Secretary of State Roger Williams, the chief elections officer, said that they are in the final stages of validating the petition signatures submitted last month. "Hopefully, that will be completed by Wednesday," he said. "But we're still trying to determine how many of Strayhorn's signatures came from her ex-husbands."
Zing!
I know y'all don't come here for weather reports, but I've got to say "Enough already!"
Houston escaped the heaviest rains overnight, but forecasters warned this morning that the ingredients for violent thunderstorms remained in the area.Shortly before 5 a.m. some major rain-producing storms formed along a line just east of Houston, from Clear Lake to downtown, over the same area where Monday morning's storms were the worst.
"For Eastern Houston that's not a good thing at all," said Patrick Blood, a forecaster at the Houston Galveston office of the National Weather Service.
The good news, Blood said, is that the storms appear to be moving and not stalling over a single area to provide significant localized flooding.
Prior to these storms, eastern Houston received only a tenth of an inch overnight. The heaviest rains in Harris County fell to the north, where Kingwood received about 2 inches. The Woodlands received about 1 inch of rain.
Forecasters still believe the storms could produce significant rainfall in the Houston area this morning, but downgraded their expectations from isolated totals of up to 10 inches to 3 to 4 inches. About 1 inch should fall over the area between now and noon, Blood said. A flash flood warning remains in effect for Harris County until 7 a.m.
Cripes. And to think we were worried about drought conditions earlier this year. (Some parts of Texas still are.)
At least one good thing has come out of all this.
It was hardly a dry run, but Monday's heavy rain gave local emergency officials practice in a real and dangerous weather event — though one less widespread and destructive than a hurricane.At the Houston Emergency Center, for example, officials recorded 38 percent more emergency calls than typical for a Monday morning, many of them from motorists stranded by high water.
The center, which dispatches the city's police, fire and emergency medical service, took about 7,500 calls from midnight to 2 p.m., up by almost 2,100 over an average Monday volume for that time period.
HEC spokesman Joe Laud said the center handled the increased volume, which spiked around 7 a.m., even though some employees couldn't get to the North Shepherd facility for the morning shift change.
The situation, and the improvisation it required, should help the center's workers keep a cool head later, he said.
"There are lessons learned," he said. "We see situations like this as helping us in the future."
He added, "It was stressful, but the personnel did a great job."
Kudos to them all. May today be more restful. And may no one utter the words Tropical Storm Allison again any time soon.
A couple of Democratic State Reps are out there on the op-ed pages making the case that what happened in the Lege this past spring did not represent success in dealing with school finance. First, Rep. Lon Burnam chides the Star Telegram for its cheerleading.
The Star-Telegram Editorial Board seems to have lowered its standards for what it considers "good work" from the Legislature. Merely succeeding in passing legislation does not mean we succeeded in passing good legislation that works in the interest of the people.The board's kind treatment of the Republican leadership is the equivalent of "social promotion" in schools. If a student simply shows up and puts in minimum effort, he or she gets passed on to the next grade, regardless of merit. There is little merit in the legislation produced last month in Austin.
The Republican leadership basically succeeded in saddling the state with indefinite annual budget shortfalls. According to the Legislative Budget Board (of which the lieutenant governor and Texas House speaker are members), the tax plan will lose about $5 billion per year.
Miraculous tax cuts are not difficult to achieve if you take the money from future budgets. The money raised from tax increases on business, smokers and used-car sales does not come anywhere close to paying for the property tax cuts that Gov. Rick Perry promoted.
Five billion dollars is no small amount. It represents 15 percent of annual expenditures from state revenue.
This hijacking of the state government almost guarantees that Texas will face a $10 billion shortfall for the '08-'09 biennium, precipitating a budget crisis similar to that of three years ago.
And over in Amarillo, Rep. Jim Dunnam sounds a similar theme.
How do you define success?Is it enough that the Legislature passed bills that will keep public schools open for one more year? Or should the Legislature have taken the opportunity to craft a truly long-term solution for our broken public school finance system?
Since the end of the last special session of the Texas Legislature, Gov. Rick Perry and several other Republican politicians have in one way or another claimed success.
For example, Perry is now running TV commercials claiming that the average Texas homeowner will receive a $2,000 cut on his or her property taxes.
But anyone even remotely familiar with our state's property tax system knows that this claim is utterly ridiculous.
Unlike the governor, I believe that, sadly, the latest special session achieved little beyond getting us out of court temporarily. Unlike the governor, I'm not running TV commercials that make false claims in order to sell a lemon to the people of Texas. Unlike the governor, I don't define success as just doing something - I define it as doing the right thing.
Governor Perry's been rewarded with an approval bounce from SurveyUSA, so whatever the truthiness of his ads, they have probably done what he hoped they would do. I wonder, though, if people begin to use property tax calculators and come to realize that they ain't getting a $2K cut no matter how you slice it if some of that bounce will flatten out. We'll see.
Those of you who live, work, and/or commute along the US290 corridor, I hope you've been paying attention to the Katy Freeway construction, because you'll be experiencing it soon.
Proposed improvements to U.S. 290 and Hempstead Road will affect a long swath of properties along the roadways, according to a study by Mark Sikes, a principal with Lewis Realty Advisors.The real estate appraiser and consultant said the proposal will affect some 700 parcels, as the Texas Department of Transportation acquires additional right of way to expand the roads.
"It's going to be just like I-10," said Sikes, referring to the businesses and landowners that were displaced because of the expansion.
Sikes, who helps owners negotiate fair values for their properties, said the expansion primarily will affect commercial parcels.
The Houston District of the Transportation Department, along with the Federal Highway Administration and the Harris County Toll Road Authority, are moving forward with a long-range plan to reconstruct the U.S. 290 corridor from the 610 Loop to FM 2920. Property along Hempstead Road will also be affected, as a tollway or HOV lane is planned.
Still, the reconstruction project is many years off.
The department said the land acquisition won't begin until around 2008, according to the latest newsletter posted on its Web site.
The thing is, much of what is currently on 290 is new. When I worked out at 290 and Hollister in the early 90s, there really wasn't much in the way of development along that freeway. Once you got past 34th Street, there was a lot of empty space. Really made for slim pickings at lunch, let me tell you. With all the new development that's there now, I have to wonder just how expensive that land acquisition is going to get.
Now, if Hempstead is more or less as it was 15 years ago, and the bulk of the construction is there, then it won't be as bad. There was even less on Hempstead, and I don't think that's changed as drastically. Can't say for sure, as it's been awhile since I've taken that road, but if that's the main target then maybe this project won't cost a godawful amount. We'll see.
On a side note, let me offer my congratulations to Chron writer Nancy Sarnoff on her new job. I too will miss her Sunday real estate column - I got quite a bit of blog fodder out of it. And thanks to Houstonist for the link.
Greg notes that the twenty-day period in which Governor Perry has to call an emergency special election to fill a Congressional vacancy is ticking away with no indication that one will be called. He wonders if there may be some extra risk associated with that position now that there's a lawsuit that could slow down the replacement selection process. Be sure to read through the comments on that post - my thanks to Greg and Ken for the fine discussion.
Speaking of the lawsuit, Federal Judge Sam Sparks has set a hearing date of Monday, June 26.
Judge Sam Sparks left in place a temporary restraining order that expires Thursday, though he did not extend it. Sparks is expected to hear evidence and lawyers' arguments at the hearing.Democrats went to court earlier this month to prevent the state Republican Party from replacing DeLay on the ballot. A state district judge blocked the process with the temporary order. Attorneys for the Republicans then had the case moved to federal court.
Though Republicans plan to initiate steps to fill the GOP vacancy on the ballot once the temporary order expires, the process wouldn't be complete by the time of the court hearing, said GOP lawyer Jim Bopp.
I guess that's good news for the Republicans, since at least they can get started. I'm not sure what it means for the suit itself. I've put a statement from the Texas Democratic Party beneath the fold.
Meanwhile, here is what DeLay has been doing with his free time. Perhaps someone should have bought him a US Atlas as a going-away present. The candidate he shilled for lost, by the way.
[Yesterday], Federal Judge Sam Sparks set a hearing date for June 26, 2006, to hear arguments in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing regarding the pending lawsuit filed by the Texas Democratic Party to prevent the Republican Party of Texas from improperly replacing Tom DeLay on the ballot. Judge Sparks refused to quash the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) issued in State Court against the Republican Party of Texas, meaning the TRO remains in effect through June 22, 2006. This TRO prevents the Republican Party of Texas from finalizing the back door deal they made with Tom DeLay to allow his replacement on the ballot to be hand picked by a handful of party officials after a sham primary.
"Today's ruling advances our important effort to end the political sham set up by Tom DeLay and the Republican Party of Texas," said Texas Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie. "Whether this petition is heard in State Court or Federal Court, the merits of this petition remain the same. The Republican Party cannot conclusively establish from any record, either today, tomorrow, or in October, that Tom DeLay will not be an inhabitant of Texas on Election Day," Richie added.
Under the U. S. Constitution, eligibility for Congress is established when a person is determined to be an inhabitant of the state on Election Day, not by state residency requirements. When Tom DeLay filed for office, he swore that he would be an inhabitant of Texas on Election Day. The Republican Party of Texas cannot prove from any public record that Tom DeLay will not be an inhabitant of Texas on Election Day.
"The Texas Democratic Party is acting to protect the voting rights of all Texans. If Tom DeLay and the Republicans are successful, they will have established a precedent allowing Party leaders to arbitrarily swap out candidates whenever their nominee looks like a loser," said Richie. "As a matter of principle, we cannot allow Tom DeLay to fake a primary campaign and trample on our electoral process any longer."
Want to ask a Texas Democratic Congressperson a question? Here's your chance.
We invite you to join us on Wednesday, June 21st at 3pm EDT for the inaugural Regional Online Town Hall Meeting for Region 6 to discuss issues of concern to you. Participating Members of Region 6 serve districts in the state of Texas.We welcome your questions and will try to address your concerns on whatever topics you may wish to discuss, including rising gas prices, college affordability, Social Security increasing health care costs and keeping our nation safe. Please note that your questions will be directed the Member of Congress in Region 6 who represents your area. You may submit your questions in advance by clicking here or join in live by visiting this site from 3pm to 4pm EDT on June 21st. A full transcript of the Online Town Hall Meeting will be available on this website at the conclusion of the meeting.
We look forward to hearing from you, and hope you will join us for the discussion on June 21st.
I'll have to wait for the transcript, since this is not a convenient time for me. If it works for you, by all means jump in and ask something. If you do attend, please let me know how it goes.
I've got a look at the state of the Libertarian Party in Texas over at Kuff's World. Check it out.
The Chron gives an overview of the new school tax along with a calculator to help you determine what your rate might be this year and next. Emphasis on "might", for this is how they disclaim it:
Remember that this only applies to school taxes. Taxes for counties, cities and other entities aren't affected by the new law.It will figure your homestead exemption and show what your taxes would have been this year without the tax break, what they will be this year with the tax break, and what they should be next year when the break goes into full effect.
The calculator provides links to appraisal districts in Harris and adjacent counties, where you can find your home's assessed value if you don't know it.
The calculator won't determine bills for taxpayers with senior-citizen or disability exemptions. Their bills are frozen when they claim the exemption, and generally won't be affected by the new tax rates.
The Web calculator provides estimates, not guaranteed tax bills. There are four things that could change your bill:
- The new tax law reduces only the portion of school property taxes devoted to school maintenance and operations. Most districts also have a smaller tax devoted to debt service. If your school district changes its debt structure or floats new bonds, that rate could change.
- The new law reduces your maintenance and operations taxes by 11.3 percent on your next tax bill, and by one-third on the one that comes the following year. For many typical districts, that means a tax of $1.50 per $100 assessed value will be reduced to $1.
But the law also allows school boards to raise the tax rate back up by 4 cents without asking voter permission. We've included the 4 cents, because the law effectively encourages districts to raise it.
That's because revenue from the 4 cents won't be subject to the "Robin Hood" rule that requires property-rich districts to share some of their revenue with property-poor ones. In turn, property-poor districts will receive state matching funds for revenue from the additional 4 cents, said Harrison Keller, director of research for House Speaker Tom Craddick.
- A small number of districts with booming real estate markets might have to reduce their property tax by a few cents because of a "rollback" provision that even the law's authors have a hard time explaining. Essentially districts can't collect too much more money next year than this year, but it is a generous and complicated formula.
- The biggest variable is "appraisal creep," in which the taxable value of your homestead rises along with the market value of homes in your neighborhood. Assuming you're not protesting your appraisal, this year's figure is already set, but a rising value could affect the calculation for next year.
If you think your appraisal is going up, the calculator can still help. Enter your current appraisal, hit "calculate" and write down the figures shown. Then guess how much your appraisal might go up. Multiply your appraised value by 1.01 for 1 percent, 1.05 for 5 percent and 1.10 for 10 percent. Then enter the new figure and click "calculate" again, looking only at the new "next year" figure.
I'd argue that there's a fifth factor in play as well, which is how the Lege ultimately reacts to the need to feed the tax-cut beast. Governor Perry's budget cut mandate to state agencies only goes so far to cover the big honking shortfall that HB3 saddled us with. There's only so much more that can be cut back, so we're back to the old familiar argument: Roll this cut back, or find something new to tax. How much savings will you net if the sales tax gets hiked? Past history suggests the answer for most people is "very little, if at all". Of course, what effect there may be here is very much an unknown. I just think it needs to be a part of the conversation, because it's definitely out there.
On the other hand, the call for appraisal caps is being sounded again. By all rights, were it not for the sheer incompetence of State Rep. Dwayne Bohac, this would have passed in 2005. It's probably got as good a chance in 2007, assuming they find a sponsor who can walk and chew gum at the same time. I have serious problems with putting yet another constriction on tax revenues, especially when it's the state dictating to localities, but I'll be surprised if this doesn't happen in the next session.
Finally, I note in passing that Comptroller Strayhorn put out her own tax calculator last week, this one for the new business tax. Naturally, Governor Perry attacked it as being biased, but then he'd say the same thing if she hung a thermometer outside her office and reported the temperature on an hourly basis. Make of it what you will.
Jury selection for the Andrea Yates trial 2.0 begins tomorrow.
The first half of a 120-person panel will begin answering questionnaires intended to help attorneys gauge who can fairly and impartially decide whether Yates knew right from wrong when she killed her children in their Clear Lake-area home.The remaining panelists will go through the process Wednesday, with jury selection to begin the following day. The trial, which is expected to last about a month, will begin June 26.
[...]
Yates has once again pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. Perhaps the biggest difference this time is that jurors will not be able to consider the death penalty if they convict her, since she was sentenced to life in prison in her first trial.
As a result, this jury will be chosen much more quickly than the first. And Yates could benefit by ending up with a more liberal jury, since death-penalty opponents will not automatically be excluded, one consultant said.
"That's going to change the dynamics of the jury pool pretty dramatically," said Houston jury consultant Ellen Finlay. "All those people who might be more moderate jurors and more concerned with her mental issues are not likely to be disqualified this time, which could mean a better jury panel for her."
The passage of time since the drownings likely will help Yates, another consultant said.
"It may be she's convicted again by another jury, even though the shock has worn off. But I think the public will be much more understanding if she is not convicted than they would have been in the first trial," said Dr. Richard Waites, a board-certified trial lawyer and chief trial psychologist for The Advocates, a jury consultant service.
Not having a so-called "death-qualified jury" is indeed a big deal, as it makes Yates more likely to be acquitted on insanity grounds. No guarantees, of course, but if Vegas were running a line you'd get shorter odds on the defense this time around.
I'm not sure if the passage of time will matter all that much. I do think the prediction that an acquittal will stir less outrage now is accurate, though.
The new trial - again in the court of state District Judge Belinda Hill - will follow a course similar to that of the first one, attorneys predict. Many of the same witnesses are expected to testify, and much of the same evidence will be presented.However, there could be some new elements. One is the addition of Dr. Michael Welner, the state's new mental health expert, who evaluated Yates during a two-day period last month at Rusk State Hospital, where she has been confined while awaiting her new trial.
Welner, a well-known forensic psychiatrist at the New York University School of Medicine, is founder and chairman of The Forensic Panel, which touts itself as the country's first peer-reviewed forensic practice. Prosecutors said they have not yet received his findings.
And then, there is Yates' mail. Prosecutors have obtained copies of more than 200 letters she wrote while in custody, but they have not revealed the contents. The letters could be introduced as new evidence.
There's still a motion by the defense to preclude Dr. Welner's testimony. I tend to think the state will prevail on that, but it's still an open issue. As for the letters, who knows? I feel pretty confident in saying that whatever they say, there will be more than one way to interpret them.
Prosecutors also have a statement from a former cellmate who stepped forward last year to report what she said was Yates' chilling account of the drownings during a conversation in 2002.Felicia Doe, 28, of Alvin, who has been subpoenaed to testify, said Yates described locking the doors of her home before the drownings so nobody could get inside or out.
This strikes me as a high-risk gambit by the DA. If Ms. Doe is a credible witness, this could be very damaging to the defense. If not, the prosecution will look bad, even vindictive. No way to know until she takes the stand. It all begins next week, so stay tuned.
Continuing with my program of Q&As with local judicial candidates, today I bring you Chuck Silverman:
1. Who are you and what are you running for?I am Chuck Silverman, a 46 year old native Texan and I'm running for judge of the 189th Civil District Court in Harris County, Texas. I have enjoyed practicing civil litigation as an attorney at law in Harris County for over 19 years. I have been married to my wife, Liz for 19 years and we have 3 children - a 14 year old son, an 11 year old daughter, and a 3 year old son. Also included in our family are cats, a dog, frogs, and fish.
2. What kind of cases does this court hear?This court tries civil actions where the amount in controversy exceeds $200.
3. What are your qualifications for this job?After receiving my B.A., M.B.A. and law degree from Tulane University I began my legal career in Houston, Texas in 1986. I have actively represented litigants in federal and state trial and appellate courts since then. In addition to my litigation practice, I represent clients in administrative hearings and alternative dispute resolution forums throughout Texas. As a result of my practice I have a solid understanding of the rules of civil procedure and evidence and I have extensive knowledge of judicial practices and procedures.
Based on my experience I am of the opinion that a judge must be an effective administrator and a fair-minded decision maker. I am confident that I can be both. I have a solid understanding of the rules of civil procedure and evidence and will be able to effectively conduct judicial hearings and trials. Also, I am an effective manager. Throughout my career, I have had managerial responsibilities. Early on, I was responsible for managing other attorneys, paralegals and staff. I understand and have a firm grasp of management and the responsibility associated with supervisory positions. I am confident that I can competently and efficiently manage court personnel and an active docket.
4. Why do you believe you would do a better job than the incumbent?My hard work ethic, calm demeanor, impartiality, courtroom experience and knowledge of the law make me a superior candidate. In the 5 years preceding my opponent's appointment to the bench he represented just nine (9) parties in Harris County district court. On the other hand, in the last 5 years, I have represented parties in over fifty-five (55) Harris County district court cases. Additionally, I have a good judicial temperament, would be fair to lawyers and litigants and have a good depth of legal knowledge. Finally, if elected, I will be the only Democrat on the civil court bench. In such position, I will be able to foster judicial independence and will bring a sense of fairness and impartiality to the bench. I will not be influenced by personal interest or relationships or external political pressures.
5. Why is this race one we should care about?The 189th Civil District Court has been dominated by the Republican Party since 1992. In fact, a Democrat has not been elected to a Harris County civil district court bench for over 16 years. I believe there is an inherent problem with a one party court system. Because judges should be nonpartisan, it is important that the legal system be well-balanced and provide the foundation for the civil liberties and freedoms enjoyed by the citizens of our state and country. It should be free from the influence of money and special interests. Unfortunately, our legal system has become a target for those who fear its independence. These attacks have weakened our legal system and have resulted in the loss of civil liberties and the encroachment of government into our homes and personal lives. It is time to elect judges who are neither subservient nor willing to pander to politicians or special interests at the expense of the citizens. As a judge, I will work hard to be apolitical and protect and preserve the rights and civil liberties guaranteed to everyone by the United States and Texas Constitutions.
6. What else do we need to know?I am an avid outdoorsman and enjoy camping, hunting and fishing. As a youth growing up in Corpus Christi, Texas I was involved in numerous activities, including the Boy Scouts and achieved the rank of Eagle Scout. At Tulane University, while working towards my degrees, I participated in school activities, including serving as vice-president of the student government. I also took part in all things New Orleans - music, food, and fun - and even married a Louisianan. We still enjoy eating crawfish, oysters, and gumbo. Currently, I am an assistant scoutmaster for Troop 993 in Houston, I participate in neighborhood committees, and I take a very active interest in my children's schools and activities. During my spare time, you can usually find me in the company of my wife and kids, reading a good book, following the stock market, or taking a walk outside.
Thank you, Chuck Silverman. You can also read my previous Q&A with Bill Connolly here.
(Note: This is the correct URL for the 189th District Court, but none of the District Court links are working as I type this. I presume it will be fixed at some point.)
Following up on the Angry Bear has some economic analysis of the recent Indiana deal. It's a little heavy, but worth wading through. Check it out.
I've been remiss in not mentioning the entertaining blog Don't Get Stapled before now. It's written by a pseudonymous supporter of Democratic candidate for Agriculture Commissioner Hank Gilbert, whom I interviewed at the convention. You know how some candidates just have charisma, and if it were the case that everyone who planned to vote had a chance to see or hear them, they'd win a high percentage of the time? Hank Gilbert is one of those candidates. Don't take my word for it - See for yourself.
I'm pleased to see, by the way, that the 2006 State GOP platform urges the repeal of the Trans-Texas Corridor (Word doc). Guess which candidate for Ag Commish supports the TTC and which one opposes it? Yeah.
Anyway. Don't Get Stapled. Check it out, and Hank Gilbert, too.
I love this story about Star Trek fans filling the TV void with their own productions.
From these Virginia woods to the Scottish Highlands, Star Trek fans are filling the void left in a galaxy that has lost Star Trek. For the first time in nearly two decades, television spin-offs from the original 1960s Star Trek series have ended, so fans are banding together to make their own episodes.Fan films have been around for years, particularly those related to the Star Wars movies. But now they can be downloaded from the Web, and modern computer-graphics technology has lent them surprising special effects. And as long as no one is profiting from the work, Paramount, which owns the rights to Star Trek, has been tolerant. (Its executives declined to comment.)
As you might imagine, I approve of this hands-off approach by Paramount. It seems to me they have little to lose, and as long as new Trek content is being created, the fan base is being maintained. And who knows? One of these hobbyists could hit one out of the park, and thus create enough demand for another official show to be produced.
"The fans are saying, 'Look, if we can't get what we want on television, the technology is out there for us to do it ourselves,'" said Sieber, a 40-year-old engineer for a government contractor who likens his Star Trek project, at www.starshipfarragut.com, to "online community theater."And viewers are responding. One series, at www.newvoyages.com, and based in Ticonderoga, N.Y., boasts of 30 million downloads. It has become so popular that Walter Koenig, the actor who played Chekov in the original Star Trek, is guest-starring in an episode, and George Takei, who played Sulu, is slated to shoot another one later this year. D.C. Fontana, a writer from the original Star Trek series, has written a script.
Make fun of these folks if you want, but that's pretty impressive. I may have to check one of them out. It can't be any cheesier than a Trek novel or comic book, right? (Yes, I've bought and read each. Go ahead, make fun of me, too.)
Just one quibble:
For many Trekkies, contemporary science fiction on television - such as Battlestar Galactica and the more recent Star Trek spin-offs - are too dark."Modern science fiction takes itself too seriously," said Jimm Johnson, 37, who presides over Starship Exeter.
John Broughton Jr., who founded the Farragut project, agreed.
"One thing about the classic Star Trek is at the end of the episode, it was pretty much a happy ending," he said. "It was sort of like The Brady Bunch. It was all tidied up."
Dude. Brady Bunch comparisons are never flattering. I thought the darkness and longer story arcs of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine made it the best of the lot. Your mileage may certainly vary, but please. Ixnay on the Brady Bunch references, okay?
The Chron throws a little love to the GOP precinct chairs of CD22 as they gear up to select a replacement for Tom DeLay.
"We've been discovered," said Harris County precinct chair Kathy Haigler. "We are the lowest level of public officials that exist. We are the last ones on the ballot. But we are the first ones candidates call for an endorsement."[...]
A four-member committee representing each of the counties in the district will select the nominee to replace DeLay on the November ballot. And precinct chairs in the district will name the committee from among their ranks, so they're getting lots of attention from more than half a dozen candidates who covet the spot on the ballot.
Besides selecting the November nominee who may well succeed DeLay in the U.S. House, Harris County GOP precinct chairs also will nominate a candidate to replace County Treasurer Jack Cato, who died May 22.
[...]
"Good precinct chairs know the primary voting history and identification of registered voters for each home in their district," said Harris County Republican Party Chair Jared Woodfill.
"They are the building blocks of the party. It's the secret to having a successful grass-roots organization," he said.
The job has become less secret because of the battle to succeed DeLay. "These elections have put the precinct chairs in the limelight," Woodfill said.
Woodfill is seizing the opportunity as a recruiting tool. In Harris County, about 40 percent of the precinct chair posts are vacant.
Woodfill has the ambitious goal of bringing the proportion of occupied GOP precinct chairs to 90 percent.
I'm sure this kind of publicity can only help that effort. I mean, wow.
That nasty old lawsuit wasn't discussed in this story. There are some pretty good comments about it in that post. As with the selection process itself, that puts us in some uncharted waters. I'd love to see some more written about this. The politics are obvious enough, but the merits - heck, the questions themselves - are less so. Consider this, which hasn't gotten a whole lot of play (besides Greg).
No matter what court hears the case, the issue is DeLay's eligibility, Democrats said.Democrats are calling the former Majority Leader’s move to Virginia "a sham."
"The merits of this case are still there, no matter what court," said Hector Nieto, deputy communications director for Texas Democrats. "The fact is we cannot say for certain Tom DeLay is a Virginia resident.
"He was still voting as a Texas congressman in Congress even though he had registered to and voted in Virginia."
On DeLay's last day in office, he showed off a sticker that indicated he had voted absentee in the Virginia Republican primary.
A few hours later, he cast his last vote as a congressman as a representative from Texas. DeLay contends his move to Virginia did not prevent him from serving in Congress but did make him ineligible to be on the November ballot for another term in office.
Where do you even begin with that? I'd really like to see more written about this, but a Google news search on "DeLay lawsuit" comes up nearly dry. I just don't know what to make of that.
And of course, there's another issue that isn't touched on in this story:
Haigler, who is seeking to represent Harris County on the selection committee, predicted that the Harris and Fort Bend county representatives will back candidates from their home counties, which could make the other two county representatives the swing votes. "Galveston and Brazoria have no dog in the hunt," she said.
The hell they don't. This is not an election, where those two counties would represent about 20% of the voters in CD22. This is a committee-of-four selection. Galveston and Brazoria represent half of that committee. They have exactly as much clout as Harris and Fort Bend, though they weren't a part of this story. If a hopeful could win the support of both of these committee members, he or she would be Chosen One. It's as simple as that. (Even winning one might be enough.) There's a rumor going around that this has already happened. I can only wonder what Kathy Haigler would say to that.
Our appeal for ActBlue was successful - thanks to everyone who donated, ActBlue will be activated for Texas state races. You'll be hearing much more about this in the coming weeks. I'm pleased to see that Dallas Blog picked up on this. Kudos to them for being plugged into what the Texas netroots are doing.
In the meantime, BOR wants to know "what types or mix of candidates or 'requirements' would you propose for candidates to be on" the upcoming TexRoots page? What qualities should a candidate have to not just be supported but be advocated by bloggers for their readers? I'd also like to know any feedback you may have on this. Thanks very much.
Following up on the earlier report about the air quality situation in Houston, City Council Member Carol Alvarado, a native of the most-affected area, writes an op-ed in the Chron that gives a call to action.
The state Legislature meets again in 2007. It is then that we must devise a regional approach to this problem, encompassing both market-based solutions and ironclad clean air standards backed up by firm regulatory powers.Furthermore, as the summer wears on, candidates for elected office in Texas will be visiting Houston asking for your vote in November. It is incumbent upon every Houstonian to insist that each candidate for office this fall also commit to taking action on this problem to whatever degree the office they seek permits. Whether you live in the East End or Clear Lake, Kingwood or Meyerland, you should ask them what they are going to do about this issue if they are elected. If they say, "I'm going to study it some more," they don't deserve your support.
The facts are indisputable and more than sufficient to demand a firm commitment to action. Houston's air is full of deadly toxins. The health effects are enormous and the social costs are clear. The financial burden is also significant, and each and every one of us is required to foot the bill.
Even if you live in a part of town that is the least affected by these toxins, understand that the most affected areas are also home to people least likely to be able to afford health insurance. Therefore, they don't go to the doctor when they sense health problems because they simply can't. When the problem becomes chronic and severe, they go to the emergency room, and the doctor bill is sent to the taxpayer.
In addition, dirty air and the attendant publicity about it make our region less attractive to new investment. The fact is, this limits our economic potential.
What else can I say besides "I agree"?
Those of you who use Harris County's toll road system on a regular basis, read this and think about the implications.
The Harris County toll road system could be sold for as much as $20 billion, but only if the county were willing to cede control over toll increases to a private company.There is "a direct correlation between the rate at which the tolls would be permitted to increase and the value the county would realize from the sale," the county's office of management services said in a report.
How much are you willing to pay for that trip on the Sam Houston or Westpark toll roads? More to the point, how much do you think the Harris County Toll Road Authority thinks you're willing to pay? If they're serious about going through with this boneheaded idea, you'd better hope they guess correctly.
The county would be more likely to net $5 billion to $12 billion after paying off bonds, concluded JP Morgan and Popular Securities in a study commissioned by the county.
I'm going to ask a question that I asked before when this madness first surfaced: What in the world does Harris County need all that cash for? What could they possibly do with it?
OK, I know that Harris County would not get a lump sum up front for the toll roads, but would instead get paid over time. The thing is, sooner or later those payments would end, meaning that the county would eventually lose a steady source of income, as well as the option of ending the tolls for an asset that's been fully amortized. I realize that all this may happen many years from now when we're all dead, but unless you think Harris County will cease to be a functioning entity, or you think we'll all finally have those flying cars we were promised in 2000, then how is this a responsible thing for the HCTRA to do? Remember, the only way this kind of deal makes sense for the buyer is if they think they'll get more money back than they pay. So please, someone tell me: In what way does the county benefit from that?
At its annual capital improvements meeting Tuesday, the Commissioners Court will consider whether the toll road system, whose annual revenues have increased steadily, should be sold, leased or continue to be operated by the Harris County Toll Road Authority.If the county opts for selling or leasing, the court is not expected to make a specific decision for months. It could authorize a more detailed study.
And once again I ask: Do we, the taxpayers of Harris County, get any say in this? As in, do we get to vote on it? If not, why not?
JP Morgan and Popular Securities advised Commissioners Court to determine how much control it needs to exercise over the system before deciding whether it should sell the system to the highest bidder.The study noted that motorists likely would turn to the county with complaints about tolls or other issues, no matter who owned the system.
The county wants "to avoid having a successful sale and a failed public policy," the JP Morgan and Popular Securities report said.
Damn right. And if the Commissioners' Court wants a peek at their future, consider this.
The decision to hand the Indiana Toll Road to an Australian and Spanish team for $3.8 billion at the end of this month has blown up into one of the biggest brawls here in a generation. It has unsettled the state's politics in the months before the November elections, pitting a governor who was President Bush's first budget director against the people of northern Indiana, which the highway passes through.
Max Sawicky calls this what it really is:
When a government takes a lump sum in exchange for permitting a private firm to manage a road and levy tolls, it is not only privatizing. It is borrowing, worsening its fiscal position. Most states are looking at growing budget shortfalls in the future, as Medicaid costs in particular continue to grow more rapidly than their revenues.The Gov could just as easily contract out operations and management, but keep the tolls for itself. The fact that the money is earmarked to new projects -- investment -- is irrelevant. It's still borrowing. You could just as easily keep the roads and float a bond -- also borrowing -- for the new projects. The leasing is not necessary. The political onus against explicit borrowing can warp decisions.
Yes. The question is what are they borrowing all this money for? The example of Indiana in that WaPo article at least makes a decent case why a government might consider doing this. We have no idea at this point what Harris County has in mind. Why is that?
There's more heavy-duty economics on this at Angry Bear. I really don't think I can overstate how bad an idea I think this is. I just hope that someone - anyone - expresses skepticism at Tuesday's Commissioners' Court meeting.
The lawsuit filed by the Texas Democratic Party to block the Republican Party of Texas from replacing Tom DeLay on the November ballot in CD22 has been moved to federal court.
State Republicans filed papers Thursday to move from state to federal court a lawsuit filed last week by the Texas Democratic Party. The Democrats sued to block Republicans from picking a replacement for former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay on the ballot for the 22nd Congressional District.[...]
A temporary restraining order set last week by a state district judge remains in effect until midnight Thursday. Lawyers for the Democrats are expected to seek an extension of that order before U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks next week.All of the elected state district judges in Travis County are Democrats. Sparks was appointed by former President George H.W. Bush.
"If Democrat plaintiff trial lawyers want to raise federal issues under the U.S. Constitution, they cannot then seek to have them decided in the liberal state court of their choice," said GOP Chairwoman Tina Benkiser.
[...]
Attorney Chad Dunn of Houston, who represents the Democratic Party, said he is confident that Democrats can win their legal case "in any jurisdiction."
Dunn said the Texas Election Code prohibits a candidate from withdrawing from a ballot after being elected in the primary. Although DeLay has registered to vote in Virginia, he remains active in the Houston area and his wife still lives in Sugar Land, Dunn said.
Jim Bopp, an Indiana attorney who represents the Republican Party, said DeLay has bought a condo, registered to vote and gotten a driver's license in Virginia.
He said Democrats have raised federal claims that are appropriate for the federal courts.
"They want the court to determine the inhabitant issue, and that's a federal claim. They want the court to say that the chairman of the Republican Party cannot declare DeLay ineligible because the (U.S.) Constitution prevents that," said Bopp.
I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure how valid that point is. It sounds reasonable enough, for what it's worth. I don't think the judges' partisan backgrounds will make or would have made any difference. Mark has some legal analysis of all this, as does Greg, who explains why he believes this is about expediency rather than partisan makeup.
What wasn't clear to me from this story was where the papers were filed and who made the ruling on removal. Mark says that Judge Sparks was the one who did that. Fort Bend Now fills in another blank in an earlier story.
On Thursday, Margaret Wilson of Austin's Potts & Reilly law firm filed a notice of removal, seeking to have the case moved to U.S. District Court in the Western District of Texas."In response to the frivolous lawsuit filed last week by Democrats regarding the Texas Congressional District 22 race, the Republican Party of Texas has removed the case to federal court," the state GOP said in a prepared statement Thursday evening.
[...]
Chad Dunn of Houston's Riddle & Brazil law firm, who is handling the case for the Texas Democratic Party, said a hearing on the issue has been scheduled for Thursday before U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks.
In the meantime, a temporary restraining order granted by Travis County District Judge Darlene Byrne still is in effect. The order prevents Benkiser from calling a meeting of the so-called District Executive Committee or taking other measures to replace DeLay as the Republican Party nominee for CD-22.
So the RPT is still enjoined from taking official action to replace DeLay on the ballot. I'd guess the temporary restraining order will be extended beyond the current June 22 deadline. What happens after that, I have no idea. Stay tuned.
There's a nice profile of State Rep. Garnet Coleman in the Progressive States Network. Coleman's one of the real good guys, so it's always a pleasure to see him get a little attention. Check it out.
I just finished setting up my mother-in-law with her DSL connection. She's already marvelling at how much it beats the pants off of dialup. In the vernacular, this makes me a Good Boy. I'm taking the rest of the day off.
(And before anyone asks: Windows Update - set for Automatic; McAfee Virus Scan - up to date and set up for automatic update checking; Microsoft Defender - installed and configured. Did I miss anything?)
Nick Lampson writes a letter to Fort Bend Now.
Congress should be ashamed of giving itself a raise at a time when our nation faces the largest debt and deficits in its history.Our country is facing a real mess with skyrocketing deficits, wasteful spending, an over-committed military and unsecured border. But instead of working to fix the mess it has created, Congress is busy patting itself on the back with a pay raise. This is just plain wrong.
Members of Congress voted Tuesday to give themselves a $3,300-per-year pay raise despite the federal government’s record debt and deficits. With a debt of more than $9 trillion (more than $30,000 for every man, woman, and child in America) and a deficit of around $350 billion, there is a lot of talk in Washington about cutting waste. But talk is cheap. A $3,300 pay raise for 435 members of Congress is waste.
While members of Congress apparently believe they are doing a great job, they think much less of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. In 2003, they voted against a $1,500 bonus for our troops in combat even as they went ahead with their own pay raise.
Every year, members of Congress continue to give themselves raises even as they short-change our troops, education, and health care and even as they run up the highest deficits and debt in history. It must stop.
While in Congress, I routinely voted for efforts to remove Congressional pay raises from the budget.
Texas has some 70,000 National Guard and Reserve troops. Many of them have taken huge pay cuts to go abroad and serve their country. It is unbelievable that members of Congress, who already make a nice salary, refuse to make a small sacrifice for their country. It shows a lack of commitment to getting this country back on track.
Well said. Link via Bay Area Houston.
Hey, we may have found a use for the Astrodome:
The world's largest indoor amusement park is coming to the Astrodome next week. With Astroworld gone the Astrodome is picking up the slack for summer fun.[...]
Jerry Murphy says he expects to get 28 to 35 rides inside the dome. Work begins tomorrow and will be complete just before opening day. This is not Murphy's the first indoor amusement park.
"We've done it in the Superdome in New Orleans for about 20-years and it's been very successful. People have been able to come in out of the hot weather when it's 90-100 degrees out, come and it's cool and nice and they can ride all day long, and another thing we can give them a cheap ticket, you know, like 20-dollars for the whole day."
Hey, sounds pretty good to me. Alas, it's only temporary - from June 22 to July 4. If you've got any nostalgia at all for the Dome and/or Astroworld, I'd say you ought to consider checking it out. Link via Houstonist.
I've wondered before if the anti-rail-on-Richmond forces were going to put their money where their mouths are and file suit to force Metro to adhere to what they claim was clear ballot language that indicated the line would be built on Westpark. Now I see that KTRH is reporting such a suit may be in the works.
This week, attorney Andy Taylor asked Metro for copies of a study which may prove the transit authority initially intended to build the line down Westpark, then changed plans. A coalition that opposes Richmond rail believes that a 2003 referendum approved by voters calls for the line to be built on Westpark.
Andy Taylor! The man does get around. I'm not sure how the existence of such a study (if there was one) might affect whether or not the eventual ballot language stated or implied something that is not now being executed, but hey, that's not my job. I can't wait to see what clever theories Taylor comes up with this time. Thanks to blogHouston for the link.
(Note: The following letter was signed by all members of the Texas Progressive Alliance and sent to the TDP office yesterday. We're also posting it publicly to ensure that the good work done by Amber and Hector is properly lauded.)
Amber Moon, Communications Director
Hector Nieto, Deputy Communications Director
Texas Democratic Party
707 Rio Grande Street
Austin, Texas 78701Dear Amber and Hector:
Over the past few months, you have done tremendous work to bring the Texas Democratic Party and the surging Texas netroots community together.
Specifically, we want to commend you for the accommodations you provided at the recently completed Texas Democratic Party Convention in Fort Worth. From the front row seating to free wi-fi access, you gave us tremendous access to an excellent convention. Most importantly, you treated us with the same respect you gave the traditional media.
The Texas blogging community may be an unconventional bunch. We don't write for major dailies, and we can't guarantee thousand dollar checks. We do, however, work tirelessly -- as volunteers, as activists, as organizers, and as bloggers -- to fight for the candidates and the people of our Texas Democratic Party.
Thanks, again, for all the work you did helping make the 2006 TDP convention a success, and we are eager to continue working together to help move Texas forward.
Sincerely,
The Texas Progressive Democratic Webloggers
Click the More link to see a list of signers. Or click here to read the letter in Spanish.
A Capitol Blog
Rep. Aaron Pena
http://www.acapitolblog.blogspot.com
The Agonist
Sean-Paul Kelley
http://www.agonist.org/
Annatopia
Anna
http://www.annatopia.com
Brains and Eggs
Perry Dorrell
http://brainsandeggs.blogspot.com
Burnt Orange Report
Karl-Thomas Musselman, et. all
http://www.burntorangereport.com
Capitol Annex
Vince Leibowitz
http://capitolannex.com
Common Sense
Nathan Nance
http://www.commonsensetx.com
Dos Centavos
Stace Medellin
http://dos-centavos.blogspot.com
Eye on Williamson County
wcnews and dembones
http://www.eyeonwilliamson.org
Greg's Opinion
Greg Wythe
http://www.gregsopinion.com
Jobsanger
Shannon & Ted McLaughlin
http://jobsanger.blogspot.com
Just Another Blog
Matt Glazer
http://justanothermatt.blogspot.com
Marc's Miscellany
Marc Gault
http://marcsmiscellany.blogspot.com/
McBlogger
Trey McAtee
http://www.mcblogger.com
Musings
Martha Griffin
http://muse-musings.blogspot.com
Off the Kuff
Charles Kuffner
http://www.offthekuff.com/mt
The Red State
M. Eddie Rodriguez
http://theredstate.typepad.com
Texas Kos
http://texaskos.com
CC: Boyd Richie, Chairman, Texas Democratic Party
Ruben Hernandez, Executive Director, Texas Democratic Party
As many of you know, ActBlue is the federal clearinghouse for donations to Democratic candidates, having channeled over $5.5 million to Dem contenders so far. But did you know, that with your help, you can activate it for Texas... for statewide, state house, and state senate candidates?
Together, Texas bloggers have agreed to help activate ActBlue for our state's non-federal candidates by asking our readers to put us over the top. Normally, ActBlue asks each state to raise $10,000 before moving forward (Texas being at $4,500 so far). But we've got some good news for you from the people at ActBlue.
However, in doing some more preliminary research Texas turns out to be similar to some other states we've already done -- so if we could break $5000 we'd be ready to move ahead with it. Would the texroots be able to help us out with the remaining $1000 by the end of the month?As far as timeline, my aim would be to have everything ready to go as early in July as we can.
So we ask: Will you, the TexRoots get us over the $5,000 mark and activate ActBlue for all our state non-federal candidates? Do it here - donate today!
This is the most important thing you can do for the Hank Gilberts, Kristi Thibauts, and Goodwille Pierres of Texas as we move forward in unity to support our TexRoots candidates to be announced in the coming months by the Texas blogosphere.
(You'll see posts like this elsewhere on the Texas progressive today. We're all in this together. Please help if you can. Thanks very much.)
We're still a few weeks away from seeing the second quarter financial reports for campaigns, but there's some good news for Chris Bell in the fundraising numbers from the special session.
According to records filed Wednesday with the Texas Ethics Commission, Bell collected $333,212, more than the $307,534 reported by Strayhorn and the $149,132 by Friedman.Bell's donations between April 17 and May 15, the period covered by Wednesday's filing, came close to the $375,021 collected by Republican Gov. Rick Perry.
Let's not kid ourselves - Bell still trails far behind in cash on hand to both Perry and Strayhorn. But this is encouraging no matter how you look at it.
But the report also showed that $100,000, nearly a third of the new money, came solely from Houston oilman A. Earl Swift, who died of colon cancer May 30.Bell's report also showed $56,900 of in-kind contributions, most of it from Ricardo Wietz of Houston, who let Bell use his plane. Another $8,225 came in the form of donated gemstones the campaign plans to auction.
In-kind contributions are reported the same as cash.
Bell spokesman Jason Stanford said those donations should not discount the money raised.
"We have to play well in all phases of the game," he said.
"Part of that is getting those six-figure checks and getting the big guys on board," Stanford said. "Around here, every single $10 check is cause for celebration."
That "but" is irritating me. The fact that a chunk of Bell's money for the month in question came from one big donation is a good thing. Remember all the stories from before about how traditional big-dollar Dem donors have been cozying up to Strayhorn? That fueled a perception about this race that redounded to Strayhorn's benefit. If that trend is reversing, it's a boon for Bell. And c'mon - how much of Rick Perry's money comes from small donors? Let's be consistent here.
Now again, I don't expect Bell to come close to Perry's culumative totals, or Strayhorn's for that matter. Getting to the same order of magnitude, and getting ahead of Friedman, both of which would help keep words like "underfunded" from getting attached to Bell's name in campaign stories, that's what he needs to do. If the narrative after July 1 is "Bell's fundraising surges ahead of Strayhorn's and Friedman's, keeps pace with Rick Perry's", so much the better. This is a good start; we'll see if the finish is there as well.
The defense team for Andrea Yates, in conjunction with a passel of mental health advocates, is challenging the qualifications of a prosecution expert for the upcoming retrial.
Yates' attorneys are challenging the qualifications of the state's expert witnesses, including Dr. Michael Welner, a New York forensic psychiatrist who evaluated Yates during a two-day period last month at Rusk State Hospital.The issue is pending before state District Judge Belinda Hill, who will preside over Yates' new capital murder trial, scheduled to begin June 26.
[...]
The advocates who filed Wednesday's motion say that Yates clearly suffered from "severe postpartum psychosis" when she drowned her five children in a bathtub at the family's Clear Lake home on June 20, 2001.
But postpartum psychosis is an illness that is unfamiliar to many forensic mental health experts, the advocates said.
They argue that the integrity of the verdict is at stake, depending on which experts are allowed to testify in Yates' trial.
"Knowledge of the current research is required to ensure that the jury receives necessary information about postpartum psychosis and how it affected Mrs. Yates," the motion states. " ... The lack of expertise in the relevant mental health area presents the peril of misleading the jury."
The parties joining the motion included National Advocates for Pregnant Women, the Postpartum Resource Center of New York, Postpartum Support International and Texas Mental Health Consumers.
I have a lot of sympathy for the Yates team. Her illness is far less common, and far more pernicious, than postpartum depression. That needs to be clearly understood in order to judge her fairly. If they can make a reasonable case that any of these particular witnesses don't have an expert's level of knowledge about postpartum psychosis, then I think the judge ought to take a hard line on who gets to testify.
Having said that, I don't know what the case law is here. It seems to me that it's appropriate for the prosecution to question assumptions about Andrea Yates' condition - if they concede this particular diagnosis, it puts them in a tougher position, since in doing so they'd be admitting there's something unique and unusual about Yates. While I think Judge Hill should be reasonably strict about defining what expert status is in this case for the prosecution's witnesses, I also think she should give them some latitude in demonstrating what their bone fides are. If this all sounds a bit self-contradictory, it's another way of saying that I don't envy her the decision. I'll be very interested to see how she sorts it all out.
It's been a busy week for suing the state of Texas.
Edd Hendee, executive director of Citizens Lowering Our Unfair Taxes, sued Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Speaker Tom Craddick, Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn and the Legislative Budget Board."The limitations in the constitution need to be defended against Republican leadership that has fallen intoxicatingly into this habit of spending more money than the constitution allows," said Hendee, a restaurant owner and a KSEV radio talk-show host.
He is asking the court to enforce a provision approved by Texas voters in 1978. The section states that the growth in appropriations shall not exceed the growth in the state's economy.
The lawsuit, filed in Travis County state district court, alleges the Legislative Budget Board has used artificially robust estimates of economic growth to justify high spending limits. The board, made up of Dewhurst, Craddick and other legislative leaders, develops recommendations for state agency appropriations.
Hendee wants a judge to declare the recently passed school finance appropriations unconstitutional. The Legislature spent nearly half of the state's $8.2 billion surplus to cover initial property tax cuts, a teacher pay raise and new high school spending.
You never know. Maybe they'll find one of those legislating-from-the-bench activist judges I keep hearing so much about and get a favorable ruling. In the meantime, anything that sows a little division among Republicans is all right in my book.
Speaking of which, where there's division among Republicans, there's opportunity for Carole Keeton "Call me Grandma, please!" Strayhorn.
Strayhorn, the Republican comptroller who opted to run as an independent against Perry, said she welcomed the lawsuit, agreeing that state spending is out of control."During the last six years, the state budget has increased $44 billion. That is 44.75 percent during the last six years," said Strayhorn.
Now, I know that Strayhorn has been for and against all kinds of things this campaign season, some of which were things she was against and for in years past. I don't have the time to do a thorough search, but I do know that Strayhorn has been more than willing to push for various kinds of spending increases when it suits her purposes - teacher pay raises, for instance. But today's story calls for her to put on her Fiscal Conservative/Belt Tightening cap, so she's there with a quote to fit the occasion. It's what she does, and she's good at it.
(By the way, I might have had a better idea about what actual issues Strayhorn cares about if her pathetically uninformative website had an Issues page on it. I know people from that campaign have read this blog in the past - if any of you are out there reading this now, please do something about that. It's embarrassing.)
Anyway. You can read the lawsuit here. Thanks to Dallas Blog for the link.
Fewer drivers are getting parking tickets in Houston, but those that do are much more likely to end up paying them.
The city has issued about 170,000 parking tickets so far this fiscal year, which runs through June 30, down nearly a third from the same period four years ago, according to the Parking Department. But this year through February, the most recent statistics available, 86 percent of those tickets were paid, compared with 62 percent in 2003.Fewer tickets have been dismissed because better-trained parking enforcement officers now make fewer technical errors, said Liliana Rambo, assistant director of parking management.
"We're doing a better job at what we do. We're training officers better," Rambo said. "We're being more accurate."
The most dramatic annual decrease in tickets - 25 percent this year over last - can be attributed at least partly to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Rambo said.
Whatever the reason, this is how you want it to be. Tickets that get dismissed, especially those that were issued in error, are a waste of resources for the city and a pain in the neck for the poor saps who got them. If the city is being more efficient in who they ticket, good for them.
Since I can never resist numbers, I'll do a little crunching. The print version of this story had a chart that said there were 243,094 parking tickets issued in Fiscal Year 2003, and 169,330 for FY 2006. Sixty-two percent, or about 150,718 tickets were paid off for FY03, while 86 percent, or 145,624 tickets were paid off for FY06. Nearly as many paid tickets, nearly 70,000 fewer tossed ones. Nicely done.
Via Houston Dems, the Texas Civil Rights Project has filed a lawsuit to seek an injunction to force the use of paper ballots in Texas. From their press release:
Voters, civil rights groups and a statewide candidate filed a petition Wednesday to prevent the State of Texas from using unreliable electronic voting machines in the November elections.Travis County voter Sonia Santana, the NAACP of Austin, its president, Nelson Linder, also a Travis County voter, and David Van Os, a candidate for attorney general, filed a petition asking the court to enjoin the county from using voting machines that do not produce a paper ballot. The Texas Civil Rights Project represents the plaintiffs.
"Voters deserve the assurance their voices will be heard," said Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project. "By using machines that provide no permanent record, the state is failing in its constitutional duty to provide the people with an election in which they can trust the results."
[...]
The petition charges that the use of these machines is a violation of three of the plaintiffs' rights guaranteed under the Texas Constitution and the Texas Election Code:
The right to a secure election, since the machines are all-too-often open to failure, mistake, tampering and fraud.
The right to a recount, since there is no way for voters to verify whether the votes were properly recorded, stored, tabulated or printed..
The right to equal protection under the law, since Travis County voters are forced to use a voting system that is less reliable than systems available to other Texas voters.
"The state has chosen to protect one of our most fundamental rights, the right to participate in our government, with a system rife with failure and vulnerable to fraud," Harrington said.
As you know, I believe in the need for paper receipts as part of the voting process. I'd be happy to have them in place as either the primary or backup method for counting votes, as well as for disaster recovery and audit purposes. I do not believe that paper ballots by themselves are a panacea for all complaints about voting systems, but I believe using electronic machines only without a redundant system in place is asking for a disaster to happen. Steven Wayne Smith would probably argue that we've already had such a disaster.
The Statesman has a response from the defendants.
The Texas Civil Rights Project sued Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams and Travis County Clerk Dana DeBeauvoir in state District Court.[...]
DeBeauvoir and a spokesman for Williams, along with the founder of the Austin company that created eSlate, all rejected the claim that paper ballots are necessary for a fair and secure election.
"I am not a lawyer but I kind of doubt that there is much of an argument," said DeBeauvoir, whose office runs elections in Travis County. "I believe that the system is accurate and secure the way it is."
David Hart, the founder of Hart InterCivic, said that more than 400 jurisdictions nationwide use the company's eSlate system, which uses tablet-size screens on which votes are cast with dials and buttons.
He said the system, which is not connected to the Internet, stores ballot information in three electronic places. In Travis County, it captures images of each ballot so electronic or manual recounts can be conducted.
"The eSlate system has got a lot of security built into it," he said.
That's nice, but it still doesn't address my concern. What happens if one of these suckers fails catastrophically? What's the recovery method for a worst-case scenario?
The lawsuit claims that more than half of states - but not Texas - require electronic voting systems to produce paper copies.Hart's company has a machine that also prints paper ballot results. It is being reviewed by Williams' office for use in Texas elections, and DeBeauvoir said she'll present the option to the community if it's approved.
"I can run any kind of election this community wants," she said.
That's good to hear. Now tell me more about the Hart machine that does print paper ballots. Seems to me that its approval and adoption would settle this matter pretty quickly.
Nice little article here on HD126 contender Chad Khan. I've reprinted it beneath the fold since I have no idea how long these community newspaper links last. Khan's a good candidate, and he'll have the resources he needs to run a strong campaign, but this is a tough district. It's not just that it's a little more than two-to-one Republican based on 2004 voting. It's also that there's very little dropoff from President Bush's vote total and percentage to those of the downballot candidates - Victor Carillo, for example, who usually does the worst among statewide Republicans in district comparisons because of the presense of a Hispanic Libertarian candidate on the ballot, had almost 95% of Bush's total vote, and was within half a point of Bush's percentage. Kathy Stone, the top Democratic votegetter in Harris County, got 34% in HD126 (John Kerry got 32%). In short, there was very little ticket-splitting.
On the plus side for this year, it's an open seat, as former incumbent Peggy Hamric left to make an unsuccessful run for the State Senate. Khan will be an infinitely better and more active candidate than 2004 milk carton poster girl Casey McKinney, who for all anyone knows moved to Northern Virginia immediately after filing her papers. On the other hand, the Republicans did manage to nominate the non-insane contender from their primary, so that and the monolithic nature of the HD126 voters are working for them.
Be that as it may, Khan's a good guy, and you should get to know him better. Click the More link to get started on that.
Chad Khan, the Democratic candidate for State Representative District 126, says he'll push for lower property taxes, increased funding for public education, and expanded healthcare for children if elected. In addition, he'll get tough on crime and fight for environmental protections.Khan was guest speaker at the governmental affairs meeting at the Cy-Fair Houston Chamber of Commerce on June 1. The successful businessman has been very adamant about community activism for the last two decades.
The District 126 race pits Khan against Patricia Harless, who defeated John Devine during the Republican primaries in March. Whoever is elected will represent communities throughout the Spring, Cypress, FM 1960 and IH-45 areas.
Khan has developed a strong community presence serving positions in several organizations such as the Homeowners' Association, Harris County Municipal Utility District, Emergency Medical Services Board and positions within local Democratic groups.When Wal-Mart's distribution routes ran through his subdivision, he was instrumental in helping the company develop an alternative route. As a result, the distribution center donated $25,000 toward neighborhood improvements.
"It's not that people didn't want Wal-Mart," he said. "It's just that they didn't want those trucks in our subdivision. As a voice of my subdivision, I sat down with them and helped find a common ground for everybody."
Khan held a fund-raising reception at Beso Restaurant near Westheimer where Houston City Councilman Ron Green encouraged Khan's supporters to continue the momentum and help to "take back the House."
When Khan first announced his candidacy, Tom Rowan, president of the 1960 Democrats, took it upon himself to learn more about Khan. After a "pretty vigorous screening," Rowan says he concluded that Khan possessed some of the best political abilities of any candidate and that learning more about him on a personal and political level has been rewarding.
"I'm really pleased to see someone with all of that talent," Rowan said. "I think he has the right temperament relating to middle class and wanting to help people. It's a unique talent to have in Harris County, and I will be pleasantly surprised when they elect him as candidate."
One of the public meetings held last week was to discuss plans for some flood mitigation ponds around I-10 near the Heights. Robin has some information on what is currently being proposed, plus some background info on the project if you need it.
Be sure to reference "IH-10 detention ponds" in your letter and mail it to:
TxDOT -- Director of Project Development
PO Box 1386 Houston TX 77251-1386
You have until June 18 to give your feedback to TxDOT on this, so speak now or forever hold your peace.
The treasurer for Texans for a Republican Majority, a political committee at the heart of almost four years of criminal investigations and civil litigation, has paid $65,000 to former Democratic candidates in an attempt to end his role in the campaign finance saga.During the 2002 elections, former Dallas lawmaker Bill Ceverha was treasurer of the committee founded by former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay. Ceverha filed for personal bankruptcy last fall after a judge ruled he had violated state law by failing to disclose $600,000 of corporate money the committee spent to defeat Democrats.
[...]
Ceverha always maintained he did nothing wrong, but he filed for bankruptcy as an attempt to remove himself from years of appeals and other lawsuits. The Democrats, however, claimed his bankruptcy was a sham, arguing that Ceverha had transferred assets and paid "friendly creditors" to deny claims by the Democratic candidates.
Earlier this month, the two sides reached a settlement that allowed Ceverha to complete bankruptcy. He paid almost a third of the $196,660 in damages that a judge awarded five Democratic candidates, including Austin's Ann Kitchen, a former legislator defeated in 2002.
"Enough is enough," Ceverha said of the settlement. "This has been too much of a strain on me, my family and my activities."
[...]
"TRMPAC was an effort by Tom DeLay and his gang to rob working Texans of a voice at the state Capitol and to consolidate their power," lawyer Cris Feldman said. "For us, it was never a case about money. It was a case about whether the state's highest public officials and large corporate interests are above the law, and whether Texas law permits secret corporate cash in elections."
Testimony indicated Ceverha raised money for the Republican committee but served primarily in a figurehead role as treasurer. Although the testimony indicated Colyandro and the committee's accountant, not Ceverha, prepared the committee's public reports, Ceverha was responsible under the law for the accuracy of the reports.
Good. It's about time Ceverha was made to pay for his role in the TRMPAC shenanigans. I presume that barring some sort of statute of limitations, it'll be John Colyandro, Jim Ellis, and Tom DeLay's turn to break out the checkbooks after their felony trials have been conducted. Surely another suit will be filed if they get convicted of the charges against them - as I recall, the reason they weren't named as defendants in this suit was because of their status as felony indictees. Once that resolves itself, I imagine we'll see a return to the civil courts.
Democrats have targeted Ceverha, who serves as a board member for the state's Employee Retirement System, for accepting checks as gifts without reporting the amount. Although the Texas Ethics Commission said Ceverha didn't have to disclose it, Ceverha finally revealed that Houston homebuilder Bob Perry gave him $100,000, after taxes, during 2004 and 2005 to help with his legal fees.Critics, led by Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth, say such cash gifts give the appearance of impropriety.
Ceverha and Burnam had an exchange of pleasantries recently over this matter. You can read about it here. Thanks to Pink Dome for the link.
From yesterday's Chron, some action on the clean-air front.
Concentrations of a dozen air pollutants in the Houston area pose significant risks to public health, and nowhere is the risk greater than in east Harris County, along the Ship Channel, a task force of public health and toxicological experts convened by Mayor Bill White concluded Monday.In a city that ranks as one of the most polluted in the nation, the study provides, for the first time, a "to-do" list for reducing pollution, based on the risk to Houstonians' health, the mayor said.
[...]
"There is a myth that we need years and years more study before we take action against polluters ... we know enough now to know there is significant risk to our population," said Mayor Bill White, who convened the task force in March 2005, after reports by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the Houston Chronicle exposed high levels of pollution in some city neighborhoods.
The landmark 58-page report evaluates 179 chemicals that are released from car tailpipes, ships, industrial plants, and small sources such as dry cleaners and gasoline stations, for their potential to cause cancer, lung disease and other ailments.
The quality and quantity of information available on each chemical varied. In some cases, the scientists relied on computer projections of pollutant concentrations based on emissions in 1999. In others, they used data on 50 pollutants collected by 20 monitors in the Houston area in 2004. In the end, according to Dr. James T. Willerson, president of the University of Texas Health Science Center, which led a committee of eight scientists from five different institutions, the rankings came down to scientific judgment.
[...]
The 12 riskiest compounds contain some usual suspects, such as ground-level ozone, the main ingredient in smog, and the fine particles in diesel exhaust and soot. But the bulk of the list comprises more obscure, toxic chemicals like ethylene dibromide, acrolein, and chromium VI, that are difficult to monitor and do not have federal health standards.
The mayor said the report would be used almost immediately to develop a regional plan that would focus on specific neighborhoods and sources. The first step is targeting the chemical benzene in the Clinton Park/Tri-Community and the Harrisburg/Manchester neighborhoods on the city's east side, the most polluted of the region's 895 census tracts. Though the bulk of the city was exposed to three or fewer of the 12 chemicals identified, the 28 tracts in east Harris County had three or more pollutants at concentrations posing a definitive health risk.
"There are some sad results of this study ... of the disproportionate impact of pollution," White said.
I'm more than glad to see Mayor White take the lead on this, especially given the lack of leadership from the Legislature. It's something he campaigned on, and he sees it (rightlly, in my view) as a key quality-of-life issue. Businesses won't locate where their employees don't want to go, and having a reputation for pollution does Houston no favors. How long has it taken Cleveland to live down the Cuyahoga River Fire of 1969? I'd argue their image still hasn't fully recovered. Taking all reasonable steps to ensure Houston does not suffer a similar blow to its prestige is a good idea.
Congrats to John for becoming the newest member of the Chron.commons community. His new blog is called Blue Bayou. Nicely done!
I don't see the word "blog" anywhere on Chet Edwards' spiffily redesigned webpage, but it's got a blog-like structure to it. Whatever you want to call it, it looks good. Check it out for yourself and see.
Via Houston Dems: Annie's List has added HD133 candidate Kristi Thibaut to its ledger of endorsed candidates for State House. I've been a fan of Kristi's for awhile now, so I consider this very good news. Among other things, Annie's List targets races they see as winnable (which the open 133 definitely is), and it's a good source of grassroots campaign contributions from around the state. I fully expect Kristi to do all right in the fundraising department, since she has a professional background in the subject, but this will likely be an expensive race, and her opponent (Jim Murphy) is one of the better quality Republicans out there, so every little bit will certainly help. Murphy's coffers were dry after the GOP primary and runoff, but money spent in the function of voter outreach is an investment, not a problem. This race ought to be a priority of the local GOP, so I also expect Murphy to get the resources he needs.
I've got a post percolating to analyze HD133 more fully, so expect that soon. In the meantime, get to know Kristi Thibaut.
Via David Pogue's technology blog comes Enron Email.
Search through more hundreds of thousands of email messages to and from 176 former Enron executives and employees from the power-trading operations in 2000-2002.For the first time, they are available to the public for free through the easy-to-use interface of the InBoxer Anti-Risk Appliance. Create a free account, and go to work. You can search for words, phrases, senders, recipients, and more. (Lots of stuff in there. We found a copy of a message regarding Tom DeLay and political contributions for use in Texas.)
Or, use the built in tools to find offensive messages, personal messages, and others that would have triggered an alert if Enron had been using the InBoxer Anti-Risk Appliance back in 2000-2002, and can alert companies to similar risks, if they happened today.
This has been around for a few months, but I confess I hadn't heard of it before now. Since Enron is in the news again (twice!), I figure today is as good a day as any to link to it. Thanks to Linkmeister for the tip.
As you may recall, the Krispy Kreme donut franchise exited Houston in March in the midst of a nasty franchisee lawsuit. At the time, a local outfit called Jumbles Dough Factory and Coffee Bar took over several former Krispy Kreme locations under the auspices of Lone Star Doughnuts, Ltd. Now it looks like they're kaput, too.
Many Jumbles locations are no longer doing regular business. Suppliers say they are unable to reach Lone Star executives.Brinton did not return phone calls placed to his office or his cell phone.
The lights are off and the phones are out at various Jumbles locations.
[...]
H. Mills Duncan IV, president of Duncan Coffee Co., says he hasn't heard a word from anyone at Lone Star Doughnuts.
"They aren't returning my phone calls," he says. "I don't have any idea what is going on."
Duncan says it's unfortunate if the concept has failed because the operators had a strong name and a solid concept for the new business.
Jumbles also supplied doughnuts and pastries to area Kroger stores.
"We are no longer doing business with Jumbles," says Russell Richard, director of public affairs for The Kroger Co.
I'd say that sounds like an ex-donut business to me. As I said before, at least we'll always have Shipley's. Thanks to Houstonist for the link.
You know, five trips to the College World Series in the last ten years really doesn't suck. And of course, the last time the Owls made it to Omaha, coincidentally also after having been the #1-ranked team for a good portion of the season, they came home as national champions. I'll take those odds. Go Rice!
UPDATE: Here's some stats for the eight CWS teams for you.
The public meeting for the proposed Intermodal Transit Center north of downtown was this weekend. Here's what Metro unveiled.
The terminal would be a half-mile north of the University of Houston-Downtown, where the existing MetroRail Red Line now ends, on a site bounded by Naylor, Burnett and San Jacinto streets and White Oak Bayou.The centerpiece is a 400-foot-wide circular plaza, tentatively designated "the Great Space," where transit riders would disembark into a setting with greenery, an open-air market and other amenities.
[Metro's director of architecture and urban design Jim] Gast showed slides of Jackson Square in New Orleans, Rome's Spanish Steps and DuPont Circle in Washington D.C. as examples of what such plazas can mean to a city.
As a transit hub, he said, the terminal would become the new north end of the Red Line, whose tracks would rise about 30 feet onto the plaza.
To continue north, riders would descend to street level and transfer to the planned North Line, whose buses on guideways would leave the terminal on its west side and curve north to North Main.
If ridership grows enough to justify converting the North Line to light rail, its tracks would enter the terminal complex directly on North Main and connect to the Red Line, Gast said.
Metro's planned East End and Southeast guided rapid transit lines, which would also be converted to light rail as ridership increased, would enter the terminal complex from the east.
Eventual commuter rail lines from U.S. 290 and the Katy Freeway would enter from the west. Union Pacific would also continue to operate freight tracks there.
For buses, Gast said, there would be four bays initially and room for another 10.
North of the plaza would be the rail and bus terminals - enclosed structures with restrooms - and to the south would be parking lots that Gast said could hold 2,000 vehicles.
Drivers heading out of downtown on North Main could take any of three options: a bypass for through traffic on the terminal's west side; a pickup-and-dropoff route on its east side via Naylor, San Jacinto and Burnett; or nearby San Jacinto, which would be improved to handle more traffic.
So the existing light rail line would be extended north of UH-Downtown to this terminus, where it would connect to the proposed BRTs (now apparently also called "guided rapid transit lines"). I don't see anything here about space for relocating the Midtown Greyhound bus terminal. I'm guessing that would ratchet up the opposition to this plan considerably - judging from the article, right now there's not much animus, just the usual concerns from local businessfolk who might be affected by construction.
There's also no mention of a time frame in the story for this; going back to my archives, I see we're talking 2011 or 2012. That's assuming all goes more or less as planned, of course. I figure the fight over the Universities rail line is distracting some attention from this project, so perhaps we'll see more of that once a location for that line has been determined. Or maybe not - this may wind up being much less controversial. Hard to see how it could be more, after all.
From the DC Political Report, via The Muse:
EXCLUSIVE: Tom DeLay To Be Investigated for Voter Fraud: D.C.'s Political Report has learned that a challenge has been filed with the City of Alexandria's Voter Registrar alleging that former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's (R-TX) voter registration in Virginia was illegal. The challenge alleges that DeLay lacked domiciliary intent when he registered to vote and that he maintains legal residence in Texas. Similar to the legal action filed by the Texas Democratic Party, the challenge notes that DeLay is still registered to vote in Texas, has a Texas driver's licence and is receiving a Texas homestead exemption. Under Virginia law, DeLay has the burden of proof that he has changed his domicile. His Texas domicile is presumed to continue until he has a residence in the Virginia and the intention to remain there. DeLay's continuing presence in the Lone Star state is presumptive proof that he remains a Texas citizen.Correction: In an earlier edition D.C.'s Political Report reported that the investigation would be conducted by Commonwealth Attorney S. Randolph Sengel (D-VA). In fact the investigation will be conducted by Voter Registrar. The Commonwealth Attorney's office will only get involved if there is evidence of criminal intent.
Emphasis mine. As I understand it, Texas' law is pretty loose regarding one's residence for voting purposes. I am neither a lawyer nor a Virginian, but the way this is written it sounds to me like perhaps things are a bit more stringent in the Commonwealth. I don't seriously expect this to amount to anything, but until there's more detail and analysis by someone who is familiar with these matters, who knows? Stay tuned.
Coming out of the Dem convention, Chris Bell is taking aim at Carole Keeton Strayhorn for her many about-faces on different issues, such as CHIP. The following is from an article reprinted from the Rio Grande Guardian.
When Gov. Rick Perry has a bad idea, time and again Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn backs him up. That was the message Democratic gubernatorial candidate Chris Bell delivered to Rio Grande Valley reporters outside a Medicaid Eligibility Center earmarked for closure under a Texas Human Services privatization plan initially recommended by Strayhorn.Bell said he was calling his border swing the Carole Strayhorn Reality Tour. He said he planned to visit Del Rio Monday afternoon and El Paso on Tuesday.
"The bottom line is this," Bell said. "When Rick Perry has a bad idea, Carole Strayhorn has backed him up time after time after time, or vice versa. Rick Perry and Carole Strayhorn are two sleeves of the same empty suit."
"While Mrs. Strayhorn has come to rival Mary Lou Ratton with her flip-flopping abilities, changing her positions on numerous issues and trying to trick Democrats into believing she’s our friend, facts paint a very different picture indeed," Bell said.Strayhorn is now running for governor as an Independent. She has blasted Perry for a drop in the enrollment of Texas children in the Children’s Health Insurance Program. "It's time to put children first," Strayhorn has said. "It's unconscionable that we’re dead last in percent of children on health insurance."
Bell pointed out that in the Office of the Comptroller’s e-Texas report of April, 2003, Strayhorn recommended reducing the eligibility period for the state's Children’s Health Insurance Program from 12 to six months for the 2004-05 biennium.
"This resulted in the $231 million so-called savings that Rick Perry and Carol Strayhorn were originally so proud of," Bell said. "It also resulted in over 200,000 kids losing health insurance."
The case against Strayhorn's Grandma-come-lately wooing of Democratic and progressive voters is pretty clear. Dave McNeely lays it out.
# Redistricting - As a member of the Legislative Redistricting Board, Strayhorn in 2001 cast the deciding vote to re-draw Texas House districts to reward Republicans and punish Democrats. In 2002, with corporate campaign funding help engineered by then-U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, the GOP took over the House, installed Tom Craddick of Midland as Speaker, and with direction from DeLay and help from Perry, re-drew Texas' congressional district lines to kill off half a dozen Democrats with decades of seniority.# Vouchers - Got a loan of almost $1 million from voucher supporter James Leininger in her 1998 comptroller campaign. But earlier this year, Strayhorn vowed to ''veto any type of legislation that puts a single dollar into any voucher program.''
# Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) - Called for cutting CHIP spending in 2003, by requiring registration every six instead of 12 months. But in 2004, she blamed Perry's tight-fistedness for a large drop in enrollment. ''It's time to put children first,'' Strayhorn said. ''It's unconscionable that we're dead last in percent of children on health insurance.''
# Toll Roads - Strayhorn called for more toll roads as part of a Texas Performance Review report in 2001 on the Texas Department of Transportation. But since toll roads have become a focus of Perry's road-building program, Strayhorn said in January that she is ''dead set against toll roads.''
# Tuition Deregulation - Strayhorn called for it in 2003, but nine months later said a student's tuition rate should be frozen at what they paid as a freshman.
# TAKS Test - She endorsed grade advancement based on testing in 1998. But a few weeks ago, she said she would ''scale back the importance of the state's standardized TAKS test.'' Democratic standard-bearer Bell will be telling Democrats in Fort Worth this weekend, and voters around the state until November, that he may not be the perfect candidate against Perry, but he comes a lot closer than Carole Keeton Strayhorn.
Thanks to Eye on Williamson for the link. I wonder sometimes if people like Ben Barnes and Tony Sanchez think about these things.
The only concern I have about this is that I'm not convinced it's Strayhorn who's currently the biggest poacher of Democratic votes. Given that Rick Perry's numbers are consistently around 40% and that Strayhorn is around 20 in most polls, you'd think that would imply that at least half, maybe even three-quarters, of her total is coming out of Perry's hide. It's Kinky Friedman and his 10-15% that worried me more, even if I think his numbers are inflated by unlikely turnout projections. I understand the rationale for going after Strayhorn - the first mountain to climb is still the persistent perception that Strayhorn is the frontrunner among the challengers, and the best way to do that is to knock her down in the polls. I'm just saying that there's still work to be done after that.
Elsewhere, Bell's participation at a stem cell summit drew hearty praise and a call for support from a fellow attendee. And finally, there's links to more media coverage of Bell at the Dem convention here.
Vince has links to videos of all the convention addresses. Since I missed most of these, I'll have to go back and watch a few. One that I have already watched is this one by all of the newer State House Democrats. It's a very positive message, and nicely put together. Check it out.
Dot Nelson-Turnier is the latest blogging candidate among the State Rep contenders, as she debuts Blue Notes from Dot. I've got a lot of respect for Dot for being the first Democrat since at least 1990 to run for the HD150 seat and for challenging the infamous Debbie "Pit of Hell" Riddle. Check it out, and get to know Dot better.
State Sen. Rodney Ellis, the author of the James Byrd Jr. Hate Crime Act of 2001, looks at the law's effect and concludes it could and should do more.
Texas prosecutors rarely use the hate crimes statute. Since the hate crimes law was passed in 2001, 1,617 hate crimes have been documented in Texas - 363 in Harris County - and only seven have been prosecuted under the hate crimes act.Why don't prosecutors want to apply this law? It's not because they don't want the maximum punishment for these sinister criminals. My friends in law enforcement tell me they won't apply the law because it is not tough enough and that is why, come this next legislative session, I am ready to strengthen the law so it will get used effectively. I am proposing the following changes next session: creating a hate crimes registry so that the public has record of hate crimes perpetrators; raising the minimum punishment for hate crimes convictions; imposing a penalty or fine as a term of punishment; imposing cultural sensitivity training for those convicted of a hate crime; and allowing the victim of a hate crime to have their identity protected.
I confess, I've always been a bit skeptical of hate crime legislation. I'm a believer in allowing judges to use their judgment when it comes to imposing sentences. Legislative restrictions on judicial latitude, especially (but by no means solely) in drug cases, are a major contributor to overincarceration and the increasingly expensive burden of an aging inmate population. I'm leery about anything that might add to this.
Having said that, some cases do call out for assurance against undersentencing. I believe we can do a reasonable job of defining those cases and ensuring that all necessary steps are taken to protect the public from those who present extra dangers to it. I support the proposals Sen. Ellis outlines here, in particular the provisions to track hate crimes, and to keep the victims' identities secret. I look forward to seeing what the final version of his bill looks like and having a productive discussion about it.
I haven't been following very closely this story about high school kids in Round Rock who got arrested for skipping school during the immigration rallies back in March, but I've got a few thoughts about it now.
Of the more than 200 students cited for breaking daytime curfew, more than 80 have pleaded guilty or no contest to their citations, agreeing to pay fines or do community service.But about half pleaded not guilty and requested jury trials, arguing that the curfew that requires them to be in school provides an exception for exercising free speech rights. The citations are a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by up to a $500 fine.
All things considered, I suppose we should be grateful it's not a felony charge.
The prosecutions have outraged civil rights groups, attorneys and some local residents who say the city seems more concerned with protecting its tough-on-crime image than the students' rights. They note that they haven't heard of any other towns prosecuting student protesters.The Texas Civil Rights Project is representing 82 students, promising costly court battles that could tie up Round Rock's municipal court.
"We don't think they broke the law," said Efrain Davila, a 52-year-old Round Rock resident who criticized the prosecutions at a City Council meeting Thursday night. "They came down too heavy-handed and now it's a criminal thing and we don't think it's a criminal thing. The whole United States saw it differently, except for Round Rock."
Davila said it was a mistake to ticket the students in the first place.
"I think they thought they could bully their way into getting these kids to conform and plead guilty and do community service," he said. "Now, we have these litigates at the door, biting at the bit to defend these kids, and I think the city attorney is going to be hard-pressed to prosecute these kids, and now we're in a pickle."
[...]
"The MO of the Round Rock Police Department is that we're going to do what's the right thing to do," said Capt. Tim Ryle, who led the issuance of citations. "And that means that we don't turn our heads when a crime is committed, no matter if it's just a little bitty one, because it's important to hold people accountable."
Ryle said police were concerned about the students' rights and even escorted them on foot and in police cars during a march through town to ensure their safety.
He said he thinks the majority of youths left school because they were passionate about the issue, but that some just saw a chance to skip class, and that's why each case should be judged individually
[...]
Last week, a municipal court judge granted a prosecutor's motion to dismiss the cases, which were scheduled for trial June 30. The motion said there was insufficient evidence to prove the two girls weren't exercising their First Amendment rights.
The next trials, for four students, are set for July 7.
Critics of the prosecutions cheered the dismissals, saying they may indicate a change of heart, or at least of strategy, for a city that initially tried to persuade the students to plead guilty.
"What I sense is going on is they're suddenly coming to the realization that they may not have the solid legal ground they thought they did," said Jim Harrington, director of the civil rights group. "Also, a lot of eyes are focused on Round Rock and now they're hopefully starting to come around."
Turns out there's a right to freedom of speech built into the Constitution. Who knew?
I can understand the rationale for having a daytime-curfew law (though I have to ask - is truancy that big a problem in general in Round Rock?), but I think the police overreacted. Captain Ryle seems to imply that he thinks the the kids who were just there to skip class are the ones who were really breaking the law. Why not just give them the citations? If the answer to that question is "because we can't read their minds", then there was no point in citing anyone, since the First Amendment defense would then apply universally. The police are allowed to exercise their discretion in matters like this. I realize that selective ticketing would surely leave them open to allegations of unfairness, but being indiscriminate has its own set of consequences, too, especially for the kids who have already given in to the pressure to plead out.
If this is all sounding a bit like the Sugar Land Kiddie Roundup, well, same here. Everyone in that case who resisted the push to cop a quick plea later saw the charges against them dropped. I won't be at all surprised if that's what happens here.
And just so we're clear:
There were two days of protests. The first day, students from Stony Point High School marched to Round Rock High School, alarming school officials and causing them to lock down the school. Police said they just gave warnings and instructed students not to do it again.The next day, they did it again. Police issued more than 200 citations, but only after escorting the students through town, trying to "keep them from getting run over," Ryle said.
Gordon Perez, Round Rock high's associate principal, said the school also disciplined the students with in-school suspensions or Saturday detention. Perez said the students may not have been punished as severely if they hadn't unsettled both campuses.
"Their whole day was disrupted as a result of this situation," Perez said.
I have no quarrel at all with any discipline handed down by Round Rock High School. The kids were given fair warning that once was enough. They chose to act again, and that meant facing the consequences from their school. Accepting punishment for breaking rules in the name of serving a higher purpose is a central tenet of civil disobedience. That punishment is still supposed to fit the crime, however, and there's no requirement to take unfair retribution lying down. The citations issued to these students are an excessive response to their actions, and I look forward to seeing all of them dismissed.
UPDATE: Stace comments.
One of the goals I set for myself at the beginning of this year was to do as many candidate interviews as I could. I'm off to a pretty good start so far, I think, and I hope to have a few more in the near future.
I'm doing some interviews by email as well. Here's the first of this particular group, with local judicial candidate Bill Connolly:
1. Who are you and what are you running for?Bill Connolly. I am the Democratic Nominee running for the 315th Juvenile District Court of Harris County, Texas
2. What kind of cases does this court hear?This court hears cases involving criminal offenses committed by children between the age of 10 and 17 (delinquent conduct), children in need of supervision under the Juvenile Justice Code; cases involving the Department of Family and Protective Services ("CPS"), which include termination of parental rights and conservatorship for abuse and neglect claims; petitions for further action or modifications of previous final family law cases that were originally heard and disposed of in the court, and some adoptions.
3. What are your qualifications for this job?I am a trial and appellate lawyer with 26 years of experience (23 years in juvenile law). I am Board Certified in Juvenile and Family Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. I was an Adjunct Professor of Juvenile Law at South Texas College of Law for 4 years. I am a past Officer, Director and Chair of the Juvenile Law Section of the Houston Bar Association and am currently serving on the Council for the Juvenile Law Section of the State Bar of Texas. I am a frequent author and lecturer on Family Law and Juvenile Law. I am on the Advisory Boards of Child Advocates and The Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse Houston. I am also an Elder at St. Philip Presbyterian Church in Houston.
4. Why do you believe you would do a better job than the incumbent?I really like my opponent. I have tried cases with him. He was appointed to the bench effective May 1, 2006 after Judge Kent Ellis decided not to wait until the end of the year to retire and left before the end of his term. Judge Ellis had announced his retirement in 2005 and intended to serve out his term until 12.31.06. My opponent never handled a juvenile case before his appointment to the bench. He had worked for the County Attorney and has dealt a lot with the CPS cases. I have been in practice almost 3 times as long. I believe that he is in his 9th year. I believe that this is an important bench and that my experience is better suited to the needs of the families and children of Harris County. If elected I plan to bring some initiative to the bench in dealing more effectively with the alcohol and drug problems and mental health concerns that play a significant role in the dockets of the Court.
5. Why is this race one we should care about?It is a court that deals with children and parental rights all day every day. It combines civil law, criminal law and procedure and constitutional law in one place. It is a court that generally deals with those that are less fortunate economically and is one of high profile only when something sensational happens. In truth, something sensational happens in these courts every day. A child is certified to stand trial as an adult or sentenced to many years in prison or the parent-child relationships are severed forever in a termination case. This is heartbreaking for parents and extended families and children in some cases and a happy day for some prospective adoptive parents and children in other cases. How we deal with these children and parents will help us mold the future of these families.
6. What else do we need to know?This is a Court that a Democrat can win this year. There are no Democratic District Judges in Harris County. This County and the State of Texas need to have a balanced political system from the Courthouse to the Statehouse. Having one political party in complete control is not healthy for a democracy.
Thank you, Bill Connolly. Look for more of these interviews in the coming weeks.
The Chronicle says good-bye to Tom DeLay.
DeLay's absence in office is already being felt. Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick, R-Midland, said DeLay always stood ready to pursue or protect Texas' interests in Congress. Now, as Texas fights to be reimbursed for its costs in feeding, housing and educating hurricane evacuees, it lacks a powerful champion in Washington.[...]
During DeLay's days as a backbencher, Congress failed to renew the federal income tax exemption for state sales taxes, placing Texans who itemize at a disadvantage against Americans who pay a fully deductible state income tax. Had DeLay remained in the leadership, the result might have been different.
In seeking to gain power for himself and his party, DeLay stretched the rules beyond the prescribed limits. Texas law says corporate funds may not be used to affect the outcome of elections, but DeLay asserted that in most circumstances they may. He felt no guilt at charging special interests for the opportunity to play golf with him while important legislation was pending on the House floor. He denied the existence of three reprimands from the House ethics committee.
Had he been more conservative in interpreting the rules governing his conduct, DeLay probably would have wielded as much influence without endangering his political career. As it is, DeLay's loss of power deprives this region of an important political asset.
Let's not forget that even if he'd stayed in Congress, Tom DeLay had already deprived the Houston region and the state of Texas of a considerable amount of power. Thanks to DeLay, we lost the following:
Max Sandlin, eight years of seniority.
Nick Lampson, eight years of seniority.
Jim Turner, eight years of seniority.
Charlie Stenholm, 26 years of seniority.
Martin Frost, 26 years of seniority.
Ciro Rodriguez, eight years of seniority.
Chris Bell, two years of seniority.
That's 86 years of seniority flushed away by DeLay's mid-decade redistricting scheme. If Chet Edwards gets knocked off this time around, that'll be another 16 years tossed aside. As always, Tom, thanks for nothing.
The Star Telegram's Bud Kennedy attended both parties' conventions. He found more to like at the Dem convention than he did at the GOP event. Just so you know.
While everybody else was doing such a great job liveblogging, at which we all know I suck, I thought I'd try to pursue a more productive option. I spent yesterday interviewing a bunch of candidates. Here's the full lineup:
You can also read this article on Nick Lampson. I'll have all this in podcast form in a couple of days. Enjoy!
Actual lawyer Bobby Warren takes a look at the lawsuit filed by the TDP over the attempt to replace Tom DeLay on the CD22 ballot and gives his analysis of its arguments. Check it out.
For those keeping score at home, the winner of the TDP Chair race is Boyd Richie, in overtime over Glen Maxey. I will now repeat my call for a minimum of bloodshed from this point forward. I'll even add a "pretty please with sugar on top" to my plea. That is all.
This is what it looks like when bloggers party.
You might have noticed that one of us is hiding behind some other bloggers in that picture. Here's a a better look. Be nice with the captioning.
Here's a list of some of the people who were there last night. And here I am with the Blogging Rep.
More silliness from Day One: Rick Perry's school bus, and Tom DeLay's future.
The Dallas Morning News acknowledges our presence. We promise not to eat all the food in the press room, tempting though that may be.
On a serious note, let me second the thanks to Amber, Hector, and the crew at the TDP for doing so much to make us bloggers feel welcome. I know I speak for all of us when I say we really appreciate it.
More interviews coming. They're busy voting for the Party Chair now. Here's the place to go for real news on what's happening with all that.
UPDATE: Also on a serious note, speeches from Barbara Radnofsky and Chris Bell.
Here's the Q&A I promised with Shane Sklar. I've gotten some feedback from people asking for stuff like this to be done in podcast form, with an RSS feed. I think that's a great idea, and will work on it as soon as I'm back in Houston. I will put all the interviews I've done into that format and post an announcement when they're ready.
I've got a bunch of interviews lined up today, including Nick Lampson, Mary Beth Harrell, John Courage, Hank Gilbert, Gary Binderim, and more. Check back later today.
(Greg drafted this last night after he did his magic with the sound files, so his name appears as the author of this post.)
I won't have a whole lot of time for following regular news stories while I'm here, but I have to link to this story about the rousing round of ridicule Carole Keeton Strayhorn got for her bizarre request to be identified on the ballot as "Grandma". First, from Kinky Friedman, who is well-suited for this kind of task.
"She can call herself Carole Cougar Mellencamp if she wants, but when it comes to the ballot she should have to follow the law," Friedman, a musician and satirist, said in a statement. "Hell, I've been Kinky for 40 years."
Heh. I seem to recall a George HW Bush impersonater from back in the day who called his character something like George Herbert Walker Joyner Kersee Cougar Mellencamp Bush. Nice to know the classics never go out of style.
And from the Chris Bell campaign:
Jason Stanford, a spokesman for Democratic nominee Chris Bell, also said Strayhorn's request is absurd."I don't see how this race could get any weirder. She's asking the state to certify that she is a grandma," Stanford said.
The scary thing is that I can imagine this race getting weirder. I just don't know how yet. I'm almost afraid to find out.
We'll know in a few weeks what SOS Roger Williams thinks about this. I'll go out on a limb and say he'll reject it. But hey, maybe that's how the weirdness will progress. Who knows?
I'm here in "Bloggers' Alley" in the main session for the evening, where Wes Clark just finished wowing the crowd. Busy guy - he was at Yearly Kos before this. I thought I might try liveblogging this, but I'm apparently lousy at listening and typing at the same time. Thankfully, Vince, The Muse, and Damon are better at it than I. They, plus Nate and Anna, are down the table from where Greg and I are sitting. And thanks to Greg, I've now been officially quoted by a press peson. Sure, it was Greg himself, but it's a start.
Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos is up now, after a nice video intro from his son. More later.
UPDATE: One more livebog from Marc's Miscellany. Sen. Barrientos just finished. They did not play a "Journey" song. This is a good thing.
Up now, New Mexico Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron.
UPDATE: Sen. Letitia Van de Putte just played Hit the Road, Jack in honor of Tom DeLay's last day in Congress. Now, that I can (but still won't) dance to.
Oh, by the way, her surname is pronounced "van de pyoot", not "van de putt". I'd always wondered about that.
Who knew that a press pass got you free food and WiFi? I may never leave.
Just did a brief chat with Shane Sklar, which I'll post later tonight or tomorrow. I've got a chat scheduled with Mary Beth Harrell, so look for that later on as well.
Looks like we're going to get a pretty decent crowd at the Bloggers' Caucus tonighjt.
I'm feeling a little scatterbrained from the drive. I've never really attended one of these conventions before - let alone "reported" from one. My intent in coming here was mostly to network, to meet some of the people I've written about and get a chance to talk to them. I'll be going to the main session in a little while - they've set up a bloggers' table there, so I may try doing some liveblogging of the various addresses. Basically, I'm making this up as I go along. Tomorrow is going to be an interesting day.
We made it to Fort Worth (Greg came with me). Whoever said that Houston is hard to navigate has never driven in the Metroplex, I'll just say that. We've got the WiFi working, and we're about to attend a press conference for Barbara Radnofsky. More later.
I'm about to leave for Fort Worth, so here's the Chron story on the Democrats' lawsuit temporarily injuncting the GOP against starting the process to replace Tom DeLay on the CD22 ballot.
State District Judge Darlene Byrne of Austin, a Democrat, issued the order at 5:02 p.m. and set a hearing on a temporary injunction for June 22.[...]
Attorneys Chad Dunn of Houston and Cris Feldman of Austin represented the Democratic Party in court. The Republicans were represented by party General Counsel Donna Davidson.
Dunn said evidence in Fort Bend County shows DeLay still has a homestead exemption, is registered to vote and has a Texas driver's license. Dunn said DeLay also was continuing to represent the district in Congress at the time Benkiser said the county chairs could start picking a replacement.
Dunn also said the Democratic Party wants to permanently block Benkiser from replacing DeLay. Dunn said state law allows a candidate to be replaced on the ballot if they move out of state, but he said the move must be for a compelling reason.
"If you move out of the district, it's because you have a compelling reason to do so, not just because you can't win it," Dunn said. He said to allow the party to replace DeLay would set a precedent for manipulating the election process to "cherry pick" candidates.
I thought there was an interesting quote at the end of this Statesman article.
Austin lawyer Margaret A. Wilson, representing the GOP, denied in court that the party cooperated with DeLay on his exit strategy."This is not something the party plotted," Wilson said. "Whether or not, Tom DeLay plotted it, we'll never know."
Ponder that while I head north. See you in a few hours.
I had the chance to sit down and talk with HD134 candidate Ellen Cohen earlier this week. I've usually done email interviews in the past (this being the sole exception till now), but I've got a digital voice recorder now, and I thought I'd give a try at doing more traditional in-person interviews and posting the result as MP3 files. This is my first go at it. I hope to do a number of interviews up in Fort Worth and afterwards with various other candidates, so I'd appreciate any feedback you might have.
The conversation is broken into six files, each between two and five minutes in length. My thanks to Greg Wythe for technical advice and assistance.
If you'd rather read something about Ellen, check out this profile in the blog of the League of Conservation Voters. And finally, if all you want is a little fun at Martha Wong's expense, there's always this. Enjoy!
In a surprise twist to the Tom DeLay saga, the Texas Democratic Party filed suit Thursday in an attempt to keep the resigning Republican Congressman's name on the November ballot.The suit, filed in Travis County 126th District Court, seeks to undo an hours-old declaration by Republican Party Chair Tina Benkiser that DeLay is ineligible to run in the general election.
If DeLay doesn't serve as the party's candidate for Congressional District 22, then according to the Texas Election Code, no other candidate is allowed to replace him, the suit says.
Lawyers for Houston's Riddle & Brazil law firm, which filed the action, obtained a temporary restraining order at about 5:10 p.m. from Judge Darlene Byrne. Sources familiar with the case said the order prevents Benkiser from calling a meeting of the so-called District Executive Committee or taking other measures to replace DeLay as the Republican Party nominee for CD-22.
Benkiser, the only defendant named in the suit, could not be reached for comment Thursday afternoon.
DeLay announced in early April that he would resign from Congress, move from Sugar Land to Virginia and thus be ineligible to run for re-election on the November general election ballot. Benkiser formally declared him ineligible Wednesday night.
But the suit says DeLay never intended to complete his run for re-election, and instead schemed to collect campaign contributions and convert them to his own use.
"DeLay deceived voters into giving him 'campaign contributions' - money he intends to use to pay his attorneys to defend him from criminal charges..." the suit states.
"DeLay has finally let voters in on his true intent: he wants to have his name removed from the ballot in November and replaced with another candidate while keeping the money contributed to his primary campaign, in clear violation of the Texas Election Code," the lawsuit says.
[...]
The lawsuit filed Thursday called that a ruse. It cited a May article in Texas Monthly magazine in which former Fort Bend County GOP chair Eric Thode is reported to have known since early January that DeLay was planning to withdraw as a congressional candidate after the primary.
DeLay, the suit states, "knew before the primary that he intended to withdraw after the vote. He also knew that if he ran and won the primary and then withdrew, the party could not replace him on the ballot… DeLay's ruse, with the cooperation of the Republican Party, is to be administratively declared ineligible to hold office by reason of inhabitancy."
The lawsuit says that DeLay's attempt to be declared ineligible goes against state Election Code and the U.S. Constitution.
Much to consider here, but I'm in a bit of a rush. Read the whole thing, and we'll see what happens. I imagine this will be quite the conversation topic in Fort Worth. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Here's the Dems' papers (big PDF) for the suit. Thanks, Juanita!
Tomorrow night in Fort Worth, various progressive bloggers of Texas will get together and have a party.
ATTENTION BLOGGERS, BLOG READERS, LURKERS, CANDIDATES, DELEGATES, OBSERVERS, AND OFFICEHOLDERS:You're all cordially invited to THE PARTY OF THE YEAR: the 1st Annual Bloggers Caucus!!
Friday, June 9
Flying Saucer (upstairs party room)
9:30pm - midnight
111 E 4th St
Ft Worth, TX
76102
(map)
If you're in Fort Worth and want to join in on the fun, by all means please do. We've got commitments from a bunch of candidates and officeholders as well, so the schmooze-and-network factor is high, too. See you there!
Since we're in a musical frame of mind today, I think we'll all agree that the song that accompanies this article is the classic Who Are You?.
Independent Carole Keeton Strayhorn won political office under her two previous married names, but in this year's race for governor, voters apparently are saying: Strayhorn who?Strayhorn told supporters in an e-mail this week that is why she wants to solve her name identification problem by appearing on the November ballot as "Grandma" Strayhorn. She has campaigned as "One Tough Grandma" since 1998.
Born Carole Keeton, she won the Austin mayor's office as Carole McClellan. She won statewide elections for railroad commissioner and state comptroller as Carole Keeton Rylander.
But she has remarried since her last election in 1992, exchanging vows with Eddie Strayhorn and picking up a new last name in the process.
"The name change from Rylander to Strayhorn has not completely sunk in with voters (She has never run as Strayhorn)," said the fundraising e-mail.
Strayhorn has six granddaughters. "Once voters are told that Strayhorn is 'One Tough Grandma,' she jumps 10 points in every poll we have taken, and (Gov. Rick) Perry drops," the e-mail said. "No public poll has tested her nickname 'Grandma,' only Strayhorn."
The e-mail says that is why she will appear on the November ballot as Carole Keeton "Grandma" Strayhorn.
And that is how she filled out her application for a spot on the ballot, said Scott Haywood, spokesman for the Texas Secretary of State's Office.
Actually, now that I think about it, perhaps Lynryd Skynyrd's What's Your Name? is a better fit. Decisions, decisions.
Haywood said Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams will not rule on nicknames on the ballot until the petition-counting process is complete in about two weeks.State law allows the use of a nickname on the ballot if it is a name by which the candidate has been "commonly known for at least three years preceding the election."
"The law doesn't allow you to use a political slogan. So we weren't going to try that," said Strayhorn's campaign manager and son, Brad McClellan. "More people know her as 'grandma' than Strayhorn."
A small correction before I begin: Strayhorn's last election as Carole Keeton Rylander was in 2002, not 1992. She's been known as Carole Keeton Strayhorn since January of 2003.
Let me be blunt here: The proper name for all this is "baloney". If Strayhorn has name recognition issues, that's not my problem. She's got a multi-million dollar campaign budget and five months to work it out herself. If she wants to call herself Carole Keeton Rylander Strayhorn on the ballot - or hell, Carole Keeton McClellan Rylander Strayhorn - I can live with that. But you can't separate the nickname from the campaign slogan, and as such I believe it's inappropriate for the ballot. To my way of thinking, if you're not associated with a given name outside of and/or prior to your candidacy, as Richard "Kinky" Friedman can claim to be, then it's not a real nickname. Sorry.
UPDATE: Now this I could support.
For those of you who want to avoid getting a ticket from the about-to-be-installed red light cameras but don't want to change your driving habits, here are the intersections to avoid.
Camera enforcement, pushed by Mayor Bill White and approved by City Council in 2004, will begin in mid-August at the intersections, all but two of which are outside Loop 610."Our goal is to reduce the number of accidents that occur and reduce the property damage that occurs from those accidents," said HPD spokesman Alvin Wright.
[...]
The red-light camera sites are being determined by a committee of representatives from the Houston-Galveston Area Council, Rice University and the Houston Police Traffic Division. The committee is conducting statistical analyses of crash data at area intersections.
The first cameras will be installed at the corners of Bay Area Boulevard and El Camino Real; Bellaire at Fondren; Bellaire at Wilcrest; Bingle at Pinemont; Elgin at Milam; Hillcroft at Harwin; Hillcroft at Westpark; John F. Kennedy at Greens Road; Richmond at Dunvale, and Travis at Webster.
Critics of the program say it's simply a move by the city to raise money. White and police say the purpose of the enforcement is safety.
"Our intentions here are to get folks to comply with the traffic signals and what they indicate, not to generate revenue through tickets," said Wright, the police spokesman.
For what it's worth, none of these intersections are on regular routes for me. We'll see how that is for the next set of targets.
I'm glad to hear that a bunch of traffic experts have helped pick these intersections by studying historical crash data. That just makes me want to see a study of the cameras' impact on accidents and injuries at these locations even more. There's no need to have a he said/she said debate about the "real" purpose of these things, not when there's empirical evidence available. Either these cameras will reduce the number of accidents and/or injury accidents at these intersections or they won't. Once the data have spoken, we can go from there. When we know what the real pros and cons are, we can have a real debate.
Give me a minute here. I'm getting all verklempt.
Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay urged colleagues today to "stand on principle" and ignore the media in a farewell speech to fellow House Republicans at their weekly private meeting.DeLay, facing trial in Texas on campaign money laundering charges, is leaving Congress Friday. He plans one more speech before ending a 21-year career in the House.
Several rounds of applause and cheers could be heard from behind the closed doors. When they were opened to let a congresswoman in, members could be seen on their feet, cheering and applauding.
After the nearly one-hour meeting, DeLay related some of his comments to reporters. He said he advised GOP House members: "Don't listen to you guys in this town" and to "stand on principle."
"We have been able to make history for 12 years and we'll do it again," DeLay said he also told colleagues. He called the response heartwarming.
"I couldn't get 'em to sit down. The love is great," DeLay said.
[...]
"I don't bear any regret at all. I'm very excited about what the future may hold," he said. "I'm very proud of these members' records."
I'm trying to decide what song should have been playing in the background as DeLay gave his farewell address. You'll Never Walk Alone? Billy Joel's I've Loved These Days? The old reliable standby My Way? Leave your suggestion in the comments.
What's important is now the process to determine the Chosen One can now officially begin.
Texas Republicans took a key official step Wednesday toward replacing U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay on the November ballot, as the state GOP declared him ineligible to run because he has moved his official residence to Virginia.Friday is the former House majority leader's last day in Congress.
Republican Party of Texas Chairwoman Tina Benkiser notified Republican county chairs in the 22nd Congressional District that they can begin the process for selecting a new nominee. DeLay's successor as GOP nominee will be selected by a four-member committee of precinct chairs representing each of the counties in the district - Brazoria, Fort Bend, Galveston and Harris.
County chairs plan to call meetings before the end of the month. Once each of the counties has selected its representative, they will meet to choose the new Republican nominee.
The excitement is in the air already, I'm sure. Musings says the Chosen One could be in place by June 30.
And please, don't worry about poor Tom and what he may do next. He's made sure that his family is well cared for.
A registered lobbyist opened a retirement account in the late 1990s for the wife of then-House Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and contributed thousands of dollars to it while also paying her a salary to work for him from her home in Texas, according to sources, documents and DeLay's attorney, Richard Cullen.The account represents a small portion of the income that DeLay's family received from entities at least partly controlled by lobbyist Edwin A. Buckham. But the disclosure of its origin adds to what was previously known about the benefits DeLay's family received from its association with Buckham, and it brings the total over the past seven years to about half a million dollars.
[...]
Buckham, who co-owned his lobbying firm with his wife, initially opened the retirement account for Christine DeLay at First Union bank. In 2001, he transferred it to the Charles Schwab & Co. office near his home in Frederick, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. From 1999 to 2000, DeLay listed the account as a spousal asset on his financial disclosure forms without specifying its value.
In his 2001 disclosure, DeLay said for the first time that the account was valued at between $15,000 and $50,000. Beginning in 2003, he listed it as a joint asset, though Cullen said in an interview that it remained in Christine DeLay's name and that such a listing was not required. "I believe the IRA has remained in Christine's name since the inception and that [the joint] designation must have been an error," Cullen said.
[...]
Besides financing the retirement account, Buckham played a role in two other streams of income that indirectly benefited DeLay.
One involved payments to DeLay's family by his principal political action committee, Americans for a Republican Majority (ARMPAC), which drew its largest donations from corporations. Three former DeLay staffers with firsthand knowledge of Buckham's activities have described him as a decision maker for the group, even though it was formally run by its executive director.
An arm of the group paid Buckham a monthly consulting fee, and Buckham in turn employed its executive director as a consultant to his lobbying firm. The two of them shared a single office on the top floor of a townhouse owned by a nonprofit organization that Buckham created and directed. Buckham's role is relevant because from 2001 to Jan. 31, 2006, ARMPAC paid Christine DeLay; DeLay's daughter, Dani DeLay Ferro; and Ferro's Texas firm a total of $350,304 in political consulting fees and expenses, according to public records.
The Washington Post previously disclosed that from 1998 to 2002, Buckham's lobbying firm, Alexander Strategy Group, paid Christine DeLay a monthly salary averaging between $3,200 and $3,400. Cullen initially said the payments were for telephone calls she made periodically to the offices of certain members of Congress seeking the names of their favorite charities. Christine DeLay then forwarded that information to Buckham, along with some information about those charities.
Last week, Cullen said the payments were also for general political consulting Christine DeLay provided to her husband. Cullen said he does not have complete records of the salary payments or the dates when Christine DeLay performed the work from the couple's home in Sugar Land, Tex. But a source familiar with the pay records said the total she received from the Alexander Strategy Group was about $115,000.
Together with the retirement account worth about $25,000, this means the family's total financial benefits from entities at least partly controlled by Buckham exceeded $490,300.
As they say, nice work if you can get it.
UPDATE: This would be a very fitting going-away present for DeLay.
Billing it as a fitting "going-away present" for Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, three Democratic House members on Wednesday filed a bill to raise the minimum wage in the Northern Marianas and tighten immigration standards for the U.S. territory, which critics say has become a haven for apparel industry sweat shops.
If you haven't read the book The Hammer yet, it has a thorough introduction to the whole Marianas exploitation episode. I recommend it.
From the I-45 Coalition mailing list:
METRO Meeting, Thursday, June 8th, Ketelsen Elementary School, 600 Quitman Street (at N. Main) from 5:30 pm - 7:30 pm - INTERMODAL TERMINAL PUBLIC MEETINGWhat's an Intermodal Terminal ?? - It's basically a Hub / building(s) where several transit lines end or begin. Several of Metro's bus lines would end/start there; the rail line; the planned Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) that will be going North to the Intercontinental Airport area and a future commuter rail line that might be built from 290. If you want to see Metro's official announcement you can go to this link - http://www.piersystem.com/go/doc/1068/119275/. If you are not on Metro's e-mail list, you can sign up with Metro and they will notify you directly. Contact them at: http://metrosolutions.org/go/mailinglist/1068/. On May 31st, Metro's board voted to negotiate the purchase of 9 acres of land for this purpose - there is a good article by the Houston Chronicle's Rad Sallee about the Terminal at this link: http://www.piersystem.com/go/doc/1068/119442/.
TxDOT Meeting, Thursday, June 8th, Sinclair Elementary School, 6410 Grovewood Lane (North of W. 11th and between Ella and W. TC Jester) from 6 pm - 8 pm - PROPOSED CONSTUCTION OF FLOOD MITIGATION / RETENTION PONDS ALONG WHITE OAK BAYOU (near I-10)
The meeting's purpose is to present TxDOT's proposed action and project status and to get public comments and answer questions. TxDOT will need additional right-of-way to make this happen. TxDOT says that they will accept written comments at this meeting or you can submit them to Director of Project Development, Texas Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 1386, Houston, TX 77251-1386 any time before June 18, 2006.
If anyone attends either of these, please let me know how it goes.
The Chron editorializes about the faxes to nowhere, and in doing so they say what should be done next.
- Stop further CHIP disenrollments until Accenture meets basic performance levels.
- Request that the 2007 Legislature reinstate 12-month eligibility for CHIP/Medicaid enrollment. The current six-month rule churns out more paperwork for the state and dissuades some eligible families from re-upping.
- Suspend roll-out of the "integrated eligibility system" - which would expand the same privatized screening already in place for CHIP to other programs, including Medicaid and food stamps.
In short, no one else should be exposed to this privatization scheme until it works. Too many young Texans, and too many individuals' tax dollars, have already been dispatched into the void.
I think this last point needs to be emphasized more. The bottom line here is that we had in place a system that was working just fine, and we threw it out. When you replace a critical system that wasn't doing the job right, you can tolerate some transition pain, because you know that what you had before was no good, and once you get through that transition you know you'll be better off. That was not the case here, so to swap it out for something that isn't functioning properly right out of the gate simply isn't tolerable. Had we done a real pilot program, maybe all the screwups now could have been fixed before they really started affecting people. But we didn't, and so here we are.
Meanwhile, Rep. Charlie Gonzalez writes an op-ed in the Express News to respond to an earlier piece by THHSC chief Albert Hawkins extolling the virtues of the privatized system.
Given the complexities of these programs, we need trained, experienced staff helping people in need. Therefore, it makes little sense to bring in an outside company that has employees unfamiliar with these programs.Face-to-face interaction is still more efficient than talking to a call center. Many people may have language or communication barriers and will have difficulty trying to find their way through the maze of the automated menu. Moreover, for our seniors, a staffed office will undoubtedly be more effective than waiting on hold for a call center employee.
[...]
I am not opposed to instituting new methods of delivering better service to constituents and investigating ways to save money. But "upgrading" should not come at the expense of children losing their health care coverage or a family having food taken off their table.
Persistent reports indicate the call center staff was poorly trained and employees' performance during calls and processing applications was substandard, which resulted in numerous people in real need being purged from the rolls.
The Center for Public Policy Priorities published a report on Accenture's efficiency, and a weekly status report showed that as of March 26, 39 percent of calls were abandoned and callers were on hold for an average of 22 minutes. This is never acceptable.
At a time when federal dollars for these programs are becoming scarcer, we need to make sure that efficacy is the paramount consideration.
Any restructuring should put the interests of the neediest in our community before other considerations.
Putting my customer service hat on for a minute, our internal help desk aims for average wait times of less than a minute, and an abandon rate of under 10%. I don't expect quite that high a standard for THHSC, but I certainly agree that what Accenture is doing is not close to being viable, and needs to be addressed ASAP. The question is how much the state will be willing to do on its own accord, and how much the feds will have to prod them to do. We'll see.
County Commissioner Jerry Eversole has joined the list of people calling for the abolishment of the County Treasurer's office.
Commissioner Jerry Eversole asked County Attorney Mike Stafford what steps the county needs to take "to set in motion the action of doing away with the office."Eversole also asked budget officer Dick Raycraft to study how the county might redeploy the office's staff and what other departments might be able to take over its duties.
"Now would be a good time to look at it," Eversole said. "The important thing is to let it be known what we wish to do while the office is not occupied."
Abolishing the office requires a statewide vote on a constitutional amendment, which first must be approved by the state Legislature. A local lawmaker said he will sponsor the constitutional amendment legislation necessary to start that process if the county wants to.
"I'm interested in helping Commissioners Court do away with it, if they think there is a cost savings to be had here," said state Sen. Kyle Janek, who sponsored a similar measure for Fort Bend County during the 2005 regular session. Although the Fort Bend treasurer and other county officials supported the measure, it failed because of opposition from treasurers in other counties, Janek said.
Commissioner Sylvia Garcia said she supports Eversole's request for a study while the office is vacant. "This is a position that may have met its time," Garcia said. "If the office's responsibilities can be absorbed, there is a cost savings and it increases efficiencies, there's no reason not to do it."
Commissioners asked for the reports from Stafford and Raycraft before the next regular Commissioners Court meeting on June 20.
At this point, all four members of the Harris County Commissioner's Court are either in favor of abolishment, or at least not opposed to it - Steve Radack didn't espouse a position in the story of his spat with Orlando Sanchez, but he did say that abolishment "will be seriously considered by a majority of the members of Commissioners Court". That's close enough for me.
It's true that in terms of potential savings among county offices of questionable value, the Harris County Sports Authority is clearly the fatter target. But the Treasurer's office is basically a no-brainer. It's the definition of low-hanging fruit, and all the stars are aligning for its abolishment. I'd guess that successfully eliminating this office and demonstrating that there are no bad side effects to doing so would bolster the case for the anti-Sports Authority folks, since there'd be a success to point to. This isn't an either-or choice, but one can be done more quickly and with less resistance than the other. At least, that's how I see it.
Meet the new boss of the Harris County Sports Authority.
The sports authority's board voted unanimously to hire Janis Schmees as its executive director. She was given the mandate of bringing more events to the city - even though the operators of Minute Maid Park, Toyota Center and Reliant Park shoulder most of that burden.Schmees said she will focus on attracting track and field and other Olympic events as the city gears up to make a bid for the 2016 Olympics. She also will try to bring in youth soccer tournaments and other minor events that attract people to venues and put people in hotel rooms.
"We are going to look at all sporting events, (minor) events as well as big ones," she said.
[...]
County Judge Robert Eckels, Commissioner Steve Radack and state Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, have called for scaling back or eliminating the sports authority. They contend that the sports authority fulfilled its mission by building Minute Maid Park, Reliant Stadium and Toyota Center.
Now all it does is make payments on about $1 billion in bonds issued to build the venues, Eckels said earlier this year. That could be done more cheaply, perhaps by county employees already tasked with paying off bonds, he has said. The Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau and venue operators - the Astros, Texans and Rockets - could handle marketing, Eckels has said.
But Joseph Slovacek, a member of the sports authority's board, said the authority's future is not just in the county's hands. The Legislature would have to approve dismantling an organization that it allowed to be created. In addition, the authority is needed to repay bonds because bond firms made deals with the authority, not the county.
We'll get back to the subject of just what exactly it is the Sports Authority does in a moment. As reported yesterday, the choice of Ms. Schmees was perhaps about more than just her qualifications for the job.
Harris County Judge Robert Eckels, Commissioner Steve Radack and others have pushed for scaling back or eliminating the sports authority now that the sports facilities have been built.But Eckels knows Schmees, having worked with her on a foreign trade mission, and supports her hire, [Sports Authority chair Billy] Burge said.
Pretty neat trick blunting Eckels' opposition to the Authority by hiring someone he likes, I must say. Today's story doesn't have a direct quote from Judge Eckels, so I can't say whether or not it's destined to work. But you do have to salute the effort.
There is still the question of just what exactly it is the Sports Authority is supposed to do now that it's original mission of shepherding the new stadium projects through the political process is essentially done. blogHouston has been beating that drum for awhile now. I'm undecided on the question of whether or not the Authority should be disbanded, but I'm certainly in favor of having a public discussion on the topic. And if there is value in having this thing, then let's update and more clearly define what its purpose is, what power it has, and under what conditions (if any) its mission should be considered to be accomplished.
The following is from the subscription-only Rio Grande Guardian, sent to me in email.
Noriega: Reject GOP's divisive platform on immigration
CORPUS CHRISTI - A Democratic lawmaker from Houston has told young Latinos to reject the "divisive approach" signaled by the Republican Party of Texas in a new three-page immigration policy paper adopted this week.
Rep. Rick Noriega was keynote speaker at a Texas LULAC Young Adults luncheon on Saturday. The event was part of Texas LULAC's state convention.
"The GOP has adopted a gratuitous document that shows no tolerance. As Texans we are better than that," Noriega told the Guardian, after his speech.
The rest is beneath the fold. Read the whole thing, it's worth your time.
The Texas GOP's stance on immigration was formulated at the party's annual convention in San Antonio this week. The new platform calls for the abolition of House Bill 1403, otherwise known as the DREAM Act, which made Texas the first state in the nation to provide in-state tuition and financial assistance for certain immigrant children.The legislation, passed in 2001, was authored by Noriega. U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has since tried to pass similar legislation at the national level. For his endeavors on the issue, Noriega was named 2001 Legislator of the Year by Hispanic Journal.
As well as scrapping HB 1403, the new GOP platform calls for the withholding of federal funds from colleges that provide such tuition discounts.
The platform also proposes a "physical barrier" along the entire U.S.-Mexico border and the deployment of federal agents to roundup illegal immigrants so they can be deported to their country of origin.
The Texas GOP also now wants to deny automatic citizenship for children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants and repeal the requirement that hospitals give non-emergency care to the undocumented.
Noriega told LULAC Young Adults that depriving immigrants of basic public services was like "eating your seed corn." He later told the Guardian that the nation had a serious issue on its hands with immigration and border security but that it "needed to be handled in a humane and dignified way."
Noriega is a hero to many young adults in LULAC thanks in part to his success with HB 1403. Noriega had the opportunity to meet with some of the "1403 students" before the luncheon. He said he got to hear where they came from, what their hopes and dreams were, and where they were going.
"I wish you could have a few moments with these students. Absolutely powerful and inspiring," he said in his speech.
Noriega is also a major in the Texas Army National Guard. He served on active military service in Afghanistan for a year and a day and is now based at Camp Mabry in Austin, helping formulate plans for Operation Jump Start, the Department of Defense's project to deploy National Guard troops on the U.S.-Mexico border.
Noriega said his experiences in Afghanistan made him reaffirm his "mission statement" in life. He said he saw children being schooled in an overhang with a piece of chalkboard and families struggling with no electricity and little water.
He said he now knew his calling in life was that of public service. As a result he now counts down the time he has left to "change the world" by removing one little pebble from a jar each day. He calculates he has about 10,200 days to make a difference.
Noriega said his active duty service has also allowed him to see things differently. He said he was astonished to come back to the Capitol to see colleagues droning on and on about what constituted equity in public education.
"It sounded like Charley Brown's parents talking in those cartoons - wah, wah wah, wah wah," Noriega said. "Does equity mean 87 percent or does equity mean 93 percent. I said, well, hell I don't think either one of those means equity to me. Who in the world would ever conceive that equity means 87 percent or 93 percent?"
Noriega also told the audience how appalled he was, upon returning from Afghanistan, to learn that vigilantes had hijacked the term 'Minutemen.'
Noriega said the National Guard was synonymous with the original Minutemen, who pledged to bear arms at a minute's notice during the Revolutionary War. He said National Guard troops receive Minutemen awards.
"To come home and see that someone would bastardize and dishonor the word Minutemen was absolutely appalling to me. Unpatriotic; treasonous, in my view," Noriega said.
"If folks are so concerned about the security of this nation, I would have more respect for them if they put on the body armor and take up a post or be quiet."
Noriega said he sometimes asks himself what he served his country for. He said it was not for those who would water down school finance equity or hijack the "treasured term" of the Minutemen.
"I went and served for the hope of this country, which is the youth that is sitting here today. And I would do it again, con ganas," Noriega said.
He told LULAC Young Adults not to get too worked up about who held which office inside the civil rights group. "At end of the day we do not shoot inside the circle because our mission is outside the circle," he explained.
Noriega said that despite the "very, very, serious" issues facing the nation, such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, global warming, the education of its students and providing health care for the elderly, the
vitality of the young adults participating in LULAC gave him hope for the future."Your journey has a long way to go, 20,000 pebbles. Get up and think to yourself how are you going to change the world today?" he advised. "If you don't, just keep your tail in bed and let somebody else use the oxygen."
The audience applauded loudly.
Mark Warner's Forward Together PAC is having a little online competition.
The 2006 elections will be an opportunity for Democrats. For the first time in many years, Democrats have a strong chance to win majorities in both houses of Congress. Forward Together PAC has already contributed to more than 50 campaigns in more than 30 states. Now we are opening up the process.You can help us choose the next group of candidates we'll support. We are looking for fresh faces with fresh ideas - and for solutions-oriented Democrats with a focus on the future - candidates who will help us change the political map. Which candidates are you supporting? Register below and tell us who your Map Changers are!
The first round of voting runs through June 13. The top votegetters thee will advance to a second round (voting from June 14-25), where the top ten will receive a $5K contribution from the PAC. Finally, there will be a third election (June 26-July 4)to determine two final winners, each of whom will get a fundraiser thrown by Gov. Warner.
I got email about this from the David Harris campaign. He'd be a fine choice for this, but I should note that many other Democratic Congressional candidates from Texas are also in the running. Check it out and cast a ballot - it'd be awesome to bring a little national support to some of our contenders here.
From a Chris Bell press release:
Texas Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate Chris Bell will participate in a roundtable discussion during the second annual national stem cell policy and advocacy summit at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California Sunday, June 11. The summit, hosted by the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics and the Genetics Policy Institute (GPI), will bring together the nation’s top scientists, policy makers, and patient advocates to discuss the status of stem cell research in the United States and policy to ensure this lifesaving research.“Very few candidates for public office are as knowledgeable and passionate about stem cell research as Chris Bell,” said Bernard Siegel, Executive Director of GPI and a leading legal expert in regenerative medicine. “If Texas is to remain a leader in basic life sciences research and biotechnology, it must have leaders who understand the profound impact of stem cell research on the future of medicine in the 21st Century. Chris Bell is resolutely on the side of patients and cures. We are very proud to have him as a speaker at the summit.”
More at the Bell blog.
I confess to being nervous about Rep. Chet Edwards' re-election chances. He's in a really red district (66.3% Republican in 2004, according to the SOS redistricting reports), he narrowly beat a flawed candidate, and with fewer high-profile races this year, he ought to command a bigger focus from the state GOP.
On the other hand, Edwards is as sharp as they come, his current opponent is a newcomer to the district and lags far behind in fundraising, and as we know, 2006 is sure to be a less hostile electoral climate for Dems in Texas. For what it's worth, all of the national forecaster types are currently rating this race as either Lean Democrat or Democrat Favored, and not putting it in their list of most hotly contested seats. Nate has the rundown, plus a brief email response from Edwards' opponent Van Taylor, whom he interviewed back in May. I'll be worried about this one till the polls close, but I'm not as worried as I thought I'd be. Let's hope I stay that way.
Au revoir, mes amis. Il a été bon de vous connaître.
Texas pals of former House majority leader Tom DeLay are bidding adieu to their retiring leader with a single question: "Parlez-vous Francais?"DeLay doesn't speak a lot of French, but he relied on a few choice French phrases to taunt Democrats and the country of France for criticizing President Bush's policies in Iraq at the start of the war. His fellow Texas GOP House members chose an expensive contemporary French restaurant in Washington, Le Paradou, to toast the outgoing 22-year congressman Tuesday night in a private dinner.
"France and Iraq are losing credibility by the day and they are, I think, losing status in the world," DeLay said in February 2003 as the war loomed. "They are walking a fine line that is very dangerous."
During the 2004 presidential race, national Republicans made much of Sen. John Kerry's French relatives. DeLay would open speeches saying: "Good afternoon, or, as John Kerry might say, 'Bonjour.'"
After former Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle criticized President Bush saying he had failed at diplomacy so miserably the country was forced to war, DeLay fired back in a news release: "Fermez la bouche, Monsieur Daschle," telling the South Dakota Democrat to shut up in French.
But when Congress renamed french fries "freedom fries" in retaliation for the French position on Iraq, DeLay didn't see the need for it.
"I don't think we have to retaliate against France. They've isolated themselves pretty well," he said then.
DeLay spokeswoman Shannon Flaherty was unhappy with any references to the restaurant as French. "This is an American restaurant (last I checked the owner came here from France some 30 years ago) that serves French cuisine," she said in an e-mail to The Associated Press.
"I trust that you do know Mr. DeLay is French," she said.
Yes. And the French word for "self-hating" is "se-détestant". Merci beaucoup.
UPDATE: Fixed the French (thanks to Amerloc in the comments). I swear, I tried a half-dozen auto-translaters, and "individu-détester" was the most frequent result. C'est la guerre.
Let's check and see how the Kinky Friedman campaign is going.
Independent gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman, best known for his satire and cigar, took his first halting steps toward dispelling the rap that he isn't versed on the issues.He met with reporters for an hour to discuss political reforms and other issues.
Appearing uneasy at times and often deferring to his campaign director, Friedman said citizens should be allowed to place measures, such as casino gambling, on the ballot through a process called initiative and referendum.
You know, for a guy who's been running for Governor since 2003, it sure took him long enough to define some issues and articulate stances on them.
Friedman acknowledged his inexperience dealing with public policy details."I'm not the world's authority on this stuff. I'm not pretending to be," Friedman said as two documentary crews filmed the news conference.
Just what we need, another amiable but clueless guy in the big chair. That's worked so well for the country these past few years.
Look, Friedman's actual proposals are fine. Not original, mind you, and I agree with Chris Bell when he says they don't go far enough, but there's nothing objectionable to me. I even support his proposal to allow primary voters to sign a petition for independent candidates. I doubt that amounts to much in practical terms, but I've no problems with it.
But let's not kid ourselves. It's clear from reading all the coverage of this little press event that Friedman is a not-ready-for-prime-time player. Stuff like this doesn't cut it:
Meat-and-potatoes on issues were a natural next course, his staff said, now that the petitions needed for Mr. Friedman to get on the ballot have been filed for review by the secretary of state."Everyone wanted to know if Kinky was going to get serious, and we said 'Yes,' " said campaign spokeswoman Laura Stromberg. "We weren't going to spend time and resources coming up with political proposals when we weren't even assured a spot on the ballot."
Putting aside the fact that he's had nearly three years to come up with any proposals at all, perhaps if Friedman had spent one-tenth of the time he's given to documentaries, reality TV shows, and general self-promotion, he'd have been able to produce a little substance by now. But that's not the campaign he's run, and if there was any doubt about it before now, it should be dispelled.
The Chron editorializes on the recent Radack-Sanchez smackdown and the growing realization that the time is now to abolish the office of Harris County Treasurer.
During an joint appearance before the Chronicle editorial board during the primary campaign, Sanchez criticized Cato's handling of his office. He said that if he won the $96,000-a-year post he would use it as a platform to express his views on immigration and would travel to Washington if necessary.The county treasurer supervises 15 employees who process payments authorized by county commissioners; it has nothing to do with immigration policy. During his tenure Cato stuck to its mandated duties and avoided embroiling the office in controversy.
To be blunt, Cato did almost nothing newsworthy during his tenure. I'd say that's a feature of the Treasurer's office, and I daresay the Chron would agree with that.
The state of Texas and several other counties have already gone the route of eliminating their treasurer positions. The two Democratic Harris County commissioners, Sylvia Garcia, and El Franco Lee, have indicated they would support such an action.With Cato's passing, the time is right to consider whether this appendage of county government is worth the cost. Sanchez has made it clear he would use the office for a political agenda having little or nothing to do with its job description. The Democratic candidate, Richard Garcia, is running on a platform of abolishing it.
In a time when public sentiment demands lower taxes and greater economy of public services, why should taxpayers provide $96,000 a year for an extraneous position to be used only to revive flagging political careers? Harris County commissioners and state lawmakers should give voters the opportunity to answer that question in the near future.
Obviously, I agree. Judging from the letters to the editor, however, not everybody else does.
In regard to the June 3 Chronicle article "GOP in a squabble over treasurer post": Jack Cato's predecessor, Don Sumners, was anything but obscure.He called for tax cuts and more fiscal responsibility and was written about in many articles in the Chronicle.
Sumners was at the forefront of efforts to limit government growth, coauthoring the Tax Vote 97 effort to limit property taxes.
A political office is what you make of it; and judging from the wrath Sumners received from other county officials for working to bring reform to government, the office of treasurer amounted to a lot more than just disbursing funds.
Also, the idea of abolishing the treasurer's office was tried before, but obviously unsuccessfully.
Sumners testified in Austin, that with today's complicated financial transactions, a qualified county treasurer is needed more than ever.
And, at that time [in 1997], the Chronicle supported his position in an editorial that said that the county needed a fiscal watchdog.
JERRY C. LARSEN Seabrook
I find this all singularly unpersuasive. Everything listed here - calling for tax cuts (there's a courageous stance for you), working to put referenda on the local ballot, being a general pain in the butt to other county officials - can be accomplished quite readily by private citizens. None of this explains why we need an office called "County Treasurer". The fact that the Chron thought we did in 1997 is not relevant to 2006. Agree with him or not, Paul Bettencourt does anything you might want a "fiscal watchdog" to do, and he does it from an office that has actual power. So I ask again: what is it that the Treasurer does that no one else can do? I can't see anything.
A updated version of the official state hurricane evacuation plan is now online.
The state's 157-page plan was posted online late Friday, the day after the Atlantic hurricane season began. Some local emergency management officials said Monday that they did not know the plan was ready.But several who had seen it said the plan sufficiently addresses some of the most crucial concerns from last year, including traffic management, fuel availability along evacuation routes and the evacuation of people who can't move themselves.
"Clearly, the governor and his staff . . . have listened to the community, assessed our lessons learned (from Hurricanes Rita and Katrina), and the outcome is the best plan that we could have," said Rudy Garza, an assistant city manager for Austin.
The plan includes several new components, such as "comfort stations" that would provide food, water and medical assistance along evacuation routes and a point-to-point system that would pair coastal cities with inland cities for special needs evacuations. Galveston's special needs evacuees would be brought to Austin.
You can find it here. I'll look at it shortly and report back if I se anything weird.
I don't care what kind of crazy stuff some people may believe about today and today's date. Here's all you need to know:
Today is Olivia's second birthday. She started the celebration a little early by coming down with a stomach bug over the weekend (I'm sure that by the time she gets to college she'll figure out that it's party first, be sick second). She's feeling better now, and there's cupcakes waiting for her later on at daycare.
Since her first birthday, Olivia has continued to amaze us with her growth and development. She's a little chatterbox (most of the time; she gets shy around new people) and still just loves loves loves books. It's hard to say what her favorites are because she makes us read so much of her library on a regular basis, but there are a couple of books that stand out. I'll quote you a couple of lines from each (from memory, naturally - I've read these books a lot now). See if you can identify them. Those of you with small children will have no problem, the rest of you will have to think back.
1. My brothers read a little bit
Little words like "If" and "It"
My father can read big words, too
Like "Constantinople" and "Timbuktu"
2. Look at me!
Look at me!
Look at me now!
It is fun to have fun
But you have to know how!
Answers and another Olivia picture are beneath the fold.
Today is also the 40th birthday of my good friend Martha. Yes, that means she was born on 6-6-66. With a debut like that, how could she not have turned out to be cool?
Happy Birthday, Olivia and Martha!
Bonus Olivia picture:
The books in question are Hop on Pop and The Cat In The Hat. You all got them right, right?
Wherever I go, there's always someone to tell me that their city features the world's worst drivers. It's like a point of pride - "You wussies in [city X] have it easy. Here in [city Y], only the strong survive the freeways!" Well, here's a little empirical evidence to help you out the next time you engage in one of these debates.
Who would have thought it? Laredo, a historically wild and woolly border town just across the Rio Grande from a continuing drug war, is the safest city in Texas to drive in. And fellow border cities Brownsville and El Paso are right up there.At the other end of the risk pool, you're more likely to have a collision in Dallas than any other Texas city. Its suburbs of Carrollton, Grand Prairie, Garland, Irving and Mesquite are almost as bad.
Or so says Allstate Insurance Co., whose 2006 report on "America's Best Drivers" is at least a conversation-starter.
The company based the findings on its own policyholders' accident claims in 2003 and 2004. Because Allstate has a 12 percent share of the market, its clients are probably typical of drivers around the country, said the company's Texas spokeswoman, Kim Whitaker, in Dallas.
The report compares the average number of years between car crashes for residents of 200 U.S. cities. The national average is about 10 years, it says.
The safest city of all, it found, was Sioux Falls, S.D., where drivers average 14.3 years between collisions. For Laredo, the interval was 10.8 years, 34th-best overall.
Houston, where the average span of crash-free driving was eight years, ranked 163rd among the 200, but fifth among the biggest cities, beating out Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles and Philadelphia.
Congratulations, Dallas! I confess, I usually concede the point when someone from the Metroplex tells me the drivers there are worse than they are here. Now I can feel justified in doing so.
I have written before about how the changes to the school finance funding formula enacted in the last special session have been received by the plaintiffs in the West Orange-Cove lawsuit. Their contention that the requirement of a referendum to raise school taxes beyond a certain level may wind up turning into another de facto unconstitutional statewide property tax is echoed in this Express News story.
A new provision requiring school tax elections could widen the gap between rich and poor schools, critics say."It's one of the worst things in this bill," said Austin-based school finance lawyer Buck Wood. "It's a disaster for education. Tax referendums tear school districts apart."
[...]
Wood and others envision voters in rich school districts - such as Alamo Heights in San Antonio, Eanes west of Austin and Highland Park in north Dallas - supporting school tax increases. That's because most of them are college educated, they value education and they are wealthy enough to afford tax increases to enhance their children's education.
But families in working-class districts who struggle to make it from week to week may be less inclined to vote themselves tax increases.
"The priority is not taxes to improve education, so it's going to be harder to talk voters into voting for increasing their taxes," said Guillermo Zavala Jr., superintendent of the property-poor Harlandale Independent School District.
The school funding bill is designed to cut school property taxes by as much as a third after two years. But districts will have limited opportunity to increase local property taxes.
"You have just given them relief from taxes, and now you want to come back and tax them again? I don't think that's going to happen," Zavala said.
[...]
The Alamo Heights Independent School District will be allowed to keep all revenue generated by the first 4-cent tax increase in the new enrichment plan. But it would have to send the state about $1 for every $2 it may raise from additional tax increases because Alamo Heights is a property-wealthy district and must share some of its property wealth.
Property-poor schools can tell their voters that every $1 of additional taxes would generate $2 total, because the state has to help equalize their taxing effort, said Jerry Christian, superintendent of the Alamo Heights ISD.
"I think that sell would be a little easier than to say, 'For every $2 that we're going to raise in this tax, we're only going to benefit a dollar,'" he said.
"I think on both sides, it's going to be difficult to raise taxes with a populace vote," he said.
That will be especially true for fast-growing districts such as San Antonio's Northside and North East districts, said school finance consultant Dan Casey of Austin-based Moak, Casey and Associates. "A number of school districts are very concerned about their ability to sell those tax-rate increases in the future for maintenance and operation," he said.
The Northside and North East school districts must frequently appeal to voters for bond issues to build new schools to accommodate growth.
"And then having to ask for money for operations, too, causes great concern," he said.
I post all this stuff now so that four or five years down the line when another lawsuit is filed, I can dig these entries out of my archives and say "See? It's just like we said from the beginning." And if it turns out I'm wrong and the system works great without any major changes, you can do the digging and point to these entries to say "See? You've been full of hot air for years." If that's not a win-win situation, I don't know what is.
On Saturday at Kuff's World, I noted that an effort to insert a plank in the State GOP's platform calling for the repeal of the new business tax failed by a 28-3 vote. That was not the end of the fight over the new tax, however.
Republican grass-roots anger with Perry and the Legislature was on display Saturday, though, as Houston delegates pressed for a platform plank to repeal the business tax.The effort was led by Steve and Bruce Hotze and Norman Adams.
Steve Hotze told the convention that the party since 1991 has had a plank calling for the repeal of the state franchise tax that many think is an income tax. He said the new business tax just made matters worse by taxing companies whether or not they are profitable.
"Even the federal government doesn't do that," Hotze said.
Adams likened the expanded business tax to spreading fire ants from one yard to another.
When state Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, tried to explain the new tax to delegates, many tried to boo him down.
Williams said all the revenue from the new tax is dedicated to lowering property taxes.
Former state Republican Chairman Tom Pauken told the convention that the new tax goes a long way toward ending the so-called Robin Hood school finance system that redistributes money from property-rich districts to property-poor ones.
The convention first voted on the amendment with a standing vote, but it appeared so close that a roll call vote was held, and the measure failed.
The platform adopted by the convention called for a "timely review" of the new business tax.
The Morning News has more.
Throughout the week, Perry forces had characterized the tax opposition as small, and the governor sought to turn a convention-floor scare into an asset."The Texas Legislature had a vigorous debate and passed historic property tax relief and meaningful school finance reform with bipartisan support," Mr. Perry said. "The Republican Party has now had a vigorous debate and formally endorsed the Legislature's actions. I am honored to have the continued trust and support of grass-roots Republicans."
Houston talk-radio host and state Senate candidate Dan Patrick, a critic of the tax, interpreted the vote differently.
"If you're the governor in a contested, four-way race coming out of the convention with only a 55-45 victory over the centerpiece of your campaign, that's a very shallow victory," he said.
Mr. Patrick and other conservative activists, mainly from Houston, predicted a tax backlash by small-business owners and disillusionment among precinct workers.
Delegate Charlotte Lampe of Houston said Mr. Perry had slighted grassroots activists in the state's biggest urban area.
She noted that Platform Committee Chairman Kirk Overbey of Austin had called them a "small, disgruntled group."
"How could the second largest county in the nation be a 'small, disgruntled group,' " said Ms. Lampe, 52, an interior decorator. "No Republican has won statewide office without carrying Harris County. How does Rick Perry figure?"
That's a much more impressive showing by the Hotze-ites - I'd go so far as to say it's their first really impressive show of force against Governor Perry. What it isn't, however, is any kind of clear indication that Rick Perry and/or any other Republican incumbent who supported HB3 will suffer an actual loss of support at the polls in November, up to and including a sufficient loss of support to threaten his or her re-election.
I mean, look. As long as anti-business tax ringleader Norman Adams is saying stuff like this, I can't take the his group's threats seriously.
Even Norman Adams, a GOP activist from Houston who wants the party platform to include language condemning the new business tax, said, "I don't want anybody but Perry being re-elected. But I want to scare the pants off of him."
It's very simple. When a politician you support does something that you absolutely cannot abide, there are a few things you can do to try to either get him to change his ways or punish him for the transgression:
1. Figure out a way to abide what he did and give him the same support as always.
2. Withhold support (endorsements, donations, volunteerism, etc) but still vote for the guy in the end.
3. Support another candidate.
Adams appears to be somewhere between #1 and #2 - perhaps he has specifically ruled out doing anything for Rick Perry beyond voting for him, but if so I haven't read about it. Steven Hotze is (so far at least) keeping option #3 open, but as you know I have my doubts about that - I suspect he'll wind up wherever Adams lands. Sure, if this is still an issue in 2010 and Rick Perry wants to be on the ticket somewhere in Texas then, they can throw their support behind some other Republican in a primary as payback. That sound you hear is Rick Perry quaking in his tassled loafers at the prospect.
The point here is that if you decide against sucking it up and figuring out how to love the bastard that just betrayed you, you have to be willing to see him lose. You can do that passively, by choosing option #2 and hoping that the donation/elbow grease/endorsement you didn't give makes a difference, or you can do it actively by stumping for a replacement. Even if Adams really does ultimately withhold all forms of support for Perry other than his trip to the voting booth, how can you believe he's willing to see Perry lose? There's no risk involved in what he's doing, and without it, there's no power to what he says. What exactly does Rick Perry have to fear from him?
You may say well, if there were still a GOP primary to be run this year, Adams and Hotze could really go all out against Perry. Since it's just the general, their only other candidate choices are worse for them in other regards. Too bad. One way or another, their principles are going to take a blow. They just get to pick which ones.
Convention delegate Lee Roy Petersen, a retired computer systems designer from Plantersville, near Houston, said he wanted the Legislature to lower property taxes with a sales tax expansion instead of an expanded business tax. He said he plans to vote for Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, running as an independent for governor, who says she would repeal the new business tax."I'm trying to send a message to these people that betrayed our platform," Petersen said. "If they don't want to abide by our Republican Party platform, they need to go."
There's someone who's willing to put principle ahead of party. Call me back when Adams, Hotze, and Patrick are ready to do that. I'll be more than ready to hear about it.
Last year, the Enron federal task force failed to secure any convictions in the first trial of executives of the former Enron Broadband Services. Even though that case was considered stronger than some of the others they had to try, they got a mixture of acquittals and hung verdicts. Last week, the prosecutors did a little better, convicting one out of two defendants on all charges.
Kevin Howard, former Enron Broadband Services chief financial officer, was found guilty on all five counts in the indictment that accused both men of pushing through a bogus transaction in late 2000 strictly to help the division meet earnings goals.Michael Krautz, a leading accountant in the division, was acquitted of all charges, making him only the second ex-Enron employee to be found not guilty by a jury.
[...]
The clean-cut Howard, dressed in a business suit and tie, left the courtroom stonefaced, declining through his attorneys to comment.
His attorneys vowed to appeal.
"We are surprised, we are disappointed - we don't think the evidence supported a guilty verdict," Howard's attorney Jim Lavine said. "We'll look to our next steps to appeal."
Howard faces up to 30 years in federal prison for his conviction on a single count of conspiracy, three counts of wire fraud, and for falsifying books and records.
Krautz was acquitted of the same charges.
Howard, a Houston resident, is free on $500,000 bail pending sentencing scheduled for Sept. 11, at 9:30 a.m., only hours before the sentencing of former Enron executives Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay in a courtroom next door before a different judge.
[...]
Some legal experts believe the acquittal of Krautz may actually take some of the steam out of a possible appeal by Lay and Skilling. Namely, it will make it tougher for them to argue they couldn't get a fair trial in Houston.
"I think it pulls the rug out from under any argument Lay or Skilling make about a change of venue," said Philip Hilder, a former prosecutor who represented government witness Sherron Watkins.
I never doubted that Skilling and Lay would get a fair trial. If this does undercut that argument, fine by me.
The government last year failed to win convictions against Howard, Krautz and three other former executives in the division in a trial that ended with a jumble of acquittals and nondecisions. The judge then separated the case into three trials to simplify it for jurors.Former EBS executives Joe Hirko, Rex Shelby and Scott Yeager are awaiting retrial. Yeager's trial was scheduled for this week but has been put off indefinitely because of an appeal issue; Shelby and Hirko are scheduled to return to the courtroom in September.
[...]
Even with the acquittal of Krautz, some legal observers believe the conviction of Howard is enough to keep up the prosecution's momentum for trying the remaining defendants.
"Had the government bought the bagel on this one, they may have well have walked away from other broadband trials in the wake of the Lay and Skilling success," said Jacob Frenkel, the former senior counsel at the Securities and Exchange Commission's enforcement division, who has followed the cases.
"The fact that they won a conviction against the CFO, not withstanding the acquittal, will help the government maintain its vigor and resolve to prosecute the remaining broadband defendants."
So it's not over yet, though I daresay that pretty much everything else beyond return court dates by Skilling and Lay will be non-headline news most places. Also fine by me.
As usual, for an alternate view of the events, check out Tom Kirkendall.
Net Neutrality will come up in Congress again this week. Here's the latest email on the subject from MoveOn:
Dear Charles,It's time. Next week, the full House of Representatives votes on whether to protect Internet freedom. Your representative, Sheila Jackson-Lee, needs to hear solid constituent support for protecting Net Neutrality—the Internet's First Amendment.
Here's an important detail. Next week, House members will be voting on a larger law governing our nation's communications policy - and the current version of this bill guts Net Neutrality. So every representative needs to hear in no uncertain terms that they should vote against this proposed law if it is not changed to protect Net Neutrality.
Can you call Rep. Jackson-Lee to say vote "no" on the COPE telecommunications law if it doesn't protect Net Neutrality?
Here are the numbers - it's best to call the Washington, D.C. office and then your local office:
Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee
Phone: 202-225-3816
District Offices:
Houston: 713-691-4882
Houston: 713-655-0050
Houston: 713-861-4070Please click here to let us know you called and to share how it went:
Some tips when calling:
1) If the staffer is making a tally of constituent calls, make sure they have a category specifically for "Vote no on the COPE telecom law if it doesn't protect Net Neutrality." Otherwise, your representative may get a diluted message and miss the point.
2) If they ask for more details, you can urge your representative to support the bipartisan Sensenbrenner-Conyers Net Neutrality amendment (HR 5417) which passed the House Judiciary Committee last week with a powerful 20-13 biparttisan majority. And if that fails, they should vote against the entire bill.
3) If you get a voicemail option, leave a message. They will get it.
Thanks for helping to save the Internet.
–Eli Pariser, Adam Green, Noah T. Winer, and the MoveOn.org Civic Action team
Friday, June 2nd, 2006P.S. Here are two informative videos about this Net Neutrality issue:
YouTube video -tollbooths on the information super-highway
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1838&id=7879-6935528-Y_PV.wkC5qU.DfgaDjG5Qw&t=4Moby speaks out on Net Neutrality in Washington, DC
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1841&id=7879-6935528-Y_PV.wkC5qU.DfgaDjG5Qw&t=5P.P.S. Can you support this member-driven campaign today? As companies like AT&T spend millions lobbying Congress to gut Internet freedom, we will win this fight because of the power of regular people. A donation of $5, $10, or $20 would go a long way. You can donate here:
https://civic.moveon.org/donatec4/creditcard.html?id=7879-6935528-Y_PV.wkC5qU.DfgaDjG5Qw&t=6
Fill in the name of your Congressperson as needed. You can search for your representative by ZIP code here.
You may have heard that Fort Hood is having some financial difficulties.
A "severe budget crunch" has hit Fort Hood, one of the nation's largest military posts and home to a U.S. Army division serving in Iraq, officials said Thursday.The funding squeeze forced the Central Texas installation to impose an immediate hiring freeze and dramatic cuts in contracts with local providers of support services, officials said.
The move announced Thursday follows "significant internal steps to help manage existing funds through the end of the fiscal year," an announcement from base headquarters said.
"Additional measures are necessary and will be implemented beginning (Thursday)," the statement said.
In addition to the "100 percent civilian hiring freeze," other cutbacks will reduce custodial contracts, on-post housing referrals, grounds maintenance contracts and government vehicle contracts, officials said.
Additionally, pest management contracts were "severely" cut and other services were "significantly" reduced, officials said.
I sure hope this isn't a bad summer for mosquitoes in Central Texas, because there's nothing Fort Hood can do about it now.
So what is Fort Hood's Congressman, John Carter, doing about this? Well, nothing, actually. He's got other things to do.
As U.S. House and Senate conferees try to hammer out a compromise immigration reform measure, Rep. John Carter, R-Georgetown will join other House members on the tour of the border Friday in El Paso.“This tour will allow members to see firsthand the challenges at the border and learn more about the practical implementation of having National Guard members patrolling the border,” Carter’s office said.
Way to be there for your constituents, Rep. Carter. Link via Eye on Williamson.
You may recall last week that an employee of the Veterans Administration had a laptop that contained a database with more than 26 million personal records in it stolen. This led to Sen. Tom Harkin (D, Iowa) to introduce a bill called the Veterans Identity Protection Act of 2006.
The legislation would require the VA to provide one year of credit monitoring to each affected person. This will immediately alert an individual to any changes made on their credit report. After that first year, the VA would be required to provide one free credit report to each individual - that’s in addition to the free credit report each year already provided by the Fair Credit Reporting Act. This means that, after the first year of credit monitoring, eligible individuals will have access to four free credit reports over the course of two additional years.
The bill also provides $1.25 billion to fund these actions. While I expect this legislation will be very popular among Congressional Dems in general, it's nice to see a candidate like John Courage, who is himself a veteran, endorse this bill. Will Lamar Smith follow suit, or is this not an issue that attracts his attention? We'll find out if it's ever allowed to come up for a vote.
In other Courage news, Vince reports from a conference call that touched on Net Neutrality and Lamar Smith's bizarre ideas about where Homeland Security funds ought to go. Check it out.
I just have one question regarding this article that names and asks for feedback on "your favorite Houston-based athlete of all time": A.J. Foyt??
His uniform was his own, but is it even debatable that anybody was more identified with Houston than A.J. Foyt? Since winning his first midget race in 1953 at Playland Park in the city, nobody raced like SuperTex, winner of four Indianapolis 500 titles, the Daytona 500 and the 24 Hours of Le Mans.
Maybe it's just because I don't follow auto racing at all, but I didn't even know the dude was from Houston. Perhaps people of longer standing in H-Town might feel differently. Leave a comment if you do. And for what it's worth, the leaders in the accompanying " Which athlete has best represented Houston?" poll as I write this are Hakeem Olajuwon (my pick, 28%), Nolan Ryan (23%), Earl Campbell and Craig Biggio (13% each). Foyt comes in at 2%, tied with Carl Lewis and Clyde Drexler and ahead of Cynthia Cooper and Sheryl Swoopes.
Jeez, has it really been five years since Tropical Storm Allison flooded the hell out of Houston? Tiffany and I were actually out of town the weekend that it happened - the worst flooding occured overnight on a Friday. We were in Chicago to attend her sister's graduation from business school. On Saturday morning, my cell phone rang, and the phone number on the caller ID was our home number. It was our friend Andrea calling (she had a key to our house). "The good news is your house was not affected by the floods," was how she greeted me. Floods? What floods? I hadn't seen the TV or a newspaper since yesterday morning, and we didn't have a laptop at the time. She told me about it, and asked to borrow Tiffany's car - hers was a casualty of the water.
The only way to describe how devastating TS Allison was is to show you pictures, which my buddy Dan Wallach has. Here's US59 in Montrose. That's about 20 feet of water you're seeing. Here's I-10 at Shepherd, which is about two miles from our house. And here's I-45 at North Main (and another view), also about two miles from our house, northeast of I-10 and Shepherd.
Twenty-two people were killed. There were $5 billion in damages. Richard Connelly of the Houston Press, who lived in Timbergrove Manor not far from the Heights, wrote about his family's experience getting flooded out and later about other residents' experiences dealing with FEMA as they bought out many homes in flood-prone areas. If you're feeling a little emotional today, you might want to avoid those two.
Are we in any better shape today? The Chron story offers a lot of evidence that we are in many ways, but also says this:
The city has spent $4 million on city facilities downtown to reduce flood dangers that became evident during Allison, said Dawn Ullrich, director of the Convention & Entertainment Facilities Department. Flood walls and doors were built at the entrances to underground parking garages, including the Wortham Center and City Hall Annex garages.Those garages became canals during Allison, allowing water to flow freely into the pedestrian tunnel system. Now, watertight gates, called submarine doors, at tunnel entrances can be closed if there's a possibility of flooding.
"Each technique was crafted for the type of threat it might face and where the water might come from," Ullrich said.
But environmental lawyer Jim Blackburn said the city and county have not done enough, and Houston is no better off than it was before Allison.
Recently redrawn 100-year flood plain maps do not reflect increased rainfall statistics, Blackburn said.
"A lot more of this area is flood-prone than the maps show," he said. "If those maps are wrong, then you're basically not getting the right information, so how can you have a good plan?"
That's a question I'd rather not need to know the answer to any time soon.
This ought to make a few waverers on Net Neutrality sit up and pay attention.
eBay this week unleashed a political machine that should make politicians envious: a national e-mail blast over Net neutrality.Meg Whitman, chief executive of the Internet auctioneer, called on more than a million eBay members to get involved in the debate over telecommunications laws and "send a message to your representatives in Congress before it is too late."
"The telephone and cable companies in control of Internet access are trying to use their enormous political muscle to dramatically change the Internet," Whitman wrote. "It might be hard to believe, but lawmakers in Washington are seriously debating whether consumers should be free to use the Internet as they want in the future."
This is the first time that eBay has used e-mail to urge its members to weigh in on a national issue and the first time Whitman has sent an e-mail to members under her own name, the company said Thursday.
eBay--which has been active in a pro-Net neutrality coalition for years--confirmed that more than a million e-mails have been sent out so far, but declined to offer a more specific number. The campaign is ongoing.
If a company like eBay frames this issue to its customers as "Take a stand or risk not being able to use services you love like ours", I think that would be pretty darned powerful. Keep an eye on this one. Via MyDD.
From the Dallas Morning News:
By midday Friday, the booth operated by the Republican National Hispanic Assembly of Texas had few visitors, despite the bustling activity all around it.Perhaps a man carrying a sign that called for building a wall along the border to keep out Mexican immigrants captured the mood.
The sign read: "Keep America Beautiful. Build a Wall and Stop Illegal Immigration Now."
[...]
Just two years ago, Hispanic outreach was a major theme at the GOP's national convention in New York. But for this Texas gathering, some say, trying to bring Hispanics into the party has been an afterthought.
There were no major Hispanic events or socials listed in the official convention program; a hospitality room for the Hispanic Assembly was set up at an off-site hotel.
And unlike two years ago, Republican Hispanics are spending much of their time trying to stem grassroots efforts to put strict anti-immigration language in the party's platform.
Yeah, well, good luck with that. The state GOP platform has always been a haven for crackpottery of various forms. It's hard to imagine that any restraint would be allowed this year. And unlike Aaron Pena, I have a hard time feeling any compassion for these Hispanic Republicans. If they didn't see this coming, they should have. Perhaps they can commiserate with the Log Cabin folks, assuming any of them bothered to show up at the convention, on how it feels to be the Big Scary Menace of the year.
Also via The Rep and along similar lines comes Royal Masset's lament.
"My fear is that we have forgotten some of the very lessons we learned when we were still trying to break though," said Royal Masset, a veteran Republican strategist who was the state party's political director during much of the 1990s. "It used to be that our candidates for office ran to serve the people of Texas. Now it seems that they run to serve the Republican Party."[...]
"The Republican-primary voters have made it very clear that they expect action on this issue, and they expect it now," [Will Lutz, editor of the conservative newsletter Lone Star Report] said. "You're going to hear a lot of that at the convention."
Masset, who is married to a Mexican citizen who is a legal resident of the United States, said he has heard a lot from Republicans on that issue. And he doesn't like much of it.
"I am for very strong controls along the border, and I am not for amnesty," Masset said. "But I am definitely not for all of this hateful rhetoric we are hearing on this issue -- that we are going to felonize them, that we should deport them. It's talk like this that is going to lose us the Hispanic vote just like we lost the black vote in the last generation.
"We are the majority party now. We should be working now to increase that majority."
May I just say Thanks to all the Republicans now in San Antonio who are working to decrease that majority? I do appreciate it.
I don't really have the energy to read through more stories on this. South Texas Chisme does (more here), and so does Rio Grande Valley Politics, so go read them. I have some other convention thoughts at Kuff's World.
I do so love the sound of infighting among Republicans, especially over relatively unimportant matters like the office of Harris County Treasurer, which is currently open due to the untimely death of incumbent Jack Cato.
In a letter to Republican precinct chairs, who will select a nominee to replace Cato on the fall ballot, prospect Orlando Sanchez says he developed a warm and respectful relationship with Cato while running unsuccessfully against him in the March GOP primary.That's a lie, GOP County Commissioner Steve Radack says in a letter to the same group.
"Don't believe for a second that Sanchez respected Jack Cato," writes Radack, who delivered a eulogy at Cato's memorial service. "Further, he certainly did not have a warm relationship with Jack or his family. As a matter of fact, what Sanchez did was conduct a negative campaign against Jack that was outrageously cruel and unnecessary."
Sanchez began shoring up support shortly after Cato died. His letter is dated May 28, the day after a public service commemorating Cato and two days after his burial.
"I am not going to sit back and allow someone to trample on the memory of Jack Cato," Radack said in an interview. "Orlando Sanchez has stooped to a new low. He is lying. I'm not going to let some multi-time loser try and come in there and belittle a good man."
Sanchez served three terms on the Houston City Council, but has lost three bids for office since then.
In a postscript to his letter, Radack provided a phone number and encouraged recipients to call Cato's son, John, to discuss the family's relationship with Sanchez.
John Cato said he was put off by the substance and timing of Sanchez's letter. He said he disagreed with Sanchez's characterization of his relationship with his father as warm and respectful.
"I don't think it's respectful for a fellow Republican to wage a campaign against an incumbent Republican who had the support of every Republican county official," he said.
Sanchez denied attacking Cato during the primary campaign.
"I ran a positive race," he told the Houston Chronicle. "I never addressed my opponent in any of my mail pieces. I ran on the issues. I believe in the Ronald Reagan 11th Commandment, that you never speak evil of your fellow Republicans."
As for Radack's letter, "The commissioner has a long history of being involved in other offices at the county," Sanchez said. "I am shocked, though, by that tirade. He must have gotten close to one of those rabid bats in north Harris County."
Boys, please. Can't you play nicely? This is all so unseemly. And it's all so ultimately pointless, too.
The GOP nominee will be opposed in November by Democrat Richard Garcia, who advocates abolishing the treasurer's office.Commissioners Sylvia Garcia and El Franco Lee, both Democrats, have said that with Cato's death, the county should consider abolishing the obscure office, which has no real power. To accomplish that, the county would have to ask the state Legislature to put a constitutional amendment to a statewide vote.
Several other counties, and the state of Texas, have abolished the treasurer's post.
"I think it will be seriously considered by a majority of the members of Commissioners Court," said Radack, who added that he finds it interesting that the Democratic candidate is advocating the position be abolished.
"That sounds like a conservative thing to do."
Actually, it's the common sense thing to do, and common sense is all you need to vote for Richard Garcia. Though it wasn't what he intended, Orlando Sanchez had a point during the primary when he said that there wasn't even a web site for the Treasurer's office until he made an issue of it. Well, here's that website. Take 30 seconds or so and look it over - it won't require more time than that. Then tell me again why we need this elected office.
The choice is clear. It doesn't matter who the Republicans ultimately nominate for this job. The Treasurer's office has fulfilled its purpose. It's time to elect the one candidate who will do the right thing and push for its abolishment.
I mentioned before that the city of San Antonio is suing discount online hotel brokers over lost tax revenues. The city of Houston has looked into filing a similar suit, and has now taken further action on this front.
After a setback in late April - the firm chosen by the city to move ahead with the lawsuit backed out - City Attorney Arturo Michel said he hopes to ask the City Council to approve a contract with a different law firm sometime this month."We still plan on proceeding with it," Michel said. "We'll keep an open mind, but we've had a lot of good lawyers looking at it, and I'd be surprised if something happened that would change our minds."
[...]
Houston has been considering legal action for months, but plans to sue fell through in late April when a Houston law firm the city had chosen bowed out of the project.
The firm did not return calls for comment, but Michel said the move was sparked by a memo that City Controller Annise Parker issued to City Council members, expressing doubt that a lawsuit would be worth the city's time and money.
"It is my belief that there is no clear, irrefutable basis for pursuing this issue further at this time," Parker wrote on April 11.
Indeed, several cities across the country that considered legal action have decided against it.
But Mayor Bill White said Houston will continue to push for a lawsuit. The city plans to negotiate a contingency fee, so it will be financially responsible to a law firm only if unpaid taxes are recovered.
I'm not sure what the merits are of such a suit (me not being a lawyer and all), but I don't suppose I have a problem with one being undertaken on a contingency basis. At least that mitigates the risk.
As for the merits, here's the point/counterpoint for you in a nutshell:
"Part of the problem here is that like a lot of our tax laws, the hotel tax law was created before there was an Internet," said Texas Deputy Comptroller Billy Hamilton. "So the law simply didn't contemplate it."Not so, said former state Rep. Steve Wolens, a lawyer who is representing several cities in lawsuits against online travel companies.
He said both Texas and Houston law are very clear: Any person controlling a hotel room is required to collect and remit the tax.
He said that whether the Web site operators actually own the hotel rooms is irrelevant. "They control the rooms and therefore they have to collect the tax," he said.
[...]
Art Sackler, director of the Interactive Travel Services Association, which represents travel Web sites, argues they do not have to pay the tax because the price markup represents a service fee. Companies charge customers for the convenience of finding them an affordable, available hotel room, he said.
"Those service fees are not - on the law or on the facts - subject to the tax," Sackler said.
His industry is frustrated with the lawsuits, he said, because some were filed without any attempt to talk out the issue with travel companies.
"We're extremely confident that once we would have a chance to chat with anyone who is in a position to be looking at this, we'll be able to easily demonstrate that there are no taxes due on our service fees, no taxes being collected and withheld," Sackler said. "The city of Houston so far has been very responsible in this manner, approaching it in just the right way: having discussions with us."
Like I said, I'm not sure how solid the cities' cases are. I suspect that a legislative solution is going to be needed here, though I'm not sure how likely one is to pass. It would be a shorter path for the cities to get what they want if they can get a bill through the Lege, that's for sure. We'll see what happens.
Look out, Dallas, here he comes.
Dan Patrick, whose years as a conservative radio pundit helped him win a Republican state Senate nomination, is expanding the reach of his voice with the purchase of a Dallas-area radio station.By Labor Day, Dallas-area residents will be able to hear Patrick on station KMGS-AM (1160), based in the enclave city of Highland Park.
I just have one question: When one of the Dallas County Republican Senators retires, will he run for that seat, too?
It's time for another stupid and inexcusable screwup by everyone's favorite privatization project.
Three months ago, dozens of documents from Texas containing highly confidential financial and health information began arriving over a fax machine at a Seattle warehouse.Shaun Peck, a clerk at the warehouse, searched through the mysterious documents - revealing Social Security numbers, medical evaluations, income tax forms and pay stubs - and wondered why they kept coming and where they should be going instead.
Back in Texas, frustrated elderly, disabled and poor people have long wondered why they sent applications for benefits to the state only to be told they never arrived.
Peck didn't know it, but he had discovered the much-rumored "black hole" eating up Texas applications for Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program, food stamps and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
The snafu is just the latest example of confusion during the state's transition this year from public to private screening of health and welfare applicants under an $899 million contract with outsourcing giant Accenture LLP.
[...]
Accenture issued a statement to the Chronicle on Thursday. It said as soon as it became aware that faxes were going to a wrong number, it began a thorough investigation leading to actions that should stop faxes from landing in Seattle.
"We found out about it yesterday," said the company's spokeswoman, Jill Angelo of Public Strategies Inc. in Austin.
Just read the whole thing - it's too detailed to excerpt effectively. This really is a bad joke, isn't it? These yahoos at Accenture can't do anything right. But hey, think of all the money we're saving. You have to admit, they really thought outside the box on this one.
From yesterday, the Houston City Council has voted to approve the use of red light cameras at certain intersections.
The red-light vote ended more than a year of debate about whether the city should monitor Houston motorists and, if so, who should be hired to develop the system.The vote clears the way for the contractor, Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions Inc., to begin installing cameras within 45 days, initially at 10 city intersections, after a monthlong public awareness campaign.
The measure had been delayed several times while another contractor vying for the deal raised concerns about the selection process.
Mayor Bill White, who first brought the issue to the council in 2004, said the cameras will protect motorists.
"It's a big day for public safety in Houston," he said. "Unfortunately, we're not short on intersections where there have been lots of intersectional collisions or red-light violations."
Critics have charged that the real intent of the cameras is to raise city revenue through the civil penalties that would be assessed against violators caught on camera.
Those $75 violations wouldn't count against a motorist's driving record, unlike tickets issued by police officers.
I've expressed skepticism about these cameras before, mostly on privacy grounds. Lord knows, I don't want Chief Hurtt getting any bright ideas. But it seems to me that if we're going to go ahead and install these things, the least we can do is to make an effort to determine if they really do reduce accidents and improve safety. Let's design a study, right now before the first camera goes up, to measure baseline accident and injury/mortality rates at the targeted intersections and similar ones that can be used as controls. Compare the data after a year's time and publish the results for all to see. If we do see a decrease in accidents and/or injuries, then at least we have a rational reason for continuing the program. If not, then we can admit our mistake and correct it before it becomes to big and unwieldy to undo. Fair enough?
I know, I know, it'll never happen. Ah, well. It was worth a shot.
From The Red State:
Democratic State Representatives Joaquin Castro (HD-125), Trey Martinez Fischer (HD-116), and Jose Menendez (HD-124) of San Antonio will hold a press conference Friday, June 2nd at 10:00 am to call on Governor Rick Perry and the Republican Party of Texas to stop their election year gimmicks and truly work to solve the problem of illegal immigration."It is disrespectful for Rick Perry and the Republican Party to use the immigration debate as a wedge issue to divide Texans," the Democratic Representatives said. "Republicans are clearly split on this issue and have profoundly failed to provide meaningful solutions to the immigration debate. What they claim to be public policy amounts to nothing more than a band-aid approach that deals with the issue symbolically and not realistically."
WHO: Democratic State Representatives Joaquin Castro, Trey Martinez Fischer and Jose Menendez
WHERE: Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center
200 E. Market Street
San Antonio, Texas 78205
(At the corner of Alamo and Market.)WHEN: Friday June 2, 2006
10:00am
If anyone here reading this attends, please take pictures.
I don't actually ever expect Kay Bailey Hutchison to deign to agree to a debate with Barbara Radnofsky. She just doesn't do that sort of thing. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy a public call from a voter to engage herself in the process. Click the More link for the full letter.
Break the Kay Bailey Hutchison habit!
If Hutchison is confident that she is doing the best job for Texans, if she is certain that the policies she has supported in Congress are in the best interests of her constituents, if she stands behind the legislation during her tenure, and if she has nothing to hide - why not have an open and honest public debate with Barbara Ann Radnofsky?
Kay Bailey has yet to provide a satisfactory answer to this question. From whom, or what, is she hiding? As a Texas voter I deserve the most information possible so that I can make an informed decision on Election Day - a decision that will help lay out the brightest future for me and my fellow citizens.
Why is Kay Bailey denying me that right by refusing to have a debate with her challenger, Barbara Ann Radnofsky? Based on her silence, it seems Hutchison is refusing the debate for one of two reasons: Either she is ashamed of her voting record in the Senate because she knows the well-being of her constituents was not always her top priority, or she does not think the citizens of Texas have the appropriate intellect or judgment to evaluate the best candidate based on their own words.
In the world we live in today, stakes are too high not to hear the two nominees for our Senate seat express their viewpoints and differences side-by-side. Texans deserve no less.
A Republican friend of mine recently admitted that she believes Texans vote for Hutchison out of habit. She acknowledged that even though Kay Bailey is not doing what's best for Texas, she votes for her "because she is a habit - no other reason." If you are a similarly-minded Texan, it's time to break the habit ... or at the very least, demand a non-scripted public debate between the two candidates so we can decide for ourselves if the best path for Texas is to continue a bad habit or embrace a new and optimistic future with Sen. Radnofsky.
Mary E. Harris
Tyler
The Muse has a host of interesting tidbits concerning the state of the selection process in CD22. The latest buzz:
deal has been reached between three of the four counties involved in selecting Tom DeLay's replacement on the ballot in Congressional District 22 - Harris, Brazoria and Galveston. Who does that leave out? Fort Bend County. Does this explain Gary Gillen's (Fort Bend Republican Party Chair) decision to cancel the scheduled June 8th candidate forum? So who does the rumor mill say is Nick Lampson's opponent:Robert Talton
Texas state representative, district 144, Pasadena. Gay-obsessed. Ultra-conservative. "My yes is a yes and my no is a no (see my post on last Thursday's candidate forum.)
I won't say a whole lot more on Talton right now since we are at the level of rumor, but I will say that some of my friends have been saying for awhile, "Please let it be Talton! Please let it be Talton!" If that tells you anything.
I just want to say that if Talton is indeed the Chosen One, the first ad by Team Lampson should be more or less as follows::
"Why would you want to replace the worst Congressman in America with one of the worst legislators in Texas?"
Feel free to use that one to your heart's content.
Anyway. There's more good stuff at the link above. We're about a week out from DeLay's official departure from Congress (woo hoo!), but it all gets a little murky after that. Stay tuned.
I confess, I haven't been following the race for Texas Democratic Party chair very closely. I don't really have a strong preference among the three leading contenders. All I really want is for us to emerge from this contest with a minimum of blood being spilled. This is about as favorable an electoral climate that Democrats have seen in Texas since, what, 1990? Let's please do our best to not screw it up with infighting and hard feelings.
So far, at least, most of the bad stuff has happened on mailing lists and other generally not-in-front-of-the-public venues. I'll be lighting candles for the next week or so in hopes of keeping it that way.
If you want to know more about who's running, check out Phillip Martin's interviews with Boyd Richie and Glen Maxey. If there's an interview with Charlie Urbina-Jones in the works, I'll link to it when it's up. As I say, I don't really have a strong preference at this point, but there's good information out there for you if you want to make a reasoned choice. Check it out.
I just spotted this story about some new retail development in Montrose. It's exactly two blocks away from where I lived for nearly four years back in the 90s, so I'm interested in it.
To take advantage of the growth of high-density residential and office in the near southwest submarket, Wellington Development Co. has acquired one acre inside the loop for close to $1 million. Wellington's plans for the plot are to develop about 25,000 sf of retail, with an estimated project value topping out at $3.5 million.The development tract, assembled in several direct deals with local owners, takes up the corner of Montrose Boulevard and West Dallas Street. "There are very few corners inside the loop that are currently available for development, particularly when you get between River Oaks and Downtown," says Chris Hotze, partner in Wellington Development. He tells GlobeSt.com that Wellington is examining more land acquisitions in the area "if it's available. We've had discussions with the next-door neighbor of what we just bought."
Anyone know if this dude is from the same family as Steven and Bruce Hotze? Because that would suck.
Hotze says the hope is to be moving dirt by first quarter 2007. "This is a strong site for a retail spot," he says. "The 1.9-million-sf American General Headquarters is right there plus a significant number of new projects, lofts and high-rise condos."
It's also a stone's throw from the not-yet-started new housing at the old Ed Sacks Waste Paper site. There's a crapload of new condos and townhouses nearby, mostly (gag) from Perry Homes. I drove by the site this evening, so I can verify that it will be on the southeast corner of Montrose and Dallas - southwest is a very busy Chevron station, northwest is American General property, and northeast is that old warehouse plus some new housing units.
This area could certainly use some more retail space. I'll be interested to see what they get there. The one concern I'd have about this is that navigating Dallas at this intersection is annoying and a bit dangerous, since there is not a protected left turn signal from Dallas onto Montrose. The city is going to have to do something about that sooner or later; before this new traffic magnet comes online would be nice. Making the whole area more pedestrian-friendly, given the sizeable population that'll be within a few blocks of the intersection, would also be a good idea. I hope the developer will do a little asking around to see what the locals might like before doing like CVS and assuming that a suburban-parking-lot approach is the only way to go.
Link via Houstonist.
Now this is the kind of thing I like to see. Not only does it show Shane Sklar in a positive light, it portrays Ron Paul's strength as a liability:
Democratic congressional candidate Shane Sklar's call for diversifying the nation's energy supply shows the kind of leadership his incumbent opponent cannot provide for the 14th Congressional District, for Texas or for the nation.
Hailing the opening of the $15 million Galveston Bay Biodiesel facility, which will convert soybeans and other feedstocks into fuel, Sklar emphasized that "renewable energy projects ... promote clean air, energy security and economic growth."When I am in Congress, I will fight to make sure Texas farmers and entrepreneurs are on the cutting edge of renewable energy technology," the young Democrat pledged.
Given how longtime U.S. Rep. Ron Paul's narrow reading of the U.S. Constitution restricts what he thinks Congress can do, it is impossible to expect such leadership from "Dr. No."
Ouch. I'll reproduce the rest of the editorial beneath the fold. Read the rest, it's worth it.
Yet Sklar's words - and concrete actions to implement them - are exactly what the country needs now to expand its renewable energy supplies and reduce the consumption of fossil fuels, particularly oil imported from politically difficult regions of the world such as the Middle East.As Sklar well understands, the need to expand the nation's renewable energy supply presents an incredible opportunity for Texas.
A news release from the Democratic candidate "emphasized that renewable energy could have huge economic implications. ... For many family farmers, the extra income these industries generate could make the critical difference in their ability to stay on their land.
"According to the Department of Energy, wind energy alone could provide 80,000 new jobs and $1.2 billion in new income for farmers and rural landowners by 2020. Tripling U.S. use of biomass for energy could provide as much as $20 billion in new income for farmers and rural communities and reduce global warming emissions by the same amount as taking 70 million cars off the road," the news release continued.
Both the geographic size of Texas and the scale of its farm and ranch production position the Lone Star State as well now as its huge oil resources did a century ago. But Texas needs forward-looking leadership, including among those who represent it in Washington, to take advantage of this opportunity to make the state a renewable energy superproducer.
Sklar believes the federal government has both a legitimate and a necessary role to play in developing the production of renewable energy. That includes funding research for technology to produce such fuels more efficiently and at lower cost.
Equally important at the local level, "farmers and ranchers are struggling to cope with the high cost of fuel," Sklar said. "By participating in renewable energy projects, South Texas' agricultural families can be part of the solution."
This is the kind of forward-looking common sense the 14th District needs from its representative in Congress.
Damn straight. Go Sklar!
As long as the newspapers keep serving up stories about Republican discontent - about HB3, immigration, budget deficits, whatever - I'll keep writing posts trying to understand what (if anything) it all means for November. I've got two more of these posts over at Kuff's World, so go check them out or run screaming away from them as the mood strikes you.
One new item to add to the GOP Grumbling files comes from Capitol Annex, where faithful small-government devotee Jeb Hensarling is taking President Bush to the woodshed. Who's next to take a whack? I don't know, but I'll sure enjoy reading it when I find out.
Via Greg comes this nice article about 2004 Harris County judicial candidate Zone Nguyen, who has since relocated to Laredo. Nguyen, who is a reservist in the Army with the JAG corps, spent several months in 2004 at Guantanamo with the Office of Military Commissions, where he worked on the prosecutions of various detainees.
He prepared initial disclosures for three of the four detainees who have been charged at Guantanamo: Australian David Hicks, Ali Hamza Ahmad Sulayman al-Bahlul of Yemen and Ibrahim Ahmed Mahmoud al-Qosi of Sudan."It was interesting to be at the forefront of history and to participate in it - everyone wanted to get things going and start trying cases right away," Nguyen said.
"I feel that that we could have achieved our goal of being full and fair," he said. "But in the end, we're just dealing with obstacles that make it seem like we don't want to try these people."
Nguyen described the initial work of his legal team as "cutting edge."
"We were creating new laws, grabbing from U.S. and international laws, to create a true legal system," he said.
The goal was to create a body of new laws the military could use to prosecute suspected terrorists who are not U.S. citizens and who did not commit crimes on U.S. soil.
"It was like starting a whole new country, in terms of determining what would be considered right or wrong, and why," Nguyen said.
The analogy he gives is wanting to create something like the International Criminal Tribunal, which prosecuted the late Slobodan Milosevic for war crimes in Yugoslavia. But the U.S. military wanted to create a new mechanism they could oversee to try people in the U.S. war on terror.
"The war on terror is real. We need a mechanism for this," Nguyen said. "The world needs to see trials."
It's a good read. I had the opportunity to hear Nguyen speak about his experiences after he returned home in 2004. There's at least a couple of good magazine articles, if not a book, in there. Houston's loss is Laredo's gain.
Metro has taken the next step in its proposal to build an Intermodal Transit Center north of I-10 near UH-Downtown.
The Metropolitan Transit Authority board Tuesday voted to have staff negotiate the purchase of nine acres of the railroad's Hardy Yard, bordered roughly by Main to the west, Elysian to the east, Burnett to the North and Lyons and Conti to the south.The site is near North Main about a half-mile from the University of Houston-Downtown station at the north end of Metro's present Red Line, to which it would connect.
Metro spokesman George Smalley said the agency wants to build an "intermodal" terminal to "provide a nucleus" for buses and pedestrians to connect with the Red Line and future light rail or Bus Rapid Transit on the planned North, East End and Southeast lines.
Metro's long-term plans also call for a commuter rail line from U.S. 290 and northwest Houston that could terminate at the site, he said.
[...]
A public meeting on the project is set for 5:30 p.m. June 8 at Ketelsen Elementary School, 600 Quitman.
Background info on the ITC can be found here.
I figured there'd be a followup to yesterday's story about the city of Dallas balking at the proposal that they house up to 40,000 special needs evacuees from Houston in the event of a coastal hurricane. Today, at least one Dallas official says no, wait, we can do that.
Dallas County Judge Margaret Keliher said area officials should take inventory and try to identify new shelter sites to supplement the convention center, Reunion Arena and other public shelters."This community will absorb what it needs to," Keliher said. "If the state thinks it is 40,000, then we need to work with the state and identify where 40,000 people would go. No doubt that we would step up and do what needs to be done."
I'm not surprised by this development. Yesterday's story was mostly about the opinion of one person, Kenny Shaw, the director of the city of Dallas' office of emergency management. It's not unusual that someone else might differ on this matter. Shaw himself has more to say today:
[Shaw] reiterated Wednesday that the American Red Cross has said it can provide shelters for only 15,000 people in the Dallas-Fort Worth area and surrounding counties.He said the Dallas area wants to help its neighbors, but simply doesn't have the capacity required in the state's plan.
"If they're going to make plans that involve us, they need to ask us to the table and work it out," Shaw said.
He said he would like to discuss the plan further with the state, but is waiting for Perry's administration to make the first call.
This gets back to my point yesterday that if the state's plan is to count on Dallas (or anyplace, for that matter) to provide this kind of assistance, it needs to do more than just assume it will happen. I don't think I'm stretching here when I say that Shaw's words sound a lot like "how do you expect us to pay for all this?" to me. What's Governor Perry's response?
Kathy Walt, the governor's spokeswoman, said state officials have already held meetings to inform Dallas officials of the plan. She reiterated that if North Texas can't handle the influx of people, "there will be contingency plans to turn to other communities for assistance."The governor, in Houston on Wednesday to sign the new education funding law, was optimistic, saying that Dallas people are "good and compassionate individuals, and when something happens to their neighbors, they are going to be there to take care of them."
What's that saying? "Hope is not a plan"? Something like that. Sorry, but that does not fill me with confidence.
Harris County Commissioner Steve Radack was understanding of Dallas' initial response, especially after Houston's post-Katrina experience with rising crime rates and difficulty getting reimbursed by FEMA.''Anybody who is paying attention to the strain on Houston's budget or Harris County's budget related to helping evacuees is aware of severe financial problems," Radack said.
Dallas Councilman Bill Blaydes didn't make any promises, but agreed with Keliher's general message, saying "this city will not shirk its responsibility to humanity."
If the worst happens, and there's another hurricane-induced mass evacuation from here, I would certainly expect that Dallas will do what it must to help out. It's one thing to talk about plans and contingencies and budgets now, and another thing to be presented with a busful of invalids with noplace else to go. Shaw is not wrong to be concerned about these things now, while they can still be discussed in a deliberate manner. Holding meetings to "inform" Dallas what's expected of it is insufficient. Where's the plan, Governor Perry?
In related news, Eric Berger writes about the four hurricane lessons we should have learned from last year and whether or not we did, while Houstonist attends the 2006 Houston/Galveston Hurricane Conference.
UPDATE: Polimom notes that Dallas' attitude contrasts sharply with those of Austin and San Antonio. Let me clarify something here: I do think Dallas has a moral obligation to at least be willing to help people in need like this, and the comments reported yesterday and today fall somewhat short of their acknowledging that obligation. But if, as I'm starting to suspect, they're really complaining about a lack of direction from the Governor's office, then I think that's valid. It seems to me that this is something that can get cleared up in a fairly non-messy fashion if the right people get together and discuss what they need to make this work. If we could get more of that and less using the newsies as meeting coordinators, that'd be swell.
Sometimes being first is better than being correct. I point you to a tidbit in this story about Republican agida over immigration for an example.
President Bush has been courting Latino voters for years, as both a gubernatorial candidate and presidential candidate, and it has paid dividends. In his 2004 re-election campaign, Bush won 44 percent of Hispanic voters nationwide and nearly 60 percent in Texas.
That "nearly 60 percent" figure came from an AP exit poll released shortly after the 2004 election - the exact number in question was 59. Only problem is, the AP issued a revised statement a
Even before that correction, I was very skeptical of that figure, because I just couldn't make the math work based on a county-by-county breakdown of Bush/Kerry numbers. Turns out also that the 44 percent national figure was also revised downwards, but I'm not as exercised about that one. It's not so much to ask that a Texas newspaper pay attention to a story like this for more than a day, is it?
UPDATE: I just now realized that the date on that Mystery Pollster piece is December 1, 2004. Though he says he's a "bit behind" in reporting on the revised exit poll data, it can't be the case that the revision was within "a day or so" of the original report, so I've corrected that statement. I've also sent an email to the reporter on this story to point this out, as Kevin suggested. If I hear anything back, I'll post about it.
UPDATE: I have received a gracious reply from reporter Greg Jefferson, who said that a correction is forthcoming. I will post that URL when I see it.
Lamar Smith, then:
Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Congressman Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) today announced the formation of the “House Working Group On Judicial Accountability.” Rep. Smith and Rep. Chabot serve as co-chairmen of the Group.“This Working Group seeks to accomplish several goals. First, we want to educate Members and the public about judicial abuse. Second, we will try to prevent judicial abuse and third, we will support the nomination process for judges who will not substitute their own policy views for the law,” said Rep. Smith.
“The fact remains that the judiciary is a co-equal branch of the federal government. They are subject to checks and balances. Congress is right to evaluate them when they behave like un-elected super-legislators,” added Smith.
Emphasis mine. And again, Lamar Smith, then:
Three weeks ago, religious conservatives angry about rulings that have limited public displays of religion assembled in Washington for a conference titled, "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith."San Antonio's Republican Rep. Lamar Smith addressed an audience there in place of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who was attending the Pope John Paul II's funeral.
"While judicial activism has existed from the founding of our nation, it seems to have reached a crisis," Smith told the audience. "Judges routinely overrule the will of the people, invent new 'rights' and ignore traditional morality."
Finally, Lamar Smith, now.
The most pointed opposition to the Judiciary bill came from Texas Republican Lamar Smith, who said he would prefer "to leave these decisions to the courts to work out on a case-by-case basis under the antitrust law."The existing bill is far too regulatory and could "put a straitjacket on this important sector of the economy," Smith warned.
That was on the subject of Net Neutrality, where Smith was one of 13 Republicans to vote against the Sensenbrenner-Conyers bill last week. Isn't it amazing how much wiser and more statesmanlike judges became for Smith after he lost a legislative battle and needed a backup plan to stop something he didn't like? A lesser man than he would surely have gotten whiplash from such a turnaround.
Link via the Texas 21 blog. If you want a better choice for CD21, you know where to find it.