Renewal of the Voting Rights Act
In 1975, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) was extended to Texas for repeated violations of the Act with regards to the rights of Mexican-American voters. Texas is required to provide election observers in 18 counties, and bilingual assistance in Harris County. Very seldom are such observers present, nor is bilingual assistance always available. Since the Voting Rights Act was last reauthorized in 1982, Mississippi is the only state that has received more reports of violations than Texas (120 to 107, respectively). The Census Bureau reported that in 2002 there were over 800,000 limited English proficient Spanish speaking voters in Texas, and that in Harris County alone there were over 17,000 limited English proficient Vietnamese speaking citizens of voting age. The Department of Justice recently confirmed that there is widespread noncompliance in Harris County with regulations regarding the availability of voter registration forms, official ballots, provisional ballots and written voting instructions in Spanish and Vietnamese. In 2003, the Harris County Clerk failed to ensure that the eSlate ballots were available in Vietnamese, and only at a few polling places were Vietnamese translations of sample ballots available. Since 2003, voter turnout among Vietnamese-Americans has doubled, no doubt playing a role in the election of my colleague, Hubert Vo, in 2004. Were all election laws properly monitored and enforced, just think how many more Latinos and Asian-Americans would vote, and how many more candidates that they chose would be given an opportunity to represent them in our courts, city councils, school boards, at the Legislature, and in Washington, D.C.
The VRA has served to demonstrate the idiosyncrasies of Texas law. Surprising to some, Texas is either the only state or one of a handful of states in the nation to have unreasonable restrictions on voters. These laws include prohibitions on same day registration, onerous identification requirements for voters who misplace their registration cards, allowing biased selection of early voting locations, allowing the moving of polling places without notice, and permitting the unavailability of ballots and election materials in other languages. A review of the effect of these laws in Texas, most particularly Harris County, would make one think we lived in the Deep South in Jim Crow days.
Now that the Voting Rights Act has been extended to 2032, let's get to work passing laws during the upcoming Legislative Session in January to make Texas polls more accessible to all voters.
Ana Hernandez
State Representative
House District 143
I had the chance recently to sit down and talk with David Harris recently. He's yet another of the fine crop of Democratic challengers we have lined up for Congressional elections this year. Here's the interview:
Link for the MP3 file is here.
Previous interviews:
Gary Binderim - Interview
Glenn Melancon - Interview
Jim Henley - Interview
David Harris - Interview
Ted Ankrum - Interview
Shane Sklar - Interview
John Courage - Interview
Nick Lampson - Interview
Mary Beth Harrell - Interview
Hank Gilbert - Interview
Joe Farias - Interview
Harriet Miller - Interview
Ellen Cohen - Interview
This is wrong on more levels than I can articulate.
While Monopoly is the paragon of good 'ole fashioned board game fun, the "old fashioned" part had to go. Parker Brothers is phasing out the cash-based version's funmoney and replacing it with an "Electronic Banking" flavor that could leave Mr. Moneybags turning his pockets inside out as his stash is replaced by a magnetic strip. New kits are completely devoid of the famous multi-colored bills; instead, you'll find phoney Visa debit cards and a calculator / reader which keeps a running tabulation of your riches -- or lack thereof. A deal was struck with Visa to design the mock cards and readers, presumably after surveys showed that 70% of adults used cash less often now than they did a decade ago (no surprise there). When asked about the dramatic change, Parker said replacing cash with plastic "showed the game was moving with the times."
Yet another cultural metaphor of my youth going down the tubes. Is nothing sacred?
Via Fighting Jay Lee (none more surly than he), who notes that the old-fogey cash-enabled game will still be available "while supplies last". Get 'em while you can, kids.
Did you hear about the effort by Senator Hutchison to broker a deal in the battle over the Wright Amendment that ran afoul of the Justice Department?
The agency's antitrust division told lawmakers restrictions in the local agreement to repeal the Wright Amendment in eight years "would be hard-core, per se violations of the Sherman Act," according to a copy of the memo obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press.The agency's concerns refer to an agreement among Texas officials to eventually repeal the so-called Wright Amendment and legislation sponsored by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, containing the agreement.
[...]
The Justice Department said the gates to be torn down could be used by other airlines to enter and compete there. Razing them "is the very kind of collusive output reduction that the antitrust laws are designed to prevent."
The department said the parties to the local agreement are aware of the antitrust violations because they have sought blanket immunity for the agreement, instead of including an "antitrust savings clause," which the agency said is commonly done to preserve competition under antitrust laws.
Oops. Gotta watch those details. Stephen Yellin has more.
I have four words for you: Beer flavored potato chips.
Inventor Brett Stern can hear the cries echoing through stadiums and arenas across the land: "Get yer ice-cold beer!" And, more germane to his current project, "Get yer fresh Beer Chips here!"Beer Chips are his invention, and you can try your first packet today at the 19th annual Oregon Brewers Festival, which runs through Sunday at Tom McCall Waterfront Park. It'll attract as many as 80,000 beer fans, making it the perfect place to introduce Beer Chips, which are thick, kettle-style potato chips that are sweet, salty and subtly flavored with real beer -- with the alcohol removed, so they're legal for all ages.
(If that sounds like an unlikely taste sensation, you should've been at the story meeting this week where I passed around one of the prototype bags of chips. The legend is that journalists love food, and the freer, the better. But that doesn't explain the feeding frenzy that erupted and soon had me scuttling back to my desk for another bag to share. "Be sure and save some for the photo!" one of the graphic designers yelled.)
If you're like me, right about now you're slapping your forehead and saying "I can't believe no one thought of this before." That's pretty much how this came about.
When he realized that no one had thought to make a potato chip flavored with beer, he checked the name Beer Chips and the domain www.beerchips.com. He found both were available, a situation he soon changed. "I thought, 'Great! Now I'm in business! And I'm not sure what a Beer Chip is yet.' "
Truly, we live in a wondrous age.
Via Houstonist, the effort to keep the River Oaks Theater from being demolished has gotten a lot of traction.
In less than a week, an online petition sponsored by the Web site Houstonist.com has attracted more than 13,700 signers.At Historic Houston's Web site, more than 4,000 individuals have registered to receive e-mail updates about the River Oaks Shopping Center and the Landmark River Oaks Theatre.
City Councilwoman Ada Edwards, whose District D includes the shopping center, said more than 100 letters and e-mail messages have flooded into her office — none of them form letters. She and other council members hope to persuade Houston-based Weingarten Realty Investors to change its plans.
"We're going to fight to find a balance between historic preservation and development," Edwards said.
Such issues haven't gotten much traction in Houston, where preservation laws are among the weakest in the country and residents have often watched passively as old buildings are torn down for new development.
"I haven't seen anything like it in the years I've been here," said David Bush, spokesman for the Greater Houston Preservation Alliance, which set off the furor last week when it named three art-deco landmarks to its Endangered Buildings List: the River Oaks Shopping Center, the Landmark River Oaks Theatre and the Bookstop in the former Alabama Theater.
I don't usually think much of online petitions, but anything that's gotten this many signatures for an entirely local issue is worth noticing. Here's the petition if you want to join in. Calling your City Council member probably wouldn't hurt, either. Metroblogging Houston has more.
It's time to call the "debate" over the Houston Police Department's policy concerning illegal immigrants for what it is. Unfortunately anyone who believes this so-called debate, fueled by a group that calls itself "Protect Our Citizens," has anything at all to do with the police or immigration is going to be disappointed.
On the surface, what members of this organization want is for the voters of Houston to authorize a change in police policy that would, in effect, require all Houstonians to prove their citizenship whenever they are ordered to do so by the police. They don't advertise it that way, of course. They describe it as a means of enabling the police to become more aggressive in identifying illegal immigrants in our midst.
Designed to appeal to a narrow slice of our city's voting population, this petition drive and possible referendum is built on the assumption that the people inclined to vote for it won't ever be affected by the policy change because they "look like Americans." Those who will be affected by it and will be forced to "show their papers" to the police don't matter because they aren't the target of this ugly effort at voter outreach.
The goal is not to make our city safe from the supposed scourge of illegal immigration, nor is to help the police solve crime. The goal is to increase turnout at the polls among this thin slice of voters - turnout that supporters calculate will benefit one political party over another.
I like to call this scapegoat politics. In scapegoat politics, you designate a certain group of people as somehow inherently evil and responsible for all the ills facing society. You then persuade your targeted voters that they must rush to the polls to support a ballot item that will eliminate this scourge and, while they're at it, vote for certain candidates who are on the right side of this pressing issue.
In 2005, Republicans did this with the Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage in Texas. To this day I do not believe the Republican leadership gives one whit about gays who might wish to enter into legally binding monogamous relationships but by scapegoating monogamous gays they were able to persuade numerous conservative voters to come to the polls who might otherwise have stayed home.
This year, in Houston, the scourge of the moment is the illegal immigrant. And, let's be honest, it's not the illegal Canadian or British or French immigrant. It's the illegal Latino immigrant (the one that doesn't sufficiently "look" American). There is no need to have a real debate about the issues facing our community when you can persuade people that our crime and our economic challenges are all a result of our tolerance of this evil group and if we just get tough on them our city will, once again, be the land of milk and honey.
For evidence of just how cynical this is I need only to look to my immediate left when I am sitting at the City Council table. There sits an elected city council member who has long been either neutral or even somewhat sympathetic to the city's immigrant population. Suddenly, she is one of the most ferocious supporters of this petition drive. It is merely a coincidence, she says, that her position radically changed at the same time that she was launching a bid for Congress the success of which requires the support of the very same people who will be inspired by this anti-Latino anti-immigrant effort.
Ironically, a victory for "Protect Our Citizens" would be a defeat for public safety. The police often desperately need the cooperation of the general public in their hunt for suspected criminals. If members of a certain segment of the general public know they are going to be forced to prove their citizenship every time they encounter a police officer, that cooperation is going to dry up. Those who are not citizens won't cooperate because cooperation will mean possible imprisonment and deportation. Those who are citizens but don't "look American" enough are also going to be less likely to cooperate because of the indignity of being forced to prove their bona fides due, solely, to their skin color or accent.
With less cooperation, our police officers will have a tougher time protecting all of us. In other words, the citizens who stand to be protected the most from the efforts of "Protect Our Citizens" will be criminals.
Illegal immigration is a serious issue facing the United States, but it is a federal issue. The Houston Police Department policy of assisting federal officials while not actively engaging in enforcing federal immigration rules is a healthy and balanced one. It enables them to work with all who live here to protect Houston, and it provides the federal government with sufficient support.
Don't get me wrong. I firmly believe our community should be engaged on the issue of illegal immigration and members of the community from all perspectives should be working together to discuss and debate it. But that is not the debate we have today. Instead, we have a group with a name that suggests a desire to protect us and make our city safer but whose actions will do nothing more than divide us and make it more dangerous.
Carol Alvarado
Member, Houston City Council
District I
(Note: A Chronicle story from Tuesday on the kickoff event for ProtectHouston.com can be found here, and a report from event attendee Toni Medellin is here.)
Did you know that there's a bunch od hearings about the Trans Texas Corridor going on around the state? No? Well, it's not getting that much play in the big city papers, mostly because all the action with the TTC, at least in the near term, is going on in the rural parts of the state. And they're none too happy about it. Eye on Williamson has been following the news about the hearings closely. His latest about them:
The Startlegram, The TTC & Conspiracy
Report From Last Night’s TTC Meeting In Georgetown
My Impressions From A TTC Hearing
There's more over at BOR, too. One thing you'll note in all this is how several downballot Democratic candidates have been showing up at a lot of these meetings, making some headway in areas that haven't been too friendly with Dems lately. Hank Gilbert, the candidate for Ag Commish, has particularly been a force at these events. How successful will this strategy be? It's too early to say, but you can be sure that Todd Staples will not be in attendance at any of these things. So who knows?
UPDATE: One more report from EoW. Also, via the comments, here's a link to some video.
Well, not exactly, because I don't fish. But I do take a break now and then, and now is the time. We've got a bunch of extended-family activities going on over the next week and a half, so I'll be mostly away from the keyboard between now and next Saturday. I've got one or two things of my own drafted for publication during this time, and the usual cast of guest stars is in the wings to do a little standing in for me as their schedules permit. This time, I've also solicited some guest input from a number of local elected officials and candidates, and I will publish their efforts while I'm slacking off as well. Each of these will have a title that begins with "Guest Post", so you'll know who wrote them even though my name will still appear in the permalink at the bottom. This is because it was easier to ask them to send me a document than it was to create a bunch of new author accounts and show them how to use Movable Type.
Anyway. I'll be back to my regular schedule a week from Monday. In the meantime, I hope you'll enjoy what all the fine guest contributors have to offer.
I'm running short on time here, so I'll just point you to this story and this story about reactions to the Andrea Yates verdict. My own extended thoughts are here.
The Chron tells us what we already knew about the three-judge federal panel from the Fifth Circuit that will hear the appeal of Judge Sam Sparks' ruling in the DeLay ballot replacement lawsuit. They also note some new amicus briefs that have been filed.
13 current and former Democratic legislators who passed the election law in 1983 filed a friend-of-the-court brief saying the Legislature did not want to make it easy for political parties to change nominees in mid-election.The brief said the law was passed to prevent both political parties from "engaging in gamesmanship in the conduct of elections." It said both parties had engaged in "abuses" of candidate swapping.
In the 1980 primary season, eight candidates declined their party nominations and were replaced. In the next election, 10 candidates did the same.
Both parties used stalking-horse candidates. If they thought the other party nominee could be defeated, their nominee would withdraw and be replaced with a stronger candidate.
"The Legislature intended that the voters' choice be respected and preserved, regardless of political considerations," said the brief as written by attorney Susan Hays of Dallas.
Vince has the brief (PDF) plus an extensive set of excerpts from it. I think this will be a pretty persuasive document. Read it for yourself and see what you think.
As for the other brief:
One of the prospective candidates who wants to replace DeLay on the ballot, Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace, also filed a friend-of-the-court brief.Wallace's brief argues that the Texas Democratic Party is trying to have an interest in "choosing its opponent, a notion inimical to the foundations of our democracy."
Wallace said Benkiser was following a procedure for replacing an ineligible candidate, not adopting new, unconstitutional standards of eligibility.
"It would undoubtedly cause voter confusion and frustrate the democratic process to force DeLay to remain on the ballot given the conclusive evidence that he will not be a resident of Texas upon election day," said Wallace's brief, by attorney Andrius Kontrimas of Houston.
According to Juanita, Kontrimas is Wallace's campaign treasurer, and he's asking to have his services on this brief counted as pro bono work. Dave's quite a guy, isn't he?
The Houston Press devotes a big portion of this week's news hole to a story on the HD134 matchup between Ellen Cohen and Martha Wong. It's got some good anecdotes, and is certainly more than we've seen elsewhere in the papers on this race, but I need to do a little nitpicking. For instance:
Wong's vulnerability is emblematic of a Republican Party that is increasingly divided and struggling to support a consistent message. A schism in the party is being led by Carole "One Tough Grandma" Strayhorn in her independent bid for governor against Republican Rick Perry. Strayhorn has given voice to a more moderate wing of the party concerned with a lack of progress in education and health care. Few observers believe Perry will lose -- he has the support of conservative rural voters -- but his close allies in more moderate districts might get caught in the crossfire.
While it is true that "few observers" think Rick Perry is in electoral danger despite his tepid poll numbers, he's got some issues with rural voters right now thanks to widespread opposition there to the Trans Texas Corridor. And besides that, much of Perry's strength, like the Republican Party in general, has been in the more populous suburbs - think counties like Montgomery, Collin, and Denton.
That wasn't so bad. This was:
Wong doesn't deny that her district is socially moderate, but it's unclear whether she possesses enough armor in Austin to cast moderate votes and get away with it. If she had voted against her party, she likely would have found herself in the shoes of Carter Casteel (Republican, New Braunfels), a moderate who faced retaliation from Republican bosses in this year's primary and was ousted. Of course, now she faces Cohen. "Martha is just the tip of the iceberg on this," Stein says. He thinks if enforced conservative voting patterns persist, many more Republicans in major cities, such as the suburban Houston reps Peggy Hamric and Joe Nixon, will also become vulnerable to moderate Democrats.
I'm pretty sure Bob Stein is aware that neither Hamric nor Nixon is on the ballot this year, as both stepped down in an unsuccessful attempt to win the GOP nomination for SD07. I'm therefore going to assign the blame for that to the author, since Stein wasn't quoted directly here. It would have been fair to say that their districts will (or at least may) become vulnerable to moderate Democrats, but who knows what the 2011 redistricting will do.
Not the author's fault:
Citing another reason why he's not concerned about the race, [Harris County GOP Chair Jared] Woodfill points to Wong's 2002 campaign against State Representative Debra Danburg. Ousted from her Montrose stronghold by Republican-led redistricting, Danburg ran against Wong on the wind of support from many of the same groups that are now supporting Cohen. Danburg "had way more name ID than Ellen Cohen and a lot more money at the time," Woodfill says. "The Democrats were saying that Martha was vulnerable to Danburg -- and she beat Danburg soundly. So what's changed? They've got a weaker candidate that has less money."
Oh, Jared. Wong got 53.1% of the vote in a district that was over 61% Republican in 2002. She was lifted to victory by that year's GOP tide. A win this year would be much more impressive, since she isn't going to have that kind of wind at her back.
And for what it's worth, some of us think Danburg ran a crappy campaign in 2002. In fact, such sentiments were voiced in the very pages of the Houston Press back in the day. Ask around and see how many people who are familiar with Ellen Cohen would call her a weaker candidate.
Anyway. Read it, and go listen to my interview with Ellen Cohen when you're done.
I had a post drafted last night about this story concerning the US Olympic Committee's intent to trim two potential host cities from its list of 2016 hopefuls, but other events overtook my ability to finish and post it in time. Just as well, because as with the 2012 Games, we lost. We may be in line for a consolation prize, however.
Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco were named as finalists for a potential U.S. bid for the 2016 Games. Houston and Philadelphia, the remaining candidates, "will step to the sidelines at this time," USOC board chairman Peter Ueberroth said during a news conference at a Denver airport hotel.The USOC has plans, however, for its sidelined suitors. USOC chief executive officer Jim Scherr will visit Houston later this year to discuss Houston's potential to bid for 2008 U.S. Olympic trials and world championships in 2009 and beyond, and Houston businessman George DeMontrond III floated the possibility that Houston will bid for the 2011 Pan American Games.
"We need to work on our international appeal, and the way to do that is to aggressively go after events to host so that we can show off the city in an international sports context," said DeMontrond, who chaired Houston's 2012 bid and helped coordinate the 2016 bid along with Mayor Bill White and Astros owner Drayton McLane.
"The Pan Am Games are out there for 2011 (after Rio de Janeiro beat San Antonio for the right to host the 2007 games), and it's a major multi-sport event. I haven't put a pencil to the economics, but it's an intriguing possibility."
I think either the Olympic Trials or the Pan Am Games would be about as good for Houston from an exposure and economic perspective, without all of the baggage that the full-blown Olympics brings with it. I'm guessing they cost a lot less to prep for. So even though I've been rooting for Houston in this, count me as un-brokenhearted by this development.
Houston's elimination hinged on the fact that, based on the USOC's survey of 58 members of the International Olympic Committee and 42 leaders of international sports federations, it lags badly behind Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco as a perceived center for international sports."Even though Houston is a great international city and highly respected, it's not that well known as the other cities (among international sports leaders) as the cities that are going forward," Scherr said. "That's a critical factor."
That perception, Ueberroth said, was enough to sink Houston as a 2016 candidate despite strengths in several areas, topped by the leadership of White and Harris County Judge Bob Eckels, who met with USOC officials in May in Houston and in June in San Diego to discuss the city's bid.
"They (White and Eckels) were spectacular. They were in a class by themselves in terms of administration," Ueberroth said. "They were just so far ahead of any other city, it wasn't close. ... If that were the only criteria, they (Houston) would have won."
Can't say I'm surprised by that.
Last night was the final open house by Metro on the route for the Universities line. I don't think anybody expected a consensus would be reached, but at least the pro-Richmond forces were acknowledged.
Supporters of a Richmond line stated their case at City Council on Tuesday and also at a Metro board meeting last Thursday.About 150 people representing both sides of the issue mingled Tuesday night at St. Paul's United Methodist Church downtown, where Metro displayed large, aerial photos and maps of its proposed routes as it had at previous sessions.
Opponents contend that voters approved a rail line on Westpark and not Richmond, where they say it would be disruptive.
"Everyone who wants it doesn't live or work on Richmond, and they don't have a stake in it," said Daphne Scarborough, who owns a business just east of Shepherd on Richmond.
Much of the most vocal opposition to the Richmond rail has come from the Afton Oaks neighborhood that borders Richmond just inside the West Loop. But Scarborough said at the St. Paul's meeting that a poll of 204 business owners and residents on Richmond from Main Street to Shepherd showed 200 of them oppose the Richmond line. "They say the only ones who don't want rail on Richmond is Afton Oaks, but that's wrong," she said.
Tom Valega, a property owner in the Sunset Terrace/Montclair Subdivision south of Westpark said, however, that Metro can pick up more riders on Richmond, and it must show ridership to get federal funding.
[...]
At a public comment session of Houston City Council on Tuesday, architect Doug Childers, chairman of richmondrail.org, said about 1,000 residents had signed petitions in favor of the Richmond rail.
He previously had presented the petitions at the Metro board meeting Thursday, saying he represented "hundreds of residents, businesses and organizations who want neighborhood-friendly light rail on Richmond."
No mention of any reaction to that statement by city officials, but that's the way it goes.
Metro spokesman George Smalley said Metro staff is expected to decide by Aug. 8 what route it will recommend to the board. No date has been set for a board vote.
And that's when the real fun will begin. Stay tuned.
Andrea Yates has been found not guilty by reason of insanity in her retrial.
The verdict upholding Yates' insanity defense comes after the jury deliberated more than 12 hours and spent two nights sequestered at an area hotel . Yates appeared shocked and sat staring wide-eyed with her lips slightly parted as State District Judge Belinda Hill asked each juror individually whether they agreed with the verdict.The acquittal in Yates' second capital murder trial follows nearly a month's worth of exhaustive testimony, capped by four hours of emotional closing arguments Monday, during which Yates broke down in tears and her former husband, Russell Yates, abruptly left the courtroom.
The jury's verdict means Yates, 42, will be sent to a state mental hospital for treatment, rather than be sentenced to life in prison.
Shortly before 10:30 this morning, the jury sent a note requesting exhibits showing a family portrait and a photo of the children before their deaths.
Over the past two days, the jury appeared to focus on medical expert testimony from both prosecution and defense witnesses.
Tuesday, they asked to see video tapes mental-health experts made of their interviews with Yates after the killings as well as testimony from Park Dietz, a prosecution expert witness, about Yates' statements regarding Satan's presence.
It is unknown how long Yates will be hospitalized, but she will be subject to periodic reviews by state District Judge Belinda Hill's court.
To answer the question currently on the Chron homepage, I say yes, justice has been served. Judging from today's letters to the editor, I'd also say that's what most people in Houston would say as well. May Andrea Yates now finally get the help she so desperately needs.
UPDATE: I have more thoughts on this at Kuff's World.
Now this is nicely done:
I can't think of a good reason why any candidate, at any level, wouldn't want to try something like this. All you need is a digital video recorder, some editing software, and the ability to create a YouTube account. Get on board now, while it's still a relative novelty, and you may even get yourself some free media to go along with it.
Oh, and look for AbolishTheOffice.com in a web browser near you. Your move, Orlando.
UPDATE: For whatever the reason, the embedded video works fine for me in Firefox, but not in IE. Those of you using IE should try the YouTube link, which does work in IE. Sorry about that.
Tomorrow is the big fundraiser for Jim Henley:
Jim Henley Fundraiser and Film Screeningfeaturing
The Hunting of the President with special guest Susan McDougal
Thursday, July 27, 2006
7:00 PM at River Oaks Theater
Ticket Prices: Reserved $100
Preferred $50 / General $25 / Students $10Reserved tickets receive special seating and entry into a private reception with Susan McDougal at La Griglia following the film.
For tickets click here or call 713-527-0234
Susan McDougal, in case you didn't know, is Henley's sister. Tickets will be available at the door. You can listen to my interview with Henley here.
The jury in the retrial of Andrea Yates has completed its second day of deliberations, and they have asked to review some evidence while they come to their decision.
Earlier today they asked to see a slide presentation compiled by Dr. Michael Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for the prosecution, saying Yates knew the killings were wrong and killed her children for selfish motive, not to help them.They also asked to see a video tape Dr. Phillip Resnick made of his interview with Yates after the killings. Resnick testified Yates was mentally ill and believed she had to drown the children to save them from eternal damnation.
The jury deliberated about two and half hours Monday following closing arguments.
I think Dr. Welner's testimony was a reach, but if the jury is impressed by it, that will be bad for Yates.
This jury has already deliberated a lot longer than the first one did.
The jury has already deliberated more than 11 hours in two days, trying to decide if Yates is guilty of capital murder for drowning her children or not guilty by reason of insanity. That's more than three times as long as a previous jury deliberated before convicting Yates during her first trial four years ago.The panel of 12 appeared tired and weary as they walked back in the courtroom before state District Judge Belinda Hill excused them for the night. They were sequestered for a second night at a hotel.
The jurors had indicated they might be close to reaching a verdict when they sent out a note about 5:30 p.m. asking that they be allowed to continue deliberating for another hour. But they reconsidered - and quickly sent a follow-up message.
"Rescind the last request. We need some sleep," the jury's final note stated, prompting everyone in the courtroom to laugh when Hill read it aloud.
We'll see if they were close or not. If there's not a verdict by lunch, this could take a while.
Galveston Judge Susan Criss, who famously presided over the Robet Durst trial, has some comments on the jury's task as a guestblogger at Grits for Breakfast. Check it out.
Will Ciro Rodriguez run again for Congress? Depending on what map is ultimately adopted by the court, the answer is Yes, according to Aaron Pena.
Returned a call from former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez who wanted to inform me of his interest in the redistricting process. He wanted it to be known that he was actively preparing for a run for Congress if a certain district developed between the San Antonio and Deep South Texas regions. This campaign would happen if a particular map was selected by the federal three judge panel. I asked if he wanted this kept confidential. He responded that he wanted as many people to know of his interest. So there it is ...
Vince has more. Let's just say that as much as I like Ciro, I'll be a little gunshy a third time around, at least until I see who his opposition is and what his fundraising looks like. And who knows what may happen in the event of another round of appeals.
Couple of news items of interest regarding everyone's favorite political chameleon, Carole Keeton Strayhorn. First, a little backscratching on taxes.
In early June, a lawyer and an accountant who represent businesses challenging taxes collected by state Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn's office met with a legal adviser to Strayhorn. By month's end, the visitors and their colleagues had given more than $400,000 to Strayhorn's gubernatorial campaign - 13 percent of the $3 million she raised from January through June.Strayhorn's office said Monday that there was nothing inappropriate about the confab initiated by an Austin lawyer and a Dallas tax consultant. Aides said talk focused on drafting plans for rules implementing the business tax created by lawmakers in a spring special session.
"It was kind of an innocuous meeting," said Tim Mashburn, the agency's general counsel, who hosted the visitors. "I have an open-door policy. Anyone who calls and comes by is going to get to talk to me."
Mashburn said there was no mention of campaign donations. "Absolutely not."
He was echoed by Jesse Ancira, associate deputy comptroller, who said he reminds agency directors at weekly meetings about the wall between politics and government. "I would hope that (mention) would never occur," Ancira said.
Democrat Chris Bell's campaign, which learned of the meeting through documents it received after an open records request, disagreed, saying the meeting and donations raise questions about possible political abuses of the office responsible for collecting state taxes and determining refunds.
Last September, the State Auditor's Office reported that more than 750 taxpayers received $461 million in tax credits and refunds from the comptroller's office less than a year after they or their representatives donated to Strayhorn's campaign.
Auditors said they were not implying wrongdoing by anyone, though they recommended that lawmakers prohibit contributions to the comptroller or comptroller candidates from a person or group, such as a law practice or an accounting firm, that represents taxpayers before the office.
Bell spokesman Jason Stanford said Monday: "Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right. You shouldn't take money from people you regulate. It's unethical."
This is a continuation of an old story, but a little reminder never hurts. It may well be that meeting in question was innocuous, and it may well be that every one of those tax credits and refunds were wholly legit. It's also the case that any reasonable person looking at the plain facts will naturally be suspicious of the whole thing. The State Auditor's recommendation here may be a bit broad, but it's better than the status quo.
Meanwhile, Strayhorn paused her cuddle-up-to-Democrats strategy for a moment to curry favor with a rightwing group that's filed a lawsuit over a constitutional cap on state spending.
Strayhorn had been named as a defendant by Edd Hendee, executive director of Citizens Lowering Our Unfair Texas, which filed the lawsuit in June. But in a court filing last week, Strayhorn said she wanted to be aligned with CLOUT.She said she "welcomes and urges" a review of the issues presented in the lawsuit, which is pending in state district court in Travis County.
Hendee is asking the court to enforce a provision in the Texas Constitution that limits the state budget from growing more than the state's economy.
[...]
Hendee said he is "heartened" by Strayhorn's response and said he wished the other officials would join her lead.
"I question why a private citizen should have to go to court to see that the constitution is followed," he said.
They're having a hoot with this one over at Lone Star Times. I'm perfectly happy for Strayhorn to make her pitch to the disgruntled conservative faction (though judging by the comments there, she's got a ways to go to convince some of them she really means what she's saying). Hell, I wish she'd do more of it - maybe we'll finally get some tangible evidence that Rick Perry's base is actually going to retailiate against him for the school finance bills. (One wonders what Dan Patrick will say to these folks - will he give them the Kinky treatment?) I'm just going to say that any politician who tries to make nice with Edd "Tom DeLay's BFF" Hendee is someone all Democrats should be very wary of.
Anyway. LST has all the lawsuit info - the original filing, the state's response, and Strayhorn's response (all PDFs). I tried to find the state's brief, but no one at the Attorney General's office had a clue where I could find it - the closest I got to an answer was a suggestion to check the court's website. Of course, they couldn't tell me what court to look for. Way to keep the public informed, Greg Abbott!
More feedback to Metro about the eastern portion of the Universities line, whose route may include Wheeler Avenue through the Texas Southern University campus.
Dozens gathered around aerial maps at the Third Ward Multi-Service Center, which outlined the proposed paths of its University corridor rail line. Many were focused upon the plan to build a rail line from Wheeler to Scott, which requires reopening a portion of Wheeler on TSU's campus that was closed in 1984 and converted to a pedestrian mall, now known as "Tiger Walk.""Wheeler was closed because students kept getting hit by cars," explained Gabrielle Green-del Bosque, a TSU student. "Students would have to cross the rail line to get to classes and I'm not too thrilled to have to wait on a train."
[...]
"The train line will destroy the sense of community that the closure of the street has generated inside the campus," TSU's acting president Bobby L. Wilson wrote in a letter to Metro President and CEO Frank Wilson. He also cited safety, noise and interference of ongoing campuswide renovation and landscaping projects as other reasons for the opposition.
The issues being raised are perfectly valid, and all viable alternatives should be given full consideration. I'm not quite sure what Ms. Green-del Bosque means by "having to wait on the train". This isn't a mile-long freight train we're talking about, it's a compact light rail train. I've sat at the crossing at Greenbriar and Braeswood many a time, and we're talking 30 seconds or so, the duration of a red light. Of all the possible objections, I'd file that one way down the list.
Minister Robert Muhammad, of the Nation of Islam's southwest region and a TSU graduate, said a rail line would be beneficial to the Third Ward neighborhood, but he favors Alabama or Elgin as alternate routes rather than cutting through his alma mater."It would be disruptive going down the heart of the campus," he said.
But, he clarified, residents are willing to compromise rather than miss out on the economic boon light rail would bring to the community.
Metro can't ask for more than that from the community. Let's hope what gets proposed is ultimately acceptable to the majority. There's another open house on the Universities line tonight from 5 to 8 PM at St. Paul's United Methodist Church, 5501 South Main Street.
Meanwhile, the pro-Richmond forces are preparing to take their voice to City Hall this afternoon. From a RichmondRail.org press release:
We invited Houstonians to speak out for Rail on Richmond. In less than 4 weeks more than 1000 citizens have signed our petition declaring their support for neighborhood friendly rail on Richmond.We promised to make their voices heard. We are going to City Council on Tuesday with petitions in hand.
Houston City Council Pop-Off Session
Tuesday, July 25, 2006 at 2:00 pm
City Hall, 901 Bagby @ Walker
I look forward to hearing what kind of reception they got.
Finally, Blue Bayou has a nice long riff on the Richmond controversy. Check it out.
Great story in today's Chron about Lucille Bridges, the mother of Ruby Bridges, better known as the little girl in Norman Rockwell's powerful and iconic painting The Problem We All Live With. Mrs. Bridges is now living in Houston after having been evacuated from New Orleans during Hurricans Katrina, and she got to see the original Rockwell painting for the first time at the Houston Museum of Fine Arts, where it's currently on loan.
When she was growing up, Lucille Bridges said, she wanted to go to school so bad that she'd cry. But her family share-cropped in Tylertown, Miss., and school was a luxury tasted only after the crops were in. Even that education stopped after eighth grade.She wanted a better life for her children, so she and her husband, Abon Bridges, moved to New Orleans. He worked at a service station. She cleaned houses and worked nights in a chicken factory.
When the NAACP recruited black families willing to integrate white schools, Lucille argued with Abon until he agreed to sign on. Of 135 black children who took the school system's entrance test, only six passed. The school board found grounds to reject one; one chose not to go; and three went to another school.
Only Ruby Bridges went to Frantz.
Lucille Bridges says she told her daughter only that she'd be going to a new school and that some people wouldn't want her there. Ruby didn't understand why the marshals were picking her up, or why the neighborhood joined to buy her new clothes.
The marshals arrived in three cars. Mother and daughter rode in the middle one, protected on both ends.
Roughly 400 angry whites stood outside Frantz. They threw eggs and screamed threats. The girl didn't realize the mob had anything to do with her. She thought maybe it was Mardi Gras.
Her mother, though, understood why the marshals unbuttoned their suit jackets. She knew they wanted easy access to their guns.
The marshals escorted them from the cars, up the stairs, and into the principal's office. Ruby spent the day scribbling in her tablet and talking to the marshals.
Throughout the day, white parents withdrew their children from the school. By the end of the day, almost all the pupils were gone.
After the marshals escorted Lucille and Ruby Bridges home, they stationed cars at the ends of the Bridges' block. Lucille noticed that they were armed with machine guns.
The situation grew uglier still. The next day, 5,000 segregationists marched through the streets of New Orleans.
One of only a handful of children left at Frantz, Ruby was literally in a class by herself. A new teacher, fresh from Boston, agreed to teach her.
Abon Bridges' boss fired him after he refused to remove his daughter from the school. The NAACP told him to go straight home, where he'd be safe.
But even there, the phone rang all night with anonymous threats.
Abon Bridges wanted to give up, to take Ruby out of the school. His wife insisted that she stay.
The NAACP found him a new job. But it was a year before the marshals thought it safe to leave the family's home unguarded.
Over time, the Bridges family faded into obscurity. Children trickled back into Frantz, and Ruby Bridges became the first member of her family to graduate from high school - an integrated one. She became a travel agent, got married and had four sons.
I love happy endings. God bless you, Lucille and Ruby Bridges.
Continuing with my series of Q&As with local judicial candidates, today I bring you Leora T. Kahn.
1. Who are you and what are you running for?I am Leora T. Kahn, the Democratic Candidate for Justice, Fourteenth Court of Appeals, Place 6. I am running in ten counties, including Austin, Brazoria, Chambers, Colorado, Fort Bend, Galveston, Grimes, Harris, Waller, and Washington.
2. What kinds of cases does this Court hear?
The Fourteenth Court of Appeals hears the appeals of both civil and criminal cases from county and district courts in the ten counties above. The appeals from the county and district courts include, for example, DWI, serious felonies, child custody, divorce, probate, and personal injury, to name just a few.
3. What are your qualifications for this position?
I have been a trial and appellate attorney in the area of criminal law for approximately 15 years. Since my admission to the Texas State Bar, I have tried many cases before juries and have authored numerous appellate briefs, including five death penalty appeals. I have presented oral arguments before both Texas Courts of Appeals and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, respectively. I have been admitted to practice in all courts of the State, the Federal Southern District of Texas, the Fifth Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court.
My experience as both a trial and appellate attorney has provided me with a firm grasp and understanding of the rules and procedures of trials and appeals.
4. Why are you the better candidate for this position?
I bring with my candidacy for the bench, years of experience as a lawyer, community volunteer and counselor, medical social worker, wife, mother, grandmother, teacher, hospital worker and clerk. I bring to this position a unique understanding of the impact of the Court of Appeals' decisions on the lives of the people before it as well as the community-at-large. I have always loved the law and the practice of law. This passion has manifested itself into a desire to become a justice.
My background has enabled me to develop a vision for the future of the Court of Appeals as a "safety net" for all people. Thus, I will work to ensure unfettered access to the Court for all. Additionally, as justice, I will restore the independence of the judicial branch.
5. Why is this race one we should care about?
The decisions made by the justices on the Courts of Appeals impact everyone! Their interpretations of laws affect each of us directly or indirectly by telling each of us what we must do or refrain from doing in our business, educational, social, familial and professional lives. Appellate court decisions shape every facet of life in Texas as we know it. For example, personal privacy including the ability of individuals to make personal life choices; quality of goods and products and the duty of sellers and service providers to guarantee their products and services; rights of citizens to be free from unlawful searches, seizures and interrogations; duty of parents to protect and care for children; access to public education and polling booths; duty of hospitals to care for the critically ill; duty of landlords to ensure the safety of residents.Texas needs justices who will ensure unfettered access to the courts, fair and impartial review of issues and causes on appeal, honest interpretation and application of the law, and independence to act as the safety net for all citizens.
6. What else do we need to know?
I serve on the Boards of the Susan G. Komen Cancer Foundation - Race for the Cure, Houston; the Anti-Defamation League Southwest Region; and Congregation Beth Israel (Board of Trustees). I am an active member and supporter of R.O.A.D. Women (River Oaks Area Democrats), Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas, Jewish Federation of Houston, Hadassah Medical Hospital and Research Foundation, National Council of Jewish Women, and I am a sustaining member of the Harris County Democratic Party.
I graduated with honors from South Texas College of Law, Houston, and served as Note and Comment Editor of the Law Review. I am a member of the Houston and Texas State Bar Associations, Texas Democratic Lawyers, Texas Women Lawyers, Texas Trial Lawyers, Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association, Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys.
Thank you, Leora T. Kahn. You can read my earlier Q&As with Chuck Silverman here, with Bill Connolly here, and with James Goodwille Pierre here.
Rice fans hoping for big things from new Athletic Director Chris Del Conte, in particular hoping for a better venue for basketball, may find some solace in these remarks to the Chronicle.
Our men's basketball program should be an economic resource to help offset the cost of playing guarantee games in football. First and foremost, we have to redo Autry to make that a revenue source, so that all of a sudden we don't have to play those (guarantee games).This is an entertainment dollar. We're trying to build an athletic program and maintain the success that Bobby had, yet we put ourselves in position (to fail) because we have no other revenue sources coming from all of our other athletic events.
It's the chicken and the egg, and the egg needs to be Autry. (First-year football coach) Todd Graham will win, but we as the administration have to meet him halfway and give him the tools necessary to be successful. I want to be our neighborhood team. The Texas Medical Center has 28,000 people. We have West U, Southgate and Southampton. There are 60,000 people within a three or four-mile radius of Rice University. We want to be that neighborhood team.
I want to focus our energies right here where we're at. There are enough people here that we should be a vibrant part of their entertainment dollar and a vibrant part of their community.
Yes, I know, he doesn't actually say the magic words, but he's pointing in the right direction. One takes hope where one can.
Other changes at Rice:
The results of the ongoing facelift of Rice Stadium could pale in comparison to the wholesale changes in the athletic department once the fall semester commences.Three longtime members of the department - senior associate athletic director Steve Moniaci, sports information director Bill Cousins and marketing director Mike Pede parted ways with the university on Wednesday morning.
According to several people familiar with the athletic department, Moniaci, who came to Rice in 1980, resigned from the post he had held since May 2001. Cousins, who joined the Rice staff in 1983, and Pede, who recently completed his 12th year on South Main, also will not return in the fall.
[...]
Moniaci joined Rice as the executive director for the Owl Club and athletic promotions. He was promoted to assistant AD of operations in 1985 and associate AD in 1997.
Cousins, the second full-time SID in Rice history, served as an assistant to Bill Whitmore before becoming his successor in 1984. Pede spent eight years at his alma mater - Houston - before coming to Rice in 1993 and earning several national marketing awards.
All three of these gentlemen were well thought of in the Owl community. It's not a surprise that with a new AD comes this kind of change, but it's still a sad day when familiar faces leave. I'm sure I speak for many Rice fans when I say I wish them all the best.
Finally, speaking of the stadium renovations, longtime MOBster Grungy has pictures of the work in progress.
I don't see it on the news wires as I draft this, but according to Paul Burka, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear the appeal of Judge Sam Sparks' ruling on the DeLay ballot replacement lawsuit on Monday, July 31. Says Burka:
The Court had the option of deciding the case on the briefs alone, so a reasonable conclusion is that the legal issues are sufficiently clouded that the judges want to ask some questions and hear some answers.
True, but one might also reasonably conclude that the Court wants to go out of its way to ensure that no one can complain about how it approached the matter. A summary ruling might well be seen by the losing side as unnecessarily brusque. There's no reason not to care about appearances.
In any event, the three judges on the panel are (via Juanita): Edith Brown Clement (appointed by W), James L. Dennis (Clinton), and Fortunato P. Benavides (Clinton). Make of that what you will.
Finally, Fort Bend Now tells us what will happen to all those online petitions that Harris County GOP Chair Jared Woodfill collected.
Lawyers familiar with the case now before the 5th Circuit say it would do more than that. If presented to the court, such a petition could be construed as an ex parte communication which, if generated by an attorney, would constitute a violation of at least one of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.Plus, lawyers tell me, the petition could anger 5th Circuit judges sufficiently that they could strike the state Republican Party's brief before the court, if they felt like it.
"It's an extraordinary tactic," said one attorney familiar with the case. "It's just bizarre."
But no worries really, says Harris County GOP Chairman Jared Woodfill.
Despite the statement saying that petition "will be delivered directly to the 5th Circuit," it won't.
"There will be no attempt to actually talk to the judges per se," Woodfill said. It's not going to be delivered to the front steps of the courthouse.
Instead, the petition "is an opportunity for people of the district to let their feelings be known," Woodfill said, through an expression of free speech.
A mock petition, if you will.
So, never mind.
Certainly a mockable petition, if you will. Ladies and gentlemen of the 22nd Congressional District, Jared Woodfill wants you to know that he cares about your feelings. I do hope you appreciate that.
On the matter of the other, more official, outside influence on this decision, Marc has a pointer to the amicus brief (PDF) filed by Attorney General Greg Abbott. He also has some criticism of the substance of that brief.
And finally, our day wouldn't be complete without one more bit of speculation about DeLay's future as a potential candidate in CD22. The Washington Times does the honors.
"He can't see himself ever becoming majority leader again, let alone House speaker - and he sees no point in crawling over glass to get elected only to be a backbencher after so many years as a member of the House leadership," a Republican confidante of Mr. DeLay says.
Well, yeah, which is why the rumors have been about him running for the express purpose of resigning again and allowing a special election to replace him.
Publicly, his stance is different. "The Hammer," who faces trial in Texas, has implied that he will campaign hard if Democrats win their legal battle to keep the Texas GOP from replacing his name on the November ballot.His chances of winning have improved as sympathy for him has grown even among Republican voters in his district who had developed "DeLay fatigue" after 21 years of his service in Congress.
Don't know who the source is for that, but I've not seen a lot of evidence that Republicans are anything but unhappy about having to run through this gauntlet, especially since it didn't have to be this way. Various others have suggested the sympathy angle, but at this time I ain't buying it. And remember, sympathy only gets you so far when the campaign cash math is against you.
Friends say Mr. DeLay will make a run only if his party concludes it was necessary to keep Texas' 22nd congressional district from going to a Democrat in November.
This sentence makes no sense. Either DeLay can be replaced on the ballot or not. If he can, obviously he goes away. If he can't, either he makes a run or he concedes the seat to Nick Lampson. There's no other calculation, unless you try to factor in the possibility that DeLay making an active run could cause collateral damage elsewhere.
Anyway. July 31. Stay tuned.
From Zogby Interactive, via Damon, here are some more numbers on the Texas governor's race:
Perry: 38.3% (+0.6 since June/no change since January)
Bell: 20.8% (+1.1/+2.9)
Kinky: 20.7% (+3.2/+6.3)
Strayhorn: 11% (-3.1/-9.5)
I'll be blunt: Even with the litigation follies, I have a hard time believing that's a true number for Strayhorn. You can criticize Zogby all you want for its online methods, but it's been pretty consistent with the SUSA and Rasmussen numbers we've seen, with this one exception so far. I can believe that Friedman and Bell have taken some support from Strayhorn, but I'll need to see more results like this before I buy it.
Zogby also pegs the Senate race as Strayhorn Hutchison 52, Radnofsky 37. Let's just say that I think this is a far more accurate picture of the race than their first cut at it was.
Over at Kuff's World, I've got a look at the latest SurveyUSA poll of the race and of Governor Perry's popularity. Two items of interest here: Check the comments for some feedback from a SurveyUSA person on their methodology, and while bearing the usual small sample size warnings in mind, note that Chris Bell has gone from a ridiculous 32% support from Democrats in an April poll to a slightly-less-ridiculous 44% in this one. I don't know what the over/under will be for Bell's level of Democratic support in the end, but it will be higher than that. If polls ever reflect that, then the cycle-long story line of Perry versus three clustered opponents may finally start to change.
And finally, as if to provide a cranky counterexample, Rasmussen has the race as Perry 40, Strayhorn 20, Friedman 19, and Bell 13. I don't believe that any more than I do Strayhorn having 11. It also says that Strayhorn has a higher approval rating among Dems than Bell does. Again, I rather doubt it, but that's what they've got. Link via Political Wire.
UPDATE: Fixed error in Senate poll. Thanks to Larry Renolds in the comments for the catch.
Time to check in on the Andrea Yates retrial again, where closing arguments are going on. Both sides brought out their strongest expert testimony last week, and though there was some new testimony overall, this trial was in many ways a lot like the first one.
Mental illness was again a predominant theme of the trial, since Yates had struggled with that since 1999, surviving two suicide attempts and several psychiatric hospitalizations. The 15 people chosen to sit on the jury - 12 regular jurors and three alternates - heard more about postpartum depression, schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, delusions and auditory hallucinations than they will probably ever hear again in their lifetimes.They viewed Yates' medical records, listened to her doctors, heard her best friend and her former mother-in-law describe how she unraveled in the weeks before the drownings and heard about the good life she led as a young woman - graduating as valedictorian of her class at Milby High School in 1982 and working as a nurse at M.D. Anderson Hospital before becoming a mother.
They were exposed to the awful aftermath: crime scene photographs and videos of her five children's bodies after Yates drowned them - ages 7, 5, 3, 2 and 6 months - on June 20, 2001. Jurors also viewed portions of Yates' videotaped interviews with various doctors in the months following the deaths and earlier this year.
But the new trial differed in some marked ways from the preceding affair in 2002.
Perhaps most notably, jurors this time cannot consider the death penalty since the jury in Yates' first trial rejected that option.
[...]
The jurors in state District Judge Belinda Hill's courtroom during the past few weeks also did not hear from Yates' former husband and the children's father, Russell Yates, although he had been sworn in as a witness and showed up at the courthouse frequently during the trial.
Likewise, this jury did not hear from Yates' mother or other family members - but did watch testimony offered by her best friend, Debbie Holmes, and Yates' former mother-in-law, Dora Yates, who described the accused woman's deteriorating mental state in the weeks before the drownings.
Jurors also heard from a forensic psychiatrist who just joined the case late last year and watched video segments from a 14-hour interview he conducted with Yates in May. That new expert witness, Dr. Michael Welner, testifying for the prosecution, said he believes Yates knew the drownings were wrong and alleged the children's deaths were motivated by her selfish needs.
Prosecutors presented unflattering testimony from one of Yates' former cellmates, who said Yates told her about chasing the oldest child through the house and becoming angry with him during an intense struggle before overpowering and killing him.
I'll get to Dr. Welner in a second. Dr. Park Dietz was a smaller figure this time around, as any mention of his erroneous testimony in the first trial was barred by Judge Belinda Hill. That decision has generated some controversy.
There are few courts in this land as pro-prosecution as Texas' 1st Court of Appeals, and few judges as conservative as the panel that reversed Andrea Yates' conviction, citing Dietz's false testimony, the prosecution's use of it and its potential impact on the jury's guilty verdict. In fairly short order, the case was returned to the lower court, Yates' case was set for retrial and Judge Hill ruled against any mention of Dietz's false testimony. Thus unburdened, the prosecution once again offered the testimony of its star witness, Dietz.Ask any lawyer: It is a bedrock of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence that every witness who takes the stand may be shown to have bias or prejudice toward the party he is testifying against. The reason is obvious: The trier-of-fact, whether judge or jury, is entitled to that information in order to determine whether the witness is honest or not.
By any standard, the defense should have been able to undermine Dietz's current testimony - that Yates knew right from wrong, the legal test of insanity, primarily because Satan, and not God, told her to kill her sons. Unshackled, most trial lawyers would have left Dietz's testimony like shards of broken glass on the courtroom floor. Instead, Judge Hill protected the doctor, handcuffed the defense and shielded the jury from the truth.
Another legal maxim holds that appellate courts seldom reverse convictions solely because of a mistaken evidentiary ruling. Not so this time. That Dietz was allowed to testify cleansed of his unforgivable distortion, deprived Yates of critical impeachment, and thus, a fair trial, arguably the most important right enjoyed by any citizen. If the jury doesn't "cure the error," finding her not guilty by reason of insanity, and rejecting Dietz's curious "the devil made me do it" theory, some other court will, reversing the conviction and sending the case back for trial once again.
And Andrea Yates will be right back in Judge Hill's court, fighting to be sent to a mental institution for the remainder of her life, and not to jail - where enlightened societies send only sane people who have done terrible things.
Just what we'd all want. I daresay the prosecution would claim in such a scenario that Dr. Welner's testimony was what carried the day for them, but it's still a potentially messy situation. Perhaps the jury will acquit and spare us all the trouble.
Rusty Yates was also absent from the stand this time around. Like the expert quoted, I'm not sure whom he'd have helped or hurt more, so I can certainly see the reasons to avoid him. And I think I speak for many, many people when I say that in general, the less Rusty, the better.
On to Dr. Welner, the state's new star, who put a spin on the killings that I can't say I'd seen advanced before.
Michael Welner, a prosecution medical expert who interviewed Yates earlier this year for about 14 hours and reviewed other doctors' reports about her, told jurors that Yates felt overwhelmed with child care responsibilities and that she and her husband, Russell Yates, were not intimate or communicating well weeks before the drownings."She felt she was failing not only her children, but also her marriage," he testified.
Welner also said the drownings were a benefit for Yates, not a spiritual act to help the children avoid hell, as other medical experts have testified Andrea Yates told them.
"In my opinion Andrea Yates committed the crime to help herself, not her children," Welner said.
That's a mighty cold reading, one that equates Andrea Yates to Susan Smith. Given that everybody, including Dr. Welner, agrees Yates was psychotic, I'm a little skeptical about the jury buying that. But of course, you never know, and I wasn't there to see their reactions, so take that for what it's worth.
The defense told a different story, of course, with their last witness.
Andrea Yates believed one of her sons would become a serial killer, another would be a mute homosexual prostitute and that both would burn in the fires of hell if she did not kill them, a psychiatrist told jurors today.Dr. Phillip Resnick, who interviewed Yates twice after her children's deaths and also reviewed other psychiatrists' interviews with her, said Yates believed she had ruined her children and that they would grow up to sin and then be sent to hell.
She believed she could save their souls if she killed them before they reached age 10, which she considered the age of responsibility, Resnick said.
He said Yates believed that John, 5, would become a serial killer.
"Another son would grow up to be a mute, homosexual prostitute,'' Resnick said.
[...]
Resnick, a psychiatry professor at Case Western Reserve University's medical school in Cleveland, Ohio, testified that Yates' mental illness made her delusional, resulting in her belief that she was doing the right thing by killing her children to save them from damnation.
He said she believed she had beaten Satan in the battle for their souls because they would go to heaven.
Yates' religious beliefs, he said, were the ``trellis'' on which her delusions grew. She believed, he said, that she had caused her children to stumble and Satan wanted them in hell.
"Mrs. Yates began to believe that not only was Satan tormenting her, but tormented her children,'' Resnick said. "She believed that Satan would have her children.''
After the deaths, she believed that she would be punished and executed by the state of Texas, the only entity that could destroy Satan, he testified.
Note that this belief that she would be executed for what she did ties nicely into the defense argument that society's idea of knowing right and wrong is not necessarily meaningful to a delusional person. What they want the jury to conclude is that Yates may have believed her actions would be judged by others as wrong, but that she herself thought she was doing the right thing. It's a critical difference.
Dr. Resnick also addressed Dr. Welner's construction of Yates' actions.
In the 16th day of testimony of Yates' capital murder retrial, Dr. Phillip Resnick - a mental health expert summoned by the defense - bristled at a suggestion that Yates drowned her five children in an attempt to draw her husband closer to her."I'm shocked you would suggest her concern is with her husband when she's killing her kids ... To suggest this is the result of some family tiff is way off the mark," Resnick told prosecutor Joe Owmby during cross-examination.
Resnick said there is no evidence to indicate Yates thought she and her husband "would walk into the sunset" without their children, calling that "a ridiculous hypothesis."
Had Rusty Yates been called to testify, it would have been interesting to have him explore Dr. Welner's hypothesis.
I don't know what will happen, or how long it will take the jury to come to a decision. The one thing we do know for sure is that no matter what happens, Andrea Yates will be confined to a state facility for a long time.
Anybody else catch the style section cover story from yesterday called Twenty Cool Things About Houston?
We asked eight trendsetters -- all cool themselves -- to list special things about Houston that never go out of style no matter the season. See if you agree.
I'll leave you to peruse the list. While any such compilation done by rational people would naturally include the Menil, it's all pretty much subjective, so of course there's plenty of room to disagree, especially on a list as short as this one. I'll get to my suggestions in a minute, but first I'll point out the irony in the panel's second item, the potentially doomed River Oaks Theater. When it comes time to convene a group of experts to determine Twenty Not So Cool Things About Houston, the number one result ought to be "The fact that each and every one of these cool things can disappear on a moment's notice to be replaced by a soulless cookie-cutter strip center or housing development, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Yes, even Lyle Lovett."
Anyway. My list would include the Beer Can House, the Art Car Museum, Lai Lai's Dumpling House, McGonigel's Mucky Duck, and all of the sculptures of David Adickes. What do you think they left out? Leave a comment and let me know.
I had a chance to speak with Nick Lampson over the weekend. I'd done a previous interview with him at the Democratic convention in Fort Worth on more general topics (MP3 of that is here), so this time I thought we'd talk more specifically about NASA and space exploration, since that was one of his main areas of expertise while in Congress from 1996 to 2004. We did talk a little about the state of the race in CD22 at the end, but it's mostly about space. Here's the interview:
Link for the MP3 file is here.
Previous interviews:
Gary Binderim - Interview
Glenn Melancon - Interview
Jim Henley - Interview
Ted Ankrum - Interview
Shane Sklar - Interview
John Courage - Interview
Nick Lampson - Interview
Mary Beth Harrell - Interview
Hank Gilbert - Interview
Joe Farias - Interview
Harriet Miller - Interview
Ellen Cohen - Interview
I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of my regular readers vote (why would you be reading a political blog if you weren't vested in the process?), but on the odd chance that any of you don't, would the prospect of winning a million bucks change your attitude?
Of the four top gubernatorial candidates, only independent Kinky Friedman would favor having a $1 million lottery to get people to vote."I'd favor anything that would get more than 29 percent of Texans to vote," Friedman said, citing the percentage of voting-age adults who turned out in the 2002 governor's race.
Arizona voters this fall will have the opportunity to vote on a ballot measure that would set up an election lottery. Anyone who voted would be eligible to win $1 million.
The petition to get the Arizona Voter Reward Act on the ballot was pushed through by a politician who is frustrated with what he perceived as Arizona's low voter turnout, according to The New York Times. Although 77 percent of the state's registered voters cast ballots in the 2004 presidential race, just 56 percent voted in the 2002 governor's race.
Of course Friedman favors this. It's unsubstantive yet flashy and attention-getting, so it's tailor made for him.
I believe in making it as easy and convenient as possible to register and vote. Same day registration, voting by mail, voting centers - there are lots of proposals I'd favor to lower the bar to entry in Texas. But at the end of the day, if the idea of voting for its own sake isn't good enough to draw someone to the polls, then I can't say I'm unhappy by his or her absence. I too wish more people voted, but I really wish more people participated in the sorts of activity that naturally lead to voting, like joining civic organizations and attending public meetings. I don't know how to make it easier to do those things. I do know that when people talk about the world being run by those who bother to show up, that's what they mean. If that doesn't do it for you, then you may as well leave it to someone else.
I couldn't tune in to last night's blogger conference call with David Van Os, but when people like Vince participate, I can still feel like I was there. Other callers include The Muse, Bay Area Houston, Houston Dems, and Half Empty. Check 'em out.
Given that there was supposed to be another Metro open house on the Universities line yesterday, I was hoping there'd be an article on that in today's Chron so I could do one post on that and on this story from yesterday, in which Richmond Avenue property owners fret about the amount of space the rail line might take from them. No dice on a story for today, as far as I could see, so I guess I'll just go ahead with something on yesterday's story.
"According to the drawings Metro released last Tuesday, what you're seeing is an 86-foot right of way they will require - and that line is the edge of the street," said gallery owner Robert McClain.He was pointing to a blue line on the driveway of McClain Gallery on Richmond between Kirby and Greenbriar. About 80 residents and business people from the neighborhood gathered there Friday for a rally and news conference.
[...]
McClain pointed to a map with about 100 red stickers on it and four blue ones. He said [shop owner Daphne] Scarborough took a walking poll along the segment east of Kirby, and the stickers indicate sentiment against and for rail there.
Metro spokesman George Smalley said he would like to know more about the poll. "Because we have not seen the survey and don't know how that question was asked, it is difficult to know whether the results are valid or not," he said.
"People can ask leading questions. I'm not saying it was biased or unbiased, but it was conducted by people who are passionate against rail on Richmond."
As to the blue lines on the concrete, Smalley said, they are based on the "potentially flawed assumption" that Metro will need equally wide right of way on each side of the current median.
I presume this question came up in yesterday's meeting, but as of this posting, I can't say what happened from there. Maybe there'll be a story on Monday.
(UPDATE: My bad, the next meeting concerning Universities is today, not Saturday. Thanks to Kevin in the comments for reminding me of this.)
We do, however, get an editorial in favor of the Richmond option, which suggests that our options aren't so much Richmond or Westpark but Richmond or nothing.
Of the five proposed new Metro transit lines, only the route linking the University of Houston and Texas Southern University on the east to the Galleria area and beyond has generated significant controversy. Metro's preferred route would run along Richmond from Main Street to South Rice near the Galleria. Some trains would continue north on Post Oak, while others would go west on Westpark to the Hillcroft Transit Center, giving Park 'n Ride patrons access to the expanding rail system.That is the most direct route and the one surveys reveal would attract the most ridership. Without sufficient ridership, the line will not qualify for federal financing. Without federal financing, the line needed to connect all the other transit corridors cannot be built.
It doesn't have to come to that, of course - there may be an alternate route that's more acceptable to more people, won't cost more than the Richmond line would or be any more disruptive to any more people and businesses than the construction on Richmond would, and would have a comparable potential for ridership to Richmond. I'm not aware of such an alternative, but that doesn't mean one can't exist. Maybe between now and the end of the third open house meeting with Metro, we'll hear more about such an alternative. It would be nice.
I finally got around to reading this powerful Texas Monthly story about August 1, 1966, the day Charles Whitman shot 43 people (killing 15) from the top of the UT Tower in Austin, and I'm glad I did. I really didn't know very much about Whitman's crime, which was the first of its kind and which spurred the creation of SWAT teams around the country. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure why I didn't know all that. For whatever the reason, I just haven't seen much written about it before now.
Anyway. The story is done oral-history style, by the people who lived through it, and it's very moving. It's there for the usual limited time, so check it out while you can. It's definitely worth your time.
First they came for the beer bongs. Now they're coming after rude behavior.
Families have been feeling increasingly alienated on the picturesque waterways around New Braunfels, local leaders say, prompting them to crack down on rude behavior."In the past we have loved the sinners' money more than we hate the sinners' behavior," said City Councilman Ken Valentine, who lives along the river and has led the campaign to keep what he considers riffraff out of the water. "The message is: We invite you to our party, but we make the rules. Here are our rules and if you don't like them, don't come."
Yes, that's Ken "No Bong" Valentine, continuing his crusade. Say this for the man - he sticks to his principles.
The City Council is considering a noise ban on the water from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m. and later this month will consider a way to prohibit Jell-O shots, a concoction of gelatin and alcohol.
You knew that if beer bongs were targeted, Jell-O shots would be next, right?
Greater New Braunfels Chamber of Commerce President Michael Meek said he supports the city's goal, not its timing.Meek said all the attention being paid to the bad behavior and new rules at the height of the summer season is turning people away. Anecdotal evidence shows sales are down at restaurants and other businesses that get a lot of business from out-of-town tubers, he said.
"It's detrimental in-season," Meek said. "We would prefer that we have a comprehensive plan put together in the offseason and then go forward and communicate it properly. ... It's almost self-inflicted wounds."
That's probably true. It would certainly seem less silly if they did it this way.
I make fun here, but I've got some family in New Braunfels, and I know from speaking to them that there really are problems with obnoxious tubers. It's certainly not ridiculous to want to exert some control over the worst offenses. New Braunfels is a booming little town, and it's in a great location - close to San Antonio and Austin, and surrounded by natural beauty. If I thought I needed to raise my kids in a small town, it's the kind of place I'd want to live. I daresay that's a common sentiment, and as such that's a big driver of its growth. It's likely at a point where the tension between its traditional economy and its newcomers who aren't used to putting up with that kind of stuff is coming to a head and needs to be dealt with. I'm not sure that this is the best approach - I tend to agree with those who say that stricter enforcement of existing laws would suffice and that new laws targeting narrow, specific behaviors are not needed - but I wish them well in finding it, whatever it is.
TxDOT's plan to connect the existing service roads along I-10 between downtown and the West Loop are generating complaints from the neighborhoods they'd run through.
TxDOT has plans to build the elevated frontage lanes as part of its $40 million effort to create a continuous feeder road system along I-10 between Washington Avenue and Taylor Street.Linda Mercer, a resident of Cottage Grove, a community north of I-10 between TC Jester and Washington, said that if the frontage lanes are built 30 feet above grade, nothing will be able to be done to lessen the noise and pollution that will come with them.
"It would introduce an aesthetic to the neighborhood that we can't even imagine," said Mercer, who also is vice president of the White Oak Bayou Association. "There will be an industrial quality to the neighborhood. What you see along the frontage lanes in Cottage Grove now is largely residential because it's not too bad to live there. This would destroy that."
TxDOT project developer Jim Heacock said there are gaps in the frontage road system in three places along that stretch:
- Eastbound between Taylor and Studemont;
- Both east and westbound between Patterson and Heights Boulevard; and
- The area where the Union Pacific tracks cross I-10 between Washington and TC Jester.
It's at that third gap where TxDOT wants to build 30-foot-high, two-lane frontage roads on both sides of the interstate, Heacock said.Construction of the project is expected to commence in September 2007 and last about two years, he said.
[...]
"What we have now is something the neighborhood is comfortable living with," said Monica Savino, vice president of the Woodcrest Neighborhood Civic Association. "(The project) would double or triple the amount of noise we have now, and that's a disaster."
Tom Dornbusch, president of the WNCA, said that when the stretch of I-10 inside the loop was built, TxDOT took steps to lessen the freeway's negative effects on neighborhoods.
"In the 1960s the neighborhoods negotiated with TxDOT to get it below grade in exchange for all the houses that were lost," Dornbusch said. "What we want to see is the frontage lanes built below the (Union Pacific) railroad tracks."
Heacock said building the lanes below the tracks is unfeasible.
"They just won't fit under there," he said.
I'm trying to picture a road that goes over the railroad bridge. What I'm conjuring would not please me if I lived in that area, so I can certainly understand the neighborhoods' concerns. I guess I'm not really sure why there needs to be a service road there. On the westbound side, at least, where one can get past the discontinuity by driving through the residential area and crossing the railroad tracks (as I discovered one day when I exited TC Jester on my way to Washington to avoid a traffic jam), there's nothing that would be served by this road. Of course, as described here the idea is just to allow you to get from TC Jester to Washington in a direct fashion. I'm still not sure why, after all this time, that's now needed.
I can see the need for the other pieces. It would be very nice to be able to enter I-10 West directly from Heights or Yale, without having to go east towards Studemont and take the turnaround. And with the opening of the new Target at Taylor Street, a service road between Studemont and Taylor would come in handy. Maybe I'm just not as familiar with the western part of the TxDOT Service Road Completeness Plan as I am with these areas, but I don't see the same kind of value in filling that particular gap. Can anyone comment on this?
To put it bluntly, this would suck.
Three Houston landmarks, including the Landmark River Oaks Theatre and the Bookstop in the former Alabama Theater, have been declared endangered by the Greater Houston Preservation Alliance.The alliance has learned, spokesman David Bush said Friday, that two buildings in the River Oaks Shopping Center could face demolition within two years.
[...]
The GHPA has repeatedly tried to discuss the buildings with Weingarten Realty but has been rebuffed, Bush said.
But a half-dozen tenants of the River Oaks Shopping Center told the Houston Chronicle that a Weingarten's leasing agent informed them of plans to raze parts of the historic shopping center.
The first domino to fall, they said, would be the River Oaks Shopping Center building at the northeast corner of Shepherd and West Gray. Erected in 1937, the curved art deco building is "of national significance," architecture historian Stephen Fox said.
[...]
Opened in 1939, the River Oaks is Houston's oldest functioning movie theater.
Bill Banowsky, CEO of Landmark Theatres, wrote in an e-mail that Landmark is "100 percent committed to the River Oaks Theatre," and that Landmark recently signed a lease extension. Landmark spokeswoman Melissa Raddatz would not say how long that lease lasts.
Celeste Williams, a lecturer at the University of Houston's Gerald D. Hines School of Architecture, has studied Houston's earliest movie theaters extensively, and notes that in many cities the historic buildings still function either as movie theaters or auditoriums.
"There aren't many buildings I'd lie down in front of bulldozers to save," she said. "The River Oaks theater is one of them."
I'd be willing to lie down next to her. One needs to be able to take Houston's hands-off management of historic buildings with a certain air of resignation, but one also needs to draw the line somewhere. Especially if this is the second half of this one-two punch:
In addition to the two segments of the River Oaks center, the preservation alliance placed the art deco Alabama Shepherd Shopping Center on its endangered list because of fears that Barnes & Noble would close the Bookstop if it built in River Oaks. Weingarten also controls The Alabama Center.Responding to questions via e-mail, Barnes & Noble Inc. spokeswoman Carol Brown wrote that the company had "made no announcement of plans to build in the River Oaks Shopping Center." Brown wouldn't say whether such plans existed.
She also said the chain had no "immediate" plans to move from the Bookstop location.
In 1989, Bookstop won national attention for its creative preservation of the Alabama movie theater, built in 1939. Nine years later, Barnes & Noble bought the Bookstop chain.
As the story notes, a mega B&N is supposedly planned for the River Oaks center across the street from the theater, where the Black Eyed Pea now stands. If that were to be built, it would be hard to see how the Bookstop would continue to be viable, as it's about a mile away from there.
I have very fond memories of both places, and that Bookstop has gotten a lot of business from me over the years. I've been a bit worried about the overall health of the Alabama Center since Cactus Records closed. Its location is a bit of a problem, since the front entrance is on Shepherd, and shoppers approaching it on the northbound side have to make a nasty unprotected left turn to get in, which often snarls traffic on Shepherd. I've seen quite a few other businesses on Shepherd in that general vicinity come and go, and I've always been convinced that the pain-in-the-butt factor of making lefts from that street into their parking lots contributed to many a demise. I guess I figured that if the Alabama Bookstop had made it this long, it was immune to that. Looks like there may be other forces at work against them here.
Houston's historic preservation laws are among the weakest in the country, and the vast majority of the city's historic buildings can be destroyed without even a waiting period for public comment.Preservationists have responded by mounting intelligence operations to ferret out plans to raze historic buildings.
Those "cloak-and-dagger operations," Bush said, "are sad, but it's what we've got to do if we're going to draw public attention before the bulldozers arrive."
I hope in these cases their paranoia is unfounded. Please think of the bigger picture here, Weingarten Realty.
UPDATE: Houstonist has more. Given all that I've said on the subject of petitions, online and otherwise, it's with a certain amount of gingerness that I note they're sponsoring an online petition to let Weingarten Realty know what kind of opposition exists to this plan. Take whatever action you deem appropriate, bearing in mind that the Houstonist post has contact info for Weingarten if you prefer a more direct approach.
UPDATE: More here.
UPDATE: Bayou City History, a great resource for what Houston used to be like, joins in with a couple of cool old pictures.
Friday was the deadline for parties in the redistricting lawsuit to files their comments on everyone else's plans, and the state-drawn Eviscerate Lloyd Doggett plan was heavily criticized by expected and unexpected sources.
"The state plan changes two or three districts by partisan makeup. It's a partisan get-even plan," said lawyer Rolando Rios, who represents the League of United Latin American Citizens."State Republican leaders chose to put a partisan agenda ahead of the interests of Hispanic voters, whose voting rights have been violated," said Ed Martin, a Democrat consultant and redistricting expert.
GOP Attorney General Greg Abbott and his assistants submitted the state map.
Abbott declined to respond beyond his solicitor general's prepared statement that defended the state's map as one that maintains partisan balance and reunites Webb County.
"It leaves 28 congressional districts completely untouched, and alters only District 23 and three adjoining districts," Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz said.
However, a prominent Texas Republican consultant also blasted the state's proposal.
"I'm disappointed that the Republicans are using this as a cocktail party joke opportunity rather than to submit real evidence before real judges who are going to determine the future of our state," GOP consultant Royal Masset said. "The Republican plan makes no sense. It's not responsive to anything. It's like a political statement."
[...]
Trying to remove Doggett from Austin undermines the Republican argument for drawing fair districts, Masset said.
"All we did is draw a goofy map laughing at Lloyd Doggett," the Republican consultant said. "I don't know what they are accomplishing by this idiocy. There's no way in God's creation that the judges are going to approve a Republican map that doesn't have any Democratic congressmen in Travis County."
I've said this in a different context, but I'll repeat it here: No one can say for sure what the judges will do. I appreciate Masset's sentiments, and Lord knows I hope he's right, but I've been following this saga for too damn long to hang my hopes on anything as ephemeral as that.
One more point:
In addition to rejecting the state plan, LULAC also dismissed Bonilla's proposal as an "incumbent protection plan.""Incumbency is something that should not even be considered by the court in fashioning a remedy," said Rios, LULAC's lawyer.
In an ideal world, perhaps that's how it should be, but if there's one thing the courts have consistently accepted as a valid purpose of redistricting, it's incumbent protection. That in and of itself is as good a reason as any to hope that the panel will reject the state's map. With all due respect to Attorney Rios, that argument isn't going to fly.
For more on this, BOR has the Lone Star Project response, which includes the briefs filed by the Jackson plaintiffs, and over at Kuff's World, I've got some comments by A.J. Pate, one of the private citizens who has filed a new map for the court to consider. The court will meet on August 3, and AG Greg Abbott has asked for a ruling by the 7th, which would be almost exactly identical to the lead time of the 1996 Vela v. Bush ruling. Stay tuned.
For those of you up in the northern part of Harris County who are looking for some Democratic campaign activity in their area, Stace has a couple of announcements for you. You can attend some town hall meetings with Dot Nelson-Turnier, and you can go blockwalking with Diane Trautman. I like what Diane is saying here:
"I have been overwhelmed by the positive reception I have received in each neighborhood. One man told me no one has personally campaigned in his neighborhood since he lived in Houston ten years ago. Most don't even know the name of my opponent. I think it is so important for a legislator to address the needs and concerns of citizens at the community level - face to face, which Rep. Crabb has failed to do."
If Democrats are ever going to make inroads into previously written off deep red territories, this is how it'll be done. If you want to help make that happen, that's one fine way to do it.
Just wanted to note this Chron story from yesterday about the so-far-successful deployment of National Guard troops to the US/Mexico border, where they are supplementing Border Patrol personnel.
Guard and patrol officials said the month-old deployment of troops to the border is working as planned, enabling at least three dozen patrol agents to return to law enforcement duties. More than 100 soldiers have arrived and by the end of August there could be 300, said Lt. Col. Rick Noriega of Houston, commander of guard troops in the patrol's Laredo sector.Unlike other border states, Texas has been able to meet Pentagon staffing goals with in-state volunteers for a mission expected to last two years. Although it has taken several weeks to muster and train the first wave of troops, they've been well received by the patrol and this border community, Noriega said.
"This has been a task that they (patrol) have done with the utmost professionalism. We're just pleased to have made this relationship work in a very meaningful way," he said.
Patrol acting sector Chief Reynaldo Garza described the collaboration as "very successful" because it quickly allowed the patrol to achieve one of the objectives established by President Bush when he ordered the deployment on May 15.
"We've been able to reach one of our objectives ... to return Border Patrol agents to the border to do the work that agents should be doing as opposed to clerical or camera operations-type surveillance duties," Garza said.
For the first time here, officials showed the news media the kinds of tasks the Guard has assumed alongside patrol agents.
"We have to dispel a lot of what was perceived was going to happen when they announced that the Guard was going to be deployed," Noriega said.
So far, so good. There's two items of note here. First, regarding the "invasion" of the borders:
So far, no significant change in arrest data has been noted, Garza said, but in the past two weeks the Guard members assisted in seizing 2,200 pounds of marijuana and 138 pounds of cocaine.
Maybe we should be deploying troops to the northern border instead. Maybe that's where all the real action is.
And item two:
The Guard will have a further impact on smuggling when engineering specialists arrive to build barriers and fences in high-traffic areas, Garza said."To say a 'wall' is a misnomer," he said. "You will see some work, but it won't be miles and miles, and it definitely will not be the entire 2,000 miles. It's impossible."
Next time someone suggests building a wall along the border, tell him or her to talk to Chief Garza.
The Chron has a strongly worded editorial about the recent attempts by Harris County GOP Chair Jared Woodfill and Attorney General Greg Abbott to influence the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in the DeLay ballot replacement lawsuit.
Unfortunately, some politicians seem to think an appeal to partisanship can influence how the federal courts rule.A blatant example can be seen on the Harris County Republican Party Web site. It invites viewers to send a petition to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals jurists who will decide whether former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay must remain on the November ballot as the GOP candidate for the 22nd District. The petition declares, "Each day that goes by with Democrats perverting the process and denying the public their choice of candidates is a travesty of justice. This deliberate subversion undermines the will of the people and sets a horrible precedent for future elections."
[...]
The notion that judges can be influenced by a partisan petition is repugnant to the concept of an independent judiciary. The state GOP is represented in its appeal by a team of qualified lawyers. If Harris County party officials succeeded in affecting the outcome through such tactics, it would constitute a real subversion of the system and a truly horrible precedent for future litigation.
Equally misguided is Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott's decision to intervene in the case. He has every right to file a friend of the court brief, but his stated reason shows a slight grasp of the particulars of the case.
[...]
For the Texas attorney general to use the resources of the state to help his party win a favorable court judgment would be an intolerable conflict of interest. If Abbott does file a brief, it should recognize that Texas law prevents parties from replacing unpopular primary winners such as DeLay with stronger candidates - exactly what the state GOP is trying to do.
And via View from 22, it turns out there's a third person attempting to inject himself into these proceedings, one David Wallace, the onetime rising star from Sugar Land.
Wallace said he has hired Jenkens and Gilchrist to file an Amicus Brief to the court of appeals. “I contacted both the national and state Republican Party’s to see what we could do to help. An Amicus Brief is a kind of ‘friend of the court’ brief. My attorneys feel good about this but who knows what is going to happen,” Wallace said.He said the brief would focus on constitutional issues related to the case. It is a challenge, he said, because there is no existing case law to refer to. Instead the firm is having to research “200 year old documents to try and determine what our founding fathers, the framers of our constitution, meant and what their intent was,” Wallace explained.
Wallace said the appeals court required that the Republicans file their briefs last Friday, the Democrats filed their arguments this Friday and the Republicans must then file their answers to the Democrats briefs by the following Friday.
Wallace said it will cost about $10,000 of his campaign contributions to fund the research and file the brief. He filed his first congressional campaign report last week and admits that even if his bid for DeLay’s congressional seat is unsuccessful, he plans on seeking a congressional seat in 18 months.
I was going to deconstruct the twisted logic behind this, but frankly Chris Elam has already done a thorough job of it. One thing he doesn't quite touch on:
If we're going to be cynical, then three motivations exist for this brief. One, that Mayor Dave doesn't expect the appeal to succeed, and wants to score brownie points with the Establishment by appearing helpful. Two, that even if the appeal succeeds, Mayor Dave doesn't think Talton will win in November. Three, that even if Talton becomes the incumbent for 2008, Mayor Dave is confident that he can be beat in the primary. If we're going to be charitable, then one motivation exists for this brief - Mayor Dave wants to help Robert Talton beat Nick Lampson.
I think we can all reject the charitable interpretation, at least if we believe his statement about running again in 2008. Be that as it may, it seems to me that despite all the evidence to the contrary, Wallace may genuinely believe he's still the frontrunner to be the Chosen One, and thus this use of $10K of his supporters' money is appropriate and germane. That, I think, is the simplest explanation, if least flattering to Wallace, for his action.
One last point needs to be made, and that's about the recent bravado by some former colleagues of DeLay about his chances to win if the appeals court forces him to remain on the ballot.
Friends of the former House Republican boss say Mr. DeLay -- who retired to Virginia last month after being implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal and indicted by a Texas prosecutor -- is willing to wage a full-scale campaign for the seat if Democrats succeed in preventing the Texas Republican Party from replacing him on the November ballot."This whole thing could explode in the Democrats' face," says Rep. Jeb Hensarling, Texas Republican. "He has indicated that if called back into battle, he'll fight -- and I'd say his chances of keeping this seat in Republican hands are pretty good."
[...]
"If the Democrats use the courts to force him to stay on the ticket, and he doesn't even campaign, he could still win it," says Rep. John Carter, another Texas Republican. "And, remember, his district is still strongly Republican, by about 55 percent to 60 percent, and so he probably has a better chance of winning than if none of this had happened."
It's a simple matter of numbers. Juanita pointed out the problem as stated in a subscription Roll Call article.
Ex-Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) has now paid out more than $1.7 million in legal bills resulting from a pair of investigations over the past two years, including close to a half-million dollars in the second quarter of 2006 as he was retiring from the House.[...]
Some have suggested that he would wage an active campaign to defeat Lampson with the understanding that he would not then accept the seat, forcing a special election late this year or early next.
However, that likely would force DeLay to abandon his plan of using his remaining campaign cash to pay legal bills.
And if he decided to run and take the seat, he’d once again be restricted to $5,000 donations to his legal defense fund if he were to win.
Remember: In the last quarter DeLay raised $12K and spent over $800K, which knocked his cash on hand down to $641K. Needless to say, that's unsustainable. DeLay can raise cash for a campaign, or he can raise cash for his legal defense. He can't do both, and of the two only the former is optional. Do the math for yourself and you'll see.
To cite Elam again, having DeLay on the ballot, even as a placeholder for whoever would be the standard-bearer in a 2007 special election following his re-resignation (and does anyone think there'd be a consensus Republican choice for that?), is like having a candidate who's dead. We know from prior history that it's not impossible for the dead guy to win, but I feel pretty confident in saying there'd be little parallel between Mel Carnahan in 2000 and Tom DeLay in 2006.
At this point, as far as I'm concerned, if the Republicans' appeal is denied, the only question remaining is whether DeLay would formally withdraw and give his party the option of (quickly) getting a write-in candidate in place, endorsing Libertarian Bob Smither, or cutting its losses and putting its resources into other races, or if he'd stay put and lead them over a cliff. Given how utterly self-centered DeLay has been since he first announced his departure, I wouldn't be at all surprised by the latter.
UPDATE: Just as I hit Publish, I see that Abbott has filed his amicus brief. So much for that.
The very uncontentious process for selecting a route on which the East End BRT will run has come to a conclusion, with Harrisburg being the winner.
Scheduled to begin construction next July and open in December 2010, the line would begin operation with train-like buses on their own guideway and be converted to light rail if ridership increases enough.Although member Rafael Ortega had proposed to help preserve street access to businesses and industry on Harrisburg by putting part of the line on a nearby hike-and-bike trail, the final vote was unanimous.
The street was once a trolley route and is historically the business core of the East End, a largely Hispanic neighborhood that is seeing economic revival after years of decline. The town of Harrisburg was founded a decade before Houston itself, which annexed it in 1926.
"It's going to hurt my business for a while," said Bob Townley, owner of C&R Auto, 5702 Harrisburg. "But I think Harrisburg is the only intelligent way to approach the East End," he said.
"I've been 35 years in business in the East End. I think it's going to be good for the city."
Wow. The difference in response between the East End folks and the Universities Line crowd just amazes me. One might hypothesize that there's a partisan aspect to this, but that's not necessarily the case.
Also sounding a positive note was state Rep. Beverly Woolley, whose Houston Armature Works occupies both sides of Harrisburg for a two-block span and needs access by 18-wheelers."I feel like our concerns are going to be addressed," she said after hearing Ortega suggest that Metro might improve Texas Avenue, a block south of Harrisburg, to handle traffic displaced by the line or its construction.
"If they do everything they say, it will work out fine, but there are just so many unknowns," Woolley said.
Whatever Metro did with the stakeholders on this line, it needs to do more of it. And remember, the East End folks were pissed at Metro when they announced that the Harrisburg corridor would be getting BRT instead of light rail as they had expected, so it's not like the transit agency started with an extra well of goodwill here. Perhaps the result here will give them some momentum going forward on the Universities line.
Finally, regarding what Bob Townley said about the BRT line being good for the East End, it'll definitely be worth checking back in ten years or so to see how things turn out. The Main Street Line has been a catalyst for real estate development in other previously neglected parts of town. A comparison of the two sometime later on should be very interesting.
HouStoned, the new Houston Press blog, has a chat with Chris Bell today. It's mostly about environmental issues, so it's got good timing. Check it out.
The conventional wisdom is that a candidate who feels comfortable about his or her odds of being elected, especially against a lesser-funded opponent, should avoid mentioning that opponent in public. If that's the case, then Rep. John Carter is getting a little worried, since he's taken to attacking Mary Beth Harrell in a letter to his supporters. Eye on Williamson has the details, plus Harrell's detailed response. Check it out.
UPDATE: Vince goes into waaaaay more detail about this.
I noted before that HD138 incumbent Dwayne Bohac reported zero cash on hand as of June 30. I'm still not sure what that's about, but whatever it is, it's also the case that he's been out-fundraised through the midyear point by Democratic challenger Mark McDavid. Not too surprisingly, the McDavid campaign is crowing about this a bit. Click the More link for the press release.
Houston, TX - The Mark McDavid campaign is proud to announce that the Texas Ethics Commission reports for the semi-annual period from 1/1/06 to 6/30/06 show that Mark McDavid's donations exceeded the fundraising of his 2-term Republican rival, Dwayne Bohac. In addition to outpacing his opponent in fundraising, the McDavid campaign ended the period with cash on hand, in deep contrast with Bohac's 0 account balance at the end of the period. "We knew Bohac's fundraising was in trouble when our first TEC Report, due mid-May at the end of the Special Legislative Session, showed that we raised twice as much money as Bohac over the same period. This semi-annual report just confirms our suspicions that his campaign is in trouble," remarks McDavid.A detailed comparison of each candidate's Contributions shows that McDavid's donor base was 5 times as large as Bohac's and largely consists of individual donors, in contrast to Bohac's 22 contributors over the 6-month period, 12 of which were Political Action Committees and other entities. "The results speak for themselves. My donor base represents the grassroots, and his represents business as usual in Austin. You'd think that Bohac would have known better than to spend 2 dollars for every dollar raised and in the process empty his campaign account," comments McDavid. He further muses: "I can only surmise one or a combination of things happening: 1) Bohac takes his seat for granted, 2) he's lost the political will to fight for his seat, or 3) the Republican Party has abandoned him for more competitive races." Bohac won this seat in 2002 when running against Ken Yarborough, a Democrat who had held the seat for 10 years and was hurt by 2001 redistricting. "Bohac's victory in 2002 was Pyrrhic at best. He has spent well over 7 figures to buy this seat since first campaigning for it in 1996. With the demographic makeup of this ever-changing district, it's clear that the Republican incumbent's voting record is out of step with the majority in his district," comments McDavid. As of 2004, the ethnic breakdown of the district is 41% anglo, 41% Hispanic/Latino, 10% African-American, and 6% Asian. The anglo population dropped 5.5% from the 2000 Census to 2004, and has more than likely slipped further over the last 2 years.
A further noose around Bohac's neck is the thousands of dollars he took from TRMPAC, a Tom DeLay political action committee under heavy scrutiny for alleged money-laundering during the 2002 races. "Bohac served as Tom DeLay's intern and needs to get more ethical mentors," comments McDavid. A native Houstonian who grew up in the Forest West neighborhood in District 138, Mark McDavid's priorities as a state representative include improving funding for public education, cleaning up our air & water, saving our state parks system, and tackling insurance reform. Mark McDavid lives with his wife Ginny in the Oak Forest neighborhood of the District. His campaign can be contacted at: 713/812-9368, or www.votemcdavid.com.
The Dome Hotel gets one step closer to reality.
Entrepreneurs seeking to turn the Reliant Astrodome into an upscale convention hotel hope to secure financing in six months and begin work on gutting and remaking the legendary Houston venue next summer.Scott Hanson, president of Astrodome Redevelopment Corp., laid out the timetable after his project was given preliminary approval by the Harris County Sports & Convention Corp.'s board Wednesday.
Hanson and the other partners in Astrodome Redevelopment are poised to invest $450 million to turn the world's first domed stadium into a 1,200-room hotel with winding waterways, gondolas and nightclubs.
"We've done a lot of studies. We had to convince ourselves first that this will be a success," he said.
As noted before, this preliminary approval was needed for them to be able to get any financing on the deal. Tom isn't too impressed, and thinks the odds of the hotel ever getting built are pretty slim. That may well be so, but it's still come farther along than I had ever expected, so who knows? Investors can be funny. We'll see what happens.
I'm a little late in getting to this, but this is what petitions are for. From my inbox:
Richmond residents WANT RAIL on Richmond!
RichmondRail.org demands equal airtime for Richmond rail supporters:
Get the full story at METRO board meeting Thursday at 1:00 pmThursday, July 20, 2006
Houston, TXIn the last three weeks, almost 1,000 Houstonians have signed their support for this clear statement:
“I support neighborhood-friendly light rail on Richmond Avenue.”
The papers and airwaves have been cluttered with misinformation and anti-Richmond propaganda, masterminded by a small group of vocal NIMFYs who fear change and fight rail just to fight it. But they do NOT speak for everyone! It's time for the media to tell OUR side of the story:
- Richmond is where we live.
- Richmond is where we work.
- Richmond is where we shop, eat, and play.
- And Richmond is where we want to go! We WANT rail on Richmond!
Many who currently oppose rail on Richmond have been unable to get the facts. These people have legitimate concerns and fears which the media has fanned. METRO has just begun to have the information to start answering tough questions. The answers look great, but time is running out.Rep. John Culberson has put METRO under the gun "to sell the public on Richmond," and he's given a two-week deadline to do it. Make no mistake: there IS support for rail on Richmond. And we need to show the Representative just how strong it is!
Richmond supporters to present petitions to METRO board on Thursday at 1:00 pm
We will hand deliver our stack of petitions -- more than 50 pages of them -- to the METRO board on Thursday. Residents, businesses, and property owners will voice their support for rail on Richmond.What: Richmond supporters to address METRO board (public comments)
When: Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 1:00 pm
Where: METRO administration, 1900 Main St. at St. Joseph Pkwy, 2nd floor board room
I presume they've done this by now, so I'll look for media coverage later. The RichmondRail.org blog has more.
One minor item: As Lair notes, the RR.org drawings show a station at Newcastle, which is currently not in the plan. I do hope some thought is given to changing that, especially if the line is running on Westpark at that point.
Last night, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) released a conciliation agreement reached with Americans for a Republican Majority political action committee (ARMPAC) stemming from a complaint Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed against the PAC last August. As a result of CREW's FEC complaint, ARMPAC has agreed to pay a $115,000 civil penalty and go out of business. ARMPAC was created and led by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX).This is one of the 50 largest fines ever obtained by the FEC in its 30-year history.
The FEC found that:
--ARMPAC failed to report accurately nearly a quarter million dollars in contributions and expenditures during the 2001-2002 election cycle.
--ARMPAC failed to report nearly $325,000 in debts owed to 25 campaign vendors.
--ARMPAC improperly used over $200,000 in soft money to pay for federal election activity. In particular, ARMPAC improperly used over $120,000 in soft money to pay for GOTV activities in Texas immediately before the 2002 general election.
CREW's executive director, Melanie Sloan, stated, "the conciliation agreement reached between the FEC and ARMPAC shows a clear pattern of abuse of campaign finance laws." Sloan continued, "on a disturbingly regular basis we learn that former House Majority Leader DeLay violated the law. From the Jack Abramoff scandal to the violations of Texas campaign finance laws, to Rep. DeLay's misuse of charitable organizations, the list seems endless. It is time for federal investigators to step in and undertake a thorough investigation of Rep. DeLay's financial dealings so that the public can learn the true extent of Rep. DeLay's illegal activities and he can be held accountable."
Pretty much says it all. The conciliation agreement is here (PDF). Meanwhile, Juanita is going through the particulars and found an interesting expense item. Check it out.
All things considered, I suppose this isn't too surprising.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott plans to ask the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a federal judge's ruling that Republicans cannot replace former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay on the November ballot.Democratic Party General Counsel Chad Dunn said Abbott's solicitor general, Ted Cruz, told him he will file a friend-of-the-court brief defending the state election law that Republicans want to use to replace DeLay.
Angela Hale, a spokeswoman for Abbott, a Republican, said she would not describe Cruz's brief as a request to the appeals court to let Republicans replace DeLay on the general election ballot.
Hale said the brief that will be filed Thursday or Friday will challenge U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks' interpretation of how state election law is interpreted under the U.S. Constitution.
The brief will be filed on behalf of Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams, who is the state's chief elections officer.
"Because the district court issued an injunction against the (Texas) secretary of state and declared a portion of the Texas Election Code unconstitutional, Secretary of State Roger Williams will be filing an amicus brief in Fifth Circuit defending the constitutionality of Texas law," Hale said.
Dunn said the Texas Democratic Party does not claim the state election law is unconstitutional or that Sparks ruled that way.
[...]
"It's going to be interesting if the attorney general files a brief with the Fifth Circuit saying, 'We encourage candidates to manipulate the election law,' " Dunn said.
I think Dunn has the better argument here, but we'll see what Abbott actually says.
I keep wondering what might have happened if DeLay had taken genuine steps to sever his ties to Sugar Land (putting his house on the market, for instance), and had testified unequivocally that he would be in Virginia permanently (as opposed to "indefinitely", which leaves a lot of room for an eventual return), including on Election Day. That, it seems to me, would come a lot closer to meeting the Constitutional threshhold for the eligibility clause, and would have made Tina Benkiser's declaration about his removal from the ballot look more like a compulsion than a choice. Who knows? It'll be an interesting matter for the appellate court to consider.
Via Marc Campos, a response from Council Member Carol Alvarado to this dumb idea.
In response to those that wish to make our Houston Police Department an I.C.E. arm (Homeland Security's Immigration Customs Enforcement), Houston City Council Member Carol Alvarado is spearheading the effort to organize Houstonians to defeat this ill-advised attempt to amend the City of Houston Charter. The Alvarado led organizational vehicle is called Protect Houston (a web page is currently being constructed at www.protecthouston.com.) A communitywide meeting has been scheduled for next Monday, July 24. The following is the text of the invitation that is being sent throughout the city.
A Message From Carol AlvaradoMean spirited Houstonians are gathering signatures on a petition that would force the City of Houston to call a city charter referendum that would compel police officers to demand proof of citizenship when interacting with Houstonians. If adopted by the voters, the city charter change would create a hostile relationship between the police and certain communities and limit their effectiveness in protecting Houstonians from crime.
In order to protect all Houstonians, it is imperative that the Houston Police Department maintain a respectful, professional and trusting relationship with the residents of all of the city's many neighborhoods and among all of the city's diverse ethnic communities.
This ill-advised city charter referendum threatens to divide the people of our diverse and welcoming community; tie the hands of the professional men and women who serve in our police department; and stigmatize the City of Houston in the eyes of the nation and the world.
ACTION ON OUR PART IS REQUIRED!You are invited to attend and participate in a community meeting to help develop a strategy to defeat this mean spirited assault on our community.
PROTECT HOUSTON - COMMUNITY MEETING6 P.M., MONDAY, JULY 24, 2006
CWA UNION HALL
1730 JEFFERSON STREET
HOUSTON, TX 77003
Your presence and involvement on this key public policy issue is requested. Please attend and bring other concerned Houstonians.FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO RSVP:
CONTACT 713-861-2244 OR EMAIL info@carolalvarado.com.
Needless to say, this will not be the last we hear of all this. Stay tuned.
On a lighter note, when exactly are we going to get serious about the Canadian menace?
Tomorrow at midnight PDT is the deadline to vote in the Barbara Boxer PAC for Change competition. If you haven't registered and cast a ballot for Barbara Radnofsky yet, you've got two days to do it. Every dollar coming into Texas to support Texas Democrats is beneficial to all of them, so please take a moment and go vote.
The headline for this article is more than a bit misleading.
Texas Democrats put on a show of party unity at their state convention last month, but at least two of their statewide nominees have been cozying up to independent gubernatorial candidates Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman.Democratic comptroller candidate Fred Head and agriculture commissioner nominee Hank Gilbert each show up on Strayhorn's campaign reports as a $25 donor.
"I don't believe I gave $25 to her. I bought a ticket to an event she attended," Head said, admitting last month's event was a Longview fundraiser for Strayhorn.
Head said he and Gilbert went to the event to meet Strayhorn supporters and ask them for their vote.
"I'm a Democrat, and I'm supporting the Democratic ticket," Head said.
Head also said that he has been good friends with Strayhorn and said they share issues, such as opposition to the Trans-Texas Corridor toll road project.
Head said he and Gilbert also attended a free Friedman event in Tyler last month, trying to woo supporters there.
Gilbert said he and Head went to the event because the people there would be opposed to the re-election of Republican Gov. Rick Perry. He said that means they also likely would oppose their GOP foes.
"This is not anything against (Democratic nominee) Chris Bell. This is just a chance to get our message out," Gilbert said.
In case there's any lingering doubt that the headline about "straying" (weak attempt at a pun, maybe?) is off target, Phillip asked Hank Gilbert for a clarification.
I talked to Gilbert about the event, and he reassured me that they attended to try and attract split-ticket votes."Neither party's base gets you 50%," Gilbert said in our interview. "I've traveled with Chris, I've campaigned with him, and he knows I'm voting straight Democratic. But he also knows I made excellent contacts at that event, from a lot of folks that absolutely won't support [Gilbert's Republican opponent Todd] Staples. I talked to folks that were concerned about serious agricultural issues in the state of Texas, and they liked what I had to say."
I'll add that Gilbert believed the Chronicle ran a fair article, and was more displeased that Strayhorn's campaign felt the need to leak what is essentially a non-issue just to try and cause problems for Bell. "Chris and I have talked, and he knows I'm behind him, and we're going to continue working together to defeat the slate of corrupt politicians that are ruining this state," Gilbert said.
So there you go. It seems to me that the question about whether or not Republicans who are supporting Strayhorn or Kinky might also be open to voting for a downballot Democrat like Hank Gilbert or Fred Head, and how successful Gilbert and Head have been at closing the deal with them, would make for a pretty good story. Maybe we'll get lucky and someone will try to write it.
The first of the three Metro open house meetings on the route for the Universities rail line was last night. Here's the story, about which I'll have more in a minute. Tory discusses some of the highlights, and I hope Christof will chime in as well.
Now, a couple of points from the story. The main thrust of the piece was that Metro unveiled a plan (which they had alluded to before the meeting) to switch the line over from Richmond to Westpark at Edloe, which would mean it would stay out of the Afton Oaks neighborhood.
Some of the most adamant opposition to rail on Richmond has come from the Afton Oaks subdivision, which borders Richmond just inside the West Loop. Metro board chairman David Wolff said at a news conference Tuesday that Metro will poll Afton Oaks residents to see how widespread the opposition there is."I'm perfectly happy to run this down through Greenway Plaza," he said. "It's really up to the folks in Afton Oaks."
Some of them were among more than 100 people who attended the first of the meetings Metro has scheduled in coming days to discuss the options for the University Line and get comments from residents.
Attendees milled around tables with plans depicting the line, asking questions of Metro officials.
The agency appeared to win few converts.
"I'm absolutely against this," said Beverly Stone, a 27-year resident of Afton Oaks. "It will significantly reduce the value of our homes."
Stone, a member of the Afton Oaks civic organization, said the rail line would be like a knife in the heart of her neighborhood.
If the plan is to avoid Afton Oaks, then I confess I don't understand this objection. I mean, Edloe is farther away from Afton Oaks (which is between 610 and the railroad tracks) than Westpark is. What, specifically, does Ms. Stone think having it on Richmond east of Edloe will do to her neighborhood? I'd have thought this formal recognition of the desire to not put the line in Afton Oaks would be a victory for her. What am I missing?
(And before anyone suggests it, concerns about the potential effects of the line and its construction east of Kirby don't count, since Richmond east of Kirby is not in her neighborhood. If that is her concern, then I want to hear her say that.)
U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, whose support is crucial to Metro obtaining federal money for the line, did not express an opinion on the revised plans.Culberson said Metro officials told him Thursday that "they needed two weeks to make their case to the people on Richmond, and I agreed to wait two weeks before publicly expressing what my position would be.
"Metro does not need to sell this plan to me, but to the people I represent who will be most affected - people whose homes or businesses and properties are on Richmond," he said.
Let's just say that I don't have a whole lot of faith in Culberson's professed open-mindedness on this and move along.
The new University Line maps show stations at Montrose, Dunlavy, Shepherd, Kirby, Buffalo Speedway or Greenway Plaza, Weslayan, South Rice and Hillcroft.Wilson said the stations would be similar to those on the Main Street line but would be spaced wider to avoid restricting turns.
I can understand that logic, but for what it's worth and especially if the western portion of the line does run down Westpark, I think there ought to be a station at Newcastle. There's several apartment complexes very close to the Westpark/Newcastle intersection, and if there were a parking lot nearby (for which I believe space exists or could be made), then this would make the line more easily accessible to a lot of folks in the inner loop portion of Bellaire. Just my opinion.
UPDATE: So we're clear, Metro proposed a number of possible routes, some of which did include staying on Richmond through Afton Oaks. You can see the map here. Perhaps that's what Ms. Stone's comment was about. That I can understand, but it's still not clear to me why she didn't at least note the alternative. Maybe that's the fault of the way the story is written and not what Ms. Stone said, I can't say for sure.
I missed the press conference today (Vince has the highlights), but the Chris Bell campaign is rolling out its environmental platform this week. Have we ever had a serious discussion of environmental issues in a statewide campaign? Off the top of my head, not that I can recall. Check Vince's post for the highlights and see what you think.
Now this is a candidate profile.
He doesn't have anywhere near the political experience, name recognition or financial backing his opponent, a 20-year veteran of congress has, but according to David Harris, D-Arlington, he may just be the change the people in District 6 are looking for.The Operation Iraqi Freedom veteran has been gearing up for over a year to take on the House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton, R-Ennis, in the November election and Harris says its time for the congressional veteran to pack his bags for home.
"I think it's time the voters send Barton back - back home and out of Washington," Harris said.
Running as a virtual unknown in District 6, which extends from Ennis to Arlington, Harris has a major uphill climb against Barton, who according to the latest reports from the Center for Responsive Politics, had over $1,976,519 in his campaign coffers compared to Harris with $1,264.
"I'm running a true grassroots campaign," Harris said. "I'm out handshaking and going door to door to get my message out."
[...]
"So many congressmen have become corrupted and power hungry that they've forgotten why they are there in the first place," Harris said. "Barton is one of them. I love my country and I fought for it and I don't like the way it's being run. Barton has shown his unwillingness to compromise to better our future. This isn't about me — it's about our future and our kids' future."
Harris continues to see Barton as out of touch with the district and believes that as a fresh body in Congress he can bring things to the table that Barton has overlooked.
"In 2004 Barton had a town hall meeting in the district and asked people if they thought he should be involved in things like the Terri Schiavo case, steroids in sports and greater fines to entertainers for profanity or nudity on television," Harris said. "There was nothing mentioned about lowering health care costs, education, tax cuts or renewable energy. That's what people are really concerned about and it's troublesome that our congressman is not concerned about them as well."
The recent congressional hearings on same sex marriage amendments and flag burning amendments have also been troublesome to Harris.
"The constitution is one of the most forward looking documents ever and the administration thinks we have to change it constantly with amendments," Harris said. "Soon it will start to look like the Texas constitution."
What I like about this, beyond the good things that Harris has to say on a variety of issues, is that it's actually about the candidate and what he stands for. The article doesn't waste half its space giving "equal time" to his opponent's spokesperson, which never amounts to anything more than "Am not! He's a poopyhead! Neener neener neener!" The newspaper is perfectly capable of doing an equivalent piece on the other guy, which if you're going for balance is in my opinion a much better way of doing it. Kudos to the Waxahachie Daily Light for taking this kind of coverage seriously, and to David Harris for being such a good subject. And hey, if you like what you read there, you know what to do.
I don't think I can come up with an intro that could live up to this, so I'm just going to come right out and tell you that the Harris County GOP is pushing an online petition to "send a message directly" to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in the DeLay ballot replacement lawsuit. Because, of course, federal appeals court judges are notoriously swayable by such efforts. The only possible way this could be any funnier would be if they were also asking for volunteers to hang around Whole Foods supermarkets with clipboards to solicit signatures.
(Okay, I can think of one way this could be even funnier - if Orlando Sanchez were to take a role in leading the signature gathering effort.)
Look, petitions have their place in the ecology. Like, for example, when elected officials need to know that not everyone feels the same way about an issue that's getting attention. But this is just silly. What are they gonna do, attach this to one of the briefs James Bopp filed? Oh, and never mind the implication that the judges should take anything into account other than the strict literal meaning of the law. We always knew that was a trope, right?
The text of Harris County GOP Chair Jared Woodfill's letter is presented below. Go read Juanita when you're done.
Another week, and still the Democrats are trying to run out the clock on Congressional District 22. Their strategy is clear...if they can't keep our candidate completely off the ballot, at least take as much time as possible.Currently the case is on appeal at the Federal 5th Circuit, with the Democrats maintaining their baseless claim that we can't replace Tom DeLay on the November ballot. The legal maneuvering could still take days or even weeks to resolve.
We simply cannot wait that long! That is why I need you to stand with us today and send a message directly to the 5th Circuit!
Click here to sign our CD22 petition and make your voice heard!
What does this frivolous lawsuit mean to Republicans? Tragically, it means one more day that we don't have a candidate in the race, one more day that this qualified candidate can't meet with voters, and one more day that they can't raise funds.
Recent news reports indicate that 5th Circuit could still take another few weeks to make their decision. We are confident that once we receive a fair hearing of the facts, we will prevail and we will be able to choose our Republican candidate.
In the meantime, Nick Lampson and Nancy Pelosi are hoping for as much time as possible! The Democrat head start in this campaign is the only thing that gives them a chance. In other words, they are still hoping to steal this Republican seat.
Democrats in control of Congress would certainly cut-and-run in Iraq, raise your taxes to pay for their social-engineering programs, and even try to impeach President Bush.
The Democrats have their plans in place and the key is stealing this CD 22 from loyal Republicans like you!
Click here to keep the Democrats from stealing this Republican seat!
The good news is that your Harris County GOP will not sit idly by and let the liberals steal this race. We are doing everything in our power to inform and activate voters in CD 22, but we need your help TODAY!
The grassroots voices of Harris county have won many recent victories. Will you stand with us today and sign our CD22 Petition to "Let the People Vote?"
We can still help our future nominee to victory, but we must hear from you today.
Sincerely,Jared Woodfill
HCRP Chairman
Awhile back, I along with a number of my fellow Texas progressive bloggers, asked you for some help getting ActBlue activated for Texas state races. You did that, and now I'm pleased to say that ActBlue is now available for donations to all Texas Democratic candidates in state races. Ben Rahn, the founder of ActBlue, tells about it and also about progress elsewhere. There's about ten more states that they can get going in time for this election with a little help. Take a look and see what's there for you.
Now that most of the finance reports have been filed and posted for state candidates, let's take a look at some of the State Rep races in Harris County:
Dist Candidate Contrib Expense Tot Cash
==============================================
126 C Khan 9,146 17,251 13,676
126 P Harless 64,025 121,701 34,829
127 D Trautman 11,048 6,597 1,684
127 J Crabb 29,600 68,326 76,858
129 S Matula 8,043 3,845 7,081
129 J Davis 16,900 26,364 17,394
133 K Thibaut 130,097 17,969 100,148
133 J Murphy 50,160 61,189 1,253
134 E Cohen 213,324 114,157 215,937
134 M Wong 98,893 49,655 428,429
137 S Hochberg 81,464 12,823 74,390
137 S Spivey 8,352 3,816 4,458
138 M McDavid 15,956 10,297 3,413
138 D Bohac 14,800 28,340 0
143 A Hernandez 7,701 22,353 30,441
143 D Olmos 0 2,421 15,000
149 H Vo 47,155 34,219 16,144
149 T Heflin 9,440 13,073 6,061
Chad Khan has loaned his campaign $97K, and he's in a position to do more of that. He'll have whatever funds he needs to run that race. I presume Patricia Harless spent all that money in her primary race against John Devine.
Joe Crabb, who has all of his money in a PAC, and Jim Murphy also presumably spent their wads on primaries; in Murphy's case, he had a runoff to win as well. I confess, I'm a little surprised that he apparently hasn't done anything in the interim to replenish his kitty. Kristi Thibaut can't be too unhappy about that.
One more quarter like this one and Ellen Cohen will essentially wipe out Martha Wong's cash advantage, which is courtesy of not having to campaign too hard in 2004.
Dwayne Bohac's goose egg in the Cash on Hand department is a bit of a mystery to me. Is he waiting for Bob Perry to swoop in and drop a six-figure check on him?
Republican challengers to Democratic incumbents aren't doing to impressively. Dorothy Olmos, who raised no money at all, gets that $15K from a loan to herself. Nothing wrong with writing yourself a check, but one is usually taken more seriously if one collects at least a few pennies from other people. Sylvia Spivey is outgunned even before you take into account Scott Hochberg's work ethic on the campaign trail. And pity poor Talmadge Heflin. Sure does stink to not be the Appropriations chair any more, doesn't it? I'm willing to bet that Hubert Vo will have a sizable lead in CoH by the time the September reports get filed.
I'll probably take a look at some other races around the state later. BOR has already covered Travis County for me. Click the More link to see an article by Capitol Inside with other reports of interest.
Ben Bentzin hasn't found a way yet to win a seat in the Legislature as a Republican in the state's least conservative big city. But the Austin high-tech executive may break every state House fundraising record in sight while trying if he stays in the House District 48 race with the goal of winning. Unless State Rep. Patrick Rose passes him first and shatters the records himself as it appears he might do based on a torrid pace he's setting in his second bid for re-election as a 27-year-old Democrat in a district that leans Republican.While Rose has raised more than $611,000 during the past year, Bentzin had filled his war chest with more than $837,000 by February in his bid for an open state House seat before State Rep. Donna Howard beat him with room to spare in a special election runoff on Valentine's Day. For comparative sake, former Republican House members Todd Baxter and Jack Stick had war chests of $978,000 and $890,000 respectively for their re-election bids as the top two fundraisers in the competition for Texas House seats two years ago. Bentzin has already surpassed the fundraising marks that Democratic State Reps. Mark Strama of Austin and Patrick Rose of Dripping Springs set when finishing third and fourth in the battle for bucks in races for the lower chamber in 2004.
But as Democrats and Republicans wait to see if Bentzin will roar back from a long spring hiatus and go all out in round three against Howard, his latest campaign finance report at the Texas Ethics Commission is more likely to fuel a perception that he might be more in the mood to cut his losses than pour ,more money into a race he was favored to win at the outset.
Since losing the special election for the seat that Baxter gave up last year, Bentzin has only raised only $35,000 as the Republican nominee for HD 48 with more than half of that coming in a $20,000 check from Houston home builder Bob Perry in May. On June 30, Bentzin had only $20.33 in the campaign bank.
Riding momentum from the special election and a newfound incumbency, Howard raised about $65,000 from contributors between the special election and the end of last month and entered the final four months of the fall campaign with a similar amount of cash on hand. While Bentzin has had more than twice as much to spend on the race, Howard closed out the first half of 2006 with 3,183 times more in campaign cash reserves than her Republican rival did on June 30.
Despite speculation that the GOP nominee might step aside and allow Republicans to make a bid to replace him on the fall ballot, Bentzin has money of his own that major donors like Perry could match for a November election that will revolve on a different set of dynamics that the special election early this year.
The battle for HD 48 in one of the state's few remaining swing districts has been the most expensive state House race so far in Texas this year after having the second highest price tag in House races when Baxter barely survived a challenge from Democrat Kelly White as they raised $1.6 million combined in 2004. Having already eclipsed $1.25 million in combined fundraising, Howard and Bentzin appear to be on track to spend more than the HD 48 candidates did the last time the seat was up for grabs.
In the battle for individual fundraising honors, Rose appears destined to have more for his race this fall against retired business and former San Marcos school board president Jim Neuhaus than he had with a war chest of $840,000 against a Republican foe who had substantial family money to spend two years ago. While Neuhaus might get some help from Republicans in Austin, he'll be lucky to have a fraction of the funds that Rose takes into the fall competition barring a winning lottery ticket. Neuhaus' report like some others had not been posted by the close of business on Monday.
The new wave of reports show the two most successful fundraisers during the past six months to be a pair of Democratic challengers competing for seats held by Republicans in Houston and Corpus Christi. Ellen Cohen, who raises money for a living in her role running a non-profit center that battles domestic abuse and sexual violence, is reporting contributions of $212,000 between January 1 and June 30 after taking in more during that time than any House candidate other than Bentzin among those whose reports have been posted. Cohen has raised almost as much money as Howard and won't face her first opposition until she and Republican State Rep. Martha Wong meet in the general election. South Texas attorney Juan M. Garcia was next with donations topping $205,000 during the period that ended June 30.
While Cohen has raised $110,000 more than Wong for their battle in the past year, the Republican incumbent and former Houston city councilwoman has a massive cash surplus of more than $428,000 heading into the general election campaign. Garcia is in better position against State Rep. Gene Seaman, a Corpus Christi Republican who reported donations of $90,000 during the first half of the year and almost $265,000 in cash on hand at the end of last month.
Dallas attorney Harriet Miller, who's also challenging a Republican incumbent, was among the fundraising leaders during the first six months of 2006 with contributions of almost $116,000 for a rematch with veteran State Rep. Tony Goolsby. Miller has taken in more than $188,000 for her campaign for HD 102 while Goolsby has raised about $82,000 with half of that in the first half of the year. Like Wong, Seaman and other incumbents, Goolsby has an imposing amount of cash socked away for the general election with more than $281,000 in the bank on June 30.
At least nine House candidates have already raised more than $200,000 for this year's campaigns. Democratic State Rep. Chuck Hopson of Jacksonville and Republican House candidate Bill Welch of Austin are members of that list and Republican State Rep. Kirk England of Grand Prairie is within a few thousand dollars of adding his name to it as well. Reports have not been posted at this point for the general election opponents that Hopson, Welch and England will face this fall.
While some candidates trumpeted the financial support they'd received, others such as former House Appropriations Committee Chairman Talmadge Heflin, did not have as much to gloat about when submitting lists of campaign donations and expenditures to the state. Heflin, who hopes to wrestle his west Houston House seat back in a rematch with Democratic State Rep. Hubert Vo, reported raising only $9,440 during the past six months and ended the period with only $6,000 in the bank. But while Vo raised four times more than Heflin during the first half of the year, the Houston Democrat only has $10,000 more in cash on hand going into the final four months of this year's battle with Heflin. Heflin unsuccessfully challenged Vo's 33-vote victory two years ago and has used some of $42,000 he's raised during the past 12 months to pay for legal fees stemming from the fight over the election results.
TOP TEXAS HOUSE FUNDRAISERS 2006Ben Bentzin (R)
Austin - HD 48
$342,163
$872,210
Patrick Rose (D-Inc)
Dripping Springs - HD 45
$184,195
$611,335
Donna Howard (D-Inc)
Austin - HD 48
$71,428
$373,768
Ellen Cohen (D)
Houston - HD 134
$212,238
$372,238
Bill Welch (R)
Austin - HD 47
$61,843
$277,239
Gene Seaman (R-Inc)
Corpus Christi - HD 32
$89,956
$264,897
Martha Wong (R-Inc)
Houston - HD 134
$98,893
$262,044
Chuck Hopson (D-Inc)
Jacksonville - HD 11
$83,200
$230,440
Patricia Harless (R)
Houston - HD 126
$64,025
$216,505
Juan Garcia (D)
Corpus Christi - HD 32
$205,640
$205,640
Kirk England (R-Inc)
Dallas - HD 106
$93,330
$193,968
Harriet Miller (D)
Dallas - HD 102
$115,877
$188,404
Dora Olivo (D-Inc)
Richmond - HD 27
$70,204
$187,297
Kristi Thibaut (D)
Houston - HD 133
$130,595
$130,595
Tony Goolsby (R-Inc)
Dallas - HD 102
$43,287
$81,919
Hubert Vo (D-Inc)
Houston - HD 149
$47,155
$50.787
Talmadge Heflin (R)
Houston - HD 149
$9,440
$42,440
CASH ON HAND IN THE BANKND 6/30
Patrick Rose (D-Inc)
Dripping Springs - HD 45
$611,335
$528,328
Martha Wong (R-Inc)
Houston - HD 134
$262,044
$428,429
Tony Goolsby (R-Inc)
Dallas - HD 102
$81,919
$281,194
Gene Seaman (R-Inc)
Corpus Christi - HD 32
$264,897
$261,671
Ellen Cohen (D)
Houston - HD 134
$372,238
$215,937
Chuck Hopson (D-Inc)
Jacksonville - HD 11
$230,440
$195,135
Kristi Thibaut (D)
Houston - HD 133
$130,595
$100,148
Another step in the Astrodome Hotel saga, as the developers are asking for a new exit ramp from Loop 610 to their location, in order to avoid Reliant/rodeo traffic.
Astrodome Redevelopment Corp., a consortium proposing the development, favors building a ramp from the Loop 610 feeder road to the Dome.But Texans officials so far have balked at the proposed ramp, saying they have "aesthetic concerns" about its effect on the appearance of Reliant Park, county-hired consultants said in a report.
"I really believe we will be able to resolve all these issues," said Scott Hanson, president of Astrodome Redevelopment.
A ramp would cost $5 million to $10 million, while the alternate proposal, a tunnel from the Loop feeder road, likely would cost $10 million to $15 million, Hanson said.
I can't quite picture where they want this ramp to be and to go. There's already an exit both ways for Fannin/Greenbriar, and for Kirby. Maybe they want to add some kind of flyover to the existing ramps (westbound at Fannin, eastbound at Kirby) to take people directly to the Dome Hotel parking lot, bypassing the intersections at Fannin and Kirby? Heck if I know. I want to see a diagram for this puppy.
Whatever the case, and there are some questions by the Reliant and Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo folks, who have a considerable amount of stroke over what goes on at the complex, there's progress being made in turning the Dome Hotel into a reality.
The Harris County Sports & Convention Corp., the county entity that oversees Reliant Park, and Astrodome Redevelopment are expected Wednesday to sign an agreement, called a letter of intent, that spells out each side's willingness to move forward with the project.It is expected to say that the county is giving Astrodome Redevelopment six months to obtain financing and seven months to reach pacts on issues including parking, the hotel's ramp or tunnel entrance and profit-sharing.
Astrodome Redevelopment needs the letter to obtain financing. It will be given a year from the time the letter of intent is signed to reach a lease agreement with the Sports and Convention Corp.
The letter of intent "will be a major, major milestone," said Willie Loston, director of the Sports & Convention Corp.
Now they just have to find someone to put up the dough. I wouldn't mind being a fly on the wall for some of their presentations, just to see how they sell the concept.
The hotel would be modeled on Gaylord convention hotels in Grapevine, Nashville, Tenn., and Orlando, Fla. Senate Hospitality, a Nashville-based company that includes former Gaylord executives, would operate the Dome hotel. Gaylord hotels cater to groups that want hotels, restaurants, meeting rooms and convention halls under one roof.Houston already has a convention hotel, the city-owned Hilton Americas next to the George R. Brown Convention Center. Unlike the Hilton Americas, the Dome hotel would imitate the Gaylord concept and try to attract groups looking for a self-contained facility.
"Prior to seeing the Gaylord Texan (in Grapevine), I thought it was a dumb idea," [HLS&R Chief Operating Officer Leroy] Shafer said. "After we visited the Gaylord Texan, we began to see it is a different model. But personally, I still have concerns that it will work."
Since I blogged about the Gaylord Texan Resort in Grapevine, I've had the chance to stay at a Gaylord resort myself, in Orlando. I can now see how it would work - basically, the hotel itself is built with a huge enclosed atrium in the middle and all the rooms around it, with the convention center attached on one side. The Dome structure would serve very nicely as the atrium. It really is an enclosed little world, with food, shopping, and entertainment all contained within. That also answers my qualms about the crappy location. Who cares if there's nothing to do near the Dome if all your needs are met inside it? I still have some concerns about its viability, but that has more to do with the general nature of the convention center business and not this particular project. At this point, I'll wait to see what the moneybags folks think of it all.
The top lawyer for the Texas Health and Human Services Commission says that yeah, things do suck with Accenture, but they don't quite suck enough to fire them.
"Termination is always a pretty severe remedy, and it's the one that you would hope to invoke as a very last resort," [Steve] Aragon, who is preparing recommendations for Executive Commissioner Albert Hawkins, said in an interview."I can't say that I've seen anything that represents something that in my opinion would require termination of the contract for cause."
My view on this is pretty clear, but I can accept that not everyone sees it my way. It would be nice to know under what conditions Aragon and Hawkins would consider terminating that contract, however. The threat of termination is meaningless if there isn't something that can and will trigger it. And if grounds for termination are not already spelled out in the contract (as they should be), then I'd say now is the time for all parties to agree on what's broken, how and when it will be fixed, and just what exactly happens in the event that it stays broken.
"It doesn't take a very detailed or legal analysis to see that Accenture has not delivered on what they said they were going to deliver," said Mike Gross, vice president of the 12,000-member Texas State Employees Union, which includes workers who have lost jobs in the outsourcing.After the private group, formally known as Texas Access Alliance, launched the pilot version of its enrollment system in Travis and Hays counties in January, applicants for Medicaid, food stamps and welfare experienced long hold times and spoke with call center operators who couldn't answer their questions. Hawkins has delayed the statewide rollout of the system, which replaces some enrollment offices with call centers, until problems with training and technology are addressed.
The commission also is paying $1,800 retention bonuses to 1,000 state workers.
Here's something else to mull over. The thing that the state has that Accenture does not is a large pool of trained, experienced employees who know how to get the job done effectively and efficiently. Even I will agree that given enough time and money, Accenture will eventually have such an asset. But while we're waiting for them to get to that point, the state's asset - its experienced employees - will gradually deteriorate, as those people move on to other jobs or retire. There will come a point where terminating the contract is no longer a viable option because the state will not be in a position to revert back to what it had been doing before.
Obviously, if we get to that point, we'll be truly stuck. Sure, we can sue Accenture and maybe get our money back, but that won't help the people who've been harmed by this exercise, nor will it get us back to a state of having trained and competent employees in place to help those people. That's why we need to know, and soon, what the failure conditions are.
State officials couldn't immediately put a price tag on unexpected costs the state has incurred because of the enrollment system's problems. They plan to negotiate reductions in some of the fees paid to the contractor, Aragon said.When a call center representative screens an applicant for public assistance, for example, the state pays a fee, about 2 cents.
State officials originally estimated they'd save $646 million over five years through outsourcing. They don't have an updated estimate, but Aragon said he is confident there will be some savings.
Funny how the bad numbers always lag behind the good ones, isn't it? And I must say, Aragon's continued optimism is touching.
Commission spokeswoman Stephanie Goodman said that despite the problems, Texas' 3 million public assistance recipients will have more options under the new system, which allows them to apply for programs via fax, Internet, mail or in person, instead of just in person.
Um, we didn't need to privatize to add these options for THHSC beneficiaries. Last I checked, pretty much every government office had fax and Internet capabilities. Adding that into the previously existing workflow would (or at least should) not have been a big deal. Certainly, it would have been vastly easier and cheaper to accomplish than this huge outsourcing effort.
Anyway. For further reading, there's this Chron editorial from yesterday, which stops short of calling for termination of the contract now, and Father John, who knows well how this system should be run. Check 'em out.
If you're tired of campaign finance reports, then head over to Kuff's World, where I've finally delivered on my long-promised analysis of HD133. Lots more numbers, of course, but at least they don't have dollar signs in front of them. Check it out.
Last week, I had the opportunity to sit down with Jim Henley, the Democratic candidate for Congress in CD07. Here it is, for your listening pleasure:
Link for the MP3 file is here.
At this point, I've interviewed just about all of the Congressional candidates that I'd have wanted to:
Gary Binderim - Interview
Glenn Melancon - Interview
Jim Henley - Interview
Ted Ankrum - Interview
Shane Sklar - Interview
John Courage - Interview
Nick Lampson - Interview
Mary Beth Harrell - Interview
I've got an appointment to talk to Nick Lampson again this weekend, and I hope to talk to Sklar again, since he was the first interview I did and I didn't know what I was doing yet. I also hope to get a chance to talk to David Harris. If so, that'll mean I'll have interviewed nine out of the 20 challengers to incumbent Republicans. Not too shabby, if I do say so myself.
Along with that, it'll be State Rep candidates through the end of the campaign season. I hope you have found this to be useful and informative. If you have any feedback on how to make this better, please let me know.
(Yes, I'm still going to do this as a podcast, with an RSS feed. It's coming, I swear.)
Finally, as noted before, Henley's big fundraiser is coming up next week. Click the More link for the details.
Thursday, July 27 - Jim Henley Fundraiser & Film Screening
7:00 PM at River Oaks Theater, 2009 W. Grey
Featuring The Hunting of the President with special guest Susan McDougal. This gripping documentary chronicles the 10-year partisan campaign to destroy the political legacy of the Clintons. Susan McDougal, the candidate's sister, spent 22 months in prison after refusing to cooperate with Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr and testify against the Clintons. Read about this movie at http://www.thehuntingofthepresident.com/.
Ticket Prices: Reserved $100, Preferred $50, General $25 / $10 Students
Reserved tickets receive special seating and entry into a private reception with Susan McDougal at La Griglia following the film. For tickets, visit www.henleyforcongress.com , or call 713-527-0234
Forms can also be printed - please indicate that the donation is for the fundraiser, and bring to Henley for Congress Headquarters at 2482 Bolsover (at the NE corner of Kelvin) or mailed to P.O. Box 980323, Houston, TX 77098.
I've taken the results of the FEC Summary Search Reports query for Texas candidates and put it into a spreadsheet for convenience and future reference. It's mostly up to date as I draft this, though the Senatorials are all still on the March 31 report. I've filtered out most of the no-longer-relevant candidates for ease of reading, though I left in all comers from CDs 22 and 28 (including one in CD28 I've never heard of) just in case.
I put a little extra at the end, people who are interesting in some way despite their absence from the November ballot. Some choice tidbits for you:
- Libertarian CD10 candidate Michael Badnarik is the only non-major-party representative in the report. Presumably, no one else has collected enough contributions to be required to file one. Badnarik has boasted of his fundraising ability, and it's true that he's collected some $300K for his race. He's also spent nearly that same amount, and has $9500 on hand. I wouldn't be expecting a media blitz from him any time soon.
- Chet Edwards continues to be a fundraising mammoth. He's got $1.5 million on hand, which puts him comfortably ahead of challenger Van Taylor, who is at $454K. Edwards' campaign in a press release also made a point of emphasizing where each candidate's contributions came from:
While Edwards raised $132,125 in individual, itemized contributions from the district for the quarter, Van Taylor's in-district receipts totaled just $21,150 despite a personal fundraising visit from Vice President Cheney. 55% of Edwards' individual contributions came from the district; only 6% of Taylor's did. For the entire 2006 election cycle, Edwards has raised $407,290 in itemized contributions from the district, more than five and a half times the $72,755 Taylor has raised here. Taylor is also still $150,000 in debt because of a last-minute loan the challenger made to his campaign when he was struggling to win the divisive March primary election. The Edwards campaign has no debt.[...]
"Even though he had never lived here until 13 months ago, Mr. Taylor is fond of bragging that he is running 'the best campaign this district has ever seen,'" [Edwards campaign manager Chris] Turner said. "The truth is, Mr. Taylor's floundering campaign is obviously in deep trouble when he cannot even raise a third of the money Arlene Wohlgemuth raised in the district."
At this point in the 2004 race, Wohlgemuth had raised three times more than Taylor has in the district, $246,854.
Though state races don't appear in this report, the Ellen Cohen campaign made a similar comparison for her race against Martha Wong:
Ellen CohenAmounts
Amount Raised during the reporting period: $194,022.00
Amount raised from registered voters in the district: $129,171.00 (66.58%)
Amount raised from non-registered voters in the district: $64,851.00 (33.42%)Contributors
347 (67.12%) out of 517 contributors are registered voters in the district
170 (33.42%) out of 517 contributors are outside
Martha WongAmounts
Amount raised during the reporting period: $98,838.72
Amount raised from registered voters in the district: $20,345 (20.57%)
Amount raised from non-registered voters in the district: $78,548.72 (79.43%)Contributions
174 (71.5%) out of 246 contributors are not registered voters in the district
72 (29.5%) out of 246 contributors are registered voters in the district
I certainly don't have any issue with candidates raising money from supporters outside their own districts. But if the level of contributions from one's own pool of voters is an indicator of how strong one's real support is, then it seems that Edwards and Cohen have the edge here.
- At the bottom of the spreadsheet, we see that two-time loser (in two different districts) Phil Sudan and Ben Streusand combined to pour about $7 million of their own money into their unsuccessful campaigns. Dave Phillips was in the same 2004 GOP primary for CD10, which surely ranks as the most lavishly financed Congressional primary in the state. I can't figure out why some of these people are still showing up in FEC reports. Mark Brewer was part of the cattle call for the CD07 GOP nomination in 2000. He got about 7% of the vote for his half-million bucks. The weirdest one to me is Greg Laughlin, who was the Democratic incumbent in CD14 before switching parties after his 1994 reelection. He was eventually ousted in a GOP primary runoff by Ron Paul in 1996, and as far as I can tell, that's the last time he's run for office. Why is he still in this report ten years later? I haven't got a clue.
Finally, BOR is tracking some other finance reports. And though it probably belongs in its own post, I'll close this one by pointing you to Chris Bell's TV ad, about which you can read more here.
Dr. Park Dietz is on the stand again today for a third day of testimony and cross-examination in the Andrea Yates retrial. On Friday, he gave his reasons why he thinks Yates does not meet the statutory requirements for legal insanity.
Park Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, said Yates quoted Scripture to him when she talked about the killings."My children weren't righteous," she said. "They were going to stumble. Better for them to tie a millstone around their necks and they should perish than they should stumble."
Dietz, whose erroneous testimony four years ago resulted in Yates' new trial, said the former Clear Lake-area housewife's religious beliefs indicate she knew the killings were wrong. She considered killing them a sin and believed her homicidal thoughts came from Satan, Dietz said.
"Mrs. Yates, in assessing her obsession to harm the children, regarded that idea of harming the children was a sin," Dietz said. "That killing the children would be sinful is an indication that it would be wrong from her point of view."
One could also argue that when a devoutly religious woman starts taking orders from Satan, she is by definition insane. Apparently, Park Dietz doesn't see it that way.
[Defense attorney George] Parnham also asked Dietz about his testimony in the 2004 capital murder trial of Deanna Laney, who was acquitted by reason of insanity.In Laney's trial, Dietz said that psychotic delusions made Laney unable to determine right from wrong during the killings - the legal standard in Texas' legal standard for insanity.
Laney, who believed God chose her and Yates as witnesses after the end of the world, said she believed God had told her to kill her three children.
Dietz testified that Laney believed she was right to kill her children because God would never order her to do wrong.
[...]
Parnham asked Dietz if people commanded by God to kill are insane.
"Only if a person is of a faith that believes God is good and infallible."
He said Yates told him in a interview in November 2001 that Satan was the origin of thoughts about harming her children.
"Because Mrs. Yates said that the thoughts were bad, she knew it was wrong, and because of her faith she concluded they were from Satan," Dietz said.
As I've said before, one really needs to choose the voices in one's head carefully. I think Parnham's explanation of what it means to know right and wrong is relevant here.
"We go back to the word 'know,'" Parnham says. "Does 'know' mean a perception on the part of the sick person that society would view her actions as being illegal or wrong, but she knows them to be right? The danger is that what we do with our (Texas) standard is impose our own logic - our own logic that is unfettered by mental disease. If you're psychotic, you live in a different real world."
That's the challenge the jury faces. I hope they're up to it.
From yesterday, a look at the petition signing efforts for independent gubernatorial candidates Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman in Harris County.
Overall in Harris County, Strayhorn outdid Friedman by collecting 37,739 signatures to Friedman's 19,117, according to data provided by the Texas secretary of state's office.
The story doesn't mention it, so I'll tell you that 33,304 votes were cast in the Democratic primary for Governor (Chris Bell got 27,292 of those votes), while 76,544 were cast in the GOP contest. That latter total was no doubt helped by the SD07 primary, where Dan Patrick collected 28,870 of 41,952 total ballots (for comparison purposes, Sen. Kyle Janek got 6,978 votes in the the uncontested CD17 race).
If the disqualification rate for signatures in Harris County was roughly the same for each candidate as it was statewide, then Strayhorn had about 19,000 valid sigs, while Friedman had about 16,000.
Dean Barkley, campaign manager for Friedman, said Friedman did well in neighborhoods where he had motivated volunteers.One of those volunteers was Katy Whelan, a 47-year-old resident of the Timbergrove neighborhood who works in the oil and gas industry and collected 400 signatures for Friedman. She said most of the signatures were gathered at a popular weekend farmers market in the Heights.
She also tapped her friends and neighbors at wine parties and other gatherings.
"We're all like-minded, pretty much basically Democrats," she said. "Everybody is such a fan of Kinky's."
sigh I wish the reporters had asked Ms. Whelan why they liked Friedman, because the mystery endures for me. I suspect that as Fighting Jay Lee once wrote, the answers would be all over the map.
Best reason to read this article:
Joyce Aquil, a 60-year-old educator, remembers signing a petition for Strayhorn at the Buffalo Soldiers National Museum in the Third Ward. But she acknowledged last week that she didn't know much about the candidate."What's her claim to fame?" she asked. "Is she the grandmother person?"
Memo to Roy Minton: When your lawsuit finally gets before a judge, be sure to call this lady as a witness.
The fact that heavy petition support for Friedman and Strayhorn came from the Democratic strongholds of Houston as well as counties such as Travis and Bexar could be bad news for Bell.Jason Stanford, a spokesman for Bell, said Bell's challenge is to get "Democrats to vote for the Democrat."
"What the petition signers really want to do is beat Rick Perry," he said. "There's only one candidate who can possibly break out of this pack to challenge Rick Perry, and that's Chris Bell."
All I can say is tell it to Katy Whelan.
We've already established that I'm a musical Luddite, still wedded to the ancient and dying CD format for my tunes. So, I'm highly encouraged (and a bit surprised, given the trash talk) to read that someone has put out a call for someone to create a podcasting application that I would embrace with enthusiasm.
Want to be famous and actually make some money too? Then create this-An application, online or local, that allows a user to subscribe to podcasts and organize their subscription lists.
Allow them to listen to the podcasts online or to download them into an iPod.
Here comes the new and important part...
Create an easy to implement way to have selected podcasts automatically burned to a CD-R every week or so, with each podcast to be a separate track. After it is set up, the application would simply prompt the user to insert a CD-R every so often, at which time it would burn that week's podcasts onto a CD-R that could be listened to in the car.
The application would also create a text document with the track numbers, names, dates and descriptions of the podcasts. That document could be printed and used as a listening reference. Label maker developers could write plug-ins that would allow the automatic printing of jewel case labels or, even better, templates for applications, like my Primera printer, that print on the CD-R itself.
Have the podcast name and date burned on the CD-R as CD Text.
Most car stereos can play MP3's now, so that would be the default setting- for more capacity. But there would also be an option to burn the CD-R in CDA format so older car stereos could also play it. CD-R's are almost free these days, so cost is not a factor.
Plus, the CD-R's would allow the user to create an archive of podcasts and to share good ones with friends.
People would happily pay for this product. And if you wanted to be true to the Web 2.0 mantra and get some of the allegedly infinite ad revenue, you could place ads on the application pages, if it's an online application, or on the CD-R between the podcasts themselves. Perhaps there would be a cheaper version of the application that has brief ads between the podcasts and a full-priced version that doesn't.
Yes, yes, yes (and for the record, I'd pay the full price to avoid the ads). It's a simple matter of time and efficiency for me. When I'm at the computer, I'm working or blogging. I can divide my attention between pages when I'm reading and writing, but words in the background, even music to an extent, get filtered out. Further, the last thing I need is another feed to check and do something with. If all I have to do is put CDs into a burner, and for this effort I get a copy of "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" or some new music to sample, all of which I can listen to in my car as I commute, that's outstanding.
The time I spend in my car is time I can't spend doing other stuff. It's perfect for this kind of multitasking. That would be worth some money to me. I do still intend to get an iPod, but it occurs to me lately that the main reason I haven't felt so motivated to do it is that I'd need to hook it into my car stereo to make it truly useful to me. I don't need it enough to change the way I go about my daily business.
Now, I realize that the auto-burn-to-CD approach, which Dwight calls a "burncaster", is a stopgap. Some day this sort of thing will be built directly into one's car. That capability will almost surely depend on technology or infrastructure that doesn't exist yet and may be quite a ways off. What's being proposed here could be available in a matter of months and would likely make a decent amount of money prior to (and continuing for awhile after) its obsolesence. So have at it, someone! I'm waiting to buy your product.
Local political consultant Mustafa Tameez has gone over all of the redistricting map proposals that have been submitted to the three-judge panel, plus their briefs where available, and put together a concise analysis of them all, complete with illustrations. I have a copy of his report here (PDF) for your perusal. Oral arguments will be heard on August 3, and as noted before, the new map should be in place in time for the November election. Take a look and see what the judges will have to work with.
Finally...I still don't know why I can't find it through a summary report search, but here's DeLay's report for the second quarter:
This Period Cycle-To-Date
6. Net Contributions (other than loans)
(a) Total Contributions (other than loans) 11981.00 3711330.03
(b) Total Contribution Refunds 7230.00 35599.13
(c) Net Contributions (6(a) - 6(b)) 4751.00 3675730.90
7. Net Operating Expenditures
(a) Total Operating Expenditures 813016.94 3250193.15
(b) Total Offsets to Operating Expenditures 31006.62 106651.23
(c) Net Operating Expenditures 782010.32 3143541.92
8. Cash on Hand at Close of Reporting Period 641273.72
In short, DeLay raised $11K, spent over $800K, and went from $1.4 million cash on hand to $641K CoH. One more quarter like that and we'll have a pretty good metaphor for the federal budget situation under his stewardship, if you ask me.
I'll refer you again to Juanita for the expenditure details. Whatever would his daughter do for money if she had to get a real job?
Bottom line: Tom DeLay, David Wallace, Shelley Sekula Somethingorother, and Crazy Bob Talton have, combined, less than 30% of Nick Lampson's cash on hand. That, more than any aspect of the DeLay replacement-go-round, is the story of CD22 right now. Lampson has as big a war chest as any Texas incumbent, and his opposition is either writing six-figure checks to defense attorneys or sitting on comparative chump change. Everything else follows from that.
UPDATE: Forgot to add, here's DeLay's new business venture. I wonder where Dani fits on the org chart?
UPDATE: Vince has an in depth look at DeLay's expenditures, much of which went to legal fees. Many payments for political activities were made after DeLay announced his resignation, including this:
Finally, in a sign DeLay may have been anticipating the legal wrangling that may lead to him ultimately staying on the November ballot in Congressional District 22, his campaign paid Americans for a Republican Majority (a PAC DeLay founded) $34,186.88 to acquire contributor lists on June 13 - the Tuesday following DeLay’s last day in Congress.
Or, perhaps given his incredible burn rate, he just needed to identify a likely group of
UPDATE: The Muse takes her crack at the DeLay FEC report.
Looks like my mail problem has been resolved. I still can't say for certain that stuff is arriving in a timely manner, but it all does appear to be arriving. So, please go back to using the offthekuff.com address as usual. I do check my Gmail account, but not nearly as often, so it's for backup purposes only. Thanks!
I love stories like this.
Not many folks like to stick around when the rubber meets the reptile.But Jim Christiansen sees opportunity in roadkill, not a mess.
Christiansen started the Sun City Reptile and Amphibian mapping project shortly after he and his wife moved to the retirement community in January. He's a retired herpetologist, studying snakes and turtles and other creepy, crawly things that frequent the ponds and sunning rocks of Williamson County.
The project is designed to find out whether Sun City's planned community, which includes natural areas along with well-manicured golf courses, allows local reptile and amphibian populations to thrive.
"As urban areas expand, the natural areas are destroyed at an incredible rate," Christiansen said.
"If you can find a way to have the urban areas and keep the natural areas, that's a win-win situation."
Christiansen gathers turtles, snakes and other animals that turn up squashed on the roads and preserves them to create a snapshot of the animal life in Sun City.
It's easy to crack jokes about stories like this, but I think it's a great idea. We really are putting a lot more people and houses in areas that used to just have animals, and we really do need to have some idea what effect all that has on those animals. If Mr. Christiansen can make headway on that, then good on him.
Via email from his campaign manager, Shane Sklar's report has been amended to show $118K cash on hand, not $113K. He still trails Ron Paul by a fair amount, but Paul's own fundraising prowess has not been too impressive. Also according to Sklar's campaign, Paul had over $700K cash on hand at this time in 2000, instead of the $395K he has now. It's costing him more to raise the dough, and he's not getting as much of a response as he once did.
Question: What in the world is former CD02 Rep. Jim Turner doing with over a million dollars in cash on hand? I suppose he could be saving it for a Senate run in 2008 against John Cornyn, but man, some of that money could do a whole lot of good this year if it were spread around strategically. You want to get a whole bunch of activists on your side early on for that race, Jim, you think about that.
While we're on the subject, what in the world is retiring State Sen. Ken Armbrister doing with his $1.1 million treasure chest? Unlike Turner, there's no indication I'm aware of that Armbrister might have his sights on another elected office (there was a rumor that he might be appointed to something by Governor Perry, but I'm not finding anything on that via Google right now). What's the rule for this sort of thing - is he required to disburse this cash in some fashion by a certain date, or is it his to keep? That's another pot of money that could do a lot of good for the Ds, if Armbrister cares about such things.
Henry Cuellar has $50K in his kitty. As an unchallenged incumbent, that would have been fine. Now, with the possibility that he could face an opponent in an open priary race in November, or worse yet get thrown into a district with Henry Bonilla and his two million bucks, I'm thinking he's going to be a very busy fundraiser in the coming weeks.
Pete Sessions has $881K on hand, down from the million plus he had on March 31. Still a big lead over Will Pryor, just not quite as big as it was before.
Still no news on Tom DeLay. He's gonna drag that out till the last minute, I guess.
UPDATE: Juanita has some news on DeLay's FEC filing. Still no word on available cash, however.
My webhost is apparently having some having some problems that appear to be affecting my mail delivery. I say this because I haven't seen any new mail since 6 PM last night, and I've verified that I don't get a bounce message when sending to my offthekuff.com address. So, until further notice, if you have an urgent need to reach me by email, please send it to my alternate address, cakuffner - at - gmail - dot - com. Thanks!
UPDATE: I've just verified that I can send. It's just that there's nothing coming in. I've reported my problem and will hopefully get it fixed soon.
UPDATE: Some mail has now arrived. Looks like everything's delayed, and not necessarily arriving in any kind of order. But at least I'm getting stuff.
Candidates in state races have the same July 17 reporting deadline as federal candidates. While the FEC reports are starting to come in, the Texas Ethics Commission reports are arriving at a much slower rate so far. The TEC search page isn't as friendly for getting overviews as the FEC page is, so this will be a much more tedious process.
We do know about some candidates' reports, from their press releases. We know about Ellen Cohen and we know about Kristi Thibaut, to name two. You can now add a third name to that group, Juan Garcia. From his press release:
District 32 State Representative candidate Juan Garcia previewed today his fundraising accomplishments through the first half of the year that will be made public in Monday's contribution and expenditure report. He will report raising $205,640.95 since announcing his candidacy in January.The Garcia campaign received donations from some 400 individual contributors, a sweeping grassroots showing of financial support from across the district, and across the country (with 20 states represented). The majority of contributions were $100 or less, and came from a broad cross-section of contributors that includes doctors, teachers, and military personnel, with an overwhelming outpouring of support from former classmates, White House Fellows, and Navy squadron mates from across the globe.
"As a political newcomer and first-time candidate, I'm aligned with no faction, indebted to no interest group, and free to follow my conscience. My report reflects that independence. I'm grateful to have earned the support of the citizens of District 32, and to have lifetime friends who believe in me. Come the fall, we're going to have the resources to get our message of 'New Leadership for a New Direction' out across the Coastal Bend," said Garcia.
Among the many former Gene Seaman contributors who are now supporting Garcia are Dr. Michael Mauger of Corpus Christi, and retired Foreign Service Officer and Republican Lynn Lee of Rockport.
Said Dr. Mauger: "It's refreshing to see a young man with his qualifications step up. He'll be a breath of fresh air in the Capitol."
"Communities like Rockport have been paralyzed for years from a dearth of leadership across this district," said Lee. "I admire and share Juan's dedication to public service and am excited to finally send someone of his integrity to Austin."
Nothing like getting your opponent's former contributors to back you publicly. Garcia can use the cash, since Gene Seaman had $266K cash on hand as of January. His July statement will be one of many that I'll be looking for next week. Stay tuned.
Metro has three more open house meetings in the next two weeks to discuss the Universities rail line.
The following open house sessions have been scheduled to convey important updated information.
Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Time: 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Location: Holiday Inn Select
Address: 2712 Southwest Freeway
Parking: Parking garage - expense covered by METRODate: Monday, July 24, 2006
Time: 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Location: Third Ward Multi Service Center
Address: 3611 Ennis
Parking: Surface parking lot and surrounding side streetsDate: Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Time: 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Location: St. Paul's United Methodist Church
Address: 5501 South Main Street
Parking: Lot across from Church and surrounding streets
These sessions are being held in wheelchair-accessible locations. 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 they plan to attend. Every reasonable effort will be made to accommodate these needs.For bus route information, call 713-635-4000 or click here to use our online Trip Planner.
The reason for the meetings:
Three public meetings over the next two weeks may be the Metropolitan Transit Authority's last chance to allay fear and opposition over a possible Richmond route for its planned University light rail line.On Thursday, Metro President and CEO Frank Wilson and board Chairman David Wolff gave a status report on the project to U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, whose support is crucial to Metro's obtaining federal funds for it.
Culberson said afterward that he agreed to wait until two weeks after the first public meeting, scheduled for Tuesday, before making his decision on the project.
[...]
Culberson said he would consider input from constituents but give most weight to "Richmond residents and business and property owners."
Christof explains why the Universities line is so important. Check it out.
Just a few bits and pieces from the second quarter FEC filings as they trickle in. All results as of June 30.
I'm sure he won't have any problems raising more dough, but it's still surprising to see John Culberson with only $155K cash on hand. Jim Henley isn't exactly flush, though he does have what's likely to be his biggest fundraiser coming up. I just would've expected a guy like Culberson to have a lot more money than that.
Ron Paul has $395K on hand, but for a guy who had no real primary opposition, he's burning through it at a fast rate - $943K raised, $730K spent. Either he's got some expensive tastes, or he's not very efficient about raising the money.
Silvestre Reyes has spent a higher percentage of his contributions than that, but at least he doesn't have a major party opponent. Good thing, when $38K COH is all you have.
Will Pryor continues to be a surprise - $321K raised, $180K on hand. Not too bad for a guy that's a virtual unknown to the netroots, but he is up against a guy who had over a million bucks as of the last quarter. So it's all relative.
Finally, a couple of the CD22 wannabees check in: Shelley Sekula Somethingorother has $30K, while Crazy Bob Talton has all of $750 after loaning himself $800. Make of that what you will. He's not listed yet, but I'm told that David Wallace raised about $170K, which falls short of his $200K goal. After subtracting for expenses, he'll have about $150K - he also loaned himself $30K. Needless to say, they're all way behind in that race.
UPDATE: Here's David Wallace, with $157K cash on hand. Muse and Juanita have more.
Also in now: Shane Sklar has $275K raised, $113K cash on hand. There's still a few who haven't updated yet, including one Thomas Dale DeLay, so I'm sure I'll have more later.
UPDATE: If I'm reading this correctly, Crazy Bob Talton has reported $28K cash on hand to the Texas Ethics Commission as of July 5. I don't know if that would be transferable to a Congressional race or not, but who cares? It's 28K, compared to two million. Now I really want to know what Tom DeLay has to his name.
I'm counting a total of twelve new maps available for viewing at the Texas Redistricting site. My eyes are a little crossed from looking at all of this - the RedViewer is a great resource, but an annoying one as well, since it doesn't work with Firefox.
The latest news is another attempt by the state to cut Lloyd Doggett off at the knees (more from the Chron). I don't think that'll fly with the three-judge panel, while PerryVsWorld thinks that map is a slight favorite. The court may give deference to the state in recognition of the Lege's role in drawing maps, or it may give more weight to the plaintiffs for winning the lawsuit in the first place. And they may go another direction, or draw their own map - as Paul Burka says, they have lifetime tenure for a reason.
I don't quite have the energy to give all these maps a full going-over. If you want more analysis, follow those links above plus these to the Lone Star Project, more from Burka, Rep. Pena, BOR, and in what may be the most exhaustive blog post I've ever seen, Vince.
Whatever happens, I'm sure the judges are hoping this will be the last they see of Texas Congressional maps for a long time. After three goes at it in five years, I'll bet they're sick of the whole process, and I can't say I blame them.
UPDATE: More from Burka and CQ Politics (via Political Wire).
The Chronicle's blog empire just got a little more interesting with the addition of former Astros manager Larry Dierker to its stable. Dierk was a pretty insightful analyst on TV (as well as a not-too-shabby manager), so it'll be very interesting to see what he makes of this new outlet. Kudos to Dwight and the powers that be at the Chron for making this happen.
After a day of debate, the House voted 390-33 to renew the [Voting Rights Act of 1965], which is intended to ensure no voting jurisdiction illegally suppresses the votes of minorities or of citizens who might have difficulty casting ballots because of limited proficiency in English or other factors.Extended requirements include bilingual ballots where officials deem them necessary and federal permission for election-related procedural changes in Texas and eight other states with a history of discrimination in voting practices.
Six Texas Republicans voted against final passage: Joe Barton of Ennis, Mike Conaway of Midland, Jeb Hensarling of Dallas, Sam Johnson of Plano, Ron Paul of Lake Jackson and Mac Thornberry of Clarendon.
"All that the (Voting Rights Act) sought to correct has been corrected," Conaway said. "It labels Texas as a racist state, and that's not true. There are those who might look at (my vote) as a racist vote. I hope not."
Funny you should bring that up, Mike, since your comrade in the "we don't need the VRA 'cause there's no racism in Texas any more" business, John Carter, voted for final passage. Perhaps he was feeling the heat from his earlier tomfoolery on the issue. Maybe the two of you should get together over coffee and talk about it.
As noted by Vince, Carter was in fact the only Texas Republican to vote against any of the proposed amendments - he opposed the Norwood amendment, which would have allowed a state to escape the pre-clearance requirement after three consecutive presidential elections in which minority turnout exceeds 50 percent. All other amendments fell along party lines, with only the six dead-enders noted above voting against final passage.
Anyway. It's over, and the good guys won. That's what matters for now.
Proposals for new Congressional maps are starting to come in for examination by the three-judge panel. LULAC is first out of the blocks, with two maps that make changes to five districts. I've got a look at them over at Kuff's World.
Another one from the inbox:
[Yesterday] morning, State Representative Jim Dunnam announced his request that the Texas State Auditor begin a comprehensive audit of four different lobbying contracts that state-funded entities have with Tom DeLay's former chief of staff, Drew Maloney. The four contracts are costing Texas taxpayers more than $1 million and just scrape the surface of fiscal mismanagement and potential corruption on the part of Governor Rick Perry and Drew Maloney.
Please find the attached documents from this morning's press conference. If you need these documents in another format, please contact Rep. Dunnam's office and we will try to accommodate your needs.
In addition to the documents attached to this email, you may view a recorded copy of this morning's press conference using the online media player RealPlayer by going to the following URL:
http://www.house.state.tx.us/fx/av/79thpressconferences/60713aPC.ram
Those of you who recall that Carole Keeton Strayhorn did an audit on the lobbying contracts get a gold star, but in the end she only ordered payments suspended to one of the two groups involved. Turns out she had a wee little conflict of interest going on. That's where Dunnam is picking up the ball.
Here's Dunnam's press release on the matter, a summary document and a flowchart (all PDFs) for those who prefer more visual aids.
And another Democratic challenger checks in with a big fundraising total for the second quarter - Ellen Cohen raked in over $200K between April 1 and June 30, bringing her grand total to over $372K. Almost 70% of that total came from people in HD134, too. A copy of her press release is here (Word doc). As a reminder, my interview with Cohen is here. Let's hope there's more news like this coming in the next couple of days.
The folks at RichmondRail.org have sent the following letter to Metro:
TO: Mr. David S. Wolff, METROMr. Frank Wilson, METRO
Members of the METRO board
CC: Mr. John Culberson, Ms. Sheila Jackson Lee, Ms. Kay Bailey
Hutchison, Mr. John Cornyn
Mr. Garnet Coleman, Ms. Martha Wong,
Mr. Bill White, Mayor, Ms. Anne Clutterbuck, Ms. Ada Edwards, Ms. Pam Holm
Mr. Robert Eckels, Mr. El Franco Lee, Ms. Sylvia Garcia, Mr. Steve Radack, and
Mr. Jerry Eversole
Dear Mr. Wolff and Mr. Wilson:
In just 15 days, more than 700 Houstonians have signed their support for this clear statement:
"I support neighborhood-friendly light rail on Richmond Avenue."
We are residents, business owners, workers, and students living and working on or near Richmond Avenue. We are civic leaders and professionals with a stake in Houston's quality of life and economic vitality. We are landowners and institutions with a specific interest in the long term health of Richmond Avenue. And we want light rail on Richmond.
We want to preserve and enhance the quality of life and vitality of our neighborhoods, businesses, and institutions. We want to ensure the long term quality and success of our neighborhoods through the addition of light rail along Richmond Avenue from Main Street to its connection with the Uptown line and beyond.
Houston will not have a healthy and vital future without a mass transportation system that is built where the people, places, and destinations are. RichmondRail.org will be fighting for rail on Richmond and for solutions that maximize the benefit for all citizens - and minimize the negative impacts on businesses and neighborhoods in the corridor.
In the coming weeks, we will be signing up thousands more residents, institutions, and businesses along the Richmond corridor that support a Richmond alignment. The more than 700 Houstonians listed with this letter are just a taste of the broad based support for and logic of a Richmond rail alignment.
We expect METRO to thoroughly study and expertly design the Richmond alignment. We expect our local elected leaders to support it. And we expect our Congressional representatives to fund it.
Sincerely,
Doug Childers, Chair
RichmondRail.org
Given the current report that Rep. Culberson is threatening to kill federal funds to Metro if they don't do things his way, I'd say the timing of this letter is apt.
These folks got off to a slower start in the PR battle than the anti-Richmond forces did, but they're fully engaged now. Hopefully, their presence will help to change the perception of this debate. If they help nudge a few public officials in the right direction as well, that would be good, too.
The letter plus some more information is here. You can sign their petition here.
Congratulations to Jim Henley and his four-time national champion debate squad!
Lanier Middle School debate coach Jim Henley isn't surprised with his team winning its fourth successive national title at the Middle School Forensic League National Championships July 1-2 at Claremont-McKenna College in Claremont, Calif.He, too, finds it rather ordinary the squad produces individual champions in several events.
He provides his team with plenty of time to speak every time it practices. Practice makes perfect, so awards seem a given.
"We give them a foundation in strong communication skills and we develop strong speakers by doing speeches and peer critiques every day," Henley said. "Team members know how to organize their thoughts and develop original oratory presentations. We give them lots of learning opportunities. This is very demanding at our school because it is a high school credit course."
Since debate focuses on current events and public policy, Henley believes this training prepares the pupils for public service.
"They become very intelligent and informed about current events, and they are very articulate about expressing themselves," Henley said.
Henley said the group's latest title was "very sweet."
Bittersweet, even. Henley, a Democrat, opposes Republican incumbent John Culberson for the U.S. Congressional District 7 post in the Nov. 7 election. A victory may make 2005-06 his last of a 10-year career as Lanier's debate coach.
"If I win, I will be going to Washington, D.C., in January," he said. "But I would leave the team in very capable hands if that was the case."
I've got an interview with Henley in the works. Look for it on Monday.
Okay, let me see if I've got this straight. KHMX fires morning DJs Roula and Ryan and replaces them with former KRBE spinner Sam Malone. Now KRBE has fired its replacement morning crew of Atom (former evening DJ) and Maria (Malone's former sidekick) and replaced them with...Roula and Ryan. Sound about right?
In the sports world, this is what's known as a challenge trade. Two players, each of whom plays the same position, swapped straight up. It's the kind of trade that (in theory, at least) can't be a win-win, since one player by definition will do better than the other. (Think Garry Templeton for Ozzie Smith here.) The only question is which team judged correctly. Will KRBE do better in the ratings with Roula and Ryan than they once did with Malone and Todd, or will KHMX come out on top? Ladies and gentlemen, start your engines, and may the best team win.
The comparison isn't totally apt, since Malone left KRBE on his own accord, in part so he could join the rightwing-talk lineup on KTRH in addition to his new morning gig. As such, KRBE's hand was forced. But that's basically what it boils down to, since Malone's availability led to R&R's departure at KHMX.
Not that I really care - I'm a KACC listener now, and while I occasionally enjoyed R&R's pop-culture schtick in the past, I would never voluntarily tune to a Top 40 station. I still find the whole thing amusing. Houstonist has more.
The Republican Party of Texas had better hope for a favorable outcome from their appeal of Judge Sparks' ruling in the DeLay ballot replacement lawsuit, because DeLay himself says he can't be the candidate.
Today on Fox, DeLay was asked by Neil Cavuto if he still had a chance to win the election. DeLay said, "I cannot run for office [in Texas]" because "I'm ineligible."DeLay also trashed the federal district court decision as "a policy statement instead of a ruling" and expressed confidence that the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals would "turn it around." Election Law blog explains that the ruling is on soild constitutional ground and argues that "there is good chance this opinion is upheld on appeal."
Transcript:
CAVUTO: I've noticed now a judge has ruled you're still on the ballot, so you could conceivably still win this thing. What's the deal?DELAY: Well, we had a Democrat federal judge make a policy statement instead of a ruling. I think the Fifth Circuit will look at the law, look at the constitution and understand that the voters of the 22nd district need a choice. I'm a resident of Virginia. I live in Virginia. I'm working in Virginia and Washington, DC. I've established a legal defense fund, a speakers bureau. I'm even working on a book and working with conservative groups. I'm making my living in Washington, DC, so by the Constitution, I cannot run for office and I'm ineligible. So I don't know what this judge is doing, but I think the Fifth Circuit will turn it around.
Emphasis in the original. Whatever will DeLay say if the Fifth Circuit upholds Judge Sparks? Thanks to Jeff N. for the catch.
I haven't seen it hit the news wires yet, but according to Vince, the Fifth Circuit has agreed to hear the expedited appeal. He's got a press release from RPT attorney James Bopp on the subject. Fort Bend Now has some more on this topic as well. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: SCOTUSblog has more.
I wrote before that I was puzzled by the seeming lack of aggression by the prosecutors in the second Andrea Yates trial, since it appeared they were doing very little cross examination of defense witnesses. Whatever the case was there, they've certainly gone into attack mode with the rebuttal phase of the trial.
A deputy who overheard Yates' interview with MHMRA staff the day after she arrived at the jail following the deaths of her children testified she decided to kill the children the night before."She said the night before she had a deep impression that she should take the children to the next world the next morning," said deputy Michael Stephens.
Stephens said he overheard Yates become very agitated when she talked about the deaths to MHMRA Director Dr. Melissa Ferguson. Stevens testified that Yates told Ferguson she shouldn't have killed all of the children and that killing her daughter, the youngest, would have been enough.
In response to a question from Ferguson, Stephens testified, "she responded by saying that she knew what she was doing was wrong."
Houstonist thinks this could be a blow to the defense. It's a little hard to say how this went over with the jury, since (guess what!) there's no report of any cross examination of Deputy Stephens. The obvious point to make is that once Yates had been medicated and was reasonably lucid again, of course she'd say she knew what she did was wrong. All that matters is whether or not she knew that at the time, when her illness was in full force.
On another front, the prosecution brought in a specialist to describe in gory detail how the Yates children died. This ground was covered in their case in chief, of course, but going over it again gives them a chance to shock the jury's sensibilities and perhaps put them in a mind to punish someone for this horrible tragedy. It could also backfire, since you'd have to believe that Andrea Yates is evil incarnate to have been a sane person doing all these things. My personal feeling is that the jury is more likely to conclude she is and has been mentally ill, and driving home the violence of the children's deaths would therefore only serve to underscore how firmly in the grip of her delusions she must have been.
Finally, Park Dietz is taking the stand again. What will he say this time? Who knows, but I think we all know what he won't say. Stay tuned.
Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt is about to get graded by the rank and file, and he's expecting to see some harsh evaluations.
Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt said he looks forward to reading the results of a survey from rank-and-file officers in the department."I really want to know what their issues and concerns are so that we can address them," he said.
Although he wouldn't draw conclusions from a survey that has yet to be released, Hurtt seems prepared for results that won't reflect favorably on him.
"This is not a popularity contest," he said. "I am in charge of a complex organization, and there are going to be different philosophies on how to handle matters."
To a degree, Hurtt is correct. Like anyone in a leadership position, his job is not to be liked but to be effective. Some of the feedback he'll get is going to be uninformative griping. That needs to be filtered out.
But there's sure to be a lot of useful information in there, including the responses from some of the strongest critics. The question will be what will Hurtt do with that criticism?
"I am encouraged that Chief Hurtt, at least, wants to see what the results are," [Houston Police Officers Union] executive director Mark Clark said. "Houston police officers for a very long time now have wanted somebody, anybody in a position of authority to listen to what they've got to say."Clark didn't know the exact ratio of positive-to-negative comments from the survey but said a "significant number" of officers take HPD officials to task on matters including disciplinary issues and the department's facial hair policy, which prohibits beards and goatees.
"There was serious, serious questions about how officers were deployed and not having proper backup out on the street," Clark said.
One detective wrote that long-term planning was rare and that Hurtt "shows a lack of interest, a lack of heart and a lack of passion for the job."
What I'd like to know is how Hurtt is perceived in comparison to some of his predecessors. I don't recall Betsy Watson, Sam Nuchia, or C.O. "BAMF" Bradford having particularly cordial relations with the two big police unions. Is Hurtt better, worse, or about the same as any of them from their perspective, and in what ways is he better or worse?
Some of what the HPOU members are complaining about is undoubtedly tied to staffing shortages and policies put forth by Mayor White. A Chron editorial from last week discussed the tension between Hurtt and White's competing visions. How much of the negativity Hurtt will get is due to things he doesn't have direct control over?
Here's HPOU's statement from when the survey was sent out to its membership in June (link via Houstonist). We'll see what happens from here.
State Rep. David Swinford has asked AG Greg Abbott for an opinion on whether changes to the state's abortion laws could lead to capital murder charges for doctors.
Swinford said he disagrees with the interpretation by the Texas District and County Attorneys Association because there is no evidence that the Legislature intended such a result from changes it made to the law governing doctors' conduct last year.He said the changes were intended to provide appropriate criminal penalties for a physician's failure to comply with restrictions on third-trimester abortions or to obtain the consent of a minor's parent, but "certainly not to subject a physician to prosecution for capital murder."
Shannon Edmonds, director of governmental relations for the prosecutors' group, believes a doctor could be charged with capital murder for performing a restricted abortion. He said, however, that he has heard of no such prosecutions.
Edmonds discovered the problem when he was looking at new criminal offenses enacted during the 2005 regular session.
"We started connecting the dots and that's where we ended up," said Edmonds.
When Republicans took control of the Texas House in 2003, they began enacting new restrictions on abortion. One of the first laws was the 2003 Prenatal Protection Act, which allows prosecutors to seek criminal charges when a fetus is killed by a violent attack. Capital murder charges were already possible for killing a child younger than 6.
Abortion rights advocates warned in 2003 that the act could be used to criminalize abortion, and the Legislature provided a defense for doctors performing a "lawful medical procedure."
Last year, lawmakers on the House floor attached two abortion-related amendments to a bill restructuring the Texas Medical Board, which licenses and disciplines doctors.
One prohibited physicians from performing an abortion on a minor without her parents' consent or a court order. The other banned third-trimester abortions except to save the life of the mother.
The Senate accepted the amendments, and the bill became law Sept. 1.
Edmonds reasoned that because those two acts are no longer "lawful medical procedures," the defense in the Prenatal Protection Act no longer applies.
I'm curious why it's taken almost a year for someone to solicit an opinion from AG Abbott. The TDCAA raised this point last August, just before the new laws passed in the 2005 regular session went into effect. Here's a further clarification of the TDCAA's position on this. Note that they are not advocating anything; it's their job to educate District and County Attorneys about new laws, and they see this as a conflict in the law. Why didn't someone request an opinion from Abbott in 2005?
Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life, lobbied for the amendments. He believes that the only crime a doctor could be charged with is violating the Occupations Code, a third-degree felony which carries a punishment range of two to 10 years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine.The Texas Medical Association agrees with that analysis.
"The Legislature specifically established penalties when it passed the new law. Any physician who violates that law obviously should not be subject to capital punishment," said Brent Annear, a spokesman for the association.
Peggy Romberg, director of the Women's Health and Family Planning Association of Texas, said the issue needs to be resolved. "This could have a chilling effect on providers and could result in women not having the access they need at a crisis time in their life," she said.
Ultimately, whatever Abbott rules, I think the Lege is going to have to fix this. I don't particularly relish that thought, since it will be an opportunity for further mischief by the usual suspects, but the Lege created this conflict in the law, and that means the Lege needs to deal with it. For now, we'll see what Abbott says and go from there.
UPDATE: Here's Swinford's request (PDF).
You may recall that State Rep. Lon Burnam filed suit in April to force the Texas Ethics Commission to reverse its incredibly boneheaded ruling that public officials who receive cash or other gifts don't have to disclose their value (see this Texas Observer story for the full background). Acting on an edict from the judge in that lawsuit, Burnam has requested a formal opinion from the TEC on this matter.
Burnam made the request to aid a lawsuit he filed against the commission. He sued after its staff attorneys advised Bill Ceverha, a trustee of the state Employee Retirement System, that a gift of $100,000 in two checks from Houston homebuilder Bob Perry could be reported only as a check.Ceverha voluntarily reported the checks on his personal finance report earlier this year.
A judge has told Burnam that his lawsuit can't continue until a formal opinion was requested from the commission. Burnam said his lawsuit will proceed if the commission upholds the original staff decision.
The commission has 60 days to issue its opinion.
I can't wait to see how they justify this. Bear in mind, this was not a unanimous decision by the TEC. I don't know if they have any facility for filing a minority report; perhaps we'll get to see. In any event, Eye on Williamson has all of Burnam's paperwork connected to this request. Check it out.
A bipartisan group of Texas lawmakers wants to fire Accenture for its poor performance.
Sixty state representatives asked the Health and Human Services Commission today to fire the contractor in charge of processing applications for Texas' low-cost insurance program for children and running the state's new benefits eligibility system.The letter written by Republican state Rep. Pat Haggerty, of El Paso, urges Health and Human Services Executive Commissioner Albert Hawkins to cancel the state's contract with Accenture and rebuild the community-based benefits system.
"Every dollar we spend on our health and human services is precious," Haggerty said in the letter signed by 12 Republicans and 48 Democrats. "We do not have the luxury of throwing good money after bad."
Technical and operational problems have dogged Accenture's implementation of a new state computer system that lets people apply for benefits such as Medicaid, food stamps and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families over the phone, online or in person.
The problems forced Hawkins to delay the system's rollout indefinitely. Commission officials have said they may penalize the contractor for failing to meet performance goals and force it to repay the state for unexpected costs.
Their letter is here (Word doc). Believe it or not, Accenture counts its work in Texas as a success story. One can only wonder what they think a failure looks like. Thanks to HHSC Survivalist for the link.
Not everyone is on board with this, of course.
Haggerty's letter was sent two days after 30 Republican state representatives sent a letter urging Hawkins to stay the course.In the Monday letter, state Rep. John E. Davis, of Houston, said he and his colleagues recognize the new system has experienced problems. But, he added, that was to be expected.
"While HHSC and their contractor are working through the early challenges, we are confident they can be resolved and the new system completed to benefit both low-income Texans in need and Texas taxpayers," Davis said in a Wednesday statement.
Perhaps if you gave some benchmarks and criteria for judging when and if Accenture turns things around, that might help. So too would an indication that you'd be willing to reconsider if those benchmarks were not reached. Otherwise, this sounds like an incipient case of Six Month Syndrome to me.
I've written a bunch about this ongoing fiasco. Some of the most recent stuff is here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Vince has been staying on top of the fight to renew the Voting Rights Act. A group of Republicans, including the three Texans listed in the banner atop Vince's post, have held up the VRA's renewal, which was supposed to have been a formality. It all comes to a head today.
Having quieted dissenting conservatives, House Republicans are trying again to renew the 1965 Voting Rights Act in an election-year effort to win support from minority voters.The bill's progress through Congress is considered by Republican leaders as one way to stem the damage to the party's "big-tent" image among minorities watching the contentious debate over whether to grant most of the nation's 12 million illegal immigrants a chance at citizenship.
The renewal of the Voting Rights Act - the legislative centerpiece of the civil rights movement - is widely supported by House leaders in both parties. It had been expected to sail through the House last month, but a rebellion in a closed GOP caucus meeting forced supporters to cancel the vote.
Conservatives, mostly from the South, contended that the bill singled out their states for Justice Department scrutiny without giving them credit for strides on civil rights.
Hours of negotiations in recent days yielded an agreement, approved 8-3 on Wednesday by the Rules Committee, to allow votes on a few amendments proposing the changes pushed by the objectors.
The changes are not expected to be added to the legislation. But House leaders, intent on passing the bill over to the Senate this week, agreed to allow votes on the four amendments to move it along.
Civil rights advocates, however, see the amendments as the latest in a history of attempts to undercut growing political influence of racial minorities.
"I hope the House will see this for what it is and vote against these amendments," said Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a veteran of the civil rights movement.
They got some firepower late Wednesday from big business - namely Tyco, Comcast, Disney and CBS Corp.
"Reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act reinforces the importance we as a nation attach to each vote cast by every adult American," CBS Corp. President and CEO Leslie Moonves wrote to congressional leaders. "I look forward to saluting you and your colleagues when this important task is successfully completed."
[...]
The amendment with the most appeal, sponsored by Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, would renew the law for a decade, rather than 25 years.
The LATimes has a nice Republicans-in-disarray story on this.
In an intensely competitive election year, this was supposed to be the issue virtually everyone in Congress could agree on: renewing civil rights-era laws protecting minorities' access to the ballot box.But on the cusp of a vote scheduled for Thursday that White House strategists and other top Republicans once hoped would symbolize a GOP eager to attract more blacks and Latinos, a group of increasingly vocal Capitol Hill conservatives is staging a revolt - arguing that certain provisions of the law are out of sync with party principles and are insulting to the South.
The result is another emotional standoff within a party already fractured over how to deal with illegal immigration.
[...]
On Tuesday, Republican leaders were waging a fierce, behind-the-scenes fight to persuade recalcitrant conservatives that backing the act would benefit the party.
But the conservatives weren't buying the argument, pressing their belief that Congress should change sections that impose federal oversight of states with histories of institutional racism and those that require bilingual ballots.
A two-hour meeting among House leaders, GOP strategists and the law's critics failed to resolve the disagreement, leading some to question whether the House would go ahead with its Thursday vote.
A postponement would be the second time within a month that the vote had been delayed - a move that would heighten the White House's embarrassment and intensify its need for damage control within minority communities.
"I want this bill finished this week," House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters after the meeting. "But to tell you everything is settled and everyone is happy would not be the truth."
[...]
One House leadership aide, who requested anonymity because of the delicate nature of the negotiations, said that top Republicans had "had a lot of engagement" with [Georgia Rep. Lynn] Westmoreland and others who launched the unexpected rebellion.
But sighing at the turn of events since the renewal first sailed through the House Judiciary Committee this year, the aide added: "The reason we brought this whole thing up is to show people we're for extending the Voting Rights Act. Instead, we created our own problem."
Sucks to be you, I guess.
Finally, over at DallasBlog, Vince has a nice guest post that explains why we still need the Voting Rights Act in 200 and beyond. Check it out, and if you're represented by one of the three Texans who have been holding it up, give them a call and explain it to them.
Kristi Thibaut, who had a nice fundraising haul this past quarter, is looking for some blockwalk volunteers this weekend.
Please come out and help Kristi on Saturday if you have the time.Councilmember Ronald Green, Richard Garcia (candidate for Harris County Treasurer), and James Goodwille Pierre (Candidate for Harris County Clerk) will be joining us. Please RSVP as soon as possible so we can work on the logistics. Thanks for your help! This will be some of the most important work we do!
RSVP Email Address for Event: ksthibaut@yahoo.com
Location
Meet at Jack in the Box
Dairy Ashford at Beechnut
Houston, TXSee map: Google Maps, Yahoo! Maps
I've (still) got a post in the works on the partisan breakdown of this district and how it's been trending blue lately, but trust me: This is a winnable race, and Kristi is a great candidate. Give her a hand if you can.
One Litigious Grandma is wearing out a path to the courthouse.
Independent candidate for governor Carole Keeton Strayhorn sued the Texas secretary of state today in her attempt to have the nickname "Grandma" listed along with her full name on the Nov. 7 ballot.[...]
Strayhorn's attorney, Roy Minton, filed the lawsuit in state district court. It alleges that Williams denied Strayhorn the right to have her nickname on the ballot as provided for by the Texas Election Code.
Minton stated that the word "Grandma" has never been a slogan. Minton has said that Strayhorn began using the name when she became a grandmother in 1994.
Oh, for God's sake. Does this mean I get to be "Daddy" on the ballot if I ever run for office? It's a name I've been called since 2004, after all. I'm losing IQ points just contemplating the depths of this argument.
The secretary of state said he took several factors into account in deciding Strayhorn's ballot name request. He noted that Strayhorn has never appeared on an election ballot under the name "Grandma" and that her declaration of intent to run as an independent, as well as her petitions to get on the ballot, listed her as "Carole Keeton Strayhorn."[...]
"This is not the first time that Carole Strayhorn has sued Secretary Williams for upholding Texas' law," Williams' spokesman Scott Haywood said. He said they were confident the courts would agree with Williams' interpretation of the Texas Election Code.
Maybe if Strayhorn spent as much time on the campaign trail as she did in the courthouse, she wouldn't need to pull BS stunts like this to prop up her candidacy.
Honestly. Carole Keeton Strayhorn used to be a sharp and savvy politician, one who wasn't easily pigeonholed and who certainly wasn't afraid to buck the party line. When exactly did she become a bad parody of herself? Is there no one on her campaign staff to explain to her why this is such a joke?
The Chron gave her a pretty solid slap yesterday, before she actually filed suit.
Gov. Rick Perry's campaign spokesman, Robert Black, accused Strayhorn of throwing a "childish temper tantrum." No doubt the governor would breathe easier if Strayhorn were not in the race, but Strayhorn's "grandma" strategy, far from being a display of temper, has shrewdly kept her name in the news and will continue to do so should she make good on her threat to sue Williams.[...]
Texas has a long, ignoble and continuing history of candidates who run for office only in the hope that their familiar-sounding names will attract sufficient votes. Unqualified candidates named Houston and Crockett and Yarbrough have been disastrously elected or come dangerously close to defeating superior candidates.
Had the secretary of state allowed Strayhorn to embrace "grandma" on the ballot, there would be little to prevent candidates from filing as "Rick the Business-minded," or "Chris the Virtuous." Fortunately, every so often a limit is applied to the transparent ploys politicians hope will give them unearned advantage.
Any time you're being compared to the likes of Sam Texas and The Wrong Don Yarbrough, you've really gone off the rails. The Express News says it's time to "move on to more serious matters, such as the issues that actually affect the lives of Texans". And the best quip of them all goes to Paul Bourgeois:
Being a whiner and a bad loser are such attractive attributes in any candidate, don't you think?Hey, here's a nickname that might work: Carole Keeton "One Big Crybaby" Strayhorn.
... or she could suck it up and try being a serious candidate for a change.
Kinky is a joke. Why does she feel the need to compete?
Gotta love a twofer.
UPDATE: PerryVsWorld weighs in.
The Nick Lampson juggernaut continues apace.
Nick Lampson, the Democrat who faced former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay on the November ballot until DeLay resigned, has raised more than $600,000 during the most recent reporting period, bringing his total raised to about $3 million, his campaign said today.[...]
While the Republican side of the ballot is undecided, Lampson has been raising money, campaigning and beginning television advertising in the largely Republican district that sweeps across Houston's southern and western suburbs.
"Texans respond to the fact that I will return to Congress with eight years seniority and that, in 2001, I brought home more resources than any member of the Texas delegation - including Tom DeLay," Lampson said in a statement. "That's why seventy-one percent of the money raised this quarter came from right here in Texas."
Lampson raised $609,000 in the three months ending June 30. His campaign said he had raised $2.9 million since launching his campaign and has more than $2 million in cash on hand.
Saturday is the deadline to file reports with the FEC. I'll be very interested to see what DeLay and the various wannabees report for this cycle. Will they have raised as much as $600K combined? Stay tuned.
This ought to be exciting.
A Texas Indian tribe filed a federal lawsuit today alleging ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed and their associates engaged in fraud and racketeering to shut down the tribe's casino.The Alabama-Coushatta tribe of Livingston, Texas, alleged the defendants defrauded the tribe, the people of Texas and the Legislature to benefit another of Abramoff's clients - the Louisiana Coushatta tribe - and "line their pockets with money."
"Ultimately, the defendants' greed and corruption led to the Alabama-Coushatta tribe permanently shutting its casino. The funding for economic programs evaporated, over 300 jobs were lost in Polk County and the Alabama-Coushatta tribe has spent years struggling to recover and revitalize its economy through other means," the tribe said in its lawsuit, obtained by The Associated Press before it was filed Wednesday.
The lawsuit also names Abramoff's ex-business partner Michael Scanlon, a former aide to former Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land; Neil Volz, a former aide to Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio; and Jon Van Horne, Abramoff's former colleague at his law and lobbying firm, Greenberg Traurig.
[...]
Had the public or tribe known the Louisiana Coushatta tribe was the main opponent, Christian groups would have been "less mobilized," the Texas tribe contends. Because the Texas and Louisiana tribes share family ties, Louisiana Coushatta members would have opposed the attack on their sister tribe, the Alabama-Coushatta said.
"There's no reason why Indian tribes would cause this kind of havoc against another tribe," [tribal chairwoman Jo Ann] Battise said.
Good for them. I just hope there's something for them to collect. More on this can be found here, here, here, here, and here.
UPDATE: Ralph Reed gets to face GOP primary voters in his quest to run for Lt. Gov. of Georgia on Tuesday. Ed Kilgore says he's in trouble.
Hey, remember the inflated Texas Lotto jackpot scandal, the one that cost unqualified Perry crony Reagan Greer his job? It was supposed to have been fixed last year. Well, not quite, according to an audit of the Texas Lottery Commission.
Auditors found "a significant number of instances in which agency management did not comply with policies and procedures to review or approve documentation related to jackpot estimations, jackpot prize payment calculations and transfers to the Foundation School Fund."[...]
Lottery officials had asserted that they inflated four jackpot estimates between May 4, 2003, and June 11, 2005, auditors wrote.
But from November to March, auditors found three more instances in which lottery officials knowingly approved jackpots that exceeded the agency's "high-end" estimated sales.
Winners wouldn't have been impacted on those occasions because, as the report notes, they occurred after commissioners agreed to guarantee winners the higher of either the advertised jackpot or percentage of actual sales.
But auditors noted that "failure to accurately advertise Lotto Texas jackpot amounts may contribute to a lack of public confidence in the Lotto Texas game and the Texas Lottery Commission." They also pointed out that if the agency is required to pay jackpots that exceed sales, they may have to be paid with money that would otherwise go to education.
"That is troubling to me because that does take money from the state," said Gerald Busald, a lottery watchdog and math professor at San Antonio College. "The difference is when Reagan Greer did it, if somebody would have won, the player would have been out money. Now if somebody wins, the state is out money."
Busald praised the audit overall and said he had confidence that the agency's newly named Executive Director Anthony Sadberry, a longtime Houston attorney, would continue improving morale and trying to establish a culture of playing by the rules at the lottery.
Sadberry had been the interim director before being hired two weeks ago. In addition to this, he's still got a lot of morale issues at the TLC to deal with. The good news is that the employees there seem to approve of his hiring. We'll see how it works out.
Travis County DA Ronnie Earle wants to keep some of the details about his investigation of Tom DeLay a secret.
Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle doesn't want to release details about his investigation of former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay - specifically, how he's been spending taxpayer money to bring money-laundering charges against DeLay.Earle is suing the state attorney general to keep the information private.
In March, before DeLay resigned from Congress, the Houston Chronicle filed a request under Texas' open records law for vouchers, hotel and airfare receipts, plus budget documents, memos and e-mails describing the expenses for the DeLay inquiry and related investigations.
Earle appealed to Attorney General Greg Abbott, arguing that releasing the information could compromise the prosecution.
The state's lawyer, who reviewed examples of the information, generally ruled that Earle didn't have to disclose secret information related to grand jury investigations but noted that the public records law requires disclosure of "information in an account, voucher, or contract" relating to the expenditure of public monies.
Earle sued last week to overturn that opinion.
"The first obligation of law enforcement is the protection of the public," Earle said in a statement Monday. "This opinion makes that job harder."
Earle complained that releasing such documents would reveal information about investigations or prosecutions before a suspect or defendant could legally access it.
"Such premature revealing of often sensitive and sometimes life-threatening information could adversely effect public safety," Earle wrote.
[...]
Austin lawyer David H. Donaldson Jr., a First Amendment specialist, said state law anticipates such a conflict between the public's need to know what officials are spending and the protection of criminal investigations. He said it's the attorney general's role under the law to act as a referee and decide what, if anything, can be released.
Donaldson said prosecutors might keep secret specific vouchers that would reveal the identity or location of an informant, but prosecutors should release documents showing how they are spending the public's money.
"I think the Public Information Act contemplates the public having a general sense of how much is being spent on a particular criminal investigation," Donaldson said.
Rick Casey gives some background on this today. I can understand Earle's concern, but in this case I think it's misguided. Unless I'm really missing something here, this sounds like a legitimate public interest request, and I believe Earle should comply with it.
I've said before that I greatly respect The Onion for its ability to stay ahead of the satire curve in these crazy times. Alas, sometimes being so far out on the cutting edge can lead to casualties. John has the gruesome, yet hilarious, details.
The Houston Press blog that we were promised recently is now available. It's called HouStoned, and while we can certainly expect a lot of music content, it looks like it will indeed be covering a fairly wide range of things as they first said, like missing murals, Andy Fastow's newfound thriftiness, and even naked PETA protests. They've got an RSS feed and a blogroll, which makes me happy (that I'm on their blogroll doesn't suck, either). Check it out.
Dwight links to a story on the municipal WiFi rollout in Corpus Christi.
The network, projected to be complete this summer, could drive down Internet prices around town and increase service quality. City officials also envision the wireless access making residents' lives more convenient and possibly even saving lives."There are actually too many things you can do with it," said Ogilvie Gericke, director of municipal information systems for the city. "We will have to manage which things we want to do first. That will be a challenge."
The $6 million project should be finished by late August or early September and will provide wireless access for all of the city's 147 square miles. Possible applications include letting students complete homework online and ambulances transmit information to hospitals while en route.
As Dwight says, this is well in advance of Houston's project. We should be able to learn from their experience, even if doing WiFi in Houston will be a much bigger job.
Would you pay a toll if you could drive faster? Via Toll Road News, you may get that opportunity, in Austin and perhaps soon elsewhere.
Posted speed limits are a major financial issue in the terms of the toll concession for Texas State Highway 130 Segments 5 and 6 (TX130-S for South). The fine print of the concession agreement now available on the TxDOT website shows that posted speed limits are seen as a key to attracting large volumes of traffic from free-competitor I-35.Exhibit 7 (Ex7) titled Compensation Terms provides that the concessionaire will pay TxDOT three radically different amounts of money depending on the legally enacted speed limits for the new tollroad (TR).
[...]
Exhibit 7 provides for two approaches for the state to garner a share of higher speed toll revenues: (1) higher upfront concession fees or (2) a higher share of annual toll revenues.
$25m for 75mph, $92m for 80mph, $125m for 85mph
Most rural expressways in Texas were posted for speeds up to 70mph when the concession was negotiated but in the past month have been increased to 75mph (121km/hr). So without special treatment TX130 would now be posted 75mph. At that posted speed TxDOT only gets $25m upfront fee. Ex7.A.2 reads: "In the event TxDOT authorizes, within 180 days after the Service Commencement Date, a maximum daytime posted speed limit for passenger vehicles of 80 miles per hour on the Facility, other than in populated areas or other specific locations where design does not accommodate such speed, and TxDOT affirmatively elects in writing to waive increased revenue sharing under Part B respecting such posted speed limit, Developer shall pay to TxDOT an additional $67 million." There is more refinement on the timing.
Then in Ex7.A.3 the agreement reads that if TxDOT authorizes 85mph for passenger vehicles the concessionaire must pay an extra $100m in upfront fee.
80mph is now the legal posted maximum speed on a 695km (432mi) stretch of I-10 and on 143km (89mi) of I-20 in the west of Texas so there is precedent for 80mph, but there are no highways yet with 85mph posted. In a peculiarity of the law on speed limits in Texas higher speeds are not flat illegal but "prime facie" (considered on their face) to be unsafe speeds and an offense.
Basically, in order to lure more drivers to this toll road, which skirts around Austin, the private owner Cintra (the same outfit that's been bidding on the Trans Texas Corridor) will pay more up front for the right to set a speed limit of 85 MPH.
Jose Maria Lopez de Fuentes, head of Cintra in North America told us in an interview: "This will be a very safe road built to the most modern standards and we think it can operate safely at higher speeds. At higher speeds our studies show we get significantly more traffic, but the decision is up to Texas legislators. We have structured the concession so if we attract more traffic from higher speed, we share the revenues with the state - either in a larger upfront payment or in larger year by year revenue sharing."COMMENT: There is a lot of inherent logic to this approach. If the 130 TR is to act as an toll express lanes alternative to free I-35 then speeds will play a major role in determining how much traffic the toll road attracts. However the road safety lobby are liable to go ballistic over this approach (they probably haven't discovered it yet). The safety lobby think there is some inherently 'safe' speed for different classes of roads and - we guess - will demagogue the issue of higher speeds being encouraged to earn more toll revenues and more money for TxDOT. We have to wonder whether TxDOT and the concessionaire have spokesmen capable of articulating the case for high speeds.
[...]
QUESTIONS:
Is there going to be the political will to enforce lower speeds on I-35 sufficiently to give the 130 TR the advantage intended by any legislation? And if such legislation were passed would it be sustained in the face of protests against a law designed to benefit the TR. Would it sustain a random run of newsworthy crashes on 130? Seems doubtful to us.
Note how the question of whether or not it's actually safe to allow such high speeds is not considered. I'm surprised they didn't consider the possibility of a wrongful death suit claiming that to allow such speeds is reckless and negligent. One also wonders whether enforcing a lower speed on I-35 might eventually mean reducing the current speed limit if the initial usage of the new toll road falls short of projections.
But what are the traffic and revenue prospects? Given that most traffic is local and this pike won't get much local traffic the numbers are bound to be light.The executive summary of the state's assessment of TX130 - the whole 89mi (143km) project segments 1 thru 6 - said on traffic: "Year 2020 forecasts of SH 130 traffic range from a high of 124,000 vpd within the northern, more urbanized portion of the corridor, to a low of 22,000 vpd in the southern, more rural area." Lopez told us the studies they have had commissioned suggest higher traffic than the state's older estimate. Higher than 22k apparently.
Say 25k to 30k? At 27k and assuming an average trip length of 30mi and an average toll of 20c/mi you have annual toll revenue in 2020 of $59m. They are spending about $1325m ($1300m project cost plus concession fee $25m), or 22 times gross revenue. That's below the ratios of 30 to 40 paid for the Chicago Skyway, Indiana TR and Pocahontas Parkway, and clearly there is no early profit to be had in any of these. The prices being paid are based on projections of much larger returns decades off. Whether they are discounting adequately for risk and to present value is a matter for argument. (Our gut feeling on TX130-S is they aren't discounting adequately and that traffic may well be very light, only 10k or so, for some years, but it would be nice to see some traffic and revenue studies and the assumptions they make.)
A real speed differential in favor of the TR would help a lot, but we wonder how much actual speeds are affected by posted speeds.
Well, as we know, the real speed limit on any road is 10 MPH above what's posted, so I guess the prospect of pushing 100 might be a draw for some. It might also be a deterrent. Lord knows I'd be pretty skittish about it, and I don't consider myself a slowpoke by any stretch.
Another thing to consider, especially in these times of high gas prices, is the effect of all this extra speed on one's mileage.
For most cars, the "sweet spot" on the speedometer is in the range of 40-60 mph. Cars with a higher road load will reach the sweet spot at a lower speed. Some of the main factors that determine the road load of the car are:
- Coefficient of drag. This is an indicator of how aerodynamic a car is due only to its shape. The most aerodynamic cars today have a drag coefficient that is about half that of some pickups and SUVs.
- Frontal area. This depends mostly on the size of the car. Big SUVs have more than double the frontal area of some small cars.
- Weight. This affects the amount of drag the tires put on the car. Big SUVs can weigh two to three times what the smallest cars weigh.
In general, smaller, lighter, more aerodynamic cars will get their best mileage at higher speeds. Bigger, heavier, less aerodynamic vehicles will get their best mileage at lower speeds.
Imagine what doing 85 MPH does to a semi's mileage. Since big rigs are a targeted audience for this road, has anyone considered the possibility that there's diminishing returns in a higher speed limit? I'm just asking.
Getting back to the safety issue for a minute, I'd have to say that the "road safety lobby" needs to hone its response a bit.
As for the safety questions raised by that higher speed, [Phil Russell, director of the Texas Department of Transportation's turnpike division] said the agency is working on design standards for the Trans-Texas Corridor, a proposed 4,000-mile network of toll roads, that would make them as safe at 85 mph as interstates are at 70 mph."Whatever the speed limit is, we're going to make sure our design standards can accommodate it," Russell said Monday.
Judie Stone, president of the Washington-based Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, doesn't buy it.
"I just think it's a violation of public health responsibilities on the part of the state," Stone said. "It's the first time I've ever heard of anything like that. Following on the heels of raising the speed limit to 80 on some segments of the interstates, it's very disturbing. It sounds like safety's for sale in Texas."
Some numbers might be helpful here. Sal Costello, from whom I got these links, quotes a press release that says "Nearly 40 percent of the 3,600 people killed on Texas roads in 2004 were speed-related crashes". That's great to know, but what if you want to impress people, how about telling them how much more likely they are to die in a crash at 85 than they are in one at 55 or 65? Telling me would be nice, too, since my Google muse seems to have abandoned me on this one.
So. Would you pay to be able to drive faster? If so, how fast is too fast? Leave a comment and let me know.
The defense rested today in the Andrea Yates trial after her best friend testified that "she became a zombie" after the birth of her fourth child. Next up is the rebuttal phase, which will bring the reappearance of an old friend.
On rebuttal, prosecutors have said they plan to call Dr. Park Dietz, the psychiatrist whose testimony inadvertently led to Yates' conviction being overturned.Dietz, also a Law & Order television series consultant, told the first jury that in one episode a woman was acquitted by reason of insanity after drowning her children in a tub. He said the show aired before the Yates children died, but after her conviction, those involved in the case discovered no such episode existed.
The state is also planning to present the findings of forensic psychiatrist Michael Welner.
My my my. I confess, I hadn't expected Dr. Dietz to testify again. Besides being an obvious reminder of why we're here in the first place, I'd have thought he might have burned his bridges with the Harris County DA's office. Apparently not. I can't wait to read about his cross examination.
And speaking of cross exams:
In morning testimony, despite intense questioning by prosecutor Joe Owmby, neurologist and neuropsychologist George Ringholz disputed suggestions that Yates manipulated personality tests to show she did not know right from wrong in drowning her five children.Ringholz, testifying for the defense, said that although personality tests can be manipulated, he did not believe that occurred in Yates' case.
At one point, prosecutor Owmby's rapid-fire questions about Yates' personality test results drew a loud objection from defense attorney Wendell Odom. District Judge Belinda Hill raised her voice to settle the heated exchange between the attorneys.
Ringholz testified that Yates spoke about a vision she had after the birth of her first child, Noah, in 1994.
"What she described as a feeling or presence," Ringholz said, "she described as Satan, and then hearing a voice that said take a knife and stab her son Noah."
I guess that answers my question about what the prosecution has been doing for the past week or so. We'll see how the rebuttal phase goes.
It didn't quite go as I hoped, but I can't complain.
After an exciting few weeks the MapChangers contest has come to a close. More than 9,000 people voted over the course of the contest, casting 18,500 votes. In a very close third round and after hard-fought final day of voting, Forward Together PAC is excited to declare Colorado's Bill Winter the winner of our MapChangers Grand Prize.A Fighting Dem, Bill is running in Colorado's 6th district against controversial Republican Tom Tancredo. The Winter campaign ran a spirited campaign and had tremendous success in turning out their online supporters to bring them to victory. Governor Warner congratulates all eleven of the MapChangers from the last round. The online mobilization skills those campaigns developed for the contest will be essential to their strategy come election day.
Tancredo is a reprehensible, vile racist, so any support for his opponent is all to the good. As this comment on BOR makes clear, the effort to get Governor Warner to throw two fundraisers is still ongoing, so John Courage's second place showing may still be a winner. Regardless, congratulations to Bill Winter, a worthy champion running against one of the worst that the Congressional Republicans have to offer.
Will Tom DeLay saddle up for one more electoral ride if the courts don't give him a way off the ballot? I take a look at the options at Kuff's World.
The Great Ballot Name Battle is not yet over, as Carole Keeton Strayhorn threatens to sue to overturn SOS Roger Williams' decision to disallow calling her "Grandma".
At a news conference on the front lawn of a campaign headquarters she calls Grandma's House, Strayhorn said she intends to file suit sometime this week in state District Court to have Williams' ruling struck down. When asked if she might be wasting the court's time, Strayhorn said it was Williams who is cluttering the docket."I'm not tying up the court. It's the secretary of state who incorrectly interpreted the law," Strayhorn said. "Grandma is a not a slogan. Grandma is who I am."
Strayhorn - who last appeared on the ballot in 2002 with the name Rylander, before she married Ed Strayhorn - took issue with a TV reporter who did an informal poll before the news conference and found that many people on the street did not know Strayhorn as Grandma. It would be unfair, Strayhorn said, if the multitudes on the campaign stump who do refer to her by the endearment were unable to look for that name on the ballot.
She insisted, however, that she could still win election without it.
I'm not going to waste too much time on what an embarrassing spectacle this has become. Vince has done most of the heavy lifting, while South Texas Chisme chimes in as well. From a practical perspective, I have to wonder if the litigation process could even be resolved in time for the various county clerks to start printing ballots, assuming that Strayhorn could find a judge to grant her a TRO against Williams in the first place. Of course, from a "there's no such thing as bad publicity" perspective, which I daresay has been the driver of this silliness all along, it would be just fine with Strayhorn if she gets one more chance to play the victim card. It's so much easier than actually campaigning, after all.
For whatever the reason, today my mailbox is overflowing with stuff that's going on this week. Most of this is related to various campaigns, so it's primarily of local interest. Click the More link to see what's taking place around town in the next few days.
Space Program Supporters Invited to Lunch with Nick Lampson
What: Lunch with Congressman Nick Lampson
Who: Space program supporters, workers and retirees
Where: Franca's Real Italian Restaurant
Clear Lake - 1101 NASA Road One
When: Thursday, July 13 at 11:30 am
Why: To meet and discuss space with Nick Lampson
Space workers, retirees and supporters are invited to a luncheon with Congressman Nick Lampson Thursday, July 13 at 11:30 am at Franca's Real Italian Restaurant at 1101 NASA Road One.
Lampson wants your input from attendees about perspectives on the human spaceflight program. A major space program supporter while in Congress, Lampson will speak about his plans for a more robust human space flight program.The Space Advocates for Lampson group is working with the Lampson campaign to build space program support with workers and retirees of NASA and its contractors, as well as students. Campaigning to replace Tom DeLay with Nick Lampson, the volunteer group of space supporters advocates improvements in plans for Shuttle, Space Station and exploration of the Moon and Mars.
Please RSVP to bounder77062@yahoo.com for this low cost buffet luncheon and call 281-782-2721 for more information.
ALSO, check the Space Advocates for Lampson Internet Forum at www.spaceadvocates.forumsplace.com. Read about Lampson and other space issues, and make a post or two to tell others what you're thinking about!
Harris County Tejano Democrats Officer Installation & Membership Drive
You won't want to miss this Party!Join us and bring your friends to join!
Thursday, July 13, 2006
502 Highland (Janie & Frume's Casa)
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.(if you get lost call 713-862-6121)
Hamburgers and Hot Dogs & Cash Bar
The Mark McDavid campaign has a blockwalk blitz planned for the weekend of 7/15-7/16
Saturday, 7/15/06: Spring Branch----
Meet us at the home of Democratic Precinct 444 Chair Rick Potthoff:
1814 Pine Village
(77080, between Campbell & Gessner just south of Neuens)
8:00 am, Continental Breakfast
9:00 am - 11:00 am: BlockwalkingSunday, 7/16/06: Langwood area (Oak Forest--Pct. 117)
Meet us at the home of Oscar & Louise Sweet:
6601 Granite (77092, between Hempstead & 290 off of Lang)
5:00 am, Meet & Greet with refreshments
6:00 pm - 8:00 pm; BlockwalkingIf you can't join us for the blockwalk(s), please let us know if you'd like to phone-bank before the weekend blitz. We'd be happy to get you some lists to help us call!
Please help us spread the word, as the more volunteers we get the more territory we can cover! If you can make it and/or want to help in other ways, call us at: 713/812-9368.
Shane Sklar for Congress Cookout at the New Galveston Office - 7/15
Shane Sklar's campaign for Congress will celebrate the opening of its Galveston headquarters on Saturday, July 15 with a cookout. If you're in the area that day, we hope you'll drop by for food, fellowship, and information about this exciting Congressional race. For more information or to RSVP for this event, e-mail us at info@shanesklar.com.WHO:
Shane Sklar, Democratic candidate for Congress
Families from around the 14th Congressional DistrictWHAT:
Shane Sklar for Congress CookoutWHEN:
Saturday, July 15
12 to 3 p.m.WHERE:
Shane Sklar for Congress Galveston Headquarters
4108 Broadway
Galveston, TX
Jim Henley Fundraiser and Film Screening
Featuring The Hunting of the President with special guest Susan McDougal
Thursday, July 27, 2006
7:00 PM at River Oaks Theater
Ticket Prices: Reserved $100,
Preferred $50, General $25 / $10 Students
Reserved tickets receive special seating and entry into a private reception with Susan McDougal at La Griglia following the film. For tickets visit www.henleyforcongress.com or call 713-527-0234
Forms can also be printed – please indicate that the donation is for the fundraiser and bring to Henley for Congress Headquarters at 2482 Bolsover (at the NE corner of Kelvin) or mailed to P.O. Box 980323, Houston, TX 77098
The Hunting of the President This gripping documentary chronicles the 10-year partisan campaign to destroy the political legacy of the Clintons. Susan McDougal emerges as the film’s heroine after refusing to cooperate with Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr and testify against the Clintons. As a result, she spent 22 months in prison.
New blog alert: The Caucus Blog, written by members of the Houston GLBT Political Caucus. The first entry, posted by HGLBTPC President Jenifer Pool, gives some background on the organization and its recent electoral successes. Should be a good resource, so check it out.
I saw this story in the Chron awhile back and meant to write about it but never got to it. As today is the day of the MLB All Star Game in Pittsburgh, in which I have no interest beyond that of any other exhibition game, I figure now is as good a time as any to blog about an effort to get all major league teams to retire uniform number 21 in honor of Pirates great and Latino hero Roberto Clemente.
Hispanic supporters delivered a petition with 30,000 signatures [in June] asking Major League Baseball to retire the jersey No. 21 belonging to Roberto Clemente, one of the game's greatest Latin heroes.The honor would recognize the growing status of Latin American ballplayers in the U.S. national pastime at a time when Hispanic immigrants are asserting their rights in U.S. society amid a political debate about immigration policy.
Clemente, of Puerto Rico, was a Hall of Fame outfielder for the Pittsburgh Pirates. He was revered for the way he lived - as a proud ambassador for Latin America - and how he died - in a plane crash at age 38 while delivering relief supplies to Nicaraguan earthquake victims on December 31, 1972.
Major League Baseball is considering the move but acknowledged that one issue was whether it would dilute the recognition given to the only player to have his number retired throughout baseball, Jackie Robinson.
Robinson's No. 42 was retired from all Major League teams in 1997 for the 50th anniversary of his breaking the color barrier, when he became the first black player of the modern era, joining the Brooklyn Dodgers.
"I think there's enough space for a great Latin American alongside a great African American," said Fernando Mateo, president of Hispanics Across America, who delivered the petition in cardboard boxes to the league's office in Manhattan.
"It would be the best company that Jackie Robinson could ever have," Mateo said.
[...]
Robinson's daughter Sharon Robinson opposed retiring Clemente's number, the New York Daily News reported.
"The purpose of retiring my father's number is that what he did changed all of baseball, not only for African Americans but also for Latinos, so I think that purpose has been met," she told the paper in a January interview.
Roberto Clemente was not the pioneer that Jackie Robinson was. Almost every major league team had integrated by the time he was a rookie in 1955, and as Latino Baseball notes, Latinos have been a part of MLB since 1902. Clemente was not the first breakout star among Latinos - that was Minnie Minoso, who along with Chico Carrasquel was the first Latin-born player to participate in an All Star Game. Clemente was not the first Latino to be Rookie of the Year - he didn't win that particular honor, but Luis Aparicio did, in 1956. And Clemente was not the first Latino to win the Most Valuable Player award. That was...no, I'll leave that as a trivia question. Check the extended entry for the answer. Anyone who knows this one off the top of the head is a true fan.
Having said all that, Clemente is most definitely a player who is worthy of more recognition, including at a league-wide level. His death in 1972 was as heroic as it was shocking and tragic. He's the only person to have the five-year post-career waiting period for induction into the Hall of Fame waived. He was a truly great player, and a role model for all. I'm agnostic on the question of whether or not the number 21 should be retired by all teams, but I think a nice, long, national discussion about the contributions of men like Roberto Clemente and what they brought as immigrants to America would be a fine thing to have this summer. To that end, I salute the efforts of Fernando Mateo and Hispanics Across America.
(One correction to the history laid out above by Latino Baseball: Chico Carrasquel was not the American League MVP in 1950; that honor went to Phil Rizzuto. Click the More link to see which player of Hispanic origin was the first to win an MVP award.)
The first Latino MVP was Zoilo Versalles, who won the award as a 25-year-old shortstop for the pennant-winning Minnesota Twins of 1965. Versalles, who was Cuban-born, never had another year nearly as good as that one. Clemente won his only MVP in 1966, though he finished in the top five three other times (1961, 1967, and 1971).
Here's an update on Metro's planning for the Bus Rapid Tranit (BRT) line through the East End. This meeting, which was a scoping meeting, was apparently fairly free of rancor. That's a good thing, because like all rail lines, someone will be negatively impacted.
Where Harrisburg passes though the East End's commercial heart, near Wayside, it is five lanes wide. Of the three rearrangements that Metro is considering, two require widening the street and one of these would reduce it to one vehicle lane in each direction, as on Main Street in downtown and Midtown.The third layout would fit mostly into the street's present dimensions, but transit vehicles would share the street with cars. Experience with the Main Street line, where the two are mostly separated, suggests there would be frequent collisions.
That leaves what Metro calls Option 2, with two transit tracks and four lanes of traffic. But this would increase the right-of-way from its current width of 90 feet to a maximum of 118 feet at stations with left-turn lanes.
"I've said it's going to destroy my business, and maybe destroy Harrisburg," said Lynn Woolley, president of Houston Armature Works, which makes electric motors for refineries and chemical plants. The business occupies both sides of Harrisburg for two blocks between Stiles and Burr.
Woolley said 18-wheelers need access to his plant, which has been there since 1960, but that they can't turn from a one-lane street, and a major widening will cut into his buildings.
"It's a serious problem, and there are other businesses in the same situation," he said.
Woolley said it would help if Metro would provide him access on the back side of the business by widening Texas a block to the south. "They say they're studying all the options," he said.
Other business operators, though, are enthusiastic about rapid transit on Harrisburg.
"That train isn't going to stop me from doing business," said Bob Townley, owner of C&R Auto, 5702 Harrisburg. "We work on some bobtails (trucks) and occasionally a tractor-trailer, and I understand the concern," he said.
"I'm not questioning that things are going to change. I'm questioning whether the change will be good or bad for us and the people in this neighborhood," Townley said. "Overall, I think it will be a great thing. I believe that in 20 years, this part of town is going to be like the Heights.
"We work on cars, and we're already doing a lot more lawyers and professors than we used to," he said.
How very civilized. Here's hoping the rest of the process goes that smoothly.
Meanwhile, on the Universities line, there's some concern about the eastern portion of the route going through Texas Southern University.
Some Third Ward residents who attended a public hearing on Metro's University Corridor on June 27 don't want light rail running through the Texas Southern University Campus.The possible route, part of MetroSolutions' larger plan to link routes throughout the city with bus rapid transit and light rail, goes east of Spur 527 down Wheeler Avenue and brings light rail through TSU.
"It shouldn't have even been an option," said Ed Banks, who describes himself as a community activist and said he has lived in Third Ward for 50 years. Banks said traffic disruptions have long been a concern for the TSU campus.
"Fifteen years ago, it was agreed to close Wheeler Street to through-traffic on the campus. Now Metro wants to run a rail straight through the middle of the thing. The rail is not an option that Third Ward residents are going to put up with. This is not just me talking."
I'm not familiar enough with the area to comment on this. I'll hand that off to Christof, who thinks what Metro is proposing isn't all that farfetched. Check it out.
With the prospect of Webb County being reunited in a single Congressional district, the citizens of Laredo are pondering whether they're better off bifurcated, where at least there'd two Congressfolk nominally representing their interests.
Laredo Mayor Raul Salinas believes it is good for the vibrant border city to have the help of two congressmen on issues such as border security and international trade."We just want to have a voice in Washington. We have so many problems here," Salinas said. "We have two very able congressmen that are doing a good job for the border."
Because "two are better than one," Salinas said the "ideal" solution would be for Laredo to retain two congressmen, presuming one remains based here.
"I just want a loud and proud voice of Laredo to represent us," Salinas said.
Then what he wants is Henry Cuellar. Given the political landscape, however, that may mean keeping Cuellar away from a rematch with Bonilla.
Republican political consultant Royal Masset said Bonilla should not have to worry if he is paired with Cuellar. Masset said Cuellar came close in 2002 only because Laredo resident Tony Sanchez was on the ballot in the governor's race.Masset said he believes the federal court will try to avoid pitting any incumbents against one another.
He noted the federal panel includes 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Patrick Higginbotham and U.S. District Judge John T. Ward, who were on the panel that drew congressional districts in 2001. In that instance, the judges tried to protect the incumbents.
I hate to say it, but I largely agree with Masset in his assessment of Cuellar-Bonilla, both for 2002 and potentially beyond. It's not that I think Cuellar can't take him out, it's that I think he starts out as an underdog, and he'll need to make up ground in the vast West Texas part of the district, without having much time for it if a new map is in place for November. If this were deferred till 2008, which would be wrong in my opinion, I'd feel more optimistic about Cuellar's chances in a rematch.
On the other matter, while I agree the judges will lean towards protecting the incumbents, it's not clear to me that the Democrats will be so considerate in the maps that they submit. They may very well be happy to stick all of Webb in CD23, thus handing CD28 back to someone who's likely to be better received by the caucus, and take what's probably their best shot at ousting Bonilla. I expect them to submit one such map. What'll be interesting is if more than one is like that. It'll say a lot about Cuellar's standing and clout among his colleagues.
Democratic consultant Matt Angle analyzed the redistricting possibilities for his Lone Star Project.Angle said he believes the court will change as few districts as possible.
"It is assumed that options rippling across the entire state, or far outside South Texas, will not be seriously considered by the court," Angle said.
I've touched on this before, and I still think this way. You can see the LSP's scenarios here.
It's official: You will see "Kinky" on the ballot, but not "Grandma".
Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn won't be allowed to use "Grandma" on the November ballot because it is more of a political slogan than a nickname, Secretary of State Roger Williams ruled today.Fellow independent gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman, meanwhile, will be listed as Richard "Kinky" Friedman, Williams said.
[...]
"Your letter does not articulate any facts that would counter my interpretation that the use of 'Grandma,' in the context of Carole Keeton Strayhorn's name appearing on a ballot, is a slogan and as such is prohibited by the Texas Election Code," he said in a letter to Strayhorn's attorney, Roy Minton.
Minton, in a letter to Williams last month, had said Strayhorn was widely known as "Grandma."
The secretary of state said Strayhorn never has appeared on the ballot as "Grandma" and doesn't use the name on her official letterhead.
Williams said state law requires Friedman's given name, Richard, to be listed on the ballot as well as his more commonly known nickname, "Kinky."
I'm disappointed that SOS Williams didn't take my advice for how Friedman should appear, but I'll get over it. This is the right ruling, in my opinion, and however long it took Williams to make up his mind, at least he got it correct in the end.
QR lays out a pretty clear case why Strayhorn lost her bid to be everybody's Grandma.
The Secretary of State took into account several factors in making this ruling, including:
- Ms. Strayhorn has never appeared on the ballot under the name "Grandma"
- Ms. Strayhorn's declaration of intent lists her name as Carole Keeton Strayhorn
- Ms. Strayhorn's petitions list her candidate name as Carole Keeton Strayhorn
- The only reference to "Grandma" in communication with the Secretary of State's office appears on Ms. Strayhorn's campaign literature
- The term "Grandma" is not found on any of Ms. Strayhorn's official letterhead or communication with the Secretary of State
When you put it that way, it's hard to imagine how she ever thought this would be accepted. Move along, nothing to see here.
Via Greg, a fellow named Rob Bell will be in town on Wednesday night for an interesting performance.
Mr. Bell, 35, is the pastor and founder of Mars Hill Bible Church, an independent evangelical congregation in Grandville, Mich., outside Grand Rapids. The church has a weekly attendance of 10,000 and meets in a former mall.His performance here was the first in a monthlong tour of 21 cities — joined by one roadie, a whiteboard and his wife and two sons — taking him to venues usually presenting rock bands. His 100-minute talk, billed as "Everything Is Spiritual," features no music or film clips, no sound other than his voice and the squeak of his marker, filling the board with Hebrew characters, diagrams, biblical interpretation and numbers.
He wore black pants and shirt, and spoke with the awed enthusiasm of someone describing a U2 concert, moving from a gee-whiz discussion of physics to questions of how God might move in other dimensions, like those discovered by mathematical string theorists.
"When you get to the subatomic level, everything we know about the basic makeup of the universe falls apart," he told the audience. "They use phrases like 'we don't know.' So high-end quantum physicists are starting to sound like ancient Jewish poets."
Dude. I'm trying to wrap my brain around this guy performing at Numbers. If anyone goes, by all means drop me a line and tell me about it.
One more thing:
Mr. Bell sang in a rock band while attending a Christian college in Wheaton, Ill. He then went to Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, Calif., and entered the ministry through the nondenominational Calvary Church in Grand Rapids, which is conservative both theologically and politically. Ed Dobson, the church's senior pastor, helped write the agenda for the Moral Majority and was a personal assistant to Jerry Falwell.At his own church and in his videos, Mr. Bell avoids controversial topics like same-sex marriage, abortion rights and school prayer, and in his talk here he offhandedly dismissed "any spiritual institution that says you should vote a certain way."
Explaining afterward, he said: "It's against what Jesus had in mind when it becomes about how much power we can have as a voting bloc. The way of Jesus is serving the voiceless."
Well, that's certainly refreshing. If you're free Wednesday night and this sounds like your cup of mocha latte, check it out.
It's always entertaining when a candidate gets together with a bunch of bloggers someplace where caffeine and WiFi are served. Chris Bell did so last night at the Daily Grind in the Heights, and we proceeded to have a good conversation. Progressive Texan was among the laptop brigade, and he liveblogged the event. Stace, who has a photo, and The Muse have also written about it so far.
As Progressive texan noted, the first question Bell got was from me about whether he thought Strayhorn or Friedman was the bigger threat to take away Democratic votes from him. Bell clearly believes it's Strayhorn, and while I continue to worry about Friedman's cult of personality allure, I can't argue with that approach. One thing Bell discussed in answering my question was the nature of the polling data that we have so far. As you know, I have some problems with the likely voter models that SurveyUSA is using. I can't say what Rasmussen and Zogby Interactive are doing, but their results are generally similar to those of SUSA, so my assumption is they're determining likely voters in a similar way. It's interesting that none of these three are "traditional" polling outfits. SUSA and Rasmussen use automated call technology, while Zogby is a modified online poll. I keep wondering when an outfit like Gallup will jump in. I'd really love to know how - or if - they differ from the newer style polls.
Be that as it may, we had a loose and lively chat. I recommend you read Stace's post for Bell's discussion of immigration - I found it pretty refreshing, and I daresay I wasn't the only one at the table to think so. I believe Team Bell is planning something like this for the Austin blog crowd soon, which ought to be entertaining.
Finally, on a side note, Bell also got some good reviews from the locals in recent visits to Tyler and Amarillo.
UPDATE: PDiddie weighs in.
UPDATE: Eye on Williamson wasn't there, but he has a few thoughts anyway.
MP3 for download
Today's the last day of voting for the winner of the Forward Together PAC Mapchangers. As of this writing, John Courage holds the lead, but that could change as other candidates will surely make a last minute push. As we've discussed before, the best thing you can do right now for all Texas Democratic candidates is help Courage win this contest. If you haven't voted yet, now is very much the time.
And don't forget Sen. Barbara Boxer's PAC for Change contest, in which Barbara Radnofsky is currently running second. Wouldn't it be great to get a twofer in these events? Sure it would. The deadline for this one is July 29, but don't let that stop you from voting now. Thanks!
UPDATE: Well, I'll be. John Courage and Bill Winter, the two frontunners in the Mapchangers race, have posted an open letter to Mark Warner asking him to do a fundraiser in each state. Given that Winter is running against the execrable racist Tom Tancredo, I have to say I support the idea of helping out both of these worthy candidates. Your move, Governor Warner. Thanks to Texas 21 for the catch. (You can also read this letter at BOR.)
Ron Paul got a lengthy mash note in the WaPo over the weekend. Usually, there's no such thing as bad publicity, but every once in awhile one realizes that with some politicians, less is more. For instance:
As for Social Security, "we didn't have it until 1935," Paul says. "I mean, do you read stories about how many people were laying in the streets and dying and didn't have medical treatment? . . . Prices were low and the country was productive and families took care of themselves and churches built hospitals and there was no starvation."("Where to begin with this one?" asks Michael Katz, a historian of poverty at the University of Pennsylvania who has studied charity case records from the early 20th century. "The stories just break your heart, the kind of suffering that people endured. . . . Stories of families that had literally no cash and had to kind of beg to get the most minimal forms of food, who lived in tiny, little rooms that were ill-heated and ill-ventilated, who were sick all the time, who had meager clothing . . .")
I can only presume that the Great Depression never occurred in whatever universe Paul inhabits. Maybe he can write the history textbooks for the Free State Project some day.
In Texas's 14th District, which runs along the northern Gulf Coast and includes the cities of Galveston and Victoria, Paul is either a beloved figure or a mystifying one. He calls himself the "taxpayers' best friend," and this has led him to controversial stands, such as voting against federal farming subsidies despite the wide swaths of agricultural land in his district. Because he won't cooperate with fellow Republicans in the House unless a bill is in line with his principles, some constituents feel he puts his libertarian agenda over the district's needs."He's certainly the taxpayer's friend if the taxpayer doesn't want to get anything done," says John W. Hancock Jr., a rice farmer and banker in El Campo. "All he does is go to Washington and write articles and vote no."
You know what the answer to that is, right?
Among the many people who showed up to the Fort Bend get together on Friday night was Sherrie Matula, who's running for HD129 over in the Clear Lake area. Last Thursday, she organized a conference call for us bloggers, on which fellow candidates Diane Trautman, Ellen Cohen, and Chad Khan also participated. Perry and The Muse have already recapped what we talked about, so I won't cover the same ground.
What I will say is that Matula is an extremely knowledgeable candidate on all things education, because that's her background. She's been a teacher, a school board member, an education lobbyist, and more. She's really done her homework on the legislation that was passed in the recent special session and how it will impact local schools. One of the underreported aspects of the new legislation was how much more decisionmaking power was given to the State Board of Education Commissioner, which leads one to wonder what there is for local school boards to do any more.
I've got an interview with Matula high on my to-do list for the near future (and Trautman and Khan and as many of them others as I can get to; I've already interviewed Cohen), so I'll skip the details for now. Please understand that when I talk about how fired up a lot of Democrats are for this year's election, it's as much about the high quality of candidates like these four as it is about any top tier race. There's no better reason to get involved in politics than supporting a great person you really believe in. People like Sherrie Matula, Diane Trautman, Ellen Cohen, and Chad Khan make that easy to do.
UPDATE: More from Bay Area Houston.
Pardon me for saying so, but this is a complete no-brainer.
Houston's candidates and political action committees aren't required to file campaign-finance disclosures electronically, making the information more difficult to access and analyze, open-government advocates say.[...]
In Houston, paper disclosure reports can be read, or copied for a fee, at the City Hall Annex. Scanned copies, which lack the search and sort capabilities of electronic databases, appear on the city secretary's Web site, www.houstontx.gov/citysec/index.html.
But campaign treasurers often submit hundreds of pages during an election cycle, some containing handwritten information - a system that complicates efforts to aggregate totals by individuals or industries.
[...]
Campaigns for People proposed several changes in Houston's system, including electronic filing of campaign-finance reports, as already is required of state and federal candidates.
Responding to Houston Chronicle inquiries, Mayor Bill White said last week that he supports that recommendation, which he said ought to happen "sooner rather than later."
"The more things we make accessible and usable, the better," he said. "The more accountability and transparency for campaign contributions, I think they're less subject to abuse."
Most City Council members and City Controller Annise Parker also support the idea.
Councilwoman Anne Clutterbuck, who was elected to her first term last year, said an electronic process would make the disclosure system easier for candidates and the public.
"I was sort of stunned by how manual the city's process is," she said.
White said his staff will gather input from candidates and officeholders about how best to make the switch.
He voiced reservations about imposing computer requirements on poorly funded candidates without access to computers. He suggested the city might provide exemptions for such candidates, as the state does.
I have a hard time imagining any serious candidate not having access to a computer, but I suppose anyone who's that underfunded won't have much in the way of contributions to report anyway, so it's sort of a self-solving problem.
I can't think of a good argument against this. The fact that every elected official in Houston's city government except for Addie Wiseman and Pam Holm, who declined to give an answer, favors this says a lot. If you want to put in an exception for donations of less than, say $100, that's fine by me. Beyond that, the more information that the voters have, the better. Let's make this happen ASAP.
Vince was the first to pick up on the story that the the state's Sunset Advisory Committee had recommended that the Office of State and Federal Relations be shut down. It's since been picked up by the newspapers.
The state agency that is paying two lobbyists with ties to indicted Washington operative Jack Abramoff and embattled former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay should be abolished and have its duties turned over to the governor's office, the commission that evaluates the effectiveness of state government operations said Thursday.The Office of State-Federal Relations, which is charged with watching out for Texas interests in Washington, came under fire from Democrats this year amid reports that Todd Boulanger and Drew Maloney were each being paid $180,000 by the state.
Maloney is a former chief of staff to DeLay, who has resigned from Congress and is under felony indictment in Texas in connection with 2002 political fundraising. Boulanger has worked in some of the same lobbying firms as Abramoff, who has pleaded guilty to federal charges of conspiracy, mail fraud and tax evasion and agreed to testify about members of Congress who are suspected of corruption.
The state's Sunset Advisory Commission said in its report that the contract with the two lobbyists should be more closely supervised. A spokeswoman for Gov. Rick Perry, who backed the 2003 initiative that turned much of the state-federal relations office over to private contractors, said the governor backs the recommendations.
I've written about the OFSR and Drew Maloney several times before, but to save you some clicking, Josh Marshall has a pretty good summary of the whole thing. Well, he doesn't go into how Carole Strayhorn eventually injected herself into this and suspended some payments by the state to the lobbying firms but not all of them - you'll have to click on my first two links for that.
As I read through the recent coverage of the Andrea Yates trial, I have to ask something: Is the prosecution not bothering to cross-examine any of these defense witnesses, or has there just been nothing to come out of the cross examinations that the Chron reporters deem to be newsworthy? Maybe they're just asking perfucntory questions and not really casting any doubt on the direct testimony, as the defense did with the woman who was once Yates' cellmate. I don't know, I can't tell - there's just no mention of any questions being asked by the prosecutors. It's a little strange.
I wish I could remember how the first trial went - I was in my early days as a blogger, but didn't follow the story much, so I've got no recall of it. I just feel like the DA isn't quite going after her as aggressively this time, what with their case in chief being so short, and with the lack of anything revelatory on cross. Maybe that's the result of not having the death penalty on the table, I don't know. I may have to do a little Chron archive searching to see how Trial 2.0 compares to the original. If you remember better or have any thoughts on this, please leave a comment.
One new item to the defense case is the testimony of staffers at the Devereux Texas Treatment Network care facility in League City, where Yates was a patient after the birth of Mary, her fifth child.
During her stays at Devereux, Yates expressed a need to return home so she could tend to her children, but could not make eye contact with them when they came to visit her at the hospital, jurors learned.During one family visit, Yates appeared stiff and unresponsive when her then-husband, Russell Yates, announced it was "time" for her to hold their infant daughter, said [nurse Sherry] Steinocher, a former Devereux employee now working in the Alvin school district.
Steinocher described cupping the unresponsive mother's hands and moving them so bystanders could place the baby in her arms. Despite the staff's concerns, Russell Yates insisted his wife would not drop the baby, Steinocher said.
"She was sitting with her hands in her lap. She wouldn't respond to the baby ... (There was) nothing, no look (on her face). She never gave the baby any eye contact. There was nothing," Steinocher said Friday.
Bystanders propped up a baby bottle with hopes of interesting Yates in feeding her daughter, but "we just gave up because we couldn't get Mrs. Yates to respond," Steinocher said.
[...]
Steinocher also revealed Devereux administrators held staff meetings in the days following the Yates' children's deaths. While Steinocher was not allowed to tell the jury any details about those meetings, Parnham later confirmed that Devereux staffers were told they had better keep quiet about the Yates case.
Steinocher, in fact, was in such emotional turmoil that she begged defense attorneys not to subpoena her for Yates' new trial, Parnham said. The nurse just met with Yates' attorneys for the first time three weeks ago.
She recalled that Yates was on "suicide watch" while at Devereux and rarely spoke, even when asked specific questions.
"Mrs. Yates was afraid to eat. She clenched her teeth so hard that her jaws would pop. She had a look of terror in her eyes as the fork or spoon came toward her," Steinocher said.
Another former Devereux employee testifying for the first time Friday - licensed clinical social worker Barbara Roberts - said she concluded Yates could not care for her children by herself.
"I didn't believe she was able to function and take care of all those needs on her own. She needed some kind of help," Roberts told the jury.
Roberts described Yates as "the sickest person I've ever seen in a mental hospital," but said the severely depressed woman would not discuss her thoughts.
None of this directly addresses the question of whether or not Yates knew at the time she killed her children that her conduct was wrong, as the state insanity law requires, but it definitely contributes to the overall picture of a woman who was terribly ill and just not fully functional. I expect the defense is betting that the jury will be forced to conclude that Yates was so out of touch with reality that she had to have been legally insane. Based on what I've read so far, it's easy to see how they might arrive at such a conclusion.
On a side note, apparently the defense is holding back Rusty Yates for the rebuttal phase of the trial. Maybe it's in this phase that the prosecutors will really go after the defense's story. We'll see.
Nick Lampson has Olivia's official endorsement.
What more could you possibly need to know?
Oh, and don't forget to check out Lampson's ads, now visible on YouTube. Greg has the embedded links.
Olivia and I drove down to Fort Bend last night where we hung out with some fellow Democrats and enjoyed a nice not-too-hot summer evening. That particular Beck's Prime is right on a waterfront, and there were ducks and turtles to look at, which needless to say was of great interest to Olivia. I missed some of the speechifying because of that, but these are the sacrifices one makes as a parent
What was of great interest to the rest of us was the question of what Tom DeLay might be up to now that Judge Sparks has ruled he either must appear on the November ballot for CD22 or withdraw and cede the race to Nick Lampson. DeLay was evasive on this point last night at a different celebration in FBC.
Former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay told a friendly crowd Friday that Democrats seeking to force him onto the November ballot "may get exactly what they want."After savoring a standing ovation, he quickly said the comment was not an announcement that he will seek the office he vacated last month.
[...]
"The last thing in the world Tom DeLay wants is to try and win this race and lose. That's why he quit the first time," said Southern Methodist University political scientist Cal Jillson.
"I do not think he will come back and make a significant effort to hold the seat."
Your guess is as good as anyone's, dude. It won't exactly be difficult to gin up some devastating ads about Tom "Virginia Is For Ballot Evaders" DeLay and his hasty attempted retreat out of town. But then everything DeLay has done since his sudden resignation announcement has defied explanation, so who knows what he might do?
It really is weird. First, DeLay makes a big point about collecting petition signatures for his primary ballot spot, which he says shows the depth and breadth of support he has in CD22. Then a week or two later he's phoning then-FBGOP Chair Eric Thode to inquire about procedures in the event he dropped off the ballot. At the time of his resignation announcement, there was much speculation that he wanted to have control over who his successor would be, but there's been absolutely zero indication he's taken any interest in that process, and the one candidate who could reasonably have been considered his heir apparent has made a consistent fool of himself during the Gang of Four proceedings. He insists he's a resident of Virginia, which is why he's ineligible and can be replaced instead of withdrawing, then makes no effort to actually pull up roots in Sugar Land, testifies that he can't say where he'll be on Election Day even though that's the heart of the Democrats' case, and refers to the Sugar Land home where his wife still lives as "my house" when a reporter asks for a reaction post-ruling. At the risk of dime-store psychoanalyzing, it's like he just doesn't care any more about what happens.
Well, that's not entirely true. He still clealy cares a lot about himself.
On Friday, DeLay received a warm welcome from several hundred people at the Sugar Land Marriott for a previously scheduled tribute, co-sponsored by the Greater Houston Partnership and the Fort Bend Chamber of Commerce.They lauded him for his business-friendly voting record and for bringing what they say was $1.3 billion worth of economic impact to the Houston region in the last year.
An ice sculpture with DeLay's name carved in the middle greeted guests as they walked into the hotel ballroom, where a giant American flag hung behind the podium. Centerpieces included DeLay bobbleheads. And there was a "gift table" of presents for the former congressman, his wife, Christine, and daughter, Danielle Ferro.
How much do you think those DeLay bobbleheads will fetch on eBay? I'd pay five bucks for one.
DeLay was typically feisty, criticizing the federal judiciary in general and Sparks' ruling in particular. He referred to the court's finding that the U.S. Constitution only requires a House candidate to "inhabit" the state he seeks to represent on Election Day. Republicans asserted that DeLay was ineligible and could be replaced on the ballot because he established residence in Virginia."For this guy to say he can't tell where I'm going to be on Election Day, and that I am forced to be on the ballot, well, they may get exactly what they want," DeLay said. "(Sparks) virtually declared Texas election law unconstitutional. Only in this country can the federal judiciary force someone to run for office."
Actually, you were the one who said you couldn't be sure where you'd be on Election Day. It's in your testimony. Judge Sparks just took your word for it.
He said he will await the court appeal before deciding what to do, but said he's ready for battle in whatever forum."I always have the fight in me," he said. "I'm not quitting, I'm not stopping the fight for the conservative cause. I'm just finding a different arena to fight in. I could be the Democrats' worst nightmare outside of Congress."
That's nice, because right now, you're the Republicans' worst nightmare. You couldn't even quit right, and they're facing consequences they never expected as a result.
Jillson agrees there may be some sympathy for DeLay but also sees "a level of disgust that he didn't know what he was doing" in plotting his departure from Congress."He did it in a way that showed he had not mastered the rules, which is not typical Tom DeLay," Jillson said. "He either misunderstood them or chose to mischaracterize them and hope no one else understood them."
The latter is wholly consistent with everything DeLay has ever done. Remember, this is the man who tried to claim that paying for pollsters counted as "administrative overhead" for a campaign. What more should you expect from him?
Well, there is one thing you should expect from DeLay. Have I mentioned naked self-interest? Yes, I think I have. But this time it's Jesse mentioning it, so that's okay.
An additional impetus for putting off the resignation until now was suggested by John Feehery, a former aide to DeLay and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.). "He needed to raise money for the defense fund. That was the bottom line," Feehery said. "He wanted to make sure he could take care of himself in the court of law." Under federal campaign rules, any reelection money a lawmaker raises can be used to pay legal fees stemming from official duties.
Wonder how much of those campaign funds he has left now, after three more months of paying lawyer bills. That June 30 FEC statement ought to be interesting.
Finally, on a side note, it may be time to bone up on Ohio's ballot withdrawal laws. You can never be too careful these days.
Nice article in the Press on the crappy database that DPS provides to the public for criminal background checks. Executive summary: Since counties are responsible for providing their data to the DPS and most of them are extremely laggard about it, lots of arrests and convictions are not there. There's also a lot of bad information, especially in cases of deferred adjudication. And much of this crappy data gets dispersed into commercial background check services, where fixing errors is next to impossible.
Two items of interest. One, Scott Henson gets some good quotage:
"The database is corrupt and a piece of garbage," says Scott Henson, a political consultant in Austin. "The thing has just turned into its own animal."[...]
"People need to be able to get jobs at some point," says Scott Henson, whose blog, Grits for Breakfast, deals exclusively with the Texas criminal justice system. "Would you prefer they robbed your house?"
Henson thinks far too many jobs are restricted based on criminal history. He's concerned about a 2006 report from the State Auditor's Office that looked at a sample of agencies and found that 26 percent of them had given access to folks who weren't allowed to look at the DPS's secure site.
"It's one thing to run a check and say, 'Has someone been convicted?' " he says. "What this database does is say, 'Have you been arrested?' "
You can get arrested for just about anything. Being found guilty is a whole other matter, and for this reason the state restricts those who can look at arrest records. Unauthorized access only increases the chance of folks being passed over based on their backgrounds, says Henson.
"People's lives are on the line," he says, "and decisions about whether they can find employment and whether they can access services are based on these databases that are completely out of control and that have grown both in their size and in the types of uses for them beyond what anyone envisioned when they were first created."
And everybody's favorite data-losing credit check company makes an appearance:
Kenneth Schustereit knows all about being denied employment because of a background check.Thirty-two years ago, he got busted picking up what he thought was scrap metal from a parking lot in Victoria. He had hoped to make nine bucks from the sale of the scrap but ended up getting charged with felony theft. The charge was later dropped to a misdemeanor and he spent 51 days in jail the summer before his senior year.
Life went on. Schustereit joined the Army National Guard and the Army Reserve. He became an electrician. He got involved in local politics. But when he applied for a job at The Home Depot in 2001, he was told he couldn't be hired on account of what was on his background.
ChoicePoint, an Atlanta-based data company, had reported his misdemeanor as a felony and told The Home Depot he'd served seven years in prison. ChoicePoint says it got the bad data from the Texas DPS; the department admits it had Schustereit's conviction misclassified, but "the seven-year prison stint was not of our doing," says Lesko. "It is not reflected anywhere in our records."
By the time Schustereit got ahold of his original disposition, The Home Depot had already found someone else for the job.
"I've got two honorable discharges and a service citation for serving my country," says Schustereit, "and they won't let me sell wire nuts to the public at Home Depot." He says he fell into a depression after the incident, further compounded by a thyroid problem that went untreated because of a lack of insurance. "It's just been very hard on me."
Over the past three years, the DPS reports more than a quarter-million dollars in revenue from the sale of criminal histories to third-party vendors such as ChoicePoint. The DPS knows these records are incomplete, but it passes them along anyway. These data are then mixed with records from other sources, often being grouped solely on the basis of a name rather than a fingerprint match, and third-party vendors sell the information to employers and landlords, promising a more thorough check than the competition.
So there you have it. Be sure you never get wrongly arrested for anything if you like being able to get a job or rent an apartment. Sort of adds a little extra urgency to the plight of those kids in Round Rock and Sugar Land, doesn't it?
UPDATE: Scott comments, and notes that this story had its genesis in an earlier posting of his. Another example of blogs driving original reporting, for those of you keeping score at home.
Kiss more of those curfew violations goodbye.
A Municipal Court judge has dismissed 47 curfew violation cases against students who walked out of class in March to protest federal immigration legislation.Twenty-six of the cases were dismissed Wednesday and three others Thursday. The cases were dismissed because prosecutors said there was not enough evidence to prove that the students had violated the city's daytime curfew.
Police issued the Class C misdemeanor citations to 204 students who walked out of class to protest on March 31. Cases against 52 students are pending, and the first case is set for trial on July 21.
Round Rock's curfew states that anyone under 17 must be in school between 9 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. Exercising First Amendment rights can be used as a defense in court.
When last we heard of this situation, the first case for trial was scheduled for yesterday. I presume it was among those that got dismissed, since we're now waiting until June 21 for a trial. Will any of these cases ever see a jury? Stay tuned and find out. More background is here. Thanks to Eye on Williamson for the catch.
I can't blame Republican officials for being upset with the ruling from Judge Sparks yesterday, but some of them are in need of a serious reality check. Look at what is being said by some of them:
Republican lawyer James Bopp Jr. described Sparks' ruling as a disaster for democracy. Bopp said it will cause election "chaos" if political parties have to wait until Election Day to determine whether a candidate is eligible to run."That would mean frivolous candidates, anybody could get on the federal ballot and then we just sort it out after the election, which would make Bush v. Gore look like a summer picnic," Bopp said, referring to the disputed 2000 presidential election.
[State GOP Chair Tina] Benkiser said the voters of the 22nd District deserve to have a "choice of candidates" on the ballot who are ready to serve them in Congress. She said the Democrats filed the lawsuit as part of a "desperate plan" to help Lampson win and to raise money from "Hollywood liberals."
"Democrats have had to turn to election by litigation because they know that as long as there is a Republican on the ballot in CD 22, Republicans will keep the congressional seat," she said in a statement.
And from the Galveston News:
Robin Armstrong, a Dickinson resident and vice chairman of the Texas Republican Party, chastised Democrats for filing the lawsuit in the first place."Democrats are trying to win an election through litigation," he said. "It would be nice to have a candidate on the ballot and to have an election.
"The Democrats have not won elections in Texas so they are trying to win through the court system."
And let's not forget Fort Bend County GOP Chair Gary Gillen yesterday:
"I think it's a sad day for the voters of the 22nd district of Texas," said Gary Gillen, the chairman of the Republican Party of Fort Bend County, which is one of the four counties in that district. "I think [the ruling] denies the voters the opportunity to select the candidate they want to vote for."
What all of this conveniently forgets is that the voters of the 22nd district already had an opportunity to select their preferred Republican candidate. They picked Tom DeLay, with 62% of the vote, in March. All Judge Sparks has done is say that this result should be respected. What exactly is the problem with that?
It's really rich to see Gary Gillen complain about disenfranchising anyone. He's busy pushing his candidate in the Gang of Four selection process, and back in April when a special election to fill the remainder of DeLay's term was being pushed by Nick Lampson, Gillen called the idea "a circus because a special election is open to everyone." That's some kind of respect for the wishes of the voters you've got there, Gary. Same for James Bopp, who's quaking with fear over the prospect of "frivolous candidates". Does that mean you'd oppose any effort to redraw CD22 as part of the SCOTUS-ordered fix to CD23, which would allow DeLay to drop off with no fuss, James? If so, please state that for the record.
It's simple, folks. The person who has done the most, really, all, to make a mockery of the electoral process is Tom DeLay. The Chron's editorial sums it up perfectly.
Judge Sparks' ruling is also well-grounded in the law and upholds good public policy. DeLay waged a vigorous primary campaign, crushing three Republican challengers. If he was not committed to the race, he should have allowed voters to make another choice.This case was decided on a constitutional question: Was DeLay ineligible to run for Congress because he had moved his official residence to Virginia? The judge said no. He noted that DeLay's wife still lives in the couple's Sugar Land home and that DeLay testified he had moved no personal effects from his old residence to his new residence. Nothing, in other words, had changed.
In fact, a Chronicle reporter found DeLay at home in Sugar Land Thursday. DeLay said he didn't grant interviews "at my house."
Apart from the residency requirements of the U.S. Constitution, Texas has a good law that prevents parties from pressuring weak primary winners to withdraw in favor of a stronger candidate. If parties could do that, there would be little point in troubling the voters with primary elections.
DeLay could have chosen not to run again in the primary. (You may recall there were reports way back when he first announced his resignation that he planned to leave Congress before the primary took place, which was later supplemented by a story in Texas Monthly that the Dems cited in their suit.) He could have chosen to stand his ground and fight against Nick Lampson, even though there was a good chance he'd lose. Hell, he could have acted like someone who really was moving out of state - like, say, putting his house in Sugar Land on the market. Any of these things would or at least might have prevented the fix that the GOP now finds itself in. But DeLay had neither the guts nor the integrity to do any of them. The resulting mess is entirely of his own making. You want to be mad about the voters getting screwed, aim that anger at the guy who lubed them up: Tom DeLay.
"We're not going to stop campaigning because Republicans can't get their act together," said Lampson campaign manger Mike Malaise. "Tom DeLay is their curse, not ours. The people of this district have been put in this position because Tom DeLay has tried to dupe and evade them all."
Damn straight.
Enough of this. On other matters, Mark looks at the makeup of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which will surely get this case next, and Greg has some YouTube video of Lampson campaign ads. Finally, there's still time to plan a trip to Fort Bend to celebrate the great cosmic karma of this case. I'll see you there tonight.
I don't know what will happen in CD22 now, but I will say this: Tom DeLay sure doesn't sound like he wants to run again.
If the Republicans lose on appeal, DeLay will have to decide whether to campaign for an office from which he already has resigned.DeLay, dressed in shorts and a baseball cap, answered the door at his Sugar Land house this afternoon, but declined to talk with a Chronicle reporter.
"I don't do this (interviews). Not at my house," he said as he closed the door. "Goodbye."
Earlier in the day, his daughter, Dani DeLay Ferro, issued a statement on his behalf.
"Tom DeLay looks forward to the correct decision being rendered by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. As a resident of Virginia, he cannot lawfully be on the ballot in November. It is unfortunate that the voters of the 22nd District of Texas are the ones who bear the brunt of Judge Sparks' ill-advised decision, but it is highly likely that it will be overturned and the voters will have a Texas 22 Republican on the ballot who will defeat Nick Lampson," she said.
DeLay et fille aren't the only ones who want to move on at this point. Which leads to the question: What happens if the Republicans lose the appeals, and DeLy decides to stay retired? It's too late to recruit someone to run as an independent - by law, that ship sailed in May. Maybe someone should have lit a fire under Steve Stockman, but that's water under the bridge now. I suppose the GOP could line up behind the Libertarian Bob Smither, though I suspect that would rub the rank and file the wrong way; it also might send a bad message for other campaigns - if it's okay to vote for one Libertarian, after all, why not more of them?
Which leaves one more possibility - a write-in candidacy. Can't say it's a good option - frankly, given the effort it would take to educate people how to vote for a write-in, I'd be surprised if such a candidate could get as much as 20% of the vote - but at least you can be sure he or she is a real Republican. The deadline for getting a write-in sanctioned is ten weeks before Election Day:
§ 146.025. FILING PERIOD. (a) A declaration of write-in candidacy must be filed not later than 5 p.m. of the 70th day before general election day, except as otherwise provided by this code. A declaration may not be filed earlier than the 30th day before the date of the regular filing deadline.
By my calculation, that's August 29. There's a petition requirement, which should be no problem, but that deadline will start to encroach as the appeals process proceeds. Someone is going to have to make a decision sooner rather than later. Vince has more on this as well as some other speculation, and a report on what the GOP is doing now.
Okay, there is one more scenario to consider. Paul Burka raises an interesting question:
What happens if, when the parties to the redistricting suit submit their maps to the three-judge panel next Friday, Attorney General Greg Abbott changes the boundaries of Tom DeLay's district? Would that force the panel to order new elections in the Twenty-Second, thereby rendering Judge Sparks's decision inoperative and allowing the Republican party to replace him on the ballot after all?
I should note that Greg in TX22 raised this same point in the comments here last week. He was joking, but I'd have to say that it sounds a lot less facetious now. My best guess is that the three-judge panel will be very reluctant to accept a map that doesn't take a minimalist approach to fixing CD23, so it would be more than a little risky for the GOP to only submit maps that altered CD22, which is far enough away from the 23rd that it realistically can't be considered necessary to be changed. Frankly, I think the court would reasonably conclude that making such a change would be a function for the Lege, not them. I'd love to see Rick Perry argue against that.
Meanwhile, via Political Wire, here's a story in The Hill that contains a priceless quote:
"I think it's a sad day for the voters of the 22nd district of Texas," said Gary Gillen, the chairman of the Republican Party of Fort Bend County, which is one of the four counties in that district. "I think [the ruling] denies the voters the opportunity to select the candidate they want to vote for."
Which voters is Gillen talking about? Because, as we've covered in exhaustive detail here, the selection process involves four people, selected from a pool of about 100 precinct chairs. Those are the only voters with a say in this process. Indeed, one could argue that the candidate the voters want to vote for is Tom DeLay, since he won the contested GOP primary in March. So how, exactly, does this decision deny anything to the voters? Unless of course DeLay chooses to formally withdraw, in which case I'd agree that the ballot would be limited. Given this, what's the problem?
"It's just not fair for Republicans," Gillen said. "All the time we're working through this process, [the Democrats] are out campaigning."
Oh, please. If you've got a problem, take it up with DeLay. You wouldn't be in this position if he hadn't tried to game the system. All the Democrats have done is ensure that the rules are being enforced. If DeLay were capable of following rules, you'd have had a candidate all along. So spare me the crocodile tears.
Something I want to point out from the Sparks decision, from page 14: He says the court must consider "whether the plaintiff will be irreparably harmed if the injunction does not issue" as part of its ruling. As he later says that the plaintiff (i.e., the Texas Democratic Party) did demonstrate an "irreparable injury", I have to wonder what that actually is. I presume this comes down to the question of fundraising and turnout, and since I criticized the Dems for bringing those things up, I feel I should acknowledge the role I believe they must have played in the outcome.
Some more reactions, from the Public Campaign Action Fund, and from the Texas Democratic Party:
This is not partisan victory, but a victory for the rule of law. This case was about protecting the electoral process and preserving the U.S. Constitution, and we are extremely pleased with Judge Sparks’s ruling.Today’s ruling confirmed what we have believed all along - that this attempt by the Republican Party to replace Tom DeLay on the ballot is at best a manipulation of election law and most importantly, a sham attempt to circumvent the primary process and ignore voters in the 22nd Congressional District. We felt it was important for somebody to stand up and fight against the Republican scheme to hand-pick the candidate of their choice and subvert the most fundamental aspect of popular democracy - the right of voters to pick their representatives.
Finally, CapInside reports on another race in which the Republicans might be looking to swap out one candidate for another. This one's a State House seat, so Judge Sparks' ruling would not be relevant. Click the More link to read the relevant bits.
I'll have more of today's news links later. I drafted this last night, because this is going to be a time-consuming story, and I knew if I'd waited till today I'd never get to everything.
Democrats in the Austin area contend that there's a move afoot among local Republicans to remove high-tech executive Ben Bentzin from the general election ballot in favor of a candidate who might have a better chance of unseating Democratic State Rep. Donna Howard in House District 48. Howard surprised partisans on both sides of the aisle when she came close to knocking out Bentzin with 49.5 percent of the first round vote in a special election in January before reclaiming the seat for Democrats with 58 percent support in a February runoff. Bentzin, a wealthy former Dell Computer executive who'd been a big supporter of the arts, had been a heavy favorite initially as the candidate backed by GOP power brokers with Governor Rick Perry's endorsement and active support.Despite the disappointing finish in the special election, Bentzin was given a second shot at Howard in the general election after running unopposed in the Republican primary. Since the special election, however, there have been few if any signs that Bentzin is actively campaigning for a fall rematch with Howard. The most recent postings on his web site, for example, are news clips that were published before the special election runoff vote almost five months ago.
Democrats initially speculated that the GOP would try to replace Bentzin in the HD 48 race with Gail King, who's worked in the banking industry and served on the Eanes School Board in the Westlake area of Austin for the past three years. More recently, however, the speculation about a possible replacement candidate in HD 48 has turned to Pamela Waggoner, a Leander school trustee and former PTA president who runs a family-owned insurance business. Democrats theorize that the GOP would prefer to have a general election challenger with experience as an educator to help neutralize Howard's background as a former Eanes School Board member herself.
If Republicans do try to replace Bentzin on the November ballot, the opinion that Sparks' issued in the DeLay case may not preclude them from doing so. Sparks ruled that Texas Republican Chairwoman Tina Benkiser did not have the authority to declare DeLay ineligible to seek re-election in November based on the grounds that he moved to Virginia in April before resigning from Congress last month.
[...]
[Sparks'] opinion suggests that the argument that Benkiser and the state party have used to support the decision to declare DeLay ineligible would be more valid in a Texas Senate or House race to which a state constitutional one-year residency requirement applies.
Looks like John Courage is doing pretty well in the Mapchangers voting - in fact, he's leading the field. Voting runs through July 10, so if you haven't cast your vote for Courage, there's still time. Remember, voting for Courage is the strategy endorsed by fellow Mapchanger finalist Chris Bell, so get out there and vote.
And when you're done with that, head over to Sen. Barbara Boxer's PAC for Change and cast a vote for Barbara Radnofsky. Texas has been a big donor state for Democratic candidates. It's high time we started getting some money flowing into our borders. This one runs through July 21, so you've got time, but there's always no time like right now.
Interesting article on what does and does not attract people to move to Houston.
As college graduates young enough to be open to new experiences in new places, they are part of a group that's being aggressively courted by employers in Houston and other major cities."These people are more mobile. They take more risks. They have less to lose," said Carol Coletta, the president of CEOs for Cities, a national coalition of urban leaders that commissioned a recent survey to gauge the attitudes and preferences of these coveted workers.
As Houston jockeys for position in this intensifying competition, the new survey suggests that it will have to do more than counter the negative perceptions of Davis and others. It will have to find a way to make a strong impression at all.
Houston appears neither among the 20 cities young college-educated workers would most likely consider as a home, nor among the 20 where they'd least like to live. New York and Los Angeles, by contrast, appear high on both lists, indicating people have strong opinions about the nation's two largest cities.
"Houston is invisible," said Stephen Klineberg, the Rice University sociology professor who directs the annual Houston Area Survey of local attitudes and demographic traits. "People don't know about Houston. They don't think of Houston."
Nationally, the survey's most striking finding was that 64 percent of college-educated people ages 25 to 34 said they would first decide where they wanted to live, then look for a job in that area. This is a reversal from previous generations that tended to seek the best job they could find and considered location secondary.
"Every economic development strategy over the last 30 years has been built on the idea that if we attract jobs, we attract people," Coletta said.
The survey reinforces an idea that Houston's business and political leaders have embraced in recent years: In a knowledge-based economy, the cities that thrive will be those that offer the lifestyle qualities that are important to young, well-educated workers.
There's nothing terribly revolutionary about that idea. Very few people nowadays find employment with a company that they can reasonably expect - or want - to last for their working lifetime. Once the mindset shifted to the concept of multiple jobs, even careers, potentially in multiple locations, then why not think about where you want to be first, and where you want to work second? You're probably only going to have that job you take for a few years anyway, so why not make sure it's someplace you'll want to be when the time comes to start looking again?
Trae Stanley, 25, didn't have quite such a harsh view of Houston when his girlfriend, Sarah Hueske, landed a teaching job in the Alief school system and the couple decided to move here from Austin. But he did have reservations."I was less than enthusiastic," said Stanley, a University of Texas graduate and aspiring filmmaker. "The geography of the city was a concern. I was worried about having to drive a lot."
On the other hand, Stanley said, he was attracted by Houston's arts scene and by the small-town ambience of older neighborhoods such as Montrose, where the couple have moved.
"I decided to give it a shot," Stanley said.
This is an underrated aspect of Houston, in my opinion. There's quite a few neighborhoods that have that feel, and they're all over the place, which means that you have a decent shot at finding one that's near where you work. I daresay most people would have no idea about this until they come here and do a little research.
And on a more practical note:
One quality that Houston leaders often emphasize in pitching the city is its low housing prices.This was an important consideration for Davis and Milios, who want to save money to buy a house.
"There was no way for us to afford the house we were renting" in Los Angeles, said Milios, who has worked as a journalist and as communications director for the Los Angeles school board president. "It would have cost us $750,000 to $1 million."
Houston isn't as cheap as it used to be, but given the nationwide housing boom, it's still relatively very reasonable. I don't really expect that to change any time soon.
UPDATE: John has some good thoughts on this.
It almost seems anti-climactic with all the bigger news going on this week, but I've got part two of my tour of CD23 up at Kuff's World (part one is here). I've still got some more material to work through, so please take a look and let me know what you think.
The subject of what happens to the allegedly ill-gotten gains Ken Lay owned now that he's dead was raised yesterday as the news of his death came out. Today, the Chron takes a closer look.
When the criminal case is vacated, so too are the prosecutor's efforts to seize assets from Lay. The government could file motions to seize assets through a civil proceeding, however. That move by the government seems likely, said David Smith, a forfeiture expert with English & Smith in Alexandria, Va., and former deputy chief of the asset forfeiture division of the U.S. Department of Justice."I don't see any way the government can get around this on the criminal side," Smith said.
The two main civil cases, a massive shareholder suit that was granted class-action status on Wednesday and the suit brought by former Enron employees can continue to seek damages, but the estate of Ken Lay will take the place of the man as a defendant.
It's not clear what will happen with the civil suits however.
When former Enron executive Cliff Baxter killed himself in early 2002, attorneys representing the shareholders decided to drop his estate from the case.
Attorneys for the shareholders could not be reached for comment Wednesday
Robin Harrison, an attorney representing the former Enron employees, said he had hoped to begin discussing a possible settlement with Lay and co-defendant Jeff Skilling, Enron's former CEO, later this summer because they were the only two parties left who had not either been dismissed or reached a settlement.
"It's too early to tell what might happen to our efforts to resolve the case," Harrison said.
If any of Lay's assets were frozen by the government the freeze would go away as the case was vacated, Smith said. That means the plaintiffs in the civil cases would have to scramble to get a lock on those assets, which would be particularly hard to do in the civil arena.
Perhaps even more significant for the civil cases, once the case is vacated it's unlikely Lay's prior indictment and conviction could be used as evidence in any ensuing trials, Smith said.
"They would have the burden of proof to prove his guilt all over again," Smith said. "It's a mess for the government and the victims, who were probably already counting the money."
I find that all very strange and a little hard to understand. Ken Lay was indicted and convicted. Yes, I know there's precedent in the common law, yes, I understand the rationale of not visiting his sins on his heirs, and yes, I agree that as long as an appeal is in process his story has not been fully written yet. It's still feels wrong to me that the plaintiffs in the civil matters that are pending against him have been dealt such a blow. I just think they should not be denied the opportunity to use what we all know and saw happened in their litigation.
Be that as it may, that's how it is. I agree with Loren Steffy when he writes that Lay's death does not bring closure to the Enron saga, but that it "opens the wound anew, and once again underscores the human toll extracted by Enron's tragedy." I can feel sympathy for Ken Lay, as Tom does, even if I disagree with the assertion that Lay was unfairly hunted by the federal prosecutors. But at the end of the day, my sympathies really lie with the people who were hurt by Enron's fall. Whether you believe Ken Lay had a direct role in causing that hurt or not, I believe they deserve it more.
Hold onto your hats, it's gonna get even crazier from here.
U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks, a Republican appointee, ruled that DeLay must appear on the Nov. 7 ballot as the GOP nominee for the congressional seat that DeLay abandoned last month. Sparks ruling was confirmed by Texas Democratic Party spokeswoman Amber Moon.Details of Sparks ruling were not immediately available.
Sparks ruling halts the process of replacing DeLay on the ballot, but the GOP is expected to appeal the decision to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
If the Republicans lose on appeal, DeLay will have to decide whether to campaign for an office from which he already has resigned.
I have no idea what will come next. Every day I think this campaign season can't get any wilder, and every day I'm proven wrong. Unbelievable.
UPDATE: Here's Judge Sparks' ruling (PDF). Basically, he asserted that the Constitutional requirements for eligibility to the House are all there is and all the Framers intended there to be. Since Tina Benkiser's testimony and other evidence indicated that no one could say for sure where DeLay would be in November, ruling him ineligible in June "would amount to a de facto in-state residency requirement in violation of the United States Constitution. The Court holds DeLay is not ineligible and shall remain on the ballot for the general election on November 7, 2006 as the Republican candidate for House District 22."
More interesting is the footnote to this paragraph: "The simple fact is that DeLay, for personal reasons, decided to withdraw his candidacy for the general election after the voters elected him in the Republican primary election. DeLay is entitled to withdraw from the race for House District 22 before the general election; however, Texas law specifies the manner of the withdrawal and its consequences." As they say, indeed.
UPDATE: Ooh, another juicy footnote: "The Court suspects that the only reason DeLay did not simply withdraw from the race is that the Texas Election Code prohibits the substitution of a replacement nominee in a withdrawal based on these facts." I'd say Judge Sparks did not think much of the GOP's case here.
UPDATE: The Lone Star Project has more excerpts from the ruling if you don't feel like reading it all (though you should, it's good stuff). And here's Nick Lampson's reaction:
Lampson campaign manager Mike Malaise released the following statement today regarding the granting of an injunction in favor of the Texas Democratic Party against Republican Party of Texas Chair Tina Benkiser.Malaise stated: "Judge Sparks said it best in his opinion, 'Political acumen, strategy and manufactured evidence, even combined with a sound policy in mind, cannot override the Constitution.' Regardless of who he ends up running against, Nick Lampson is going to use this time to get his positive message to voters. He went up with two tv ads yesterday, our campaign has knocked on thousands of doors, and made thousands of phone calls, and Nick Lampson will continue to work hard all the way to November."
I know there's an appeal coming, and anything can still happen. But I'm going to enjoy this right now, even perhaps more than I'm enjoying the chaos at the Fort Bend Executive Committee meeting, where the backbiting and hard feelings that surely would have resulted from the completion of the replacement process may get forestalled. That will still come, so let's live in the moment for awhile.
UPDATE: Here's a pretty good timeline of events leading up to Judge Sparks' decision. Link via Juanita, who will be celebrating this decision tomorrow night in Sugar Land. If things go as planned, I'll be there as well.
Secretary of State Roger Williams is still mulling over the issue of how candidates should be listed on the gubernatorial ballot, and Kinky Friedman is requesting that he be listed by nickname only.
Friedman's campaign general counsel, Blake Rocap, wrote Williams to say Friedman has gone by the nickname since he was a freshman at the University of Texas in 1962."He signs his name Kinky Friedman, he introduces himself not as 'Richard Friedman but people call me Kinky,' but as simply Kinky," Rocap said. "He has recorded and released ten albums, published twenty-six books and countless articles have been written about Kinky Friedman or published under the byline Kinky Friedman."
Rocap said state law does not require the nickname to be used in conjunction with a given name. Rocap also rejected a suggestion by Williams that Friedman could have legally changed his name.
"Exalting this sort of technical form over substance would be a waste of the court's time and serve no purpose but to show an obstinate inflexibility and blind fealty to your original interpretation of the statute, no matter how erroneous," Rocap said.
Actually, I'd say that how Friedman introduces himself varies with who he's introducing himself to. Allow me to quote from Armadillos and Old Lace, page 47 (my God, Amazon's page search tool is awesome):
I stood at the window outside the Crafts Corral and noticed that Eric had a new assistant. She was bending over the kiln, and from where I was standing behind her, she looked like she was going to be a big boost to a lot more than just the handicrafts program. She seemed to have been delicately formed on some celestial potter's wheel."Pam's from Oklahoma," Eric said, following my gaze.
"I'm Richard Kinky 'Big Dick' Friedman," I said by way of introduction. "And I never met a Pam I didn't like."
Pam had short blond hair and green, partly cloudy eyes that seemed to cut into me like dust blowing across the barren landscape of my soul.
"What's the 'Big Dick' stand for?" she said.
As I recall, he never gives a straight answer to that question. Clearly, he's been prepping for his gubernatorial run for many years now. And boy, if only he'd given Susan Combs some advice on how to write erotica, the world would be a far better place.
Where was I? Oh, yes, nicknames. I suppose I don't care too much if he's listed as Richard "Kinky" Friedman or just plain Kinky Friedman. I doubt it really matters. I'm tired of this silly story, which like just about everything connected to Friedman's campaign is consuming way more news cycle space than it deserves. Does SOS Williams need another six weeks to make up his mind? Could he maybe have been thinking about this while he was verifying all those petition signatures, or is multitasking too much to ask?
As for the other prominent alter ego in the race:
Williams has not made a final ruling on the use of Friedman's name or that of another independent candidate, Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, who wants to be on the ballot with the nickname "Grandma." Williams has questioned whether that is an attempt to get her campaign slogan, "One tough grandma," on the ballot.
Who knew this was such a tough decision? PerryVsWorld has more, including a link to Friedman's letter to SOS Williams. Any day now, dude, any day now.
Now that sanity has been restored (for now, at least) to the library at the University of the Incarnate Word (see here and here for the background), we can step back and take a look at just what the heck happened there. Trinity University history professor Char Miller does so in this San Antonio Current article. Check it out.
Thanks once again to reader Jeff N., who forwarded me the Friday filings by both sides in the DeLay replacement lawsuit. You can see the GOP filing here and the Democratic filing here. Neither one looks like they're breaking new ground, and it's clear from these how each side is approaching the case - the GOP focuses on the law, while the Democrats emphasize the facts of the case. I'm sure I'm not the only person here who's anxiously awaiting Judge Sparks' ruling.
Meanwhile, Greg in TX22 points to this Galveston News article, in which DeLay speculates about what might happen in the event of an adverse ruling for his side.
When asked what he would do if Sparks ruled his name must remain on the ballot, DeLay seemed to leave the door open for a return."You never know what can happen," he said. "I feel confident we have the law on our side, and we will prevail. But I hadn't thought about it until you asked. There may even be a chance for me to win.
"Wouldn't that be something?"
That's one word for it. I'm not sure if this casts any light on DeLay's beliefs about his current eligibility, as Greg suggests, but then I've believed all along that DeLay was strictly motivated by doing what he thought he could get away with. I don't think he ever believed in this beyond what he needed to in order to get the replacement process sanctioned and completed.
Finally, the Fort Bend GOP precinct chairs got together yesterday and picked their selector, Terese Raia. They also did the following:
Immediately after the meeting was adjourned, Fort Bend County GOP Chairman Gary Gillen had party officials pass out informal ballots to the CD-22 precinct chairs present, and asked them to vote for the DeLay replacement candidate of their choice.Gillen’s Harris County counterparts took a similar straw vote last week, but have yet to count the results for fear of influencing the other counties.
However, to the surprise of Raia and several party members in attendance at the meeting, Gillen immediately counted the results of Wednesday night’s straw poll and displayed them.
They showed Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace with 20 votes, state Rep. Charlie Howard with 13, Fort Bend County Commissioner Andy Meyers with 7, Houston City Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs with 2, and candidates Tim Turner and Tom Campbell with 1 vote apiece. Twelve precinct chairs did not cast votes.
After the votes were tallied, Wallace called on Raia to support him as the candidate favored by Fort Bend County’s CD-22 precinct chairs.
Raia is of course not bound by this, though I'm sure it will influence her. As Mark documented, Raia had a questionnaire for the chairs to get more information from them about what kind of candidate they wanted. Mark's summary of all this is very funny, so check it out. The Muse was also present and gives a report as well.
Will any of this matter? We should know soon enough. Stay tuned.
First, as Phillip has documented, Vilma Luna's resignation turns this from an uncontested incumbent race to a two-party open seat contest. Good for democracy, not so good for the Democrats, though despite my concern I'd still mark whoever their chosen one is as a fairly solid favorite. Needless to say, though, that's still less than 100%.
According to Paul Burka, the hot rumor is that Luna is going to become a lobbyist, most likely for HillCo Partners. (I heard this independently from another source as well, for what it's worth.) And, as he notes here, Luna's exit strategy is a major screw-you to her soon-to-be-former Democratic colleagues.
By resigning her seat, Luna allows both parties to name candidates to run in the general election. Had she announced that she was moving out of her district (say, to take a lobbying job in Austin), she would have been ineligible to serve -- as was Tom DeLay after his recent "move" from Sugarland to Virginia, which is currently the subject of a federal lawsuit. If Luna had become ineligible, the Democrats still could have named a replacement, but the Republicans would have out of luck. Her choice of exit lines gave the Republicans a huge gift. Was Luna was doing one last good turn for Tom Craddick before heading out the revolving door?
All indications point to "yes". I hope Luna's gonna make herself some money out of this, because she sure isn't going to make any friends this way.
Eddie highlights a possible contender for Luna's seat, while Vince has an overview and some linkage. Meanwhile, CapInside has a longer take on the district and Luna's departure. Click the More link to read it. And stay tuned, this is far from over.
UPDATE: Coverage from the Corpus Christi Caller-Times is here and here.
A Texas House battle that no one had expected erupted Monday when powerful State Rep. Vilma Luna of Corpus Christi sent shock waves through political circles from the Gulf Coast to Austin with an announcement that she's leaving the Texas House at the end of the month.Two high-profile Democrats wasted no time throwing their names in the ring of contenders for the House District 33 seat while some local forces touted the need for a replacement with a pro-business background and moderate reputation like Luna had developed as one of the two highest-ranking members of the minority party on the lower chamber's leadership team.
Former Nueces County Democratic Chairman Solomon Ortiz Jr. appears to have the inside track going into an abbreviated contest that's expected to be settled at the grassroots level when precinct chairs pick someone to take Luna's place as the party's nominee in the general election for the seat that she's held for the past 11 years. As the son of U.S. Rep. Solomon Ortiz Sr., who's represented the area in Congress for 24 years, the former county party boss will have a well-entrenched political machine behind his state House campaign.
But Ortiz will face major competition from Danny Noyola Sr. - an activist who appears to have the support of a faction that backed Barbara Canales-Black in a bitter fight against State Senator Juan Hinojosa of McAllen for an open seat in the upper chamber four years ago. Noyola, whose son is a member of the State Democratic Executive Committee, has been in the news in recent weeks as a veteran educator who was forced out of job as principal of Corpus Christi Miller High School and reassigned as vice-principal at Moody High School in a controversial school board decision late last month. The elder Noyola, a former superintendent in the West Oso school district, already has the support of former Texas House member Hugo Berlanga in a bid for the state House that he's expected to make.
Some Corpus Christi political players are promoting the possibility of a bid by local business owner Nelda Martinez for the seat that will open up when Luna steps down officially on July 31. Martinez put an end to former lawmaker Jaime Capelo's state House career when she captured 36 percent of the 2004 Democratic primary vote to force a runoff that she eventually lost to State Rep. Able Herrero in his initial campaign for the HD 34 seat.
Martinez raised a substantial sum of money for the House race two years ago when business interests that back tort reform legislation switched their support to her after Capelo was eliminated in the first round of the race. But Herrero had more support from the Democratic base and won the runoff with 55 percent of the vote. It's unclear at this point if Martinez would be able to qualify as a resident of HD 33 in time to qualify as a candidate for the race.
Unlike two other House districts that are located in Nueces County, HD 33 is contained exclusively within the Corpus Christi city limits and covers the heart of the South Texas coastal town. While President George W. Bush carried the district with 54 percent of the 2004 vote, the Democratic Party's statewide candidates on average had the support of 52 percent of the voters there in the general election that year. Democrats don't appear to be concerned the odds of losing HD 33 in a possible special election before the November vote. But a special election would be the GOP's only chance of wrestling HD 33 away from Democrats in light of the fact that Republicans fielded no one to challenge Luna this year.
While Democratic activists have been upset with Luna in recent years as a result of her ties to the Republican House leadership, there's no denying that the Corpus Christi area will lose significant short-term clout in the lower chamber with the incumbent's early exit. After crossing party lines to support Speaker Tom Craddick in his first bid for the House's top job after the 2002 elections, Luna went from being a B-team player when her own party controlled the lower chamber to one of its most influential members as the House Appropriations Committee vice-chair for more than three years. She not only played a key role in the state budget debate but had significant sway in battle over an expanded business tax and other levies that legislators approved in a special session on school finance this spring.
Luna took some of the steam from her critics when she campaigned for the Democratic national tickert two years ago - and she's had the inherent protection that comes from being a lawyer in a firm run by Corpus Christi lawyer Mikal Watts, who's emerged in recent years as a major political contributor on the state, local and federal levels and one of the world's most successful personal injury lawyers.
The younger Ortiz, who won the county chair's post in 2002 but did not seek re-election this year, had been hinting for the past couple of years that he was seriously considering a race against Luna. Like most county chairs in political hotbeds like Corpus Christi and Nueces County, Ortiz received mixed reviews as the Democratic Party's top local official. As a state House candidate, Ortiz will hope to benefit from the name identification and immediate resources he will have as the son of a longtime congressman. But he will try to avoid inheriting baggage that his father has shouldered lately amid publicity about privately-funded worldwide travel under the auspices of his elected position and association with lobbyists such as former Congressman Tom DeLay's brother, Randy DeLay.
Luna made history as the first Hispanic woman to represent Corpus Christi in the state House after winning a special election to replace 10-year House veteran Eddie Cavazos in 1993. She overcame challenges from a Democratic primary challenger in 1994 and no trouble against Republican opponents in 1994 and 1998. Luna received two-thirds of the 2002 general election vote against Lauro Cuellar after he switched parties in the wake of a failed bid for re-election as Democratic county chair two years before that. There was speculation in 2004 that Luna might try to unseat in a primary race for Congress before she filed for re-election instead.
Luna has held sway in other South Texas House races at the same time she's enjoyed more power than other Democrats in the lower chamber in the budget panel's number two slot, as a member of the Legislative Budget Board and as an appointee to special school finance committees. She drew more anger from Democrats while helping House leaders pass a new congressional map in 2003 as a member of the Redistricting Committee.
Today's turning out to be a busier news day than I expected, and we don't even have a ruling from Judge Sparks in the DeLay ballot replacement lawsuit yet. State Rep. Vilma Luna, one of the top Democratic lieutenants of Speaker Tom Craddick, is going to resign her seat at the end of this month.
State Rep. Vilma Luna announced Wednesday that she is resigning effective July 31.Democratic Party Chairman Alex Garcia and several others confirmed the resignation will be effective at the end of the month.
"My constituents have seen me grow from a single woman to a married woman to the mother of two wonderful boys," she said at a press conference at her legislative office on Gollihar Road. "My family has been blessed many times over, and we tried to give back ... but it is time for my family and I to have more flexibility in our lives."
Luna, D-Corpus Christi, was elected to the District 33 seat in 1993. Luna serves as vice chair of the House Appropriations Committee and also has served on the House Calendars and Ways and Means committees.
She said the timing of her resignation was in the best interest of her constituents because it allows the election code process to be followed and for her successor to be elected in the regular November election and to serve a full term.
I presume what she means by this is that there wouldn't be time for a September special election, so the November general will be the one to fill her spot. I also presume this will be a general and not a special, which means that the Nueces County Democratic Party will pick her successor. Luna had no Republican opponent, so if that's the case then whoever gets chosen there will be a shoe-in. According to Phillip, that is indeed what will happen.
Matt is asking similar questions, but he's got a flawed assumption in here:
The real question that arises is what happens to that seat for November? Luna was unchallenged in the Democratic primary and she had no opponent in the November general. Luna, has said that this will allow voters pick a candidate to serve a full two year term. Which makes it sounds like there will be a primary election before November, but I am not sure about the law on that.No matter what, this district is overwhelmingly Democrat and I view this as a victory for the party. Like Al Edwards being beaten by Boris Miles or Carlos Uresti defeating Frank Madla... Democrats have picked up yet another D vote for January.
Actually, based on 2004, this district was pretty darned purple:
Candidate Party Votes Pct
===========================================
PRESIDENT AND VICE-PRESIDENT
BUSH/CHENEY R 23,932 54.1%
KERRY/EDWARDS D 20,280 45.9%U.S. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 27
VADEN, WILLIAM R 14,100 32.9%
ORTIZ, SOLOMON P. D 28,817 67.1%RAILROAD COMMISSIONER 3
CARRILLO, VICTOR G. R 18,333 46.2%
SCARBOROUGH, BOB D 21,382 53.8%JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT PLACE 9
BRISTER, SCOTT R 19,475 47.5%
VAN OS, DAVID D 21,528 52.5%COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS PLACE 6
KEASLER, MIKE R 18,264 44.1%
MOLINA, J.R. D 23,133 55.9%
I called this a missed opportunity for the Republicans, and with Luna dropping out it's even more so. Another item for the "Why Run Everywhere?" files.
Be that as it may, this is sure to be another chink in Craddick's armor. It's still too early to speculate about who might replace him, but I'm certain he's not very happy with the news. South Texas Chisme, on the other hand, is.
UPDATE: Rico Politico speculates on Luna's future.
UPDATE: More speculation, this time about who replaces Luna, from BOR.
Former Enron CEO Ken Lay, who was just convicted on multiple felony counts relating to the fall of his company, died suddenly yesterday at the age of 64.
Convicted Enron Corp. founder Ken Lay suffered a massive coronary Tuesday and died, according to Dr. Steve Wende, of First Methodist Houston. He was 64."He and his wife, Linda, were in Colorado for the week, and his death was totally unexpected. Apparently, his heart simply gave out.," he said in a memo to church staff.
Lay had been awaiting sentencing after being found guilty May 25, 2006, on all six counts that related to Enron fraud, including conspiracy to commit wire fraud, perpetrating wire and bank fraud, and making false and misleading statements to employees at a company meeting, as well as to banks, securities analysts and corporate credit-rating agencies.
His sentencing had been set for Oct. 23.
The Lays owned property in Colorado, the only state outside the Southern District of Texas, which includes Houston, where he was allowed to go before that sentencing.
His attorney during the trial, Mike Ramsey, said today that Lay's wife, Linda, was with him when he died. Ramsey 's own heart problems forced him to miss much of the trial.
I'm sure there will be plenty more on this soon. As you know from reading this site, I've never had a particularly high opinion of Lay, but I offer my sympathies and condolences to his family nonetheless. Rest in peace, Ken Lay.
UPDATE: Here's a fuller obituary. As for the conspiracy theories, well, I suppose this couldn't hurt.
One thing that will happen now is that the government's attempt to seize what they say were Lay's ill-gotten gains from the fall of Enron will likely be dismissed. Link via Tom, who promises more later.
UPDATE: So, does this mean that I'm not one of the "more thoughtful political blogs", or that I'm an exception to their silence? Enquiring minds want to know.
Via Dos Centavos, an Express News article fro last Friday on how the CD23/CD28 conundrum may get resolved.
Some local Democrats hope to see Laredo dropped from District 28 in the remapping process, which starts with parties in the case filing their proposed remedies in federal court by July 14."I think what's inevitable is that Laredo will be reunited in one district," said state Rep. Richard Raymond, D-Laredo, a plaintiff in one of the lawsuits challenging the Republican-drawn map. "But I don't know if it's going to be in District 23."
For his part, [Rep. Henry] Cuellar doubts Laredo would be stripped from the 28th district.
"It's a possibility - but not likely," he said. "There could be a situation where I'm not even affected. ... There's nothing magical about Laredo Hispanics."
Whoever creates the new boundaries, he noted, could pull in Hispanics from the Odessa area.
State Rep. Robert Puente, D-San Antonio, likewise believes Laredo will stay put.
"I think at the end of the day you're going to have a Cuellar district and you're going to have a [Rep. Henry] Bonilla district," Puente said. "I don't think the Legislature or the courts would do a scenario where two incumbents would have to run against one another."
As it happens, the newly-minted blogger Paul Burka explains why West Texas is unlikely to help out Rep. Bonilla in making CD23 a Hispanic opportunity district again.
Why was Speaker Craddick telling folks that the Legislature should draw the lines? To make Bonilla's seat safely Republican, the Legislature split Webb County, exporting nearly 100,000 Latinos in Laredo to an adjacent district and importing a like number of Anglos from the Hill Country into Bonilla's. The Supremes ruled -- duh -- that the swap violated the Voting Rights Act. To replace the Latinos he lost, Bonilla has cast his eye on District 11, which, unfortunately for him, just happens to centered around Craddick's hometown of Midland. Craddick and incumbent congressman Mike Conaway are perfectly happy with the district the way it is.Why not just restore District 23 to its former boundaries by returning the 100,000 Latinos Bonilla needs? Er, this is a little touchy, but Bonilla doesn't want these Latinos. He won reelection in 2002 with just 51.5 percent of the vote, losing 92 percent of the Latinos in the district. The difference between Laredo Latinos and the ones in District 11 is that the latter have a history of low voter turnout.
Wouldn't Craddick and Conaway be willing to help out a fellow Republican? Not a chance. This is redistricting, remember -- the hardest hardball politics there is. The problem isn't losing the Latinos, it's taking in the 100,000 Hill Country Anglos whom Bonilla would have to give up. The last thing Craddick wants is for the balance of power in the district he worked so hard to create to shift eastward to the fast-growing San Antonio exurbs, causing Midland to lose control.
Of course, if the court ultimately redraws CD23 for this cycle, then CD11 could play a role in it. And despite Governor Perry's implied threat to redo it again in the Lege, there's no guarantee of any one particular outcome if it goes back into the sausage grinder, especially if Craddick is weakened by further depletion of his troops after November. So never say never.
It'd been rumored for awhile, and now it's official: Texas Monthly's Paul Burka, who a year ago wrote an article that basically dismissed blogs and blogging, is now himself a blogger. Life is funny sometimes, isn't it? (So is TJ Shroat, filling in for the vacationing Pink Lady.)
I've no intention of getting all schadenfreudy here. My opinion is the more, the merrier, and that changing one's mind when one is obviously wrong about something is a Good Thing that ought to be encouraged, not disparaged. So welcome aboard, Paul Burka. Now that you're feeling right at home, I have the same request of you that I do of the Houston Press: I hope yours will be a true blog, in the sense that you will use it to engage with other Texas bloggers. We've got a pretty interesting and intelligent group in this state. It'd be a shame not to take advantage of it.
Two items on why ethics in government is a need-to-have, not a nice-to-have: One, why tax lawyers love Carole Keeton Strayhorn:
In her quest to become the next governor, Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn has continued to accept, despite criticism, hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from attorneys whose firms appear to have a stake in tax rulings made by her staff.Campaign records indicate that over the past 18 months, the comptroller, the self-described "tough grandma" who is running for governor as an independent, has received roughly $788,000 from individuals working for firms that practice tax law.
All of which raises a thorny question: Should an elected officeholder who leads an agency charged with settling tax matters take money from people whose livelihoods may depend on agency rulings?
Good-government watchdog groups say no, and so did a state audit last year, which concluded that Strayhorn had accepted nearly $2 million in contributions over 51/2 years from donors who - within a year of their donations - benefited from tax reductions totaling $461 million.
The audit said it uncovered no evidence of wrongdoing on Strayhorn's part, but it urged legislators to prohibit the comptroller or candidates for that job from taking contributions from individuals with business before the office.
Meanwhile, as Rick Casey notes, homebuilder and Swift Boat financier Bob Perry has similar love for Attorney General Greg Abbott.
ONE thing you have to like about Texas politicians is their resistance to embarrassment.Take the case of Attorney General Greg Abbott.
Last Dec. 15 he received $100,000 in campaign contributions from Houston homebuilder Bob Perry and his wife.
The next day, he received a letter from Rep. David Swinford of Dumas, chairman of the House Committee on State Affairs.
Swinford wanted Abbott to issue a formal opinion on whether Grandma, a.k.a. state Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, had the authority to conduct a review of the performance of the newly created and controversial Texas Residential Construction Commission.
[...]
In addition, five days after sending his request to Abbott, Swinford received his first contribution from Perry, for $2,000. Six weeks later he would receive another $10,000.
Swinford said Perry had nothing to do with his request.
"I thought (Strayhorn) was overstepping her authority," he said.
He said Perry's contributions came because Swinford chaired an important committee and faced his first strong election challenge in ages.
"I was needing help in a tough race, and he was kind enough to give it," Swinford said.
The script went as expected. After considerable staff research, Strayhorn issued a scathing report in January on the commission and called for its abolishment.
Calling it a "builder protection agency," she said, "If it were up to me personally, I would blast this Texas Residential Construction Commission off the bureaucratic books."
In May, the attorney general ruled that she didn't have the authority to assess the commission.
As reformers are fond of saying, oftentimes the scandals aren't what's illegal but what is allowed. I've no doubt that what Strayhorn and Abbott did was within the law as it exists in Texas. I also have very little doubt that it would be practical or even possible to write an effective law that would bar this sort of behavior.
But just because something is legal doesn't mean it's acceptable, or that it should be. Strayhorn and Abbott took actions that benefitted a particular interest group, and reaped campaign contributions from those interest groups. You don't have to believe there was a quid pro quo arrangement to think that there's something wrong about that. Many people do look at that sort of thing, conclude that "everyone does it", become frustrated and cynical, and take no further action. I say if you don't like this, you have an obligation to express your dissatisfaction at the ballot box. If it turns out the person you vote in to replace the one whom you fired before for this sort of thing, vote that person out as well. It doesn't have to be a partisan thing. All it takes is to expect better of the people who are entrusted with positions of power.
If this all sounds naive, I'll confess that I drafted this last night while full of a little post-neighborhood Fourth of July patriotism. It doesn't change the basic fact that if you want better government, you've got to demand it. How many times in the past year did you stop doing business with a particular store or vendor because of poor customer service on their part? I say this is the same thing, and November is your chance to make a switch. You just have to believe it's worth the bother. And if you can't feel that way in the afterglow of Independence Day, whenever can you?
Bay Area Houston and Brains and Eggs have more.
I didn't get around to this before the holiday, so let's catch up: The next big issue in the governor's race may well be gambling, as the realities of HB3 are forcing everyone to look around for the revenue to make up the shortfalls caused by the property tax cuts.
"It has already been stated that the economy has to grow at least about $2 billion a year just to meet the property tax reduction requirements," said Bill Stinson, president of Let The Voters Decide, a group of real estate developers that favors bringing in casinos. "And that doesn't start to address the needs for school finance and health care and transportation and prisons and all the other areas that the state provides for the citizens."The only thing that's left is increasing the sales tax, which is one of the highest in the nation, or an income tax, or to allow the voters to decide whether or not they would like to allow full casinos to come in that generate jobs and bring in revenue to Texas," Stinson said.
You know, if we spent one-tenth of the time and effort discussing an income tax as we have gambling over the past few years, we might not need to be talking about gambling. If everybody could get past the ick factor long enough for us to have a productive debate on the subject, we might just come to realize that it's not such a bad idea after all.
Big casino companies working through the Texas Gaming Association envision fancy destination resorts in cities, including San Antonio. They say their proposal ultimately would bring the state $3 billion a year.Tommy Azopardi, president of the racing-industry-based Texans for Economic Development, said VLTs at tracks could provide at least $1.2 billion annually.
Before anyone starts counting chickens, please be aware that the horse racing lobby has been pushing itself as Texas' economic savior for years now. As of last year, the state's race tracks have been a big fat zero for the state's coffers. When you hear a horse racing lobbyist say that VLTs "could provide" some amount of money for Texas, what you should think is that they could also provide free ice cream and ponies for all of us, too. You won't be any less grounded in reality than they are.
Perry in 2004 supported VLTs as a way to help pay for public education but backed away after it failed to win over the GOP-majority Legislature and as the economy brightened. He had suggested his proposal would help control gambling by leading to the elimination of illegal eight-liners.The governor flatly opposes casino-style gambling and has no intention of offering VLTs again, spokesmen for the governor said.
"The notion of a massive expansion of gambling in Texas to answer the challenges of Texas is not realistic, because the Texas Legislature isn't going to pass it," spokesman Robert Black said.
Three gunning for Perry's job think an expansion is realistic enough to talk about.
Democratic candidate Chris Bell is open to casinos with local approval and to slot machines at racetracks to raise money for education. He strongly opposes VLTs in convenience stores or other venues outside of what he calls the "controlled environment" of a track or casino.
"I don't want to offer casino gambling as any kind of cure-all, but ... it could be a steady source of new revenue for the state, and I think we should at least keep it on the table," Bell said Friday.
Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, an independent running for governor, supports slot machines at existing tracks, with the revenue dedicated to property tax cuts and public and higher education.
She said voters should be allowed to consider casino gambling - and other issues - through referendums.
"We are conservatively sucking 1 to 2 billion dollars a year out of our Texas classrooms that's going to Louisiana, New Mexico, Arkansas, now Oklahoma," she also said Friday after speaking to a convention for Texas teachers. "I want to repatriate those dollars, those ponies and those jobs back to the schoolchildren and our Texas teachers."
Independent hopeful Kinky Friedman is for slot machines at tracks and casinos, with the revenue going to education. He calls it "Slots for Tots."
"Half the people in Vegas are from Texas. We fuel the economy of five other states, folks. I want to get that money reversed. I want it coming back to us," Friedman told the Texas Classroom Teachers Association on Friday.
I might be persuaded to go along with some expansion of gambling in Texas. I don't like it, and I don't believe it's going to be a windfall in any sense, but I'm libertarian enough to believe that most activities should be allowed unless there's a real good reason to forbid them. Gambling doesn't quite make the cut for me on that score, dumb as I think it is. Having said that, I believe that if the state insists on allowing more gambling, it should take heed of what it's learned from years of the Lottery and horse and dog tracks, which is that gambling revenue should be considered found money, and not a dependable source of income. Anyone who proposes using projected revenue from gambling to reduce or replace an existing income stream is deluded or dishonest. Watch what's being said carefully here, because this is going to be a major component of the 2007 legislative session.
Link via Aaron Pena, who very much sees the writing on the wall.
UPDATE: Two views on whether or not Governor Perry really opposes expanded gambling or not:
"I have talked to the governor about it. I truly do believe he was sold a bill of goods. I believe he strongly opposes what he had for a while not fully understood," said Cathie Adams, president of the conservative Texas Eagle Forum.But Sen. Jeff Wentworth - who favors video lottery terminals at race tracks as a way to raise money for state efforts that people want but for which they don't want to be taxed - has a different view.
"I guarantee you if we passed it, he'd sign it," said Wentworth, R-San Antonio. "He was for them before. I think the only reason he's now saying it's a non-starter is that we just didn't get it out of the Legislature last time."
I tend to agree with Sen. Wentworth here. Just a gut feeling on my part, so take it with an appropriate amount of salt.
I don't know if the rain we had here earlier will go away and let the annual fireworks show go on as planned, but it's looking reasonably good now. This beinh Houston, of course, one can never be sure.
If you need a contingency plan in the event of a cancellation, you can read Vince's thoughts on the Voting Rights Act instead. Or read Julia's Annotated Declaration of Independence, which she did here as a guest post last year.
If all that's a little too heavy, I have four words for you: Yep yep yep yep. If that doesn't bring a smile to your face (whether or not you're sufficiently Child Of The Seventies-ish to recognize it from your misspent youth), then I'm afraid I can't help you. Many thanks to Fred for the catch.
Do you have what it takes to become a citizen?
When immigrants want to become Americans, they must take a civics test as part of their naturalization interview before a Citizenship and Immigration Services officer. The questions are usually selected from a list of 100 sample questions (see at http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/services/natz/English.pdf ) that prospective citizens can look at ahead of the interview (though the examiner is not limited to those questions). Some are easy, some are not. We have picked some of the more difficult ones.Should you be welcomed immediately to the Land of the Free or sent home for some more homework? Find out!
(PLEASE NOTE: These questions are as asked on the official United States Immigration and Naturalization Services Web site. Candidates are not given multiple choices in the naturalization interview, which is conducted orally.)
Presented as multiple choice, I found this quiz to be very easy - as in, I got 100%, and I only had to guess at one (#19, which was basically a coin flip since two of the choices were silly). I feel confident I'd have passed anyway as a fill-in-the-blank exercise, but I might've goofed somewhere under those conditions.
How did you do?
As today is Independence Day, I just wanted to note this exercise in democracy from the weekend for future reference.
Latino rights groups today are kicking off their strategy to register new citizens and children of immigrants as voters in a bid to increase the community's political power in the fall elections and beyond.[...]
"Our people are angry. They are angry at the way that Republicans have treated them. They are scared that their families will be broken up. They are angry, and they are going to do something about it," said Christina Lopez, the deputy executive director for the Wash- ington-based Center for Community Change, a national umbrella group of immigration-focused groups.
Today's events — some to register voters and some to begin training volunteers to do so — will take place in at least 40 cities in 17 states.
In Texas, informational sessions are planned in Harlingen by the South Texas Immigration Council and in Houston by the Centro de Recursos para Centroamericanos, the Service Employees International Union and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.
The goal is to harness potential new voters by educating permanent legal residents about how to become citizens and to register the American children of immigrants.
Together, the two groups make up just over 14 million people, all of whom could be potential voters by 2008, according to a report published by the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.
[...]
Because it takes six months on average for citizenship applications to be processed, this number of voters will mostly likely not be eligible to vote in the fall elections.
Organizers of today's registration events say that they want to harness Latino and immigrant numbers into voting power for the 2008 presidential elections as well.
"This is a long-term strategy. It's a long-term outlook to engage the community, getting them involved in their own future," said Josh Hoyt, the executive director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.
Buena Suerte, y'all.
Assuming my fingers don't all fall off first from all the cutting and pasting, I'm going to do an in-depth analysis of the electoral results in CD23, from 2002 and 2004. Installment #1 is up at Kuff's World, in which we see just how close Henry Bonilla came to becoming an ex-Congressman. Tune in for more later this week, when we see what happened in 2004, and other stuff as I work it out.
The Chron looks to history for some guidance in the DeLay ballot replacement lawsuit.
Ben Campbell had just been sentenced to federal prison on bank fraud charges. He also was the Republican nominee for re-election to his state House district in Carrollton.Rather than see his district lost to a long-shot Democrat, Campbell changed his official residence to San Marcos. The GOP declared him ineligible and replaced him on the ballot with the ultimate winner.
The Democratic nominee lamented he was the victim of a political ploy, saying the Republicans took advantage of a "loophole" in state election law.
The same "loophole" that played out in that 1994 race is at the heart of the federal court battle between Democrats and Republicans about whether the GOP can replace former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay on the November ballot for the 22nd Congressional District.
[...]
Austin lawyer Buck Wood, a Democrat not directly involved in the case, helped write the law more than 25 years ago.
Wood said both parties in the 1970s were putting up straw-man candidates in the primaries and then replacing them with stronger candidates once they saw who won the other party's nomination.
Wood said the Legislature wanted to stop this practice but not make it impossible for a party to replace a nominee in legitimate cases.
"They wanted to stop the parties from gaming the system," Wood said.
That did not stop the political parties from fighting about who was legitimately replacing candidates.
In the same election cycle that Republicans replaced Campbell, a Democratic state senator from East Texas moved from his home in Center to take a lobbying job in Austin.
The 12th Court of Appeals in Tyler ruled that the Democrats could replace state Sen. Bill Haley because he no longer lived in the district, even though he had not resigned from office and continued to represent the district.
Most recently, in a case cited before Sparks, the Democrats replaced their nominee in an East Texas state House district in 2004 because he filed a statement that he had moved out of the district.
[...]
Democrats say what makes DeLay's case different is that Texas GOP Chairwoman Tina Benkiser has no power to rule on the eligibility of a candidate for Congress. They note that the Constitution says a candidate has to be an "inhabitant" of the state on Election Day and makes no reference to residency.
[...]
Republican lawyer Jim Bopp said the state law applies to DeLay because it is the constitutional "manner and means" of holding an election.
"The Democrats don't want the voters to have a choice. They want their guy to run unopposed so they can steal that seat," Bopp said.
Am I the only one who's amused that the Texas GOP had to import talent to fight this lawsuit (Bopp is from Indiana)? I mean, what, is Andy Taylor not good enough for them any more? Or was he just too busy figuring out how to sue Metro to return their phone calls?
Anyway. I've no idea how Judge Sparks will rule, and as I've said before, I'm not even sure I know how I want him to rule. I think it's perfectly clear that DeLay engineered this from the beginning, but the law may not be clear enough to stop him from getting away with it. That's a pretty good capsulized summary of DeLay's entire career in public office, isn't it?
On a side note, like Greg in TX22, I'd be curious to see what the additional filings that Judge Sparks called for look like. Anyone know if they're publicly available?
Finally, Bob Dunn looks at the state of the replacement process as it stands now. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: According to reader and Actual Attorney Jeff N., what Judge Sparks did was tell the parties to file anything else they might have by Friday. He did not call for anything in particular. So, there may be nothing new to see, but Jeff said he'd look later today to see if there's anything from Friday. Thanks, Jeff!
Pity the poor penny, the least beloved coin in America. There's another push on to get rid of it.
For the first time, the U.S. Mint has said pennies are costing more than 1 cent to make this year, thanks to higher metal prices. "The penny is going to disappear soon unless something changes in the economics of commodities," says Robert Hoge, an expert on North American coins at The American Numismatic Society.That very idea of spending 1.2 cents to put 1 cent into play strikes many people as "faintly ridiculous," says Jeff Gore, of Elkton, Md., founder of a little group called Citizens for Retiring the Penny.
[...]
The idea of a penniless society began to gain currency in 1989 with a bill in Congress to round off purchases to the nearest nickel. It was dropped, but the General Accounting Office in a 1996 report unceremoniously acknowledged that some people consider the penny a "nuisance coin."
In 2002, Gallup polling found that 58 percent of Americans stash pennies in piggy banks, jars, drawers and the like, instead of spending them like other coins. Some people eventually redeem them at banks or coin-counting machines, but 2 percent admit to just plain throwing pennies out!
"Today it's a joke. It's outlived its usefulness," says Tony Terranova, a New York City coin dealer who paid $437,000 for a 1792 penny prototype in what is believed to be the denomination's highest auction price.
[...]
Another problem: deciding what to make the penny from. Copper, bronze and zinc have been used, even steel in 1943 when copper was desperately needed for the World War II effort. In 1982, zinc replaced most of the penny's copper to save money, but rising zinc prices are now bedeviling the penny again.
"I'm very surprised they haven't gone to plastic," muses Bill Johnson, a wheat-penny collector who owns the Plimoth Candy Co. (It uses an old spelling of Plymouth.)
I'm pretty sure the American public is not ready for plastic currency, though frankly it's not a terrible idea. I've got to think there's a cheaper metal option, however.
The penny took on the profile of President Lincoln, beloved as the Union's savior during the Civil War, on the centennial of his birth in 1909. The first ones carried ears of wheat on the tails side, but the Lincoln memorial has replaced those. Four new tails designs with themes from Lincoln's life are planned for 2009, with a fifth permanent one afterward to summarize his legacy.This redesign, the first major one since 1959, has heartened penny lovers.
Those who want to keep the penny coin include small merchants who prefer cash transactions, contractors who help supply pennies, and consumer advocates who fear rounding up of purchases.
"We think the penny is important as a hedge to inflation," says director Mark Weller of Americans for Common Cents. "Any time you have more accurate pricing, consumers benefit."
I love the idea of a new design for the penny. When will it be the dime's turn? That's the only one that hasn't had a makeover proposed lately, at least that I'm aware of.
I tend to agree about the rounding up. What do you think all those $X.99 prices will become in the absence of the penny? Not that this makes a huge difference at the micro level, but it's still a price increase.
Another good argument for the penny:
Scores of charities esteem the penny, which many Americans donate without a second thought. Like shouts in a playground, pennies can multiply quickly."People don't like carrying them around, so we dump them into the nearest bowl," says Teddy Gross, who founded the Penny Harvest charity drive in New York City schools. "By the end of any given year, most Americans have got a stash of capital which is practically useless, but it's within easy reach of a young person."
Last year, his children raked in 55 million pennies, which had to be redeemed with help from the Brink's security company. They also bagged about 200,000 spare nickels.
$550K for what is essentially throwaway change. Not too shabby. I should mention that when Tiffany and I were first dating, I had a huge container of mostly pennies that I'd inherited from my ex-roommate Matt when he moved out. Tiffany cashed them in and got enough to buy me a little vacuum cleaner, something which I as a slobbola bachelor had not previously owned. They really do add up over time.
By the way, the Mint says nickels are also costing more to produce than they're worth. Pity the poor nickel?
If we do some day get rid of the penny, then I think there is an argument to go all the way and make all prices end in zero, so that the dime is the smallest coin in circulation. Or you could leave everything in place and re-value the currency so that the penny becomes worth a dime. That'll never happen, of course, but it would at least make the penny more respectable.
Anyway. I'm happy to keep the penny around. Let's find a way to make it cost less to mint, and go from there.
So. Anybody else at work today?
With the July Fourth holiday falling on Tuesday this year, Monday will be an orphan workday for many people who can't take the day off.Although other national holidays are usually moved to the nearest Monday, Independence Day is always observed on July 4. And while some companies are giving their employees an extra day off Monday, many other people who do have to work might not be as productive as usual.
Some may be a little out of sorts, knowing they're stuck on the job while friends or relatives are at backyard barbecues. But workplace experts say that it might not entirely be their fault that they're less productive - a lot of tasks require collaboration and many co-workers, customers and other business associates won't be there.
No one is projecting that Monday's lowered productivity will have an impact on the national economy. And one labor researcher says employers shouldn't worry that workers might decide to make it a habit of having lazy Mondays.
"By and far, the American work ethic and the productivity consciousness still leads the world, so the fact that we have a day that may not be as productive as every other Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, I think that that's not so daunting," said Paul Sanchez, a director of research at Mercer Human Resource Consulting.
A smart boss would have planned in advance and given as many workers as possible a day at the beach, according to Brendan Bannister, a business professor at Northeastern University. He said days like Monday are a chance for supervisors to give up a little productivity in return for a little good will. The day off means less burnout and can "engender feelings of loyalty and commitment," he said.
I'll be at work today, though I may leave early. I fully expect my office to be a dead zone. I've got a fair number of customers in Europe and Asia, where July 4 is just another date, so I'll want to make sure they're taken care of. After that, there probably won't be much to do.
What about you?
We're in the final round of voting for Mapchangers. Texas is the only state with two candidates in the final ten, Chris Bell and John Courage. You can only vote for one of them. What to do?
Let Chris Bell tell you what he thinks:
Now as we start the final round, there are ten candidates from across the country vying to win a fundraiser with Governor Warner. Voting runs through July 10th, and you can only vote for one candidate. It's a testament to the strength of the Texas netroots that we have two Texans into final ten, and we'll need every bit of that strength to bring Mark Warner to Texas. That's why we need to work together to make sure we do not split our votes.I've talked with John Courage and we've decided that, in the spirit of Texas unity, and on behalf of all Democratic candidates and activists across Texas, we will ask all of our supporters to join together:
Please vote for John Courage in this contest.
http://www.forwardtogetherpac.com/mapchangers
John is a great Democrat and a great candidate, and he finished the second round only a handful of votes shy of being the leading vote-getter nationwide. We believe that if we can pull together and get all of Texas behind John Courage and take him to victory, that we can accomplish a much greater victory for all of us across the state
Our new field director, Glen Maxey, is working with activists and campaigns all across the state to build a website at TrueBlueAction.com that will offer netroots organizing tools that will help Democrats win in November and beyond. If we can put John Courage over the top, he has agreed to use the first $15,000 raised at the Mark Warner fundraiser to underwrite the development of these tools and this website. These tools will help us across the state for years to come, and they will only get better as we build and improve on them.
The TrueBlueAction.com web site is under construction and is being developed as a open access site with lots of organizing tools for candidates and activists to use to register and turn out Democratic votes. It will be open for the use of local, state and federal candidates. It will be open for the use on any individual wanting to help the Democratic ticket or a candidate.
That's why winning this contest is bigger than John Courage or me. It's about what all Texas Democrats can accomplish if we work together. By voting for John Courage in the Map Changer contest, you will be helping all Democratic candidates in Texas.
Vote today: http://www.forwardtogetherpac.com/mapchangers
Bringing Mark Warner and this fundraiser to Texas will help the entire ticket, not just one candidate. Please take the time to cast your vote for John Courage.
You can learn more about John Courage at BOR and in this Kos post where Courage was added to the ActBlue Netroots Candidates page. You can also check out my interview with him. If he can get the funds, Courage can compete. Every little bit will help.
You can't tell from their front page, but if you look inside, you can see that the Houston Press is hopping on board the blog express.
Blogsploitation!Attention, local bands: We want your music. Yeah, your garage demos, your next hit single and your "recorded live at Rudz" secret track that only your real fans know about. Genre be damned -- if it's local and listenable (or not listenable, but if we can stand it), your mp3s will be featured on our new blog.
That's right, in the very near future, the Press will join the blogosphere. You can expect everything you find here -- in-depth news coverage, music, arts, dining, events and more -- plus coverage on sports and pop culture. Keep a lookout, and if you've got a hot tip on just about anything, send it to feedback@houstonpress.com.
Good for them, I'm looking forward to their effort. I hope it will be a true blog in the sense that they will engage with other Houston bloggers. They've already got their print content online. This should be more than just a section of non-print copy. We'll see.
Didn't get to this story yesterday.
Despite a continuing legal dispute over the process, Harris County Republicans chose on Thursday their representative on the committee that will select a nominee to replace former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay."Why wouldn't we proceed if time is of the essence?" asked Harris County Republican Party Chair Jared Woodfill. "Given the fact that the election is approaching, it's important we do everything as quickly as possible within the confines of the law."
[...]
Harris County Republicans selected Kathy Haigler, a precinct chair in Deer Park who is on the State Republican Executive Committee, as their committee representative.
Haigler's the one from Harris who gets quoted in all these stories, so this isn't exactly a surprise.
She has not stated a preference among at least nine Republicans seeking the nomination.
Mm-hmm. Anyone out there thinking she won't be casting a vote for Crazy Bob Talton? Talton is a senior attorney at Woodfill & Pressler (PDF, see Page 3), as in Harris County GOP Chair Jared Woodfill & Pressler. Talton's been rumored to be the Chosen One for a month, and reported to be a lock for it for two weeks. So the coy act would seem to be little more than a ritualistic requirement.
Which means that David Wallace and Shelley Sekula Gibbs are just deluding themselves with their radio ads and immigrant bashing. They haven't figured out that playing to the crowd won't help them in this undemocratic selection process. It's a point I've made before and I'll make again - how much will they get behind the Chosen One once the selection is made, given that there's no incentive for them to suppress their ambition for a "greater good"? After all, there will be a real primary in 2008, when the tactics they're currently employing will mean something.
And hey, depending on what Judge Sparks says next week, they may be able to wait for '08 with a clear conscience, without worrying that anyone will notice their lack of enthusiasm for a nominee that isn't themselves. There's got to be some interesting hypotheticals being discussed at Wallace and Sekula Somethingorother headquarters these days.
Nice article in one of the community papers about Diane Trautman, who's running against "Judgmental Joe" Crabb in HD127 up in the Kingwood area. Some highlights:
"At the [July 20 Crosby-Huffman Chamber of Commerce] luncheon, one of the things that I will be discussing is leadership, because that's what I teach at Stephen F. Austin State University," Trautman said. "I'm the assistant professor in the ad leadership department and I prepare teachers who want to be principals."Ethical leadership will be her subject. This is Trautman's favorite leadership theory. "It's pretty easy to remember," she said. "There are three A's: Accountability, Accessibility, and Authenticity. I think those are three really important characteristics for any good leader."
[...]
She has been hands on education for 20 years and was greatly influenced by both of her parents. Her father, a World War II veteran and retired chemical worker at Ethyl Corp., taught her to respect his core values: hard work, honesty, and integrity. Her mother placed a high value on education and educators, and the importance of the role both play in American society. Her mother's dream was for her daughter to become a teacher.
"I don't think there is a better feeling when you see that light go on in children's faces when they learn something new. For myself, I'm a perpetual learner, I'll be learning till the day I die," she said.
Referring to the transition from being a principal to becoming a candidate, she said, "The job of a politician and the Legislature is very much like a principal. The first thing you have to do is be a leader. I led a staff of 110 and a school of 1,400 students. You have to have people who want to follow you just like a campaign."
HD127 is one of the (if not the) toughest districts for a Dem in Harris County. Crabb got 70.4% in 2004, and that was the low score. Still, he managed only 59% in the GOP primary this year, so someone doesn't like him. Diane Trautman is a smart lady and a dynamic candidate, so if you're in the Kingwood/Crosby/Humble area, get to know her. I think you'll find much to like.
The University of the Incarnate Word announced Friday that it will reinstate the library's print subscription to the New York Times after canceling it earlier this week to protest the publication of articles exposing the government's secret anti-terror program to monitor international banking transactions.Dean of Library Services Mendell D. Morgan Jr., who gave the order to remove the newspaper, said in a hastily called news conference that he did not believe his decision to use the university library as a forum for personal protest was inappropriate, but did regret failing to consult library staffers.
"In retrospect, I made a personal decision perhaps in too great haste and did not seek other input," Morgan said, speaking in front of the university's library. "I wanted to send a message in protest."
Morgan e-mailed library staffers Wednesday announcing his decision to remove the newspaper and cancel the library's subscription. Library staffers protested, calling the decision censorship, and the subsequent publicity garnered national attention.
On Friday, Morgan stressed the New York Times still is available online and in several of the library's electronic databases. He said he again may cancel the print subscription, but not before engaging the university community in a discussion about the topic and reaching consensus.
"I do abhor censorship and its implications," he said.
"I just don't fully grasp what the word means, as this incident should make clear," he did not add.
But those who opposed Morgan's decision to remove the Times, including library staffers Jennifer Romo and Tom Rice, argued it was wrong to deny students access to the newspaper because of a personal disagreement with its coverage. Romo and Rice criticized the action publicly.Morgan said he wished the staffers had voiced their concerns to him before going to the media, but said they would not be punished for their actions.
Awfully magnanimous of you there, old bean. Perhaps if you'd consulted your staff before issuing your edict, we wouldn't be having this whole discussion right now. I just hope that now that you have committed to actually discussing this with everyone who will be affected, you'll really listen to them and take their wishes and concerns into account. Otherwise, this is all just a waste of time.
You have to hand it to John Culberson. The man knows how to pander.
Local officials continued to debate police policy toward illegal immigrants Thursday after the U.S. House passed a Houston lawmaker's measure that would cut off federal crime-fighting money to cities with sanctuary policies.The House overwhelmingly approved a spending bill containing an amendment by U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, intended to force state and local authorities to get more involved with immigration enforcement - or risk losing millions in federal grants.
In a news release on his amendment, Culberson listed Houston among cities that "have adopted sanctuary policies which prevent law enforcement officers from inquiring about immigration status."
Mayor Bill White, Police Chief Harold Hurtt and the top federal official charged with local immigration enforcement maintain the city doesn't have a sanctuary policy.
Responding to that assertion Thursday, Culberson said, "If they are in compliance with the law, and they can prove it to the Justice Department, then they don't have anything to worry about."
Since Culberson is so clearly interested in running the city of Houston, I look forward to the declaration of his Mayoral campaign in 2007. I'm told that the Republican Party once valued the concept of keeping the federal government from meddling in local and state affairs. You sure couldn't tell that by the current crowd in Congress. And needless to say, there's no funding being proposed to cover the extra manpower and training costs for this mandate. All sadly typical of the man.
Perhaps Culberson should ask Immigration and Customs Enforcement what they think before he took action against the city he allegedly represents.
Hurtt repeatedly has denied the city has a sanctuary policy.Bob Rutt, special agent in charge of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Houston, referred questions about the new legislation to ICE headquarters in Washington - where an answering system doesn't accept messages.
Last week, however, Rutt reinforced Hurtt's view, saying Houston police notify ICE when officers arrest people wanted by ICE. He said officers also call his agency when they suspect violent criminals might be in the country illegally, and they help out on some criminal operations.
The department also flags criminal cases involving illegal immigrants when they are sent to the Harris County District Attorney's Office, so ICE agents can determine whether arrestees are in the country legally.
"Houston is not a sanctuary city, by the definition," Rutt told the Houston Chronicle on Saturday. "They do cooperate with us."
But that doesn't make headlines, and it doesn't fire up the base, so it's not relevant.
Stace thinks we should tell him to stick it. I'd prefer that this die in the Senate rather than have it come down to that. Here's hoping.