Today's been a day of press releases touting unprecedented endorsements. First up, the Houston GLBT Political Caucus endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for President. Here's the release (PDF):
The Houston GLBT Political Caucus PAC is proud to announce its endorsement of Senator Barack Obama for the Democratic Presidential Nominee in the March 4 Primary."This was an exceedingly hard decision because we have two exceptional candidates. After historic conversations with both Senator Clinton and Obama, the Caucus board engaged in thoughtful deliberations and were proud to get behind Senator Obama," said Jenifer Pool, President of the Caucus, which held interviews with both candidates in late February.
The Caucus board was empowered by the membership to endorse candidates who sought the endorsement after February 6 and before March 5. Both Senator Barack Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton sought the endorsement of the Caucus after its membership meeting in February.
"This is a phenomenal moment in Caucus history. Never before has the Caucus endorsed in a presidential race. We require all candidates to submit their responses to our questionnaire and hold a conversation with our screening panels. When we invited the two Senators to seek our endorsement, we never truly believed we would be forced to make such a difficult decision. But both candidates held conference calls with us and answered our questions. A difficult decision because we have two extraordinary candidates," said Jenifer Pool, president of the Caucus.
I think it's both very cool, and a clear sign of how seriously this primary is being taken by both candidates, that they took the time to go through the formal screening process, which is quite thorough. Kudos to all involved, and congratulations to Sen. Obama for snagging the endorsement. BOR has more.
Next, outgoing Travis County DA Ronnie Earle has given his endorsement, the first he says he has ever given for something other than local justice system offices, to Dan Grant in the CD10 primary. I've reproduced Earle's statement beneath the fold due to its length. It's a pretty ringing endorsement, and another feather in Grant's cap. Check it out.
Thank you for coming.Today I am announcing my endorsement of Dan Grant for Congress in the Democratic Primary.
My duty to see that justice is done depends on the rule of law. That in turn depends on democracy. And democracy requires us to make sure that our country is led by those who can set an example worth following.
It is unusual for me to make an endorsement in a race that is not solely about law enforcement. But crime trickles down, and the tone of corruption at the top is reflected in violence on the streets. In order to avoid the latter we have to clean up the former.
We all know that our country is in trouble. We are endangered by corruption and we are threatened by the kind of over-simplistic warmongering that insults the intelligence of the voters.
Dan Grant has seen first hand what happens when corruption erodes the peace upon which public safety depends.
We have a remarkable opportunity to elect a person with the kind of wisdom and experience that we need to face the challenges of the future.
Dan has worked as a warrior for peace, putting his civilian boots on the ground as a peacemaker in Iraq and Afghanistan.
He has extensive experience that is grounded in realism and gained literally under fire for years. He has shown his courage by his service to his country as a peacemaker.
Now he has brought his experience and his concern about democracy to make a difference here at home.
That experience has produced a man of courage with an independent perspective formed not just out of abstract high ideals and not the product of military chain of command.
Dan has chosen to personally take command of what he as one person can do to make a difference. He is too good an offer to pass up.
He has three qualifications that set him apart, and they are the three issues that are most important to the voters:
First, he has seen through his service overseas the consequences of corruption and he is committed to clean government.
Secondly, he has actual experience doing the real work of democracy; he doesn't just talk a good game.
Third, he believes in the high ideals that made our country great and that are now in great danger.
His campaign has not been showered with cash by the large moneyed interests who profit from their business before Congress. As a result, he has been considerably outspent financially.
That gives us, as voters, the chance we need to set a better example by proving that politics does not have to be ruled by money. Democracy is not for sale in Texas.
Voting for Dan Grant for better reasons than those that can fit into slogans or sound bites is our chance to prove to politicians, big money, and the system in general:
o that voters are smarter than 30-second TV ads,
o that voters are independent thinkers who have the courage to make up their own minds, and
o that doing whatever it takes to collect and spend vast amounts of money to spend on TV advertising is not the way to convince us to vote for or against anyone or anything.Today's voters are too smart to let advertising alone determine their choices. Voters have outgrown the need to be spoon-fed TV images and sound bites as a basis for making their decisions. Voters have experience, courage, and independent thought, just like Dan Grant.
This is our chance as voters to show the political system that we have them too. A vote for Dan Grant will show that we are not controlled by big money.
We look deeper than that now to decide what's right. Some cynics have believed that there was a time when voters felt overwhelmed and powerless about their ability to self-govern.
If it ever was, that time has gone. This is our chance to prove it.
The Chron says Barack Obama is leading in Texas.
Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama appears to be consolidating a lead over Hillary Rodham Clinton among most constituent groups in Texas except Hispanics, according to a new tracking poll.The survey found Obama leading 48.2 percent to 41.7 percent over Clinton statewide. The poll, conducted Tuesday through Thursday for the Houston Chronicle, Reuters and C-SPAN by Zogby International, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.8 percentage points.
[...]
The tracking poll, which will be conducted daily until next Tuesday's election, found Obama leading with both men and women. He and Clinton were essentially tied among Anglos, but he held 84.9 percent support among blacks and she had the support of 54.9 percent of the Hispanics surveyed.
That Hispanic backing helped give Clinton a lead in South Texas of 66.7 percent. She also led in West Texas, which would include heavily Hispanic El Paso.
Obama led in every other region and was supported by about 60 percent of those surveyed in Houston and Dallas -- which have more nominating delegates at stake than all of the region from San Antonio to Brownsville to El Paso.
[...]
Momentum is clearly on Obama's side, though. A Texas Democratic superdelegate -- state Rep. Senfronia Thompson of Houston -- Thursday switched her support from Clinton to Obama.
Pollster John Zogby said the statistics that really show the momentum for Obama is the timing of when people made up their mind on how to vote. He said Clinton leads "substantially" among those who made up their minds more than a month ago, but Obama leads almost "two-to-one" among those who made up their minds recently.
That last bit jibes with a People Calling People poll (PDF) that Perry highlights, which shows Sen. Clinton holding a small lead among those who have already voted. Really, the question any poll has to answer at this point is how they determined their sample. With so many new voters in this primary, you simply cannot rely on past voting history. It seems likely to me that any miscalculations here are going to undercount Obama's support, but that could be wrong as well. We just don't know. My gut says Obama's got a decent lead, but we won't know till Tuesday.
Well, assuming there isn't a lawsuit, anyway.
Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign has raised the possibility of a challenge to Texas' primary and caucus rules just days before the contest, drawing a warning against legal action from the state's Democratic Party.Top strategists for Democratic rival Barack Obama said today they supported the party's action, suggesting the Clinton campaign was trying to block the reporting of caucus results.
Aides to Clinton said earlier this week they were alarmed at the lack of clarity about many of the caucus rules and expressed their concerns on a conference call with Obama's staff and state party officials. Texas has a two-step voting process, with a primary and then caucuses shortly after the polls close.
Specifically, Clinton aides questioned a provision allowing caucus attendees to vote to move the location if they choose to do so, and whether people who had cast so-called "provisional ballots" in the primary would have their votes counted in the caucus.
They also expressed concern about the automated phone system precinct chairs would use to call in the results of each caucus, saying the party hadn't yet trained anyone to use the system properly.
Clinton political director Guy Cecil said he asked party officials to spell out the rules in memo form and to send them to both campaigns.
"We want to see the results in writing, and we reserve the right to challenge something if we don't believe it reflects something that was discussed on the call," he said, insisting that if there were clear problems with how the caucuses were being run, "you are allowed to say something about it."
Cecil today denied that the campaign planned to sue the party, which will manage roughly 8,700 caucuses Tuesday evening.
"There were no veiled threats of lawsuits of any kind," Cecil said of the conference call.
Glenn Smith suggests a reason for this:
They want to delay and disrupt the reporting of the delegate count. They hope that if they win the popular vote, they can avoid, at least for one news cycle, news reports that even if they do so they will very likely lose the delegate fight in Texas and fall further behind Obama in the national delegate contest.This is not speculation. This has been the subject under discussion. While I have not been part of that discussion, plenty of sources last night and this morning confirmed this as the core of the dispute.
It is widely assumed that Obama's organizational advantage will achieve in the caucus portion of the Texas election just what it has achieved in earlier caucuses: a significant victory in delegates. There are 67 delegates at stake in those caucuses. The Clinton campaign would like to delay the reporting of the caucus results, and that is why they have continually "reserved the right to challenge" Texas law and Democratic party procedures.
Throw the Texas delegate results in dispute, and win or lose the popular vote, they will have advanced their case that the contest remains close and should go all the way to the convention if necessary.
Well, good luck with that. Both the Pollster average and the Belo tracking poll are also showing movement to Obama. I can understand this strategy if she wins the popular vote, but not if she loses it, as it'll sound a lot like sour grapes. But hey, you never know. Thanks to KT for the latter links.
This is the funniest thing I've seen since the demise of the Dysfunctional Family Circus.
Who would have guessed that when you remove Garfield from the Garfield comic strips, the result is an even better comic about schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and the empty desperation of modern life? Friends, meet Jon Arbuckle. Let's laugh and learn with him on a journey deep into the tortured mind of an isolated young everyman as he fights a losing battle against loneliness and methamphetamine addiction in a quiet American suburb.
Go and see for yourself, and I dare you not to laugh. It'll probably get a cease-and-desist letter soon, so don't wait too long.
On a related note, this story of how the DFC itself came to cease publication was something I hadn't seen before, and this study of recontextualization in comic strips, including a now-defunct earlier variant of "Garfield Minus Garfield", is very interesting. Check 'em out.
The party of the elephant is hoping its members don't forget about it.Record-breaking turnout in the Democratic primary across the state is causing concerns that a significant number of Republicans may not vote in their own party's primary.
With the much tighter presidential race on the Democratic side, some Republicans are choosing to temporarily jump ship so they can have a say in a race that is generating more excitement.
At local events, members are lecturing fellow Republicans on the importance of voting in their own primary.
Among the reasons being given are a need to support local GOP candidates and a concern that the results of some local primary races may not accurately reflect the Republican electorate if not enough party members cast ballots.
On Tuesday, the Texas Republican Party e-mailed a "Republican Voter Alert" to supporters statewide encouraging them to vote in their own party's primary.
"Voting in the Republican Primary is important to keeping Texas the conservative beacon of the nation," the e-mail said. "Your vote ensures your status as a Republican for the entire election cycle."
The e-mail noted that only Republicans who vote in their own primary can take part in GOP precinct conventions on March 4 or in the national convention later this year.
Funny, there's not so much talk about affecting the Democratic result any more, is there? Can't imagine why.
Meanwhile, Vince compares some Dem primary turnout numbers in GOP strongholds to 2004 general election results to demonstrate that there are indeed enough Dems in these places to support the levels of turnout we're seeing. That was one reason why I included the State Rep vote totals from 2006 in this post. Take a look at Vince's work and see what you think.
Harvey Kronberg weighs in on the turnout numbers.
Party activists say the primary numbers are misleading and Republican voters will come home next November.What I do know is this:
Nationally, people who self-identify as Democrats now exceed self-identifying Republicans by 20 percent, the biggest lead for either party since pollsters started asking the question. While I don't know what the comparable Texas spread is, I would suggest that Governor Perry's 39 percent win in the last election is probably the size of the unshakeable GOP base vote.
Maybe it's little more than an aberration driven by an exciting race, but if Democrats do start competing successfully in hard core Republican suburban counties, Texas may actually become a two party state more quickly than most of us expected.
I'll say again, I think you can take everything we thought we knew about the electorate here and throw out it. We'll all be sorting through the data for weeks after Tuesday to try and figure out where things stand now, and we'll need to start from the ground up.
Yesterday's numbers, courtesy of the County Clerk: 21,558 Democrats and 6,616 Republicans voted on Thursday, for totals of 135,733 Democrats and 41,290 Republicans overall. The last day of early voting is usually the busiest, too. I bet we'll see 30,000 Democratic votes cast today. What do you think?
Today is the last day to vote early in Texas. I really don't know why we don't extend early voting up through Election Day - at the very least, why we don't extend it through the weekend before; Lord knows we could use the extra days - but we don't. So this is it. Vote today at an early voting location, or vote Tuesday at one of these Democratic or Republican precinct locations. This is it, time's running out, no second chances.
If you vote on Tuesday at a precinct location, please note that you must go to the correct one for your precinct. Unlike early voting, where you can pick your spot, your polling place is set. Your voter registration card has your precinct number on it, which you can then use to look up your precinct polling location. If you don't have your card handy, you can look up your precinct number at HarrisVotes.org - click on Voting Information, then either Address or Name and Address to enter your information to search. You can also determine your precinct location there. The bottom line is that you may only vote at your precinct location on Tuesday. If you go someplace else, you will be turned away. Please know where you're going before you head out, especially if you vote later in the day.
You've probably heard about the "Texas two-step", which is the precinct convention that follows the primary vote. That occurs at your precinct voting location, so if you voted early and you want to participate in that, you'll need to look up your location anyway. Be there by 7:15 to take part. It's a somewhat involved process, which is described in step-by-step detail here. Given the huge number of voters, especially new voters, expect a certain amount of chaos. But this is a big part of the process, so stick with it as best you can, and we'll all get through it together.
So. How many of you have voted already, and how many of you plan to vote on Tuesday? How many of you plan to go to the precinct convention? Leave a comment and let me know.
I will be keeping an eye on this.
Former Dallas Cowboy Ron Springs, who has been in a coma since the fall after surgery to remove a cyst, is one of 11 plaintiffs challenging Texas' medical malpractice cap in a lawsuit filed Monday.The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Marshall, challenges the 2003 Medical Malpractice and Tort Reform Act, which limits awards in Texas. The lawsuit asks the court to declare the cap unconstitutional.
[...]
In January, Springs' wife filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against two doctors she said caused her husband's brain damage during a routine surgery to remove a cyst.
Springs, who suffered Type 2 diabetes, had received a kidney from his former Cowboys teammate Everson Walls in February 2007. Les Weisbrod, Springs' attorney in the medical malpractice lawsuit, has said the coma had nothing to do with the kidney transplant.
The damages cap has been a disaster, and has had no effect on the things that it was supposed to do, like solving the problem of rural doctor shortages. I feel pretty confident that if it were to go to a vote again, it would lose. Given that we're never going to get 2/3 of the Lege to pass a repeal amendment, this may be the only hope for that. They're going to ask for class action status, so we'll see how this goes.
We start today's look at turnout with a Republican talking point, which I'm sure we'll hear again in the future.
The excitement of their contest has driven up Democratic primary early voting to dramatic levels. But GOP spokesman Hans Klingler said he expects things to be Republican as usual in the November election."In the end, the important vote is obviously going to be cast in November. It is there that, empirically and historically, Democrats in Texas have a tough time turning their people back out to the polls and sustaining that level of excitement post-primary," Klingler said.
Oh, Hans. What tune is it that you're blowing as you whistle past the graveyard? It's a bit of a cliche, but I recommend It's The End Of The World As We Know It anyway.
Having had my fun with Hans, I will readily admit that all this excitement is going to come to an end, and the candidates (whether both are still actively campaigning or not) will head off elsewhere to the next battles. It's very much an open question how much infrastructure they will leave, how much resources they will invest here later on, and what if any data they will share with the state and local party organizations (most likely, not much). The record turnout will help a lot with future voter identification, but what that means is a lot of raw data for each individual campaign to sort through. Trying to figure out how many of these new voters will come back in the fall (my guess is most of them) and how many of them will be receptive to voting Democratic downballot will keep many a consultant and campaign manager awake nights.
There's plenty of good that has come out of this primary experience. People are excited about the Democratic candidates. Democrats have gotten a ton of positive attention in the media. Some number of these new voters will come back no matter what we do, others will come back with fairly minimal levels of persuasion. More people will be involved in organizing and campaigning. And on and on. There is a risk that some people will feel a letdown, or will not come back because their candidate lost, or will focus on the Presidential race to the exclusion of downballot races, but let's be clear that Democrats are in a far better position now than they've been in a long time. I'll take my chances on the downside.
Whatever else the Presidential candidates plan to do or maybe do here or not later on, here's one thing they can and should do: Spend some money on TV ads.
Obama and Clinton have spent more money on Texas television advertising in the past three weeks than all the past four Democratic presidential nominees spent on their entire Texas campaigns combined.
It would be nice to see some general election polling now, to see how strong a case one can make for Texas being in play for November, but this strikes me as a no-brainer for them regardless for two reasons. One, as part of an effort to maximize the popular vote, in particular to become the first Democrat to win a clear majority of the popular vote since Jimmy Carter. Claiming a mandate is much easier under those circumstances. And two, in hopes of broadening Democratic majorities in Congress and the Senate, which will go a long way towards getting their agendas enacted.
One positive thing I've heard about that has already resulted from the early voting madness is a shift in perceptions among donors towards the statewide campaigns. The belief that we really can win is trickling down. If the primary turnout for Obama and Clinton makes it a little bit easier for Rick Noriega, Dale Henry/Art Hall, and the judicial candidates to raise money, that will go a long way.
On to the numbers:
More than half a million people cast Democratic primary ballots in the first eight days of early voting this year -- setting a pace for the party to have more than a million presidential primary votes in the state for the first time since Bill Clinton tangled with Paul Tsongas in the 1992 elections.Texas Secretary of State Phil Wilson on Wednesday predicted 3.3 million people will vote, breaking the 1988 record of 2.7 million who turned out when both parties had presidential nomination battles in Texas.
As noted by Karen Brooks, more people have already voted in Texas than there are in the entire state of Vermont, which is also having a primary on Tuesday. That's pretty cool. Note that the SOS' projection works out to about 2.4 million Democrats, which is a shade less than the almost-2.7 million estimate by Dr. Murray. Nick Beaudrot, who had made a similar guess previously, is now backing down somewhat as well, to about 2.1 million. It's a testament to how insane this has been that I think of that as a bit of a bummer. On a side note, BOR runs some numbers for Travis County based on past early voting performances.
In Harris County, yesterday was the busiest day yet, with another 18,000 Democratic votes cast, for a total of over 114,000 so far. I think we'll easily surpass 150,000 by close of business Friday, and won't be surprised if we get as many as 25,000 votes cast on Friday itself. Oh, and it pleases me to note that two more Republicans have voted at the Julia C. Hester House in HD142, thus bringing that total up to three. Woo hoo!
Finally, on the subject of Republicans voting in the Democratic primary:
And the people Obama and Clinton are drawing to the polls are new or only occasional voters, according to a preliminary survey of early vote results from Harris and Dallas counties being done by the Texas Democratic Party.Through last Saturday, half of those casting ballots had not voted in any of the past three party primaries; 20 percent are not regular general election voters; and about 2 percent are Republican crossover voters, said party consultant Ed Martin.
Once again, the voting history of everyone who participates can be and is being checked. There is no wave of hardcore Rs showing up to mess with the Democrats' game. Obviously, we don't know how the general-but-not-primary voters have gone in past Novembers; certainly some of them intend to vote for the Republican this fall. But the voters who are speaking the loudest in this election are Democrats and those who want to me. That's what you need to know.
Mayor White is taking another crack at an ordinance aimed at the Ashby highrise, and has met with some initial approval for it.
The City Council indicated its support of White's approach by shelving a draft ordinance that had been the subject of debate for many months. Instead, the city will take public discussion for six months, and use an old city law on driveways to force traffic revisions from the Ashby developers, if needed.The driveway law dates back to 1940, though its current form began to take shape in 1968. White acknowledged that reviving this broadly worded law might have a "chilling" effect on growth, so he circulated a memo Wednesday with criteria on how it would be applied. The memo said developments that meet three criteria will receive "more intense scrutiny" of their traffic loads. The criteria are:
- A location where 60 percent or more of the properties within a 500-foot radius are residential
- Driveways that feed onto local or collector streets instead of a major thoroughfare
- A net increase of 50 additional vehicles going to and from the development during rush hours.
To mitigate the traffic effects, developers might have to add turning lanes or lights, scale back the number of apartments, or change the type of stores, White said.Enforcement comes from the city's power to reject a site plan, which shows where driveways connect to public streets.
The city will use these "interim procedures" while gathering public comment through July 1, the memo said. By Aug. 1, the city will issue a new proposal for regulating traffic from high-density developments. But it was unclear if this meant a new ordinance or the adjustment or tightening of current ordinances or policies.
"We are listening to everybody's concerns," Councilwoman Anne Clutterbuck said. "It's an extremely complex process, and one size does not fit all."
Chris Amandes, co-chair of the Stop Ashby High-Rise task force, said he was fine with the mayor's new strategy.
"They are continuing along the same lines as the high-density ordinance, but this has the additional advantage of not having to pass City Council," Amandes said.
See here for the previous update. At least this approach now has support from the Ashby opponents, which is a step forward from where we were before. I still think that a narrow focus on traffic is myopic and will not do enough to avoid this kind of situation in the future, and that the risk of exposing the city to a lawsuit over an ordinance like this is a risk that should be weighed very carefully. I'll be very interested to see what we learn from those six months of public discussion.
So a few weeks ago, this group called the Greater Harris County Democrats, whom no one had ever heard of and who listed no actual members on its web page appeared and circulated via email a group of candidates they endorsed. It caused a bit of a stir, partly because of the "who the heck are these guys?" question, and partly because some of the candidates they backed were not exactly racking up the endorsements elsewhere. I didn't blog about them at the time because I thought there was no need to give a phony group more attention, but some other folks did, and raised a few more questions about them.
And now we have some answers, thanks to a little sleuthing by the Chron's Alan Bernstein, who looked into their contributors after receiving a mailer from the group:
There is no information on the card about the folks who are making the endorsements. Ditto for the group's website. But the Houston Politics blog solved the riddle in a suave snap by going to the Texas Ethics Commission website.The 10 contributors to the organization include state Rep. Kevin Bailey ($1,000), Constable Gary Freeman ($250) and state House candidate Jose Medrano ($50).
Lo and behold, Bailey, Freeman and Medrano also are on the list of candidates endorsed by the Greater Harris County Democrats. Essentially they paid money to advertise themselves.
Another endorsed candidate is judicial contender Marc Isenberg, shown on state records as having paid $1,500 to political consultant Sheryl Roppolo. And guess who contributed $1,000 to help circulate the endorsement list? Ms. Roppolo, of course. She serves on the Texas Democratic Executive Committee with Joy Demark, whose home is listed as the address for Greater Harris County Democrats.
So these guys paid money to create a "group" that then endorsed them; in Medrano's case, it's the only such endorsement he's received, while Bailey hasn't done much better. How pathetic. Kudos to Bernstein for ferreting this out.
Meanwhile, in Endorsements That Actually Mean Something, Congressman Gene Green sent out the following email yesterday in support of Bailey's opponent, Armando Walle:
Dear Friends,I want to let you know I am supporting Armando Walle in his race against Kevin Bailey in Texas House District 140. I know Armando very well. He has worked on our congressional staff for six years. I saw him tackle tough projects, deal directly with constituents and represent me out in the community. Armando always showed high character and great devotion to service.
At the same time I have watched as Kevin Bailey has become a political opportunist-- whether it be attacking Armando's character in his negative mailings or supporting Republican Speaker Tom Craddick. And while I find Bailey's campaign tactics disappointing, it is his support of the Republican speaker that is most upsetting.
By supporting Speaker Craddick, Bailey has enabled some of the worse legislation in Texas history to become law. Bailey's actions have helped the Republican speaker:
- take away the health insurance of hundreds of thousands of Texas children
- raise college tuition by 70% at the University of Houston
- pass an "education" bill that did not give one new dime to schools
- block all efforts to rid our air of dangerous chemicals
Kevin Bailey will say he did not vote to do these things, but by voting for and supporting the Republican speaker he is every bit as responsible.That is why I am asking you to join me in supporting Armando Walle for State Representative. Please click here to contribute to Armando's campaign.
Sincerely,
Congressman Gene Green
Like Scott Hochberg, Gene Green understands what's at stake here.
And finally, in Austin, actor Mike Farrell, best known as BJ Hunnicutt from M*A*S*H, is supporting Rick Reed for Travis County DA. The email he sent out was very strongly anti-death penalty (Farrell is a longtime death penalty opponent), and despite my own deep misgivings about the death penalty, it came across as a bit harsh and off-putting to me. To be honest, it would probably not have the intended effect on me, but I'm not voting in Travis County, so no harm no foul. I've reproduced it beneath the fold, so you can judge for yourself.
A message from Mike Farrell regarding the race for Travis County District Attorney in TexasYes, in Texas, prosecutors can pursue the death penalty for some types of crimes.
We can strap human beings to a table, inject them with a chemical cocktail that anesthetizes, paralyzes, and triggers cardiac arrest, resulting in what some would call a "humane death."
Texas can hope new technologies won't exonerate these men and women in the future. We can look the other way from all the inequities in death sentencing by race and economic class.
We can even punish people with lethal injection and feel justified that ... well, at least we're not hanging, electrocuting or standing them in front of a firing squad...
...but we don't have to.
Just because you can do something in Texas doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
Rick Reed is the only candidate for Travis County District Attorney who has pledged to halt the practice of seeking the death penalty.
Rick Reed is positioned to win this race and strike a major blow against the death penalty in Texas.
Only one thing stands in his way -- getting this television ad on the air. Unfortunately, many Travis County voters will never hear Rick Reed's message...
...unless we have your help. TAKE ACTION TODAY!
If 199 other opponents of the death penalty will join me and contribute just $100 to the Rick Reed campaign, we can purchase the television time we need to get our message in front of Travis County voters.
Go online now and make a secure contribution with a credit card. $100 is ideal, any amount will help.
Forward this message to others you know who care about this issue. Ask them to also help.
Because we can do something about the death penalty in Texas ... and it's the right thing to do.
Looks like the last major hurdle for the HISD bond referendum has been cleared.
The Texas Attorney General's office plans to give a preliminary green light Thursday to the Houston Independent School District's $805 million bond -- effectively ending a three-month long legal standoff that has held up school construction.With no appeals pending in state court, Assistant Attorney General David Mattax issued a letter this week saying that the critics' remaining federal lawsuit, which claims that some HISD's policies discriminate against poor, minority children, isn't enough to keep the state from signing off on the public securities.
"Rather, (the) policy-making role lies with the local elected officials who vote to place a bond election on the ballot, and the voters who choose whether to approve the bonds," Mattax wrote.
HISD's controversial bond, which passed by a 2,000-vote margin in November, is expected to build 24 new schools and renovate 134 others. The AG is expected to approve the bonds after a scheduling hearing set tomorrow on the federal lawsuit. Approval will be final no earlier than March 7, officials said.
So this means construction can begin. There is still that federal lawsuit, but I couldn't tell you what effect that may have, or when it may have it. The bottom line is that the bonds can be issued without having to wait for further court rulings, which is not how things turned out in Waller County. As someone who voted for the HISD bond referendum, I'm glad to see this.
I'm also amused by this:
Attorney Ty Clevenger, who represented critics of both the Waller and Houston bonds, said he could have salvaged the case against HISD in Supreme Court. He said he's dropping the case because he never got paid by the opponents, who were organized by State Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston."I took the Waller case pro bono, but that was never the agreement with HISD," he said. "And I have not even been reimbursed for my expenses."
I'm just gonna let that one slide by as it is.
I've kind of lost track of the campaign overview stories the Chron has run, mostly because they've appeared somewhat erratically, but here's one on CD10, which features a hot Democratic primary between Dan Grant and Larry Joe Doherty.
Thanks to the hyperpartisan congressional redistricting map of 2003, the 19 GOP members in the Texas House delegation all represent districts drawn to create safe Republican seats.That seems to be the case in 2008, with one possible exception -- the radically redrawn 10th Congressional District now held by Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Austin. Despite the new district's Republican voting tendencies, Democrats are hoping for a national tide that, combined with a huge Democratic turnout in Austin, could help them to unseat McCaul.
I've covered this before. Boosting the vote share in Travis County, and making it more Democratic is a big step towards winning CD10, though it's not likely to be sufficient. Making gains in Harris and the counties in between, even modest ones, will be needed as well. 2008 is probably as good a time as any to make this happen.
The Democratic primary clash is less an ideological battle than a generational and geographical one. The two Democrats seeking the party's nomination are as different as the two communities anchoring the opposite ends of the oddly shaped district.Larry Joe Doherty, 61, a flamboyant former daytime TV judge from Houston, has raised lots of campaign cash. The star of Fox's Texas Justice, he made a first career out of suing other lawyers for malpractice before exchanging the courtroom for the TV studio.
His opponent, Dan Grant, 34, is a wonkish international affairs consultant from Austin whose work for a nonprofit has taken him into war zones in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Doherty has more money, but Grant says it will take more than money to beat the independently wealthy incumbent. McCaul, now seeking his third term, is the son-in-law of Lowry Mays, the chairman of Clear Channel Communications.
You can listen to my inteview with Dan Grant here, and my interview with Larry Joe Doherty here. I think Grant is overall the better candidate, but either one of these gentlemen will make a fine standard-bearer in the district.
Here's a story about the Beer Can House, which is having a grand re-opening party this weekend after a successful restoration.
The Beer Can House is, after all, an homage to individual vision, although Milkovisch, who died in 1988, might have preferred to call it an homage to Texas Pride and Pabst Blue Ribbon. Or a way to avoid painting the house.Decide for yourself. People will be able to see it up close when the house reopens March 8, one of the few remaining bungalows in a neighborhood now filled with expensive, three-story townhouses. Docents will be on hand between noon and 5 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays, showcasing what more than 40,000 beer cans and other whimsical additions can do for a house. (The house will be open by appointment, as well, and available for rental to groups of 25 or fewer.)
There are garlands made of pull tabs, the tops and bottoms of beer cans and cutouts from the sides of cans, all hanging from the eaves. That shaded the house from the harsh Houston sun, reducing Milkovisch's electric bills. The small yard is covered in concrete slabs, dotted with glass marbles. Just a way to get out of mowing the lawn, he insisted.
The mailbox and fences are covered with cans, and wooden sculptures are studded with metal letters -- AMEN, reads the top of a wooden ladder -- and elaborate cutouts.
"John Milkovisch never thought of himself as an artist," said Julie Birsinger, project manager for the Beer Can House. He was, instead, an upholsterer and a beer drinker.
[...]
Birsinger had to figure out how to renovate a house covered in beer cans, which isn't the sort of thing taught in art-restoration courses. Her goal was to restore the work to its original condition and to replace any artistic elements that couldn't be repaired.
The sunlight that once twinkled off the glass and metal is now in short supply as towering townhomes loom over the house, so new lighting will be added to recapture some of the ambience. Originally, the Orange Show had hoped to buy an adjacent lot for parking space; that didn't work out, so parking remains at a premium throughout the neighborhood.
As for the house's signature décor, many of the cans were in good enough condition to be rehung after cleaning -- a good thing since Birsinger couldn't run to the corner store for a six-pack when she needed new materials.
Beer cans have changed. Some brands are no longer produced. Other labels have been redesigned, detachable pull tabs are history and modern cans aren't even made of the same material as cans from decades past.
No problem, thanks to members of the Brewery Collectibles Clubs of America, who responded to a call for vintage cans from the 1960s and 1970s.
I cannot tell you how much I love the fact that there is such a thing as the Brewery Collectibles Clubs of America, and that they were able to respond to a call for "vintage cans from the 1960s and 1970s". Talk about one man's trash being another's treasure. Anyway, go visit the Beer Can House when you get a chance. It's a true gem of Houston, and I couldn't be happier that it's in good hands.
I've lost track of how many articles I've seen predicting the death of old-fashioned commercial radio, but here's another one with some interesting tidbits in it.
Broadcast radio faces challenges from satellite radio companies for listeners, from the Internet for advertisers and even from automakers who are making it increasingly easy for drivers to turn their car stereos into mirror images of their iPods and skip the radio altogether.Cutbacks haven't worked out so well, serving only to speed the exit of listeners and making it harder to maintain smaller and smaller profit margins. Increasingly conservative playlists have made radio less essential to even the most casual of music fans, who don't feel like they're missing anything if they don't listen every day since the same 10 or 15 songs are in heavy rotation for a month or longer.
In the name of cost-cutting and a jaded belief that listeners would tune in to whatever was on, CBS Radio eliminated New York's heritage oldies station WCBS for a DJ-free hits format called Jack, and turned its alternative rock station K-Rock into an all-talk channel, leaving New York without a rock station at a time when the city's rock scene was in the midst of a resurgence. Both moves failed and both stations have since returned to their original formats, losing listeners and momentum along the way.
Perhaps it's because it didn't replace anything worth remembering, but I think the Jack station here has been the best thing to happen to Houston radio in the 20 years I've been a resident. They have a broader selection of classic rock than The Arrow as well as a deeper playlist of 80s tunes than The Point. I've yet to say to myself "geez, give that one a rest already" since I started listening to it. It's not perfect by any means - more new music would be nice, though with the usually-preferable no-DJ formula, you'd only learn about the titles and artists via the Internet, which isn't much help if you listen while driving. I may yet as sick of this setup as I've gotten of others, but for now, it feels like a breath of fresh air. If they resist the urge to cut back the playlist, it'll stay that way for a good while.
All these previous mistakes seem to be on the mind of the folks behind the new rock station WRXP, "The New York Rock Experience," which replaced lite-jazz station WQCD on Feb. 5.At a time when most radio stations around the country try to seem like they could be from anywhere, RXP is pledging to focus on New York area artists and songs about New York. It's starting with a wide playlist that looks to combine alternative rock, mainstream rock and oldies in a way that will appeal to the 18-to-44 demographic, especially at the wealthier older end.
It's a good plan to try to introduce Led Zeppelin fans to White Stripes, to let Depeche Mode fans know about The Killers and The Bravery, to let Pearl Jam fans discover Spoon. It's also an interesting idea to remind rock fans that New York still is a breeding ground for loads of great new bands, including The Hold Steady and The National, who have both found homes on the station.
KACC is your best source of local music - okay, only source - though even they tend to play the same cuts from the local artists they feature - if it's Sisters Morales, it's "It Can Only Get Better"; if it's Bert Wills, it's "No Other Way". But hey, at least they play 'em. Honestly, this is so obviously a good idea for both the station and the local music scene that it's hard to believe no one else does this, even in this homogenized, cost-minimizing age. If nobody in the industry can figure that out, then it deserves to die.
For today's look at the early vote turnout figures, I'm just going to consider two numbers and what they might have to tell us about what's in store for November. Let's start with this memo from Professor Murray (PDF), who looked at early vote total in the top 15 counties through Sunday, and extrapolated from there.
Using these totals, we can estimate the total primary vote for each party as follows:(1) These 15 counties represent 60% of the total statewide vote, so we extrapolate that the entire state's early vote total as of Sunday was about 600,000 on the Democratic side and 200,000 in the Republican primary.
(2) Based on past patterns, we can conservatively assume that about 50% of the early vote had been cast by Sunday, which means that final early vote total will be about 1,200,000 in the Democratic Primary and 400,000 in the Republican primary.
(3) And finally, we can conservatively project that the early vote represents about 45% of the total statewide vote, which yields a final Democratic primary vote in 2008 of 2,667,000, and a final Republican vote of 889,000.
That 2,667,000 figure, which is Number #1 for today, would shatter all records for Democratic Party primary turnout, even going as far back as 1972, when everyone voted Democratic. It would represent something like 20% of all currently registered voters in Texas. And if those really are conservative assumptions and projections, it means there's a chance that Democratic Primary turnout could be higher than the 2004 general election vote total for John Kerry of 2.8 million, which is something that Nick Beaudrot had suggested before.
That's mind-blowing stuff, and I think the first thing you have to do with this is to realize that all previous assumptions about the composition of the electorate in Texas are invalid. As has been pointed out, a huge number of the people voting in the Democratic primary have no primary voting history. Some of them likely have no voting history - I'll say again I really want to get my hands on this data once it's available to me. I don't know how many of these people will come back and vote again in November, but if the person they voted for this time is on the ballot again, I like the odds. The job will be getting them to continue on and keep voting for more Democrats.
And the key for that is money. It's going to take a lot of money to identify and communicate with all those new-to-us voters. Will the large donors who sat out the 2006 election on the grounds that Democrats couldn't win statewide (*cough* *cough* trial lawyers *cough* *cough*) get back in the game? Will the DNC send back some of the money it's been notorious for sucking out of here? Will the Presidential candidates themselves take the time and make the effort to campaign in Texas, as that in and of itself would be a huge boost to Democratic prospects overall? Well, one of them says Yes to that.
State legislators supporting Barack Obama took issue with Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday over her statement that Texas isn't likely to figure into the general election for the Democrats."I'd love to carry Texas, but it's usually not in the electoral calculation for the Democratic nominee; Florida and Michigan are," she said in a recent videotaped interview with Texas Monthly.
Democratic Reps. Jim Dunnam of Waco, Pete Gallego of Alpine and Garnet Coleman of Houston, all of whom back Obama, said Texas Democrats need a presidential candidate who will try to win Texas and help rejuvenate the state party.
"It harkens back to the 1990s, when Texas Democrats were basically abandoned," Dunnam said.
Democrats lost all statewide offices in 1998. They later lost total control of the Legislature. The party has been trying to rebuild ever since.
The lawmakers said Obama has assured them he would campaign in Texas if he becomes the nominee. They noted that he helped campaign for other candidates in red states in the 2006 elections.
That's what I like to hear. If I hadn't already voted for Obama, this promise would have been enough to swing me to his side.
Which brings me to the second number to discuss, and that's 1.7 million. As in, George W. Bush won Texas by 1.7 million votes in 2004. Remember how I said John Kerry got 2.8 million votes? Bush got 4.5 million. That's a steep hill to climb.
But 2008 isn't 2004, not in any way, shape, or form. Even if you knew nothing about the crazy primary turnout, it would have been safe to assume that the GOP peaked, and the Democrats troughed, in 2004. With what we're seeing, who knows where the levels are now. Maybe we'll start to get some polling numbers to help us figure it out, I don't know. But when even a pessimist like Greg Wythe is saying that "going from say 2M primary votes to 50% of the 7.4M to eke out a win is something that may also soon enter the realm of the possible", then things really are different.
I'll leave it at that for now. We'll see where we stand after the last early voted does that deed on Friday.
The Federal Transit Administration is committed to helping the Metropolitan Transit Authority qualify for funding of two light rail lines by the end of the year, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison said Tuesday.Hutchison's statement came after a closed-door meeting in her Washington office, where FTA Administrator James Simpson and Deputy Administrator Sherry Little talked with Mayor Bill White, Metro President and CEO Frank Wilson, board chairman David Wolff and a bipartisan congressional delegation from the Houston area.
Hutchison, R-Texas, said Simpson was committed to the same goal as the delegation, "and that is a full funding grant agreement by the end of the year."
Such an agreement would ensure that Metro could complete the two lines, provided it followed required federal procedures.
So far, Metro has pushed the projects forward with a series of small grants for preliminary studies.
Metro has applied for $500 million in federal aid to build the North and Southeast lines. Hutchison said the full funding agreement is important because "once that is committed to by the FTA, then it automatically goes into the budget and we don't have to fight for it."
[...]
Federal officials had questioned the level of public support for the light rail system, and the meeting was intended as a show of unity. Hutchison said the delegation "made quite an impression."
One less thing to worry about. There will undoubtedly still be a fight, and less unity, when the time comes to get FTA funding for the Universities line, but at least that one was light rail from the beginning, so there's no extra paperwork to be done. Be that as it may, kudos to all for getting this done.
Chuck Rosenthal took the stand yesterday during the Sheriff's lawsuit, and nothing too terribly exciting happened.
Attorney Lloyd Kelley, who represents the Ibarras, tried to establish that the district attorney's office passed the brothers' claims to the Harris County Sheriff's Office for investigation -- even as the sheriff's office allegedly prevented Kelley and the Ibarras from filing an internal affairs complaint.Kelley also tried to question Rosenthal on Tuesday about deleting more than 2,500 e-mails subpoenaed in connection with the lawsuit, but that effort was halted when Rosenthal's attorney, Ron Lewis, asked to approach the judge's bench. Rosenthal still faces a contempt hearing for the destruction of those documents, which is set to resume March 14.
Rosenthal told the jury he asked prosecutor Joe Owmby to look into the Ibarra case after receiving numerous letters from Kelley complaining about the deputies' actions.
"I did not specifically order an investigation," Rosenthal testified. "I gave Mr. Owmby the authority to investigate the case if he thought it was reasonable to do so."
Rosenthal said he later received a memo from Owmby reporting on the progress. "I was satisfied Mr. Owmby had looked into it," he said.
Owmby ultimately closed the case because he had not received any complaints or statements from the Ibarras, Rosenthal said.
He agreed, however, that some claims raised by the Ibarras -- such as false facts in a police report or lying to obtain criminal charges or accepting criminal charges for an act that is not illegal -- could be potential crimes. Rosenthal also agreed the District Attorney's Office has the authority to prosecute officers who destroy evidence. Officers should not destroy film or videotape without a court order, he said.
I guess the key point here, at least from the plaintiff's perspective, is that the case was closed by the DA's office because no complaint was received from the Ibarras. Except that they allege the Sheriff's office prevented them from filing such a complaint in the first place. I presume there will be some evidence offered to back up that charge, at which point things will fit together for them. We'll see how it goes.
You may recall that a coalition of activists filed suit earlier this month to have the 1973 law banning organizations or groups of persons from expending anything of value to aid or defeat the election of a speaker candidate declared unconstitutional. They asked the judge in that case to suspend enforcement of that law until the suit is resolved. Yesterday, the judge granted their motion.
U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel barred the state from enforcing portions of the so-called speaker's statute, which restricts people outside the Texas House of Representatives from spending money to influence the election of the House leader. The court order will be in effect until a trial later this year can determine whether the law is an unconstitutional restriction on free speech, as opponents contend, or until the state gets the order overturned on appeal.[...]
The court order opens up the possibility of organizations outside the candidates' campaigns advocating their position on the speaker election in fliers and commercials as well as through the lobbying of House candidates.
Lawyer Hiram S. Sasser III hailed the judge's preliminary order. He represents the American Civil Liberties Union and two conservative political groups that sued to have the law overturned.
"The most important legislative event that will occur is the speaker's election," he said. "If you don't get to weigh in on the speaker's race, you are cut out of the process."
Texas Assistant Attorney General James "Beau" Eccles declined to comment after the decision. During oral arguments, Eccles said the law does not prevent groups from exercising their free speech rights during the primary and general elections. He said the statute primarily governs "a tiny window" of critical time between the November general election and the beginning of the legislative session in January when the speaker is elected.
Eccles argued that a flier (Vote for X because he'll vote for Y for speaker, for example) would be legal during the primaries and general election. He added that the spending restrictions in the speaker's statute could be violated during the election season if, for example, a group flew lawmakers to Bermuda to lobby them on the race for speaker.
Eccles argued that the spending restrictions "may look unconstitutional" if not considered in the context of the whole Election Code.
Dallas lawyer James Ho, arguing for the plaintiffs, rejected the state's arguments.
"The state's position is both wrong and alarming," said Ho, noting that no other state has similar restrictions.
The ACLU, the Free Market Foundation and Texas Eagle Forum brought the suit, saying the law has a chilling effect on groups that want to spend money to influence who the next speaker will be.
I disagree with the premise of this lawsuit, and with the assertion that the statute has a "chilling effect". Given that no one has ever been prosecuted under this law in its 35-year existence, even though Tom Craddick probably should have been as part of the 2002 TAB/TRMPAC business, it's not clear to me that anyone pays attention to it. I suspect the law will eventually be thrown out, and when that happens I hope the Lege takes another stab at it. We've had a pretty clear demonstration lately of just how powerful the Speaker's office can be, and I think it's appropriate to have some checks on that power. We'll see how it goes. Link via PoliTex.
Rep. Scott Hochberg understands the stakes in this year's primary election.
I realize that a lot of people are unhappy with Rep. Miles. I don't blame anyone for feeling disappointed in him. But Miles represented his district well, he voted right on the issues, and most importantly, he's anti-Craddick. Returning Al Edwards to Austin is a huge step backwards. We can't afford that, and Rep. Hochberg understands that. I'm glad to see him stand up for that by standing up for Rep. Miles. We can deal with any further issues later, if needed, once Rep. Miles wins the primary.
And though this has nothing to do with endorsements, here's some news from the campaign of Rep. Paul Moreno about his Craddickite opponent.
Marisa Marquez' latest campaign finance report shows she has taken $20,717.27 from Republican donors and special interests groups in the last 31 days, further questioning her Democratic credentials and tying her ever closer to Tom Craddick. This brings the total amount of contributions Marquez has received from Republican donors to $25,217.27."Marisa Marquez has shown time and again that when it's time to live up to her campaign rhetoric, she falls short every time," stated Roger Garza, spokesperson for the Paul Moreno campaign. "How can voters honestly expect to believe that she is not a Craddick Democrat when Marquez consistently takes money from Tom Craddick's staunchest supporters?"
The $20,217.27 that Marquez has taken from Republican donors and special interest groups represents over half of her campaign contributions from January 25- February 22. The list includes a who's who of El Paso Republicans, including Robert "Bob" Hoy, Paul Foster, and Woody Hunt. Additionally, Republican special-interest group, Texans for Lawsuit Reform has donated over $14,000 in that same time span."
"With her acceptance of contributions from Texans for Lawsuit Reform, Marisa Marquez has shown herself to stand on the wrong side of consumer protection issues," continued Garza. "Marquez would rather put the profits of neglectful corporations ahead of the rights of local El Paso consumers."
The Paul Moreno campaign reported raising $46,930.12 in that same period. Their largest contributors included the House Democratic Campaign Committee, Fred Loya, Texas AFT, AT&T PAC, the Communication Workers of American, and Mikal Watts.
That report is here if you're curious. The choice here is clear as well.
Meanwhile, back on the endorsement front, Poll Dancing has a nice roundup of Presidential nods. Just curious: Did any of the West Texas papers give a recommendation? I haven't seen one yet.
Finally, I have been informed that the Chron's editorial board was still doing candidate screening sessions as recently as yesterday, so it is possible that we'll see more endorsements from them before it's all over, hopefully before everyone in the county has cast their votes. You can add another 16,000 Democrats from Tuesday to the total, meaning we're at 95,000 Dems, and 29,000 Republicans, with three more days of this to go. We could easily be at 150,000 Dems by the end of early voting, maybe more, which will make my original prognistication of 250,000 total seem conservative. Let me just say again: Wow!
And back we go to the question of Republicans voting in the Democratic primary.
According to polling, as well as anecdotal evidence, an unusually large number of Republicans and independents may cast their votes in the Democratic contest next week, a prospect that could tip the outcome of what polls show is now a tight race. Such defections could also affect the many local and state legislative primaries around the state.
I think it's quite clear that a large number of these folks have already cast those ballots, as evidenced by the off-the-charts turnout so far.
An American Research Group poll released Monday showed Obama leading Clinton, 71 percent to 25 percent, among Texas independents and Republicans who are likely to vote in the Democratic primary.There is scattered evidence across the state that some Republicans may be voting Democratic, at least for a day. In one precinct in the suburban Houston neighborhood of Kingwood, where 82 percent of voters cast ballots for President Bush in 2004, Democrats were outvoting Republicans 4-to-1 last week in early voting.
Daron Shaw, a political science professor at University of Texas, said surveys he conducted in two state legislative districts in the Dallas-Fort Worth area revealed that almost a quarter of voters with a history of voting in GOP primaries planned on participating in the Democratic primary.
Shaw, who conducts exit polls for Fox News, said that while some Republicans are voting in the Democratic primary largely for strategic reasons, he said others may be tired of GOP control of government and are drawn to a fresh face and ideas.
Another factor contributing to the crossover voting is a lackluster GOP presidential contest. Front-runner John McCain is expected to win the nomination, no matter how well rivals Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul do in the Lone Star State.
With the Arizona senator in command of the GOP race, some Republicans are motivated to cast a protest vote against Clinton.
I think the key here is to draw a distinction between those who are casting a vote in the Democratic primary because they want to vote for Obama or against Hillary or whatever, and those who are engaing in some kind of nefarious plot to tilt the primary results one way or another. I think that latter group is small to the point of insignificance, and there's nothing in this article that leads me to believe otherwise. I also think it's important to distinguish between those who have generally voted Republican in November but who have mostly not participated in primaries, and those who have a Republican primary history, as I believe the former are more likely to stick with the Democrats, at least at the top of the ticket, in the fall. I'm not saying the GOP primary folks are unreachable, just that I think the Republican-leaning independents are more likely to be comfortable with the idea of voting Democratic and will be more open to doing more of it.
Michael Jones, a 39-year-old self-described conservative Republican who is involved in marketing, said he will cast his vote for Obama in the primary "so Hillary gets out."But he isn't enamored of Obama, a first-term senator whose experience has come under fire from both Clinton and McCain.
"I just wish he would get some substance," Jones said. Yet Jones said he is undecided about the general election because he doesn't like McCain, whom he described as "just another Washington senator."
[...]
Debi McLoughlin, a 52-year-old Department of Public Safety worker who was waiting while her daughter had her hair cut, said she usually supports Republicans. But she is likely to declare herself a Democrat so she can choose Obama.
"A vote for Obama is a vote against Hillary," said McLoughlin. She may also vote for Obama again in the general election because she thinks the 71-year-old McCain is too old.
Across the street having lunch at Maxine's restaurant, Dot Berkner, a Republican, said she will check the polls right before the primary, and if Clinton is ahead, she will vote in the Democratic primary.
"I don't want her in the final choice," said Berkner, who added she will vote for McCain in the general election.
So the anecdotal scorecard is one Republican who might vote for Obama in November, one Republican-leaning independent who is also leaning (perhaps a bit more so than the first guy) to Obama for the general, and one Republican who will only vote in the Dem primary if she thinks she needs to help deny the nomination to Hillary Clinton. I'll tell you what, I'm happy with the concept of one in three nominal Republicans thinking about a vote for Obama in November. That would be more than enough to put the state in play, and make downballot races like Rick Noriega's that much more winnable.
The point I'm trying to make here is simply this: Every nominal Republican who casts a non-strategic vote in the Democratic primary is someone who will discover that doing so will not give them a fatal case of the cooties. Some number of these people will then realize that it's okay to vote for one or more Democrats in the general election. How big that population is, and how far down the ballot they'll be willing to go, are the $64,000 questions for this year. I hope we see some polling data to address that, but regardless I hope the lesson that the powers that be in the state Democratic Party take away is that the old rules are no longer valid. The assumption that Democrats cannot win at the state level should be firmly discarded, and the opportunity that is being presented here should be zealously pursued. Anyone still operating with a 2006 mindset should be ignored.
Some Republicans doubt that most longtime party loyalists will actually cross over, in part because they would forfeit the right to participate in some competitive local primary contests, including the races for Harris County district attorney and the Houston suburban congressional seat formerly held by Tom DeLay."I think partisan voting is a lot like blood type, impossible to change," said Hans Klinger, spokesman for the Texas Republican Party.
While I've expressed agreement with the basis of this sentiment multiple times, it should be noted that people do change. If they didn't, we'd still be a Democratic state. My argument is that people who truly see themselves as Republicans will prefer to vote in their own primary and have a say in those races than cross over to mess with the Democrats, so I see no reason to be concerned with that sort of gamesmanship. But the people who are actually crossing over, if they're like the people quoted in this story, are those who may not be seeing themselves as Republicans, or at least dyed-in-the-wool Republicans any more. For people like that, partisan voting is more like a wardrobe than a blood type, and as such it is entirely changeable. Those people ought to concern Hans Klinger. They've certainly got Royal Masset's attention:
If there is a major change in Texas politics in 2008 it will be caused by the Democrats. Even I have been chagrined to learn that my 13-year-old son Ernesto favors Barack Obama. The world is changing.
May there be many more like you, Ernesto.
When last I checked, I found a lot of yard signs on my neighbors' lawns, but almost none of them were for Presidential candidates. Two weeks and a crapload of early voting later, that's no longer the casae. I took another spin around the neighborhood over the weekend, and counted 22 signs for Barack Obama, five for Hillary Clinton, and four for Ron Paul. Nobody that I could see was publicly supporting John McCain or Mike Huckabee. I don't find that surprising in the least.
Which is not to say there wasn't any evidence of interest in the Republican primary. It's just that what interest I did see was, Ron Paul aside, all in the local elections. I counted five Kelly Siegler signs, four Jim Leitner signs, and two for Charles Bacarisse. I also saw one for CD18 hopeful John Faulk, but it shared a yard with a Jessica Farrar sign, so like that Bacarisse/Farrar combo I saw before, it's either a sign of confusion or of a mixed marriage. Still, the strangest combination I've seen is a yard that features a Farrar sign, a Dan Patrick sign (!), and an upside-down Bush/Cheney 04 sign. There's a message in there somewhere, but I'll be darned if I can figure out what it is.
Speaking of mixed messages, two of the Hillary signs I saw were accompanied by Obama signs. That too may signify a divided household, or it may be a way of saying "They're both fine by me!" Much as I appreciate that last sentiment, I still find that to be an odd way of expressing it. You can only choose one at the voting booth, after all.
Finally, after a slow start, JP Dale Gorczynski is now fairly well represented in the area. Not quite as well as Harold Landreneau, but Gorczynski's presence is definitely felt.
Another day, another outrageously strong early vote showing in Harris County. Another 15,000 Democratic votes were cast on Monday, bringing the seven-day early vote total to a hair under 80,000. That means that we have already surpassed the entire Democratic primary vote total for 2004 (73,477), and we still have four more days of early voting plus Primary Day itself to get. Let that sink in for a minute.
I know there's been a lot of talk about Republicans voting in the Democratic primary, whether sincerely or not. I've contributed quite a bit of that talk myself. But let's keep things in perspective here. The fact of the matter is that Democrats are turning out strongly, whatever else may be going on. Here's one piece of evidence for that: the turnout at early voting locations in the six African-American State Rep districts:
EV Loc Dem votes GOP votes Total votes Dem %
=====================================================
HD131 2902 73 2975 97.5
HD139 4143 111 4254 97.4
HD141 5854 1095 6949 84.2
HD142 4103 513 4616 88.9
HD146 7645 490 8135 94.0
HD147 3415 40 3455 98.8Total 28,062 2322 30,384 92.4
That's what I call strong Democratic turnout. In these districts, Barbara Radnofsky got over 70% of the vote against Kay Bailey Hutchison in all but HD146, where she got 67.7%. These aren't Republicans playing at mischief. And these six districts, which have nine of the 34 EV locations in Harris County, have cast more Democratic votes than Republican votes in all of Harris County combined.
(On a side note, my favorite statistic in the entire lot: Julia C. Hester House, one of two early voting locations in HD142, has had exactly one Republican vote cast there. That happened on Saturday. I feel like there should have been horns blowing and confetti dropping when that voter announced himself. Maybe next time.)
Now, just because these votes were cast at those locations doesn't mean those voters actually lived in those districts. You can vote anywhere during early voting, after all. I can tell you that a cursory glance through the rosters suggests most of those voters were actually in their home locations at the time, but let's look at this another way. Here's the Dem performance in various State Rep districts:
EV Loc Dem votes GOP votes Total Dem % Moody % 06 Dem
===========================================================
HD126 2344 1100 3444 68.1 35.2 9114
HD127 3003 2131 5134 58.5 33.4 14305
HD129 2775 1653 4428 62.7 39.2 14397
HD133* 2249 824 3073 73.2 43.8 8750
HD134** 1845 498 2343 78.7 51.7 25128
HD135 2150 939 3089 69.6 40.2 N/A
HD137 1151 324 1475 78.0 55.8 5201
HD138* 1591 610 2201 72.3 45.1 8286
HD143 862 151 1013 85.1 69.4 6026
HD144** 706 398 1104 63.9 44.9 8017
HD149 3006 856 3862 77.8 48.7 12621
The ones marked with * are four-day totals; those with ** are three-day totals; the rest are five-day totals. "Moody %" refers to the share of the vote that Bill Moody got in 2006; "06 Dem" is how many votes the Democratic candidate for State Rep got in that district that year. Generally speaking, the better Bill Moody did, the greater the share of vote is in the Democratic primary. Note that the main exceptions are HDs 129 and 144, both of which are in CD22 and both of which have primaries for the GOP nomination for State Rep; and HD134, which also has a primary for the GOP State Rep nomination and where you'll probably find a higher percentage of people interested in the downballot races than in most other places. To me, there's nothing in these numbers to suggest any real funkiness going on in terms of crossover voting. Just a fully engaged and motivated Democratic populace.
I'll keep trying to make something of these numbers as I continue to get the daily rosters. It's getting to be a bigger chore due to the volume of the data, but I'll see what I can do. Other looks at turnout come from EoW, where you can see that while GOP participation is stagnant, Democratic early voting is increased eightfold; BOR, which is doing a day-by-day look at the top 15 counties - note also Ken Molberg's comment that of 57,000 early voters in Dallas, "less than 3,000 have previous R primary history" going back to 2002; Nick Beaudrot, who is projecting that Dems may cast nearly as many ballots in the 2008 primary as they did in then 2004 general election for President (!!!); and Paul Burka, who still hasn't quite wrapped his mind around all this - how many D-to-R voters do you think there are going to be this year? Not many, if you ask me.
The CTC has sent the following letter to Mayor White and all of City Council regarding the proposed location for Dynamo Stadium:
Honorable Mayor White and Members of City Council:We understand that the City of Houston is considering purchasing six blocks for a proposed soccer stadium. We urge City Council to consider alternate sites or design requirements that will preserve street grid access on Capitol and Rusk. Please see the attached 3-page document (969 kb PDF) for maps and analysis.
The current proposed site is bounded by Texas Ave on the north and Walker St. on the south. If a soccer stadium occupies the entire proposed six blocks, closing Capitol and Rusk where they run through that area, that would take out 2 of the 4 remaining streets that connect Downtown to the East End between Bell and Congress, reducing traffic capacity by 50%.
Closing streets may have been acceptable when the area just east of Downtown was largely warehouses. But now it's sprouting new townhouses, condos, and apartments. Planners expect population density to increase dramatically. New residents will surely generate more traffic. And so will soccer games.
There are alternate parcels of undeveloped land nearby where the City could site the proposed soccer stadium without cannibalizing the remaining street grid. For example, there are six contiguous blocks of parking lots located between Texas and Preston that have the same footprint as the currently proposed stadium site.
A complete street grid is not only the most effective way to carry vehicle traffic, but also the easiest way for pedestrians and bicyclists to get around. As population and employment density increase in East Downtown, the street grid will matter more and more.
In places where we don't have a good grid, like Uptown and the Medical Center, we are regretting it. Why should we break the grid where it's still intact?
We cannot undo the damage the convention center did, or the damage the ballpark did, or the damage the basketball arena did. But we can avoid doing even more damage. Now is not the time to further cut off the East End from Downtown or to add a traffic bottleneck that doesn't need to exist.
Thanks and best regards,
Robin Holzer, Chair
Citizens' Transportation Coalition (CTC)
Christof has more on this, and there's some good discussion in the CTC forum. While I do believe that this stadium belongs downtown, near existing or soon-to-be-existing rail transit, that doesn't mean it has to be at the location that's currently proposed. The CTC suggested alternative would also be bounded by Texas Avenue, this time to the south, so it would be equally accessible to the Southeast and Harrisburg lines. As noted before, a hearing for this at 9 AM is on the City Council agenda for tomorrow. If you have an opinion on this, that would be your best chance to weigh in on it.
On a side note, would someone please gently explain to Loren Steffy why the Astrodome is an unacceptable option for the team. Thanks.
Houston Rockets center Yao Ming will be out the rest of the season and post-season with a stress fracture in his sore left foot.Yao was examined after Monday's practice at Memorial Hermann Hospital and met Rockets team physician Dr. Tom Clanton to go over the test results.
The Rockets confirmed the news this afternoon.
"It is not an injury we feel he can play with,'' Rockets team doctor Tom Clanton said.
"I've made the recommendation that it be treated surgically and we are working with him to get other opinions just to be certain that that is indeed what should be done.''
The Rockets (36-20) have won 12 consecutive games since losing the one game Yao has missed this season. Yao averaged 22 points and 10.8 rebounds this season.
It's like they're cursed. Just when I was feeling that they've really got it all together, and when they've put themselves in a position to win the Midwest Division, this happens. Arrrrgh!
Well, I failed to find any mainstream media coverage of the West 11th Street Park dedication ceremony, but the person who sent me the word about it was kind enough to forward me these links:
KUHF:
Despite intermittent rain, several dozen people gathered to celebrate the official opening of the 11th Street Park.It's one of the few remaining large natural forested areas inside the 610 Loop.
Houston Mayor Bill White says the site fits in with the city's overall parks plan.
"Too often we haven't thought ahead about preserving the greenspace that makes our city so special as we've grown. This is part of a whole change in the culture and direction of our city as a result of the fact that we're thinking ahead and preserving more and more of our greenspace and special places and things that make neighborhoods real neighborhoods."
[...]
The City of Houston had already pledged $4 million. And community members and philanthropists were able to raise another $1.3 million. Councilmember Toni Lawrence says saving the park was one of the reasons she ran for office.
"At one of the auctions, I bought a picture of this park. I have it hanging in the hallway. And it symbolizes to my staff if you work hard and, excuse me for kind of being emotional at this, this is a very, very important symbol. This is a symbol of working hard, but it's also a symbol of the community."
The 11th Street Park is home to some of the tallest trees inside the loop and is a sanctuary for 101 species of birds.
Houston Community Newspapers:
"This has been a de facto park in the community for years," said Roksan Okan-Vick, executive director of the city's parks board. "The rest of us are just now catching up."The land had been owned by the Houston Independent School District, which declared the property as surplus when the demographics for a new school at the site and an outcry from the community put an end to those plans.
Civic leaders and the city had worked since 2005 to raise the $9.2 million to retain the area as a park.
An item added to the state's urban park budget by state Sen. John Whitmire accounted for $3.75 million allowing the parks board to acquire the final five acres.
"It's amazing what people can do if we just come together," Whitmire said.
Mayor Bill White said the city had paid a fair price for what is one of the few remaining natural urban forests inside the 610 Loop.
"We rely heavily on private philanthropy in this community," he said, adding that the decision had been an easy one for the City Council.
The Mayor made what I thought was a pretty good point about this, that in a low-tax community it's incumbent on private funding sources to fill in the gaps where needed for that community to be truly livable. There's fodder there for an excellent debate some day. Anyway, just wanted to share these stories. Enjoy!
And the Chron's editorial board once again retreats into its fortress of solitude, leaving a bunch of primaries behind without any input from them. I suppose they may do one last endorsement roundup on Sunday or Monday, but I think it's equally likely they'll simply repeat themselves with a warmed-over rehash of what little they've done so far. Seriously, guys, you should let us know if all this is too much work for you. I'd hate to see you exhaust yourselves.
Just so you'll have some endorsement stuff to ponder for today, here's some State Senators endorsing Art Hall for Railroad Commissioner, and the Statesman's curious recommendation of incumbent Nelda Wells Spears for Travis County Tax Assessor, along with Glen Maxey's response to same. From what I can see, Maxey is clearly the better candidate, and if I were in Austin I'd cast my vote for him.
The city of Lubbock has discontinued its red light camera program.
[Lubbock City] council voted 4-3 to remove the cameras. Mayor David Miller and Councilman Jim Gilbreath, who supported the program last year, cast the deciding votes to kill it. They joined Councilmen Todd Klein and John Leonard, who have consistently opposed the program."Statistics are in favor of keeping them, but if you listen to the citizens, I believe the majority of them would prefer this issue go away," Miller said. "I'm elected by the people; I'm going to try to do their will every chance I get."
The cameras have been installed at 12 intersections in Lubbock since last year. A report detailing the cameras' first six months of use, released in January, showed a spike in rear-end collisions at intersections with and without the cameras.
Opponents of the system have said studies show the cameras are affecting drivers' behavior for the worse. But the company, ATS, said six months of data is not enough time to judge them. It also said the cameras are working - accidents with injuries have dropped at the 12 locations.
ATS collected more than $295,000 in fines from drivers caught by the Lubbock cameras in the first six months of operation.
[...]
The city had collected about 70 percent of the fines from thousands of tickets issued last year, but it admitted it had no teeth in its ability to enforce collections. The city also had yet to make more money than ATS billed, meaning all the money had gone to the company. The city was not responsible for the difference.
Still, most council members have been adamant that the cameras are about safety, not money.
"It's against the law to run a red light," Councilman Floyd Price said. "I don't care if a bird sees you or a camera sees you - it's against the law."
Price, along with Councilwomen Linda DeLeon and Phyllis Jones, supported keeping the cameras up to gather at least a year's worth of data.
Miller said he thought the program was working as well but that it was distracting from other projects at City Hall. The number of red-light violations the cameras recorded were cut almost in half in the first six months.
More information, via Grits, is here. Looking at all this, it sounds like Lubbock's implementation was not optimal, though the results they got were by no means all bad. I don't get any sense that something similar is going on in Houston, but I suppose we'll find out eventually for sure. Have I mentioned that I'm very eager to see what Houston's red light camera data shows in terms of accidents and injuries?
John Truitt, who had announced his intent to run as an independent in CD07, has sent out an email saying he will abandon that effort. From the email:
With the race for the Presidency so tight, the turnout for early voting in the Texas primaries is already much, much higher than expected. This means that it will be virtually impossible to find enough registered voters in our district who do not vote in the primaries to sign the petition required to have my name placed on the ballot.Never-the-less, the stakes are too high and our country's future is the issue. So how in good concience could I ask anyone not to vote? In fact the only patriotic thing I can do under the circumstances is ask that you PLEASE VOTE!
I hope all of you vote. Not just in the primaries, but in November, too. As for our campaign . . . perhaps we'll try again in 2010.
I'd been wondering what the effect of a third candidate might be in this race since the Skelly polling memo came out. Now I don't need to worry about it. CD07 usually has high turnout compared to other districts, so this would have been an especially tough year to get the petition sigs needed for an independent run. Nonetheless, I commend Mr. Truitt for his dedication, and for his classy and civic-minded exit from this race. Good luck to you and whatever you do next, sir.
Trey Fleming, the Democratic candidate for HD135 in November, is hosting a Texas Independence Day party on March 1. It's a barbecue, of course, as befitting the event it commemorates. Click the link and enter your email address to receive an Evite invitation. Enjoy!
Are you one of the umpty-um thousands of people who have voted early yet? If not, you'd better get on line now so you can get to the eSlate machines before the poll close. And if you're still figuring out for whom to vote, check out this week's Texas Progressive Alliance roundup for some helpful hints. Click on for more.
TXsharon has a broken modem so Bluedaze is suffering but she managed to post about The RRC's approval of Atmos Energy's extravagant spending--bendover Texans. Also read about howPhil King meets Karma in Wise County and hear the horrendous sounds of the Barnett Shale.
Off the Kuff offers his incomplete list of endorsements for the Democratic primaries, and for his birthday rounds up his complete list of candidate interviews.
Gary at Easter Lemming Liberal News has blogged an eventful week or two climaxing with Paul Burka becoming a believer in the Obama Borg - Democrats can take back Texas. Wow.
Over at McBlogger Mayor McSleaze commemorates Kirk Watson's Deer In The Headlights Moment while McBlogger, beverage in hand, watches the Debate and puts the smackdown on wingnuts still drinking the school voucher Kool-Aid
The Texas Cloverleaf makes it back safely from Oklahoma City and discusses the National Stonewall Democrats meeting there, as well as the upcoming LGBT Presidential Town Hall in Dallas on Monday night.
PDiddie at Brains and Eggs had a report on Obama's visit to Houston last Tuesday, and also noted the end of the Fidel Castro era in Cuba. Open Source Dem had part three of his "Texas in Play" series, entitled "Jim Crow Lives".
Hal, who writes Half Empty, went to early vote last Wednesday and has some poll observations and some Fort Bend County stats.
Bill Howell of StoutDemBlog reminds us of some Texas election history that is relevant for this year's Democratic Primary, in Don't Be Confused By Names.
Muse was at the Bill Clinton fundraiser in Houston this week where she fulfilled a lifelong dream to touch him - handshake! She notes that not all college students are for Obama - witness the Daily Texan endorsement for Hillary. And, she receives an email where Obama encourages Republicans to crash the Democratic primary, to vote against the bad, scary Hillary. More Hillary stuff coming this week on musings!
WhosPlayin tries to explain the "Obama Movement", and has a run-down of which Texas blogs are endorsing Clinton or Obama.
Vince at Capitol Annex notes that the Texas Democratic Party has instructed county and precinct officials not to interpret election results for the media or political campaigns, and asks if national Democrats will still respect us (or call or visit) after March 4.
Here's a pretty decent overview of the four Democratic candidates running in contested primaries for the State Supreme Court. Unlike some similar pieces we've seen this cycle, it's more issues-focused than personality-driven, which I always appreciate. It also brings to the fore a little nagging doubt that has been plaguing me for a few weeks now.
For Place 7, Dallas attorney Baltasar D. Cruz is battling Houston lawyer Sam Houston.For Place 8, Galveston Judge Susan Criss is pitted against Linda Yanez, a justice on the state's 13th Court of Appeals, based in Corpus Christi.
All the Democratic candidates accuse the Supreme Court of suffering a variety of problems, including: a pro-business bias in its rulings, a backlog in the number of opinions it issues and ethical concerns.
While the court was seen as plaintiff friendly and left leaning in the 1980s, the Democratic candidates say it is now on the far right.
A study last year by a University of Texas law school professor found that defendants won 87 percent of injury and damage cases in the Supreme Court in 2004 and 2005.
"I'm not out to swing it for people who are not in business. I do believe in adding new blood ... and swing the pendulum back to the center," said Houston, an attorney for more than 20 years.
Cruz, his opponent and a civil lawyer for 17 years, said he wants to bring balance back to the court but is also focused on implementing a list of 26 judicial reforms, including prohibiting judges from accepting contributions from parties or attorneys with cases pending in their courts.
The "restoring balance" claim is one I have heard a lot - browse through the judicial Q&As I've done, and you'll see what I mean. In some ways, this is a very appealing argument, one that people who don't identify themselves strongly as Republicans but have generally voted that way might find persuasive. The problem as I see it is that it's a platform that necessarily has a limited shelf life, as at some point the court will be "balanced" as Democrats make the gains that seem inevitable in the near future if not this year. Indeed, if Harris County experiences a Dallas-like sweep this year, it's an argument that can then be used against the Democrats, first by Republican incumbents in 2010 hoping to hang on, and then by subsequent Republican challengers hoping to break up the Democratic hegemony. I'm not criticizing the use of this theme - it's good politics, and it's far from the only arrow these folks have in their quivers, as this article makes clear - but it's not a philosophy in and of itself. Just something to think about going forward.
By the way, did anyone besides me notice that the print edition had a Clay Robison-bylined story, which focused exclusively and in more depth on the Dem races, while chron.com had this AP wire piece that was shallower but included the GOP Court of Criminal Appeals primary? Weird.
This may be my favorite Presidential campaign-related blog post of all time; certainly, it's my favorite of this cycle. It's the fangirl-crushiness of it that takes it to the next level for me. I mean, hey, geeks vote, too. And who needs superdelegates when you have Samwise? Check it out.
The Observer blog takes a stab at what is surely going to be the hottest parlor game among political prognosticators and consultants this summer, Trying To Figure Out Whose Re-election Chances Are Endangered By All This Democratic Primary Turnout:
One area that will be particularly fun to watch is Senate District 10 in Fort Worth. Republican incumbent Sen. Kim Brimer is in deep trouble in his battle to fend off Democratic challenger Wendy Davis. This area is a major focus for the Democratic presidential candidates. The senate district already has deep pockets of hardcore Democrats. These are the folks that keep sending our patron saint of lost causes Rep. Lon Burnam back to the House. Brimer's district features Democrat Dan Barrett, who shocked pundits when he beat a slew of Republicans in a special election for Republican Rep. Ann Mowrey's District 97 seat. Primary turnout will certainly help him hold onto the seat. Another Republican who could fall in Brimer's district is incumbent Republican Rep. Bill Zedler in District 96. Zedler has a strong challenger in Democrat Chris Turner. Zedler won his last race with just 52 percent of the vote against an underfunded unknown. Only about 37,000 people voted. The margin of victory amounted to little more than 3,000 votes.
Well, I haven't seen any early vote numbers for Tarrant County, but I can tell you about a couple of purple State House districts here in Harris that I think will get a big blue boost from turnout in November. One is HD133, where Kristi Thibaut is rematching against first-term Rep. Jim Murphy. HD133 is in some ways an easy district to analyze. It only intersects two Congressional districts - CD07 and CD09 - and pretty much all of the CD07 precincts are red, while pretty much all of the CD09 precincts are blue. In 2006, the red precincts averaged 41.9% turnout, while the blue ones averaged 21.4%. That's not the entire story of how Murphy won and Thibaut lost - there are more voters in the red areas than in the blue ones - but it certainly made it hard for her to close the gap.
I don't know what it's going to be like in November. I do know that in 2004, red turnout was about 65%, while blue turnout was 48%, and I strongly believe that blue turnout will be higher, perhaps considerably higher, than that this year, while red turnout probably isn't going to change much. I also know that of 3073 votes cast by HD133 voters in the first week of early voting, a whopping 2249 of them - that's 73.2% - were cast in the Democratic primary. That suggests to me that we're in for a pretty good year, but let's assume for a second that we get what we've gotten before - 65% turnout in the red precincts, and 48% turnout in the blue ones. Assuming those numbers, and assuming the partisan mix remains the same as the turnout increases, this district shifts from 58-42 GOP for the average countywide candidate to 53-47. From there, it doesn't take much to move the ball past the 50-yard line. Put this one on your watch list, because the tide is moving in Thibaut's direction even before you factor in a more motivated Democratic electorate.
Another one to watch is HD138, which Burka thought was out of reach for Dems before all this primary voting happened and he had a road to Damascus moment. In HD138, 1591 of 2201 early votes so far - 72.2% - have been cast in the Democratic primary. I don't have a turnout breakdown for this district the way I have one for HD133, but this was a 57-43 GOP district at the average-countywide level in 2006, with 2006's crappy Democratic turnout. It's easy to imagine it as being similar to HD133, maybe even a tad bit bluer (Jim Sharp got 46.1% in HD138, but only 44.7% in HD133, so this isn't a wild assumption), under normal Presidential year turnout scenarios. And under what we might see this year? I like Virginia McDavid's chances.
Having said all that, there is still an elephant in the room, if you'll pardon the expression:
If Democrats target the close districts, focusing on the urban areas of the state where they are strong and half of Texas' voters live, this could be an historic year. Or, being Democrats they could let it slip away. As Leland Beatty, an Austin-based political consultant told us, it's great if there is lots of crop in the field but if you don't have the diesel to harvest it...
In other words, if Democrats want to take advantage of these opportunities, it's going to take money, money, and more money, to drive the turnout that we can and should get. The good news for Harris County is that the coordinated campaign should be doing that; certainly, we'll see a level of financial involvement that we haven't seen in years. But given that it's the race at the top of the ticket that's really generating all these crazy numbers, it would be nice if whoever wins the Democratic nomination gives a little back and gets into the game here, even if it's only a few TV ads. Whether you believe Texas is in play or not, running up the popular vote for purposes of achieving a true mandate-level victory would be smart for either Hillary or Obama. I just hope they realize that.
Finally, here are the updated daily totals (PDF) for each EV location in Harris County. You may note it was a very busy weekend - as many in-person votes were cast in Harris County on Saturday as they were for the entire EV period in 2004. Tiffany voted at the Multi Service Center on West Gray and Sunday and called me from there to say she'd been in line for an hour. Statewide, Democrats are at 360,000 in the top 15 counties, which is triple what the Republicans have done. Have I mentioned that this is unbelievable? Stay tuned, we'll see how high this goes.
Chuck Rosenthal may be gone, but his memory lingers ever still.
Chuck Rosenthal resigned 10 days ago as Harris County district attorney amid a scandal over e-mail, accused of sending and receiving racist, sexist and political messages and deleting others sought in a federal civil rights lawsuit.But he still is on the public payroll.
Rosenthal, who stepped down Feb. 15 under threat of legal removal from office, will continue to receive his $160,000 annual salary, according to county officials, because the state constitution technically keeps him in office until a successor is sworn in.
Rosenthal, 62, will remain on the payroll until Gov. Rick Perry appoints an interim replacement -- or the disgraced former prosecutor submits his retirement papers, according to a memorandum obtained by the Houston Chronicle under the Texas Public Information Act.
"Yes, a replacement must be appointed, and she/he must qualify for office by taking the oath of office and posting a bond," John Barnhill, First Assistant County Attorney, wrote last week to the county's payroll director, Richard Foisner. "Then Mr. Rosenthal is out and his pay ends."
County officials said today that Rosenthal has not yet retired. He was last paid on Thursday, for a work period that ended the day he resigned.
I'm thinking that ol' Chuck is in no hurry to fill out the paperwork. And frankly, why should be be? What are they going to do to him if he's pokey about it? Nope, this one's on Governor Perry. He can put an official end to Rosenthal's employment. It's not a matter of fiscal discipline, as I assume the replacement DA will be paid the same, but it is a matter of not paying someone who's quit his job and really should be off the payroll by now. Seems pretty straightforward to me. What say you, Governor?
UPDATE: Matt Stiles has an interesting update to the question about when Rosenthal's pay should terminate.
I've since learned that the Texas Attorney General's Office, however, disagrees [with Barnhill]. A deputy there wrote the County Attorney's Office last week, saying the county "cannot continue" paying Rosenthal. The letter [PDF] doesn't, however, state why the constitutional provision doesn't apply.
Curiouser and curiouser...
Christof returns to the matter of the proposed location for Dynamo Stadium and its potential impacts on traffic. He notes that while the matter of east-west light rail transport is being addressed, the much larger problem of further discontinuities in the east-west street grid portend trouble for the future, and I have to agree. Reluctantly, because I think this is a fine location for Dynamo Stadium absent those concerns, but agree I must as those concerns are real and troubling. I don't know what to do about it, but I do hope it gets as much consideration as the Metro issue does. If we really are "extending the boundaries of downtown", then we'd better be sure we can handle it.
I should note that not just automotive and rail transportation will be affected by stadium construction on the proposed site. As was pointed out to me by reader Mase, the city's planned Columbia Tap Trail bikeway would also need to be rethought if Dynamo Stadium gets built where they're looking at. (You can see a map of the trail and its relation to the stadium location here in PDF format.) I don't think any of this is insurmountable, but all of it is going to require forethought and deliberation. I'd hate to see us rush into something that we'll regret later because we didn't take the time to plan for the easily-anticipated consequences.
And it appears we are going to be taking some action this week, as the City Council agenda suggests:
The first item on the agenda for Wednesday is a public hearing on a plan to have a downtown special taxing district -- called a tax increment reinvestment zone -- pay up to $20 million for "cultural and public facilities" related to a six-block tract being targeted for the stadium.Which means, in effect, the city is looking to use property taxes to finance the purchase.
In the east part of downtown, those taxes are collected by a tax increment reinvestment zone, TIRZ 15, which includes the possible stadium tract.
Under a TIRZ, property tax revenues generated within the boundaries are frozen at a specified level. As development occurs and property values rise, tax revenue above the set level -- known as the increment -- is funneled back into the zone to pay for infrastructure and capital improvements to help attract further economic development.
TIRZ monies also could be used to secure bonds to pay off the purchase of the land.
[...]
"This really is property tax revenue that's just being diverted into another account; it's public money," [Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul] Bettencourt said. He said he would not be surprised if the city ends up investing far more than the $15.5 million offered for the land.
Bettencourt said having public input on a soccer stadium would be a good idea, even if it is not legally necessary.
"As the complexity and scope of the deal expands, the obligations of the city increase, and the need for having a public vote grows," he said.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. The only thing Bettencourt thinks taxes are good for is cutting. And of course, the only time someone like Bettencourt calls for a vote on something is when he opposes it and hopes to defeat it. It's straight out of the anti-Metro playbook. Though if the opinions given by the folks who will be most directly impacted by Dynamo Stadium are any indicator, that ploy may be the same loser here as it has been with Metro:
"I'm OK with our tax dollars being used for it," said Greg Kusiak, general manager of Lucky's Pub on St. Emanuel, one block from the proposed site. "I think stadiums bring people and money, and we're one step closer to the Olympics."Raul Casarez is building a nine-unit townhouse complex on Hutchins and McKinney. Two of the three-bedroom units already have sold for $350,000.
"I'm very excited," Casarez said. "Within a few years this is going to be better than Midtown."
One thriving business that would be displaced by the land purchase is JANCO Food Services, which supplies food and paper goods to restaurants.
"We've been here 10 years, and it's going to be difficult for us to move," said P. Alex Mousoudakis, one of three brothers who runs the business. "It's going to be expensive, too."
His brother said the city was making the right move.
"The Dynamo deserve it for what they did, winning two championships," Jimmy Mousoudakis said. "If they're going to clean it up and make it nicer to live around here, then I'm OK with tax money being used for it. But it's going to be a pain to move."
A stadium could create more noise and congestion for the nearby Lofts at the Ballpark rental complex, but residents did not seem concerned.
"I moved here because I want the social scene," said Crystal Poarch, 31. "It's always crowded here when the baseball games are going on and when there are conventions, so adding one more stadium to it is probably not going to even bother me."
Not exactly foaming dissent. Be that as it may, I still want to know what the plan is for dealing with the impact on mobility. I hope that's a big part of the discussion on Wednesday.
It's Monday, and that means the Chron has a random assortment of endorsements to sort of catch up on all the action they've been missing:
U.S. Congress, District 10, Democrat Dan Grant -- A graduate of the London School of Economics and Georgetown University, Grant has deep foreign policy experience earned as a U.S. Agency for International Development official in Afghanistan and Iraq. He favors an immediate pullout of the bulk of American troops from Iraq. Closer to home, Grant says his domestic priorities will be supporting policies geared to economic recovery and health care reform.U.S. Congress, District 22, Republican Dean Hrbacek -- A former mayor of Sugar Land, Hrbacek is respected for his economic development policies, tax cuts and reduction of waste in municipal government. An attorney and accountant by training, Hrbacek understands the need for expanded rail transit to reduce traffic congestion, a concept a previous holder of this office, Tom DeLay, never fully embraced. Hrbacek gave potential supporters pause when they learned a full-body campaign photo he distributed was doctored so that his face appeared on a slimmer body. Hrbacek's record leads us to trust that this instance of poor judgment is an aberration in a solid track record.
State representative, District 140, Democrat Armando Walle -- If elected, Walle pledges to focus on education and health care. A lifelong district resident, Walle is intimately familiar with the needs of this community. This is Walle's first run at elective office, but he has long served the district as an aide to U.S. Rep. Gene Green and Harris County Commissioner Sylvia Garcia. The incumbent, state Rep. Kevin Bailey, has been an able representative but appears to have lost the confidence of his heavily Democratic constituents by working closely with and receiving large campaign contributions from House Speaker Tom Craddick, a Republican.
Sheriff, Republican Tommy Thomas -- The incumbent, Thomas is the best candidate in the GOP primary. However, this endorsement is given to Thomas with reservation. He is the subject of a civil rights lawsuit and a petition seeking his removal from office for incompetence and misconduct. Thomas also raised concerns about access to public information when he suddenly required almost all department e-mail correspondence to be deleted automatically after 14 days. The move, coming as it did on the heels of the e-mail scandal involving resigned Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal -- is all the more suspect.
Sheriff, Democrat Adrian Garcia -- A former Houston police officer who put in 24 years on the force, Garcia is a Houston city councilman representing District H. He is a solid contender for this top law enforcement job. On council, Garcia has worked hard to close neighborhood cantinas that have been crime magnets, and he served as a point person on municipal homeland security issues and local gang violence. Elected to District H in 2003 and serving in his second term, Garcia has been a hard worker who has earned the respect of his constituents and the wider Houston community.
14th Court of Appeals, Republican Bill Boyce -- The incumbent, Boyce was appointed in December by Gov. Rick Perry to fill the unexpired term of retired Justice Richard Edelman. A graduate of Northwestern School of Law, Boyce was a partner at Fulbright & Jaworski. His 18 years in private practice spanned a broad range of civil case law, with an emphasis on appellate work. He pledges to judge fairly, to rule according to the law and to be consistent in his rulings so parties in lawsuits have a dependable legal framework on which they can rely.
I have no quarrel with any of these picks - indeed, I'm very happy to see them go with Armando Walle, and I think they made the right choice with Dan Grant as well - but again, their method for deciding which races to endorse in just mystifies me. Why only one State Rep race out of ten? Why only one Congressional race out of three? Why Sheriff, but not Tax Assessor, District Clerk, or County School Trustee? Do these questions even have answers?
Anyway, here's the list of races in which they have not yet spoken:
1. President.- Done
2. US Senate.- Done3. CDs 14 and 18
and 22on the GOP sideand CD10 on the Dem side. - Incomplete
4. Railroad Commissioner (Dem) and Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 4 (GOP).- Done5. State Senate, Districts 4 (GOP) and 11 (Dem). - Still not done
6. State Rep, Districts
140, 145, 146, 147, and 148 (Dem); and Districts 127, 129, 130, 134, and 144 (GOP). - Incomplete7.
First Court of Appeals, Place 3, and 14th Court of Appeals, Place 6 (both GOP). - Done8. District Judge in the following District Courts:
80, 125, 152, 174,190, 215, and 351(Dem); 55,174, 176,190, and 312(GOP). - Still incomplete9.
Harris County Sheriff (both parties), Tax Assessor (Dem), District Clerk (GOP), and County School Trustees, Positions 5 and 7 (GOP). - Incomplete10. County Commissioner, Precinct 3 (Dem). - Still not done
If you can detect a pattern, you're better at that than I am.
Elsewhere, the Statesman chooses Gary Cobb in the Travis County DA's race, going against the so-far prevailing consensus of Rosemary Lehmberg and Rick Reed. It'll be very interesting to see who makes the runoff in this one.
While I don't quarrel with the basic premise of this Chron article that the fate of House Speaker Tom Craddick will largely be determined by the primaries, I do have a nit or two to pick.
"It's 50-50, roughly," said Craddick confidant and Capitol consultant Bill Miller. "I think it's going to be in play right through the fall election."Kelly Fero, a Democratic campaign consultant, contends Craddick's fate largely will be cast by the election results in both the GOP and Democratic primaries.
"Craddick's future is all about March 4, and he's going to have to run the table," Fero said. "Every one of his allies is going to have to survive, and every one of the challengers is going to have to lose.
"And even then, his survival will depend on a few key allies having the political courage to stick with him."
I think Fero is overstating just a tad. There are only four Craddick Dems on the firing line, and of them I think only Kevin Bailey is in deep trouble. Nathan Macias on the Republican side is also likely to go, and maybe Phil King, if ParentPAC can maintain its magic. But Craddick is also playing offense, and he seems poised to score a win over Pat Haggerty in El Paso, though the Dems may make that a short-termed victory in November. He's also playing in several Democratic primaries, some of which are not listed in this story's sidebar: HD37 (Rene Oliveira), HD77 (Paul Moreno, whose opponent seems to be eminently suited for life as a Craddick D), HD147 (Garnet Coleman), and HD148 (Jessica Farrar). I think Craddick just needs to break even to still be in contention next session.
That said, note that the underlying assumption in this story is that Craddick won't make up enough ground in November to make up for his losses so far.
A combination of GOP defections, retirements and key primary races imperil his re-election for speaker.Craddick survived January 2007's challenge on an 80-68 vote.
He has since lost at least eight supporters -- dropping his likely votes to about 72. It takes at least 76 votes to win the speaker's job.
Republicans have lost a net nine seats since Craddick took over and would lose control of the House if Democrats pick up five more in the November election.
The 2008 election cycle "is shaping up to be a good Democratic year, so it is clearly possible that the Democrats pick up the seats they need to take the House," said Cal Jillson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University. "Even if they fall a couple of seats short, Craddick is toast."
"Only if Republicans expand their majority in the House and Speaker Craddick is credited with that success does he hold his speakership. The latter scenario seems unlikely," Jillson said.
All things being equal, there are more vulnerable Democratic seats this year than there are Republican ones, as the Democrats have done an excellent job in recent years winning in swing districts. But I think it's clear that all things are far from equal this year, and it's a question of how many seats the Dems can pick up. If that really is the case, then what happens this month almost doesn't matter for Craddick and his hold on the Speakership. I'm certainly not going to operate on that assumption, because I know Tom Craddick will never surrender, but it's hard not to see this as his last stand. One can only hope, that's for sure.
The Texas Observer asks a simple question.
As the U.S. Department of Homeland Security marches down the Texas border serving condemnation lawsuits to frightened landowners, Brownsville resident Eloisa Tamez, 72, has one simple question. She would like to know why her land is being targeted for destruction by a border wall, while a nearby golf course and resort remain untouched.Tamez, a nursing director at the University of Texas at Brownsville, is one of the last of the Spanish land grant heirs in Cameron County. Her ancestors once owned 12,000 acres. In the 1930s, the federal government took more than half of her inherited land, without paying a cent, to build flood levees.
Now Homeland Security wants to put an 18-foot steel and concrete wall through what remains.
While the border wall will go through her backyard and effectively destroy her home, it will stop at the edge of the River Bend Resort and golf course, a popular Winter Texan retreat two miles down the road. The wall starts up again on the other side of the resort.
"It has a golf course and all of the amenities," Tamez says. "There are no plans to build a wall there. If the wall is so important for security, then why are we skipping parts?"
Because who you know and who you donate to is more important than that. Read the rest of the story and you'll see what I mean. South Texas Chisme has more.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the governor of the great state of Texas, Rick Perry:
Let's talk about your new book, "On My Honor," which draws on your experience as an Eagle Scout and champions the values of the Boy Scouts of America, to whom you are donating your royalties.Yes, to their legal-defense fund.
Which has been fighting the A.C.L.U., to keep gays out of the scouts. Why do you see that as a worthy cause?
I am pretty clear about this one. Scouting ought to be about building character, not about sex. Period. Precious few parents enroll their boys in the Scouts to get a crash course in sexual orientation.
Why do you think a homosexual would be more likely to bring the subject of sex into a conversation than a heterosexual?
Well, the ban in scouting applies to scout leaders. When you have a clearly open homosexual scout leader, the scouts are going to talk about it. And they're not there to learn about that. They're there to learn about what it means to be loyal and trustworthy and thrifty.
But don't you think that homosexuals might also be interested in being loyal and thrifty?
The argument that gets made is that homosexuality is about sex. Do you agree?
No.
Well, then why don't they call it something else?
Feel free to leave your suggestions for an alternate moniker that would be less threatening to Rick Perry in the comments. Thanks to State of Mine for the link.
I'm still trying to puzzle out what implications there may be for November from this unprecedented explosion in Democratic primary turnout now. While I still think that nobody knows what it means right now, we can still look at the evidence we do have and see what that can tell us.
First things first, are we seeing a surge in Republicans crossing over to influence the Democratic outcome for some nefarious purpose? I don't doubt that there's some mischief going on out there. The following is an email forwarded to me from someone who got it from a Hillary Clinton supporter:
http://republicansforobama.org/?q=node/359
Attention All Texas Republicans and Independents!!On March 4th, Texas Republicans and Independents will have an opportunity to end Hillary Clinton's (and Bill's) presidential ambitions once and for all!
Since Texas has on open primary, Republicans and Independents should sign in at their polling place and request a Democratic ballot. They should then vote for Barack Obama. Even James Carville admits that if Hillary loses Texas, "she's done!" Republicans can help make this a reality!!! Just think, no more Clintons in the White House!
Voting Democratic this one time will have NO effect on your ability to vote in the next Republican primary or obviously on your vote in November. Since John McCain has the Republican nomination locked up, voting for McCain or Huckabee at this point will have no effect on the outcome on the Republican side.
After you vote during early voting or on March 4th, you ARE NOT done! Report back to your regular polling place at 7PM on March 4th to sign the Barack Obama list for caucus delegates. In a little known Texas voting quirk, 67 delegates to the Democratic convention will be seated because of these caucuses. This is a full one-third of the total number of Texas delegates. For Hillary to lose, she has to lose the primary votes AND the caucus votes.
I urge you to vote against Hillary Clinton by voting for Barack Obama. Please forward this e-mail to all your Texas Republican and Independent friends so that we can help ensure the Clinton's defeat on March 4th!!!
Personally, I don't think such efforts will come to much of anything. For one thing, as Paul Burka points out, turnout in the Republican primary is up from 2004 as well. It's just not up nearly as much as Democratic turnout is. For another, while I can imagine casting a strategic vote in the other guy's primary, following that up by attending a precinct caucus to engage in a delegate fight is a whole 'nother level of commitment. My tribal identity to the Democrats is too strong to ever consider such a thing; I have to think it's the same for most dedicated Rs. But maybe I'm wrong, maybe there are Republicans who can and will do that. All I'm saying is I know I couldn't. Your mileage may vary.
The good news is that there is a simple way to tell just how many triple Rs (who you figure would be the troublemakers) are voting in the Dem primary. The voting history, including primary participation, of every voter is publicly accessible. I don't have my hands on that data right now, but I will get it. As things stand now, I've not heard of any noticeable level of strong Rs voting. But I'll keep an eye on it.
I think it's safe to assume that what we have for the most part is people with little to no previous Democratic primary history heading to the polls. Again, this is something we can know for sure, and it's something I plan to follow up on to see what percentage these folks comprise. But there will be another number to look out for once all the data is in, and that will be the number of undervotes in the downballot races. To my way of thinking, whatever your past tendencies were, and whatever the reason you're showing up now, if you're sticking around to vote in the dozen or so contested primaries after the Presidential one, I'd feel pretty confident that you're likely to come back and vote for some more Democrats in November. If, on the other hand, you only cared to pick a President and you hit the Cast Ballot button once you had done that, then I'm thinking you may or may not return in the fall, and if you do it will probably be to cast that lone vote again. It's just a question of how many people there are that are doing this.
For comparison purposes, here's what the 2004 primary, in which I think it's safe to say anyone voting was a Real True Democrat, looked like for Harris County. For State Rep Races, the undervote was mostly in the 10-20% range, with the hotly contested Alma Allen-Ron Wilson matchup having almost 97% participation. Once you got into the entirely uncontested countywide races, it was more like 30-35% dropoff. This year, we have more contested races on the one hand, and more new voters on the other. Again, I have no idea how this will play out. But it's what I'll be watching to see if I can learn anything about what we'll see in eight months' time. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Greg has more.
Though Sunday has been their main day for doing endorsements, as we saw last week, the Chron decided to devote its editorial page space today to energy issues. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it leaves me wondering once again if anyone has informed them about this election that we've got going on, from which they are so curiously detached. Maybe tomorrow they'll fill some of the remaining gaps in their recommendations. We'll see. In the meantime, you can read Vince and Gary for some endorsement action. Check 'em out.
UPDATE: Missed these two from McBlogger.
I was able to attend the ceremony that marked the official transition of the West 11th Street Park to city-owned park space. It was a nice and pleasantly brief affair that was well-attended by folks in the neighborhood who had worked so hard to save it. There were a lot of moving parts to this effort, starting with the grassroots organization, and it required a fair bit of coordination among different governmental entities - the Mayor's office, the HISD board of trustees, and ultimately the state Parks and Wildlife bureau - and there were a lot of ways in which it could have failed. But it didn't, and we're all the richer for it. I haven't seen any actual news coverage of this, so I'm going to print the press release I got for this here:
At last, the full 20.2 acres of the West 11th Street Park property is now a permanent part of the Houston Park system. After several years of advocacy, fundraising, and dedication to protecting this beautiful urban forest, the Houston Parks Board received the final funds necessary to save the last 5 acres of the property."The city moved quickly to preserve important green space, working with the community and state and local leaders," said Mayor White. "It's an effort we're very proud of."
"I am honored to have played a role in the preservation of the West 11th Street Park," said Senator Whitmire. "Working together, we have protected this precious park land for generations to come."
The story behind the purchase of West 11th Street Park is unique, starting with discussions that began more than a decade ago with the Houston Independent School District. The history also includes a bold decision by the Houston Parks Board to take out a one-year bridge loan in order to bide time to raise the final $3.62 million to purchase the park, an unexpected commitment of funds from the Texas Legislature to ensure the park's full acquisition by the City, and subsequently, the availability of recently donated funds for new signage, trail repairs and modest park improvements.
"Having a one-year bridge loan in hopes of raising over $3 million is unheard of in the world of fundraising," stated Roksan Okan-Vick, Executive Director of the Houston Parks Board. "I am thankful that our board of directors was willing, and am thankful that it all worked out." West 11th Street Park will be managed for the City by the Houston Parks and Recreation Department.
"We are excited that the entire 20.2 acres of land will be coming into the City's system of parks," said Joe Turner, Director of Houston Parks and Recreation Department. "There have been many people working behind the scenes to make this happen. I'm happy to see that their hard work and dedication will result in such a beautiful wilderness park right in the middle of Houston."
As am I. Congratulations to everyone who made this happen.
The Walker Report says:
Gov. Rick Perry set Saturday, May 10th, as the special election date to fill the vacancy in House District 119. The seat was left vacant by the resignation of Rep. Robert Puente.Candidates for this special election must file applications with the Secretary of State no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 4, 2008. The early voting period for this special election runs from Monday, April 28 to Tuesday, May 6th.
May 10th is the next eligible uniform election date to fill that vacancy in the Texas House. The representative elected in this special election will serve out the remainder of Rep. Puente's term, which expires Jan. 2009.
Former San Antonio City Council member Roland Gutierrez is unopposed in both the primary and the general. At first blush, that might make this special election a waste of time. However, assuming Gutierrez wins it (a safe bet, I'd say), he'd get a leg up on seniority over the rest of the class of 2008. That does matter, so the special election does as well.
The Burnt Orange Report offers its slate of candidates for the primary, generating a little heat in the comments for a couple of their selections. I largely agree with their choices, and would like to echo their recommendation of Rosemary Lehmberg for Travis County DA. While I think the candidates in that race are all pretty good (though I have concerns about Mindy Montford), I'm strongly swayed by Ronnie Earle's endorsement of Lehmberg. Unlike Harris County, I think Travis would be well served by continuing the work of the outgoing incumbent, and Lehmberg appears to be the best one for that job.
Meanwhile, the Austin Chronicle updates its list of endorsements to include Sam Houston and Linda Yanez in the State Supreme Court races. Those two did very well in collecting newspaper nods. We'll see how that goes for them.
The Statesman strikes a somewhat halfhearted blow for Brian Thompson in HD46. Mostly, they're ready to be done with Rep. Dawnna Dukes, and they have a lot of good reasons for that.
Elsewhere, the Galveston News and Victoria Advocate endorse Ron Paul's primary opponent in CD14, Chris Peden. This is not a surprise, as both papers endorsed Paul's 2006 general election opponent Shane Sklar, which the GalvNews acknowledged in its piece. Thanks to Vince for the heads up.
Finally, I presume the Chron will do a few more endorsements tomorrow. It's my understanding that they interviewed State Rep candidates yesterday. Why in the world it has taken them so long to do this, especially in the face of record-breaking early vote turnout, is beyond me. But look for something tomorrow, at which time I'll update my list of races they've not gotten to.
I know I've harped quite a bit on the vast disparity between Democratic and Republican turnout so far in this primary, but that's because every way I look at the data, it's just stunning in its scope. Every way I slice it, it's a rout for the Democrats.
To illustrate this in another fashion, consider the five State Rep districts in which there is a competitive primary on the GOP side. Those districts are as follows: HDs 127, 129, 130, 134, and 144. Here's how things look after three days of early voting:
Dist Dem GOP Total Dem % Moody %
===========================================
127 1292 959 2251 57.4 33.4
129 1193 752 1945 61.3 39.2
130 1072 892 1964 54.6 28.8
134 1845 498 2343 78.7 51.7
144 706 398 1104 63.9 44.9Total 6108 3499 9607 63.6 39.5
"Moody %" refers to the percentage of the vote that Bill Moody, the top statewide Democratic performer, got in that district in 2006; the total for Moody is his percentage of the vote in these five districts. Looking at those numbers, it's kind of hard to overstate the dominance on the Democratic side. I mean, HD130 is one of the most Republican districts in the state. No Democrat is running for State Rep there. The GOP primary fight is between Corbin Van Arsdale and Dan Patrick's proxy Allen Fletcher, which is the most high-profile of the State Rep primaries here. And yet there have been more Democratic votes cast there than Republican votes. It borders on the bizarre.
Now maybe there's some crossover Republican votes going on. I don't have the capacity to check and see what kind of primary history these folks have. But I'm a little skeptical of the notion that there's more than a token amount of this happening. Assuming that there's a strategic reason for Republicans there to organize and vote for one of the Democratic Presidential candidates (presumably Hillary Clinton), the impact they'd have is miniscule. HD130 is in SD07, which will only allocate three delegates. The most you could reasonably hope for is to flip from 2-1 Obama to 2-1 Clinton. I don't know about you, but I'd consider that a pretty tiny payoff for giving up my voice in the Van Arsdale/Patrick, Emmett/Bacarisse, and District Attorney fights. The only explanation that makes sense to me is that there's a sizeable number of previously inactive Democrats and Republican-leaning independents in that Democratic majority. I'm open to other suggestions if you've got them.
HD134 is another interesting one. One GOP hopeful for that nomination is plastic surgeon/friend of Marvin Zindler Joe Agris, who on paper looks like the ideal challenger to first-term Rep. Ellen Cohen. But he's raised no money, has no web page that I can find via Google, and the only signs I've seen related to that campaign belong to his opponent, Carlos "Not Obama" Obando. Agris, I'm told, was recruited to keep Obando, who is gay, from being the GOP nominee in HD134. At the rate things are going, however, that plan may not work. Oh, and I should note that the two precincts that went strongly against Cohen in 2006, precincts 178 (Afton Oaks) and 227 (River Oaks), both of which voted 2-1 for Martha Wong, have cast a total of 105 votes. Seventy-nine of them were for Democrats. You do the math.
The question is whether any of this will correlate to November results. And the answer is that I don't know. Nobody knows - we're in completely uncharted territory. I hope there's a plan to contact all the new primary voters and give them thanks and encouragement, in hope of retaining the genuine converts for the fall. Beyond that, this is going to make ID'ing voters for mailings a lot more complicated going forward. But that's what you call a good problem to have.
Rick Casey adds a small piece to the puzzle of where the investigation into possible wrongdoings by now-former DA Chuck Rosenthal stands.
Republican candidates to replace Rosenthal have called for a special prosecutor to investigate whether he illegally used his official computer for re-election campaign purposes.And Wednesday Eric Nichols, deputy attorney general for criminal justice, sent a letter to Acting District Attorney Bert Graham offering "our office's assistance with any further potential action involving Charles A. Rosenthal, Jr."
Graham said Thursday he has not yet made a decision, but possibilities include asking the attorney general's office to pursue the matter, asking a district judge to appoint an independent prosecutor, or leaving the matter to the next district attorney.
Let me just say that options 1 and 2 are vastly preferable to 3. Whoever the next DA is, Republican or Democrat, he or she should not have to undertake the task of investigating his or her immediate predecessor. Given how political Rosenthal was in deciding when to pursue an investigation or not, this particular case needs to be as far removed from politics as possible. Let someone with no connection to Harris County or interest in its power structure handle this. This should be a no-brainer.
There's a new political science professor blogger in town, U of H's Dr. Richard Murray, who's giving his thoughts on the Texas primary to Channel 13. It's good stuff, and I hope he'll stick around there for awhile. Also new in the KTRK blog empire is the Roussel Report, by their Washington correspondent, Peter Roussel. You two make sure Miya teaches you the secret handshake so you can get into our world takeover planning meetings.
Also new on the scene is Same Blog, Different Day, written by a local activist of my acquaintance who prefers to keep her identity a bit mysterious. She's definitely got a voice for blogging, and will be a great addition to the mix. Check it out.
The wrongful arrest lawsuit against the Harris County Sheriff's office has gotten off to a good start for the plaintiffs.
Former Harris County prosecutor Jennifer Cook, one of two assistant district attorneys who prosecuted the Ibarras six years ago, told jurors Thursday she did not refer the officers' actions to the Harris County District Attorney's police or public integrity bureaus for investigation after learning one of them had destroyed film that could potentially be used as evidence in her case.But during repeated questioning by the Ibarras' attorney, Lloyd Kelley, Cook agreed the deputies did not have "reasonable suspicion" to pursue Sean Ibarra that day or lawful authority to destroy film in his camera.
Still, she stopped short of calling the deputies' actions criminal.
"This is more from the standpoint of a Fourth Amendment violation ... It's an unlawful seizure," Cook said. "I wouldn't call it a theft."
[...]
In earlier testimony, the former commander of the multiagency task force conducting the drug raid that day agreed it is not illegal to take pictures of undercover officers.
"I think it was a mistake in judgment," Baytown police Capt. Roger Clifford said reluctantly of the deputies' actions.
Clifford denied the task force had a policy of seizing film from citizens. He could not recall hearing about other incidents where bystanders took pictures of the task force's officers.
That's a good start, though again I presume there will be more. These guys are asking for heavy damages, and I think they'll have to hit a home run with the evidence to approach that.
It looks like this case won't take that long to try, given that the hearing to determine if Chuck Rosenthal is in contempt of the court for his email deletions has been rescheduled for after it concludes.
U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt set the continuation of the hearing, including Rosenthal's testimony, for March 14. It was originally scheduled to resume Monday.
All right then. We should know a lot more in the next couple of weeks. Stay tuned.
Are we done with Presidential debates, at least for now? Good. Let's debate some Friday random music instead. Cue 'em up...
1. "Momamma Scuba" - John Cale. I have no idea what this song is about. Hell, I don't even know what the title means. But who cares? It was the 70s. You had to be there.
2. "Gypsy Wedding" - Moby Grape. Back when I was a geeky high schooler taking a class that was called Unified Math and which covered some non-traditional-for-high-school-math topics as group theory, we encountered the following riddle:
Q. What's purple and commutative?
A. An Abelian grape.
Apparently, grape-themed humor has also been used in the application of band names. I feel oddly comforted by this.
3. "Topaz" - The B-52s. Cosmic Thing was one of those CDs I never quite got around to buying back in the day. Listening to it again now, I realize that I'd forgotten how good it was. It's way more than just "Love Shack".
4. "Superstition" - Beck, Bogert & Appice. Not a bad cover, but when you're competing with the Stevies Wonder and Ray Vaughn, the bar is pretty high. On a completely random tangent, if you've never seen the video for Beck's song "Ambitious", check it out. In addition to an awesome array of 80s hairstyles, it features a hilarious appearance by Donny Osmond. Need I say more?
5. "The Day The Bass Players Took Over The World" - Trout Fishing In America. - That would sure eliminate the need for these tedious debates.
6. "Old Friends" - Simon and Garfunkel. From the Concert in Central Park. How terribly strange it is to realize that in less than four years, the two of them will find out what it's like to be 70.
7. "I Knew The Bride" - Dave Edmunds. I'd like to be invited to the kind of wedding that would feature this song at its reception.
8. "End Of The World" - Great Big Sea. Also a pretty good cover, with all of the manic energy of the original, but as it doesn't have an equivalent to the Leonard Bernstein moment, I've gotta award the prize to REM.
9. "Suavecito" - Malo. I played an arrangement of this tune in high school jazz band. Why there was a jazz band arrangement of it, I couldn't say.
10. "Twenty Naked Pentecostals In A Pontiac" - Cornerstone. Based on an actual true news story from 1993 that was like manna from heaven for pretty much every Wacky Morning DJ in America. When people say that truth is stranger than fiction, this is the sort of thing they have in mind.
This ad ran during last night's debate.
Good stuff. Much as I'm glad to see the huge boost in Democratic primary turnout statewide, it does add a certain randomization factor to various races, like this one. With Noriega going on the air - he's got radio ads running as well - I'm hoping he can generate enough name ID to avoid a runoff. Gene Kelly is a pernicious force, after all. We'll see how it goes.
Remember this classic story from 2006?
Just three days after being sworn in, U.S. Rep. Shelley Sekula-Gibbs wants Congress to investigate the destruction of files in her office by former staff members of her predecessor, Tom DeLay.Seven staffers walked out of her office Tuesday, resigning en masse, reportedly because they didn't like the way she was treating them. They had served Sekula-Gibbs for about 24 hours.
Sekula-Gibbs said in a prepared statement today that seven employees in her Washington office and the district office in Stafford, "deleted records and files without my knowledge or permission" before quitting.
Spokeswoman Lisa Dimond told The Associated Press that the congresswoman had not yet gotten a response to her request for an investigation by the House's chief administrative officer.
Kevin Madden, a former DeLay spokesman who works for outgoing GOP Majority Leader John Boehner and was not among the seven, said the holdover staffers "felt like they were treated terribly." He would not elaborate.
Sekula-Gibbs, who is serving out the last seven weeks of DeLay's term, said the walkouts were "suspicious" in that the seven took the time to delete files before leaving without notice.
Dimond said other staffers discovered the work-related files were missing when they tried to access them.
See Wonkette for more. Some of us were in danger of straining our snark muscles while this was happening. But all good things must come to an end, and at long last, this terrible chapter in our nation's history is now over.
House officials now say their investigation of her charge found no wrongdoing by the six aides."Our computer security analysts did look into then-Rep. Sekula Gibbs' concerns around the integrity of computers in the office she briefly occupied and found no traces of purposeful erasure of data," Jeff Ventura, spokesman for the Office of the House Chief Administrative Officer, told the Houston Chronicle. "It was determined that any lost data may have been inadvertent or the result of standard methodology employed when any member of Congress transitions to another."
In response to that written statement, Sekula Gibbs, who is running for the seat again in the Republican primary, said this week that with the help of House technology experts, she was able to recover most of the material she had accused the staff of deleting on purpose.
She had no further comment about the House findings.
Well, I feel like a great weight has been lifted from my shoulders. How about you?
Note: This entry is part of a series of written Q&As with judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates. Even though early voting has begun, I will continue to publish the responses I get as I get them.
1. Who are you, and what are you running for?
I am Larry Weiman, the Returning Democratic Candidate for Judge of the 80th Civil District Court.
2. What kind of cases does this court hear?
General civil litigation cases. This includes: Personal Injury cases such as auto and truck accidents, slip and falls, dangerous products, work-related accidents, consumer cases, Medical/Professional Malpractice, business disputes, Insurance Law, Employment Law, Toxic Torts, Construction and Real Estate Litigation and more.
3. Why are you running for this particular bench?
Because I want to bring balance, fairness and justice to our court system where currently we do not have a single Democrat serving on any of the 59 county-wide trial courts in Harris County. I am the only candidate in this race that proudly stepped forward to do this as the Democratic Candidate for this court in the 2006 election when I first started my campaign for the 80th District Court and almost won the first time with 263,507 votes (almost 48%).
As part of my campaign, I am advocating reform of campaign financing laws and practices to eliminate contributions to judges from attorneys/litigants with active cases in their courts.
Current Judicial campaign finance laws allows judges and candidates to accept campaign contributions from attorneys or parties with active cases in their respective courts. This should be changed to eliminate or avoid the appearance of impropriety and/or injustice. As a candidate for judge I have already taken this position by requesting that attorneys or parties who have cases presently pending before the 80th District Court (which is the bench I am seeking) not contribute to my campaign while they are an attorney or party of record in this court.
I will work to establish programs to encourage Jury Duty participation so that we have fair and balanced juries that reflect the diversity of Harris County.
Also, I will work to establish programs in this court to increase efficiency, lower litigation costs and facilitate attorney cooperation with scheduling conferences early in each case where the parties help set an Agreed Scheduling Order to allow timely and fair preparation of cases for mediation/trial.
4. What are your qualifications for this job?
I have a Juris Doctor Degree from South Texas College of Law, a Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Management from Boston University and Mediation Certification from the A.A, White Dispute Resolution Center from the University of Houston.
In addition, I have over 16 years of experience representing clients in trial and appellate courts in Harris County and all over Texas. My areas of practice include: Personal Injury, Commercial Litigation, Insurance Law, Medical/Professional Malpractice, Employment Law, Breach of Contract, DTPA, Toxic Torts, Construction, Real Estate Litigation, Products Liability, Premises Liability, Dram Shop. These involved Trials, Mediations, Appeals, Administrative Hearings, EEOC hearings, etc.
5. Why is this race important?
This is the only re-match in the judicial races from the 2006 election (since that race was for the unexpired term of the 80th and now the full term is up). I only have to close a small gap of a little over 2% to win this race and become the first Democratic judge elected in Harris County in over a decade in an effort to bring balance to our courts.
6. Why should people vote for you in the Democratic primary?
I have the most diversified experience in handling the broad range of cases that come before this court. I have represented both Plaintiffs and Defendants in trial courts in Harris County and through Texas during my career and I am the only candidate in this race who is a certified mediator. Therefore, I am able to objectively understand and listen to both sides of a case fairly and impartially.
I am committed to the principle that everyone in our community is entitled to be treated with courtesy, respect and fairness in our courts regardless of their race, religion, gender, ethnicity, age, financial status, sexual orientation or political affiliation. I am the proud father of two grown children and I'm a person who cares about others and tries to give back to the community.
I will continue to work to bring about campaign finance reform to judicial races beginning with eliminating direct contributions from attorneys or parties to judges with whom they have active cases pending in this court. There should never be even the appearance or perception that a party or an attorney has an advantage or disadvantage because of contributions made or not made to the presiding judge, at least while they have a case pending in this court.
I believe that the Civil District Court Judges can help speed up the dockets of the Family Law Courts for citizens who need to get hearings and trials sooner then the current backlog allows. Since there is presently a much higher case load in the 9 Family Law Courts than that of the 25 civil district courts, if elected as Judge of the 80th, I would volunteer to serve at the Family Law Center two days per month to hear discovery, enforcement and other routine motions that any civil district judge can rule on. If at least 18 of the other 25 civil district court judges would agree to sit two days per month at the Family Law Center then there would be at least two civil judges working with each Family Law Court who would alternate so one of them would be present one day each week. While attorneys for the parties would have the right to object, I believe that many would agree to have their routine motions heard more quickly by a visiting civil district court judge rather than waiting a much longer period to appear before the presiding judge or associate judge. This would help move the dockets of these courts by allowing the presiding Family Law Judge and the Associate Judge of each Court to get to the more difficult Family Law hearings and divorce and custody trials much sooner and speed up access to these courts for Harris County citizens.
I am the lone returning Democratic Candidate from any of the 2006 judicial civil court races and I am also the only lifelong Democrat in this race and the only one who has only voted in Democratic primaries because I am true to Democratic values.
Therefore, I bring back a lot of voter support, experience and name recognition to this very same and unique race which takes advantage of all the money, hard work and campaigning that went into to that.
I have been endorsed in this race by The Houston Chronicle, The Jewish Herald-Voice, Democracy for Houston and The Black Baptist Ministers Association among many others.
PREVIOUSLY
For a full sorted list of all of my interviews and Q&As for the primary, please see this post, which I will update as any subsequent responses come in.
I did my civic duty on my way to work yesterday, getting there right as they opened at 8 AM. There was already a line at the West Gray Multi-Service Center, but it was a short one and I was in and out in a couple of minutes. Given the length of the ballot, I probably spent more time actually voting than I did waiting to vote, which I daresay won't be most people's experience. I saw a lot of DEM stickers on the printouts next to names of people who had voted there before me, which isn't surprising given that Dems have outnumbered Republicans 6-1 at that location so far. One lady in line behind me was asking about attending the caucus afterwards. If you bring your voter reg card with you and get it stamped, that should get you in the door at your precinct polling place. Like her, I expect to attend my first such caucus on the 4th. That should be interesting.
We had a door-knocker for Barack Obama show up Wednesday night. The fellow, out there with his nine-year-old son, saw my Jessica Farrar sign and figured I'd at least be a Democrat. I now have two signs in my yard. Here's a picture:
I don't know how successful he'd been before he got to chez moi. His son sounded very excited to hand out a sign, but I thought it was a "finally! we got one!" kind of excitement. That said, I've seen a few of these signs driving through the neighborhood since yesterday, so someone was giving them out.
Have you voted yet? If so, where were you, and how long did it take? Leave a comment and let me know.
Philip Martin takes a look at one of the important local primaries, between Craddick D Rep. Kevin Bailey and TPA-endorsed challenger Armando Walle in HD140.
Bailey's support is isolated to long time residents who have supported him since he was first elected, but even these voters will be in question due to Congressman Gene Green's strong support of Walle. The conventional wisdom is that low voter turnout (an anemic 1,300 voters in the 2006 Democratic primary) has been his strongest electoral asset as an office holder. Bailey's been counting on Craddick et al. for his financial support, receiving a $25,000 contribution from Texans for Lawsuit Reform in January in addition to the above mentioned Craddick money. But as Ron Wilson and Talmadge Heflin have both proven in Harris County, you can have all the money in the world and still lose for your ties to Tom Craddick.Walle's been blockwalking since October of last year, and a strong, serious grassroots effort by his campaign to reach out to new voters and increase Hispanic turnout, combined with the gigantic turnout predicted for Harris County as the Obama and Hillary campaigns come rolling through Texas (up ninefold in the first day of early voting compared to 2006), means Kevin Bailey is in serious trouble.
2006 isn't necessarily a good comparison, due to it being a non-Presidential year, though Bailey had a primary challenger then. But even in the 2004 primary, running unopposed, Bailey got just over 1200 votes. It's not like he as a deep well of support out there.
And the early voting numbers so far portend some real potential peril for Bailey. After just two days of early voting, 322 ballots have been cast by HD140 residents on the Democratic side. That's one fourth of the entire final total for each of 2004 and 2006. On top of that, I took a scan at the names of those 322 people. By my count, 157 of them have Hispanic surnames. That's 48% of the voters there so far. I might be a tad bit concerned about that if I were Kevin Bailey.
Now, that comes with several caveats. Being Hispanic is not an assurance of a vote for Armando Walle. While Walle captured many of the local group endorsements, Bailey has the support of the AFL-CIO, so if any of those Hispanic-surname folks are union members, they may well be in Bailey's camp. And while Hillary Clinton might be drawing Hispanic voters to the polls, there's no guarantee any of them, especially the non-regular primary voters, may be going down the ballot. Some 22% of the HD140 primary voters in 2004 skipped that race; who knows how many will this time. Be that as it may, the point remains: If I were Kevin Bailey, I'd be concerned right about now. But as I'm not, I'm happy to point this out. We'll see how it goes.
Here's the Daily Record of Early Voting (PDF), which has been updated to reflect Wednesday's totals on the Harris County Clerk's webpage. Day Two was similar to Day One, with a tiny dropoff. There were 8903 Democratic in-person votes cast, after 9243 on Tuesday, and 2885 Republican votes, after 2916 on Tuesday. Republicans have returned twice as many absentee ballots (2800 to 1400), but they had requested almost twice as many in the first place (17,500 to 9700). Even with that advantage, Democrats have outvoted Republicans by a 19,578 to 8,654 margin. And as suggested, the two-day in-person Democratic total has basically equalled that for the entire 2004 early vote. One hundred thousand, here we come.
You can follow the early voting day-by-day totals for the 15 most populous counties on the Secretary of State webpage. The Day One Democratic total was over 65,000, compared to 25,000 on the GOP side. In 2004, the GOP had a slight lead on the Democrats after two days. Their turnout is more than double now what it was then, but it's more than an eight-fold increase on the Dem side.
I have a full roster of who voted on Tuesday and Wednesday, which gives me a lot of data to play with. Hopefully, I'll be able to get these each day, because I'd like to track the vote in a couple of State House districts. I did that for HD144, which is the seat being vacated by Robert Talton as he runs in the GOP primary for CD22. You might think in a near-60% Republican district that features a three-way race for that State Rep seat and a ten-way contest for CD22 that the Republicans might do better than the Democrats in turnout, but if you did you'd be wrong. Of 764 votes cast by residents of HD144 so far, 479 were in the Democratic primary, and just 285 on the GOP side. That's 62.7% Democratic. Oh, yeah.
Anyway, I'll do more of this as I get newer data. Elsewhere, the Star Telegram writes about the huge burst in Democratic turnout in Tarrant County, which you may recall went 62-37 for Bush in 2004, and Karl-T does the math in Travis County. Check it out, and go vote!
Via email from Andy Neill:
There will be a "Volunteers Organized to Exercise Responsibility" (V.O.T.E.R.) Candidate Forum this Saturday, Feb 23rd, where candidates for DA, Sheriff, and County Judge will be featured. Other candidates are welcome to appear and will be recognized and introduced.
Location is Mt. Zion Missionary Baptist Church, 835 West 23rd Street, Houston, TX 77008 in the Heights area. If you have questions or would like more information, please contact Jeff Marshall at (713) 862-3323, or email him at [email protected]. RSVPs are not required for this event - but I'm sure Mr. Marshall would appreciate the heads up from any other candidates that would like to be in the audience.
V.O.T.E.R is a non-partisan discussion group that meets to converse about political issues and policies on a regular basis. They host candidate forums as well as voter education and empowerment sessions. V.O.T.E.R. was formed in 1989 by Jeff Marshall, and they are celebrating their 19th year under his leadership. Although their meeting place is in the Heights area, the membership is comprised of numerous politically active citizens from around the Houston Metropolitan area. If you have questions or would like more information, please contact Jeff Marshall at (713) 862-3323, or email him at [email protected].
I've mentioned these guys before. If you're still undecided on some of these local races, check this out.
UPDATE: The time for this forum is 6:00 to 8:30 PM. Thanks to Noel for pointing out to me that I'd forgotten to include that.
We'll have to wait for City Council to take action on the Dynamo Stadium land deal until next week, as it was tagged on the Council agenda yesterday.
The vote was delayed for a week because legal documents were not ready for examination, officials said.Mayor Bill White said he could not rule out the possibility of some public funds being used for the stadium's construction. But he will negotiate for the Dynamo's owners to absorb the entire cost, he said.
The Anschutz Entertainment Group, owner of the Dynamo, has said in the past it would bear most of the costs, but would like city assistance.
"I'm not saying we won't provide any public funds," White said. "What I am saying is we won't use funds that could be used for providing for essential city services, such as solid waste and parks and libraries and things like that, public safety."
Last spring, a mayoral spokesman said White had ruled out using property tax revenues to help finance the stadium, but sales and hotel occupancy taxes could be an option.
White said if public funds were used, they will not come out of the city's general fund or involve new taxes.
The mayor discussed a scenario that would involve property taxes collected by a Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone, a special district in which rising property tax revenues are funneled back into the zone for infrastructure improvements to attract further development.
Nothing much new here. I'm interested to hear more about what the TIRZ may do, but that's part and parcel of wanting to see all the details. Hopefully, we'll get that next week. Stay tuned.
On the whole, I thought the Bill Clinton rally last night was pretty uninspiring. Not just because he started speaking almost two hours late or because Hofheinz was barely half-full (I think the capacity is 8,500). I haven't been excited about either candidate yet, but the difference I see right now is that going to an Obama rally would probably swing an undecided voter in his direction, but tonight didn't do much to pull me toward Hillary.
Sheila Jackson Lee and Chris Bell did a little bit of introducing and endorsing before President Clinton spoke. Chris Bell still gives a nice little speech, and he's a pretty funny guy. He said that the Bush administration's message has been to "be afraid, stay afraid, and don't forget to go shopping." I wasn't so excited to see him endorse Hillary because I've been leaning toward Obama since Edwards dropped out, but I respect Chris Bell a lot.
Bill Clinton didn't make it to the stage until 10:30, two and a half hours after the doors opened. He made an all right speech that highlighted Hillary's accomplishments and her plans if she's elected. He talked about improving people's lives and futures and helping America and the world come together. Everyone that spoke really emphasized vision and Hillary's experience as a changemaker. President Clinton also talked about the difference between embodying change and empowering people to create change for themselves. I'm pretty sick of both campaigns' change vs. experience messages by now, but I didn't think the anti-Obama case was made very well. Bill did a good job of highlighting the high points of Hillary's policy accomplishments and her agenda, but all of the attacks on Obama were vague and easy to turn the other way.
All of the Clinton campaign paraphernalia looks really 1980s too. Obama and other candidates that have since dropped out have much more contemporary, attractive logos that are still completely classy. Clinton's stuff looks like it was lifted out of a campaign from 15 or 20 years ago, and that doesn't do much in her favor at all.
Even if it wasn't the most exciting night of my life. it was fun to see the former president and I'm so glad that Texas is getting all this attention from the candidates. I don't think I'll be voting for Hillary anytime soon though.
Excuse me, Governor Perry? When are we going to get a new DA?
Patrick McCann, president of the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association, said that one interpretation of state law suggests a district attorney's office without an elected head is tantamount to a court without a judge.Perry spokesman Alicia Castle dismissed McCann's theory, saying that the Texas government code stipulates that, in such cases, authority for the department is handed to the first assistant.
Castle said no timetable has been established for naming Rosenthal's successor.
Yeah, well, as with special elections, the Governor interprets these laws as he sees fit. If you're the least bit surprised by this, you haven't been paying attention.
This, however, is a surprise:
In his letter to Perry, U.S. Attorney Don DeGabrielle, Judge Olen Underwood of the Second Judicial District of Texas and other officials, McCann also called for state and federal investigations into possible wrongdoings by Rosenthal while in office.The Texas Attorney General's Office probe of Rosenthal ended with his Friday resignation.
Rosenthal learned Thursday that the office planned to file a lawsuit this week to remove him from office, Jerry Strickland, a spokesman for the Attorney Generals Office said.
Strickland disagreed with Rosenthal's attorney's claim that a deal had been struck to end the investigation if Rosenthal resigned.
Deputy Attorney General Eric Nichols has offered his office's assistance to local prosecutors in any further potential action against Rosenthal.
That a deal was in place was the clear implication attorney Woods gave. I was disappointed to hear that such a deal might mean there would be no conclusion to that investigation, if only for the learning we could take from it. As such, I'm pleased to hear that it's still ongoing. If Chuck Rosenthal broke the law, his resignation shouldn't be enough to get him off the hook for it. It's what he'd say if he were the one doing the investigating. Let's follow through on this and see where it takes us.
The lawsuit against the Harris County Sheriff's office that led to the discovery of Chuck Rosenthal's email collection (and its missing pieces), which had been delayed due to a motion to recuse the presiding judge, is underway.
Two brothers who claim they were wrongfully arrested by Harris County Sheriff's deputies who stormed into their homes without probable cause and destroyed film in their cameras are seeking $5 million in damages, a federal jury learned today.Sean Carlos Ibarra and Erik Adam Ibarra say deputies burst into their southeast Houston home after one of the brothers took pictures of an officer during a drug raid at their next-door neighbor's residence.
But attorneys for Harris County and four deputies involved in the arrest said the Ibarras cannot offer any medical records, pictures of injuries or proof of lost wages to prove they suffered any harm. The county's lawyers also argued the deputies' actions were justified because they feared for their safety.
The jury in U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt's court got a first look at the civil case as attorneys made opening statements today.
"This case may permanently change things here in Harris County and may change the way law enforcement operates here and across the nation," said Lloyd Kelley, the attorney for the Ibarra brothers.
Four deputies targeted by the lawsuit -- Preston Foose, Dan Shattuck, John Palermo and Sgt. Alex Rocha -- violated the Ibarras' First and Fourth Amendment rights when they carried out the arrest on Jan. 4, 2002, Kelly said.
[...]
Sheriff Tommy Thomas also is being sued by the Ibarras because he failed to investigate the deputies' actions after they were brought to his attention, Kelley said.
But attorneys defending Harris County and the deputies said the officers worked in an undercover capacity and feared having their faces exposed.
They also suggested the Ibarras are only after money -- not trying to change policy.
"This is a case about whether an officer has the right to ask questions about something he sees that could endanger the life of a fellow officer," said Cliff Harrison, attorney for the deputies.
We'll see how it goes. I suspect there may yet be a surprise or two lurking, though with Rosenthal now on the sidelines, some of the drama has been lost. Stay tuned.
The West 11th Street Park isn't the only park getting attention this week. So is Memorial Park.
City officials and local parks advocates Tuesday launched a $10 million fundraising campaign for a new running trail, expanded tennis facilities, a pedestrian bridge and other amenities at Memorial Park.These improvements and others are included in a master plan for the park approved by the City Council in 2004. Proposals to move ball fields and the tennis center out of the park to put more focus on its natural areas, included in an earlier version of the plan, were dropped after an outcry from groups that use those facilities.
Leaders of the Memorial Park Conservancy, a nonprofit group that works to protect and improve the park, said they hoped to raise the money and start work on the improvements in the next three to five years.
"We're excited about getting people excited about the park," said Stephen Costello, the conservancy's board chairman. "There's a significant jewel here in the city."
The new running trail on the south side of Memorial Drive, he said, will complement the Seymour Lieberman trail on the north, one of the most popular running spots in Houston.
The two trails will be connected by the pedestrian bridge, which would also be used by pedestrians and bicyclists.
This sounds great. The pedestrian bridge in particular is a fine idea. I look forward to seeing the end result of this.
So like most people, I was happy to hear that the Writers' Guild strike finally came to an end, and that we'd get to see new episodes of some favorite TV shows soon. But this harshed my mellow a bit.
Of the shows that do come back this season, none will manage more than nine new episodes. It's one thing to get only five of the expected eight episodes of Lost but quite another to learn that there will be reruns stinking up March, when the whole point of holding the series until January was to avoid interrupting the story (interruption = lost viewers). It's better than nothing that fans of great comedy -- and there's precious little great comedy on television -- will get five more episodes of 30 Rock and six more episodes of The Office. Except half of the 10 previous 30 Rock episodes seemed to appear randomly -- which didn't help in a momentum-killing strike season -- and, frankly, five more are not enough. Only eight episodes of The Office have aired (four were an hour in length). Fans were promised 30 episodes this season.NBC said Heroes wouldn't come back until the fall, where it will be "launched," which sounds suspiciously like a do-over. Fox is delaying 24 until January 2009. Does such loyalty still exist among television viewers?
[...]
Though some series are clearly a casualty of the strike, with networks deciding against restarting production because the costs outweigh the anemic ratings, a definitive swing of the ax has yet to happen (but it will, and probably within a month). But it gives off the whiff of hope where precious little exists for shows such as Bionic Woman, Journeyman (NBC); Big Shots, Cavemen (ABC); Cane (CBS); K-Ville (Fox); Life Is Wild (CW); and others.
[...]
More cynically, a number of freshman series that were doing well or moderately well in the ratings -- Pushing Daisies, Private Practice, Dirty Sexy Money (ABC); Life and Chuck (NBC), among others -- have been postponed until fall. Do you know how far off fall is in the TV business?
An argument can be made that those series are being protected by the network and they will provide the core of the programming next season because this year's development process was essentially torched by the strike. And yet, an argument can also be made that freshman series that were barely on the air won't make appealing sophomore candidates. And what happens if shows that are being developed this year test well? How about this: "What do you mean where's Life? Oh, that. Um, we lost it."
Which is all just a very cynical way of saying, "There will be blood -- lists of returning shows or not."
Well, I've already lost The 4400 (barring a miracle, anyway), and I was worried about Bionic Woman before the strike. I suppose I'll cope if I've seen the end of them, but if Pushing Daisies also bites the dust, I'll be really mad. I hope it doesn't come to that.
I'm going to quit wondering about the viability of the Astrodome Redevelopment project. The thing has more lives than Jason Voorhees.
The on-again-off-again Astrodome convention hotel plan is on again after Commissioners Court voted Tuesday to seek a deal with the project's developers.The court authorized county officials to mediate differences between Astrodome Redevelopment Co. and two opponents of the project, the Texans and the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo.
County Judge Ed Emmett said the vote was not needed because negotiations could continue without any action by the court.
But Commissioner Jerry Eversole urged the court to take a position.
"If we do absolutely nothing, that sends the message that we aren't supportive of what is happening," Eversole said. "I want to make sure that I vote today for us to continue looking at the project."
As part of the vote, the court agreed that the Harris County Sports and Convention Corp., which oversees Reliant Park, could entertain other proposals to redevelop the Dome.
I'm okay with this. Until such time as someone proposes spending public money on some aspect of this project, I see no reason to not let it play out and see where it goes. If a developer with his own funding thinks he can make something out of the Dome, I say good luck. We can always tear it down later if all else fails. And if someone else proposes something more sensible than what ARC has put on the table so far, then so much the better.
Having harped on the issue, I'm glad to see the question of where the light rail lines east of downtown will run if the new soccer stadium is built on the land now being considered by the city is being discussed.
Bob Eury, president of Central Houston and executive director of the Houston Downtown Management District, said Tuesday that the probable front-running option being considered is to approach downtown's east side on Texas Avenue.Currently, maps on the Metropolitan Transit Authority Web site show the East End and Southeast lines coming together on Capitol, a block south of Texas, and continuing into downtown on Capitol.
Also on the site is a Final Environmental Impact Statement, completed when Metro still intended to use Bus Rapid Transit rather than light rail on the lines, which shows the route split between Capitol and Rusk. The new proposal employs that tactic, Eury said.
By approaching downtown on Texas, he said, the tracks would "pass by the front door" of the soccer stadium between Dowling and Hutchins. Then they would angle south under U.S. 59 toward Avenida de Las Americas.
From there, a westbound track would continue on Capitol, passing a block from Minute Maid Park, while an eastbound track would run on Rusk, passing the convention center. Each would follow the direction of street traffic and cross the current Red Line at Main.
I'll refer you once again to Christof's post, which shows the various options. Annoyingly, the illustration of the route described above that was in the print edition doesn't appear online. But basically, this is one of the options that was available before there was talk of a stadium that would block some of the other options.
Eury cautioned that "various options are available," and that "none of this is final." Metro, he said, "is going to make the determination." Metro spokeswoman Sandra Salazar would only say that Eury's description was correct "and most importantly, that the plan has not been finalized, as we are working through the Federal Transit Adminstration process."
This borders on being unremarkable. Metro hasn't made a decision as to the final alignments of the Southeast and Harrisburg lines yet. This would clearly limit their choices, perhaps to the point of dictating them, but what remains seems perfectly reasonable. I don't see why this would affect the cost of construction, at least as far as laying the tracks is concerned. The questions of east-west automotive traffic that Christof raised still remain, but the point is that Metro isn't being forced to consider an alignment it hadn't already done. I'm sure there are some things I'm not thinking about, but offhand I don't see any big red flags. At least, no new ones.
I'll be posting later or early tomorrow about the Bill Clinton rally at Hofheinz Pavilion at UH tonight. I think it's completely OK to call it a Bill Clinton rally because none of the fliers or anything I've seen about the event even have Hillary's name on them. I thought that was weird, but it may have been a smart move. Most of the people I've heard talk about going tonight are a lot more excited about seeing Bill than voting for Hillary (I'm one of them). She's been a little bit ahead in the polls in Texas, but it really just feels like Obama's taking over. Anyways, stay tuned for a post-mortem and hopefully pictures too.
So, who's voted yet? How long did you have to wait? Going by this account in the Chron, I'd say the lines were substantial.
By the end of the day, 9,233 ballots were cast in the Democratic primary; 2,914 in the Republican, said Harris County Clerk's spokesman Hector de Leon. First-day totals for early voting in the 2004 presidential primary totaled 849 in the Democratic contests and 678 in the Republican.
Note that in 2004, the entire cumulative total of the Democratic early vote in Harris County was 18,234; add in absentee ballots and it's 21,907. We may surpass that total tomorrow, on Day Two. That's outrageous.
A little back-of-the-envelope math: At this rate, about 100,000 people will vote early in the Democratic primary in Harris County. That's almost surely an underestimate, as early vote totals tend to rise towards the end of the period, but let's be conservative. Going by 2004 and 2006 results, the early vote is about 30% of the final tally. Let's be conservative again and say it'll be 40% this time, as there's been a pretty steady message of "Vote Early!" from party officials and us bloggers and whatnot. That pegs Harris County's early vote total at 250,000. From a turnout projection done a few months ago for Rick Noriega that I saw recently, Harris County will likely be about 17% of the statewide Democratic total for the primary. That puts the statewide total at about 1.5 million.
To put that into perspective, the 2004 Democratic Presidential primary turnout was 839,000. In 2000, it was 787,000. In 1996, 921,000. You have to go back to 1992 for an equivalent turnout, which was 1.48 million.
Finally, note that state Democratic officials were throwing around the number 1.8 million earlier this week. That total was last achieved in 1988, which coincidentally was the last time the Texas primary mattered. I thought that number was too high when I first heard it, but now not so much. And it could still be higher. Wow.
Oh, and it's not just Harris:
Turnout was also brisk in the suburbs, including Fort Bend County, where 1,697 ballots were cast in the Democratic primary and 944 in the Republican.
It's a beautiful thing to see those Democratic numbers next to the Republican ones, isn't it? I don't know how predictive this will be of November totals, but I don't care at this point. I'm enjoying the moment. I just hope that this doesn't mess things up in FBC. Great timing, wouldn't you say? Thanks to Juanita for the link.
Since I've been prodding the Chron so much about their lack of endorsements, I figure I should offer a few of my own. This is an incomplete list, as I have not made up my mind in several races. The downside of there being so many contested primaries between good candidates is having to say No to some of those candidates. Some of those Nos I greatly regret, others not so much. You probably have a pretty good idea of which ones fall into the latter group by now. Most of these are races in which I will be voting, a few are not. So without further ado:
President - Barack Obama
I took a long time in deciding this one. I see both candidates as having key strengths, and I think each one has a clear path to victory in November. I think they'd each do a fine job, but in the end I find myself rooting more for Obama than for Hillary Clinton. What probably pushed me over the line was a similar feeling for Obama that I had for Bill Clinton in 1992, that I was ready for a generational change in government. In 1992, I was ready for a post-World War II President. This year, I'm ready for a post-Vietnam President. That's far from the only reason why I will vote for Obama this week, but it's up there. If you want something more soaring than this, read the BOR endorsement of Obama. I will be happy to vote for Hillary Clinton in November if she's the nominee, but in this race, and hopefully again in the next one, I'll be voting for Barack Obama.
I should note that my co-blogger Martha has endorsed Hillary Clinton. Greg is also a Hillary supporter. Alex was a fan of John Edwards; I'm not sure where she stands now.
US Senate - Rick Noriega
Surprise, right? I'll refer you to what I wrote originally when Noriega was first getting into the race. Nothing has changed since then. He has the right values and the track record to show he applies them, and I'm proud to be an early and vocal supporter of his. Here's my interview with him from earlier this month.
State Supreme Court - Sam Houston (Place 7), Susan Criss (Place 8)
You can read my Q&A with Sam Houston here, and with Judge Criss here.
County Judge - David Mincberg
County Tax Assessor - Diane Trautman
County Sheriff - Adrian Garcia
If we're serious about winning countywide offices this fall, we need to ensure the best candidates are carrying the flag. These three are the best for their races, and I am happy to support them. My interviews with them are here: Mincberg, Garcia, Trautman.
District Court Judges - Jim Wrotenbery (125th), Bob Schaffer (152nd), Ruben Guerrero (174th), Bruce Mosier (190th)
These judicial races are some of the toughest ones to decide, as in almost every case it's a choice between two or three good options. There are seven such primaries here, and I've made up my mind in four of them. That's how hard it is. Q&As are here:
State Representative, District 148 - Rep. Jessica Farrar
Another very obvious choice. If you don't support the people who stand up for the values you say are important, what are you doing? My interview with Rep. Farrar is here.
State Senate, District 11 - Joe Jaworski
State Representative, District 36 - Sandra Rodriguez
State Representative, District 43 - Rep. Juan Escobar
State Representative, District 46 - Brian Thompson
State Representative, District 77 - Rep. Paul Moreno
State Representative, District 140 - Armando Walle
State Representative, District 145 - Carol Alvarado
State Representative, District 146 - Rep. Borris Miles
State Representative, District 147 - Rep. Garnet Coleman
Some of these folks are TPA-endorsed. Many are running against Craddick Dems. All are clearly better than their opponents. We can't give ground in the House, and we need to move forward in the Senate. Here are the interviews I did with some of these folks:
Jaworski
Walle
Alvarado
Coleman
Constable, Precinct 1, Place 1 - Jack Abercia
No particular reason not to. Sometimes it's that simple.
Harris County Commissioner, Precinct 3 - Dexter Handy
Not on my ballot, but Dexter Handy is a good guy running against a perennial candidate who's run exclusively as a Republican before. We don't need such people on the ballot in November. My interview with Handy is here.
Fort Bend County Commissioner, Precinct 1 - Richard Morrison
Also not on my ballot, but Richard is an old friend who did us all the favor of taking on Tom DeLay in 2004, thus beginning the end for the Hammer. If there weren't so darned many important races here in Harris County, I'd re-register in FBC for the pleasure of casting a vote for him.
I'm happy to endorse all of the unopposed Dems in Harris County as well. Unlike in some years, I've met the large majority of these folks, and I'm very pleased with the overall quality. There's a reason I'm excited about November, and it starts with these people who are putting their lives on hold and their money where their mouths are to help bring about the change we all want. If you want another perspective, here's Stace's slate, with some more info on the judicial races I'm waffling on.
That's what I've got for now. Still a few decisions to make, as you can see. I figure I'll hit one of the crowded early voting locations in the next day or two once I've made those decisions. We'll see how long that takes. If you've got a story to tell about waiting in line, please leave it in the comments.
A lot of attention has been paid to CD10 as a pickup opportunity for Democrats this year, and justifiably so based on the 2006 results and the quality of candidates we have angling for the nomination. But that's not going to be the only game in town, as Michael Skelly is working to put himself and his race in CD07 on the map.
Democratic congressional candidate and wind power executive Michael Skelly collected more than $400,000 in campaign contributions since the beginning of the year, dwarfing the treasury of opponent U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, according to records filed Monday.Culberson, who represents the Republican-friendly 7th Congressional District in west Harris County, raised about $35,000 in the first six weeks of the year.
Culberson has shown an ability to raise ample funds in previous elections, however. He spent about $730,000 on his 2006 campaign and got 59 percent of the vote against Democrat Jim Henley, who spent about $120,000.
With federal offices closed for Presidents Day, Culberson was unavailable for comment about lagging behind his challenger in the early stages of a campaign that ends with the November election.
"I don't ask my supporters for financial help until I need it, and they always have been extraordinarily generous," he said in December when Skelly entered the race. He said he tries to accomplish his goals in Congress, "and I have discovered that elections will take care of themselves."
Skelly, of West University Place, has indicated he is willing to add a significant amount of personal money to his campaign but has contributed less than $41,000 so far, according to Federal Election Commission files.
Skelly's report is here, Culberson's is here. As you can see, Skelly currently has a 5 to 1 cash-on-hand advantage. He's talking about raising two to four million dollars for this race. Given the overall lousy climate for Republicans and the cash-strapped nature of the NRCC, Culberson may really need that generosity he talks about.
Skelly also has a poll out that shows the race to be competitive - you can see the memo here (PDF). As I said about the Fletcher poll in HD130, this is a partisan poll and needs to be evaluated in that context. But as with Fletcher, the key is the ability to get the message that moved the poll numbers out to the electorate. I think it's clear that Skelly will have that capability, and if so then look out. Heck, even Tom DeLay has expressed concern over his buddy Culberson. And we wouldn't want DeLay to worry about nothing, would we?
I should point out that I was on a conference call with the pollster the other night to discuss the result. One question I asked was the partisan mix of the sample, which I didn't see in the memo. I was informed it was 46R-29D-25I, which strikes me as about right. Culberson won by a bit more than 20 points in 2006, and I think it's safe to assume that like most places, the gap has narrowed a bit.
In some ways, this could be the most important race for Democrats in Harris County this year. If Skelly can raise and spend the kind of money he's talking about, and if he can successfully target some historically red but rapidly growing and changing areas in this district (like the Northwest) and move the chains a few points towards the Dems, then that could help build a tide to lift a whole bunch of other boats this fall. It won't take much to move the partisan index for countywide races from purple to a bluer shade of purple. Keep an eye on this one. Michael Hurta, who worked this district with the Jim Henley campaign in 2006, has more.
OK, that's a misleading title, since the West 11th Street Park never closed, though its future was in doubt for awhile there. Be that as it may, there will be a celebration to mark the acquisition of all 20+ acres of the park tomorrow, the 21st of February. Here's the details, from the press release I got:
West 11th Street Park Celebration and Press ConferenceWHAT: After several years of advocacy and raising critical funds, all 20.2 acres of the West 11th Street Park is now a permanent part of Houston's Park system. The Houston Parks Board will take this opportunity to thank donors and strategic partners who helped permanently secure this extraordinary park for Houston.
MEDIA OPP: On Thursday, February 21, the Houston Parks Board will thank the donors, city and state leaders, and residents of Timbergrove Manor neighborhood who have made contributions to help permanently secure all of the acreage of West 11th Street Park for Houston. Several leaders will speak, including Senator John Whitmire, who in May 2007, played a critical role in finalizing the park purchase by urging the Texas House and Senate to adopt a state budget that included the $3.75 million in funding necessary to complete the purchase of West 11th Street Park. Media will have the opportunity to go on a guided tour of the park by Friends of West 11th Street Park President Lorraine Cherry following the press conference.
WHEN: Thursday, February 21, 2008
10:30 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.
WHERE: West 11th Street Park, 2300 West 11th Street, on Wister St. between Shelterwood and Shirkmere next to the West 11th Street Park sign. (map)
WHY: For 32 years the Houston Parks Board has pursued opportunities to develop equitably distributed parks throughout Houston. The West 11th Street Park is a major success in this ongoing effort. The Houston Parks Board is a 501(c)3 organization whose mission is to acquire, improve, and protect parkland for Houston.
Definitely something worth celebrating. If you're in the area, you should drop by for the ribbon-cutting.
Grits has a great idea.
With so many folks attending their precinct conventions for the first time, I decided to craft two criminal justice related resolutions for readers to propose when they go, and we're going to run a little mini-campaign here on Grits to see in how many different places around the state we can get them passed.These resolutions serve two purposes: 1) if they pass, they formally request action by legislators and county officials from the party that can assist in persuading politicians on issues, and 2) the process educates party members about criminal justice problems and solutions and expands the base of support for these ideas among politically active people. Basically, you get a lot of public education bang for the buck by directly educating influential people and opinion leaders, particularly in a year when so many more folks will be attending.
[...]
My purpose here is two-fold: To support solutions-oriented criminal justice positions among Texas pols in both parties (who are used to hearing mostly politicized, "tuff on crime" rhetoric), and to test the possibilities and limits of blog-generated grass roots activism, including several specific free or low-cost tools. So we'll be following the process closely on Grits to report what works and what doesn't.
The resolutions, both of which I strongly support, are as follows:
Resolution on Prison and Jail Overcrowding
Resolution Supporting Reforms at TYC
They are entirely suitable for either party, and will hopefully help to drive some better legislation in 2009. If you want to participate, please visit the Grits link and start with this short survey so supporters around the state can be identified and updated. Thanks very much.
Amid renewed attention to ethics in Harris County government, some elected officials appear open to closing a loophole that keeps secret senior employees' outside income, real estate holdings or business connections.State law requires county judges, commissioners and county attorneys to file "personal financial statements" designed to reveal any potential conflicts of interest. But it does not apply to many of the other elected and appointed officials who make multimillion-dollar decisions with taxpayer funds.
Commissioners Court has the power to require disclosure for these officials, such as sheriffs, constables and clerks, yet the policy has remained the same for years.
In response to Houston Chronicle inquiries, some county leaders say they are willing to consider such a reform to increase transparency at the nation's third-largest county, and commissioners are expected to discuss the issue at their regular meeting today.
"I'm in favor of it," said Harris County Judge Ed Emmett, who supports the reform, along with Commissioner Sylvia Garcia, who put the issue on the court's agenda. "We live in a time now where public disclosure is a good thing."
You mean, we live in a time where public disclosure is (finally) being widely seen as a need-to-have, not a nice-to-have, not to mention a time where it's ridiculously easy to make it broadly available. And we're also living in a time where the behavior of certain public officials makes our omission on this front all the more glaring.
No official has alleged any wrongdoing by Harris County Sheriff Tommy Thomas, but KTRK (Channel 13) has raised questions about whether a one-time county vendor, whose former company still gets government business, helped modify the design of Thomas' Colorado County ranch house -- and whether the work was free.Thomas has denied any wrongdoing, and said he paid for the work. He has declined to disclose the amount of what he says is a private expense.
Thomas would have no problem disclosing broader financial information if it were required, a spokesman said.
"If commissioners want him to do that, he would," said Capt. John Martin. "One, he's never been required to, and, second, it's never really come up."
Mm hmm. Nice to know. Now let's put that to the test.
Just a few observations about the various forms of paid political outreach going on out there these days.
As we know, there's some yard signs out there, and I'm starting to see more of them as well as some bumper stickers. I've now seen my first two Obama yard signs, one in my neighborhood and one someplace else - can't remember where. (I've also seen a few signs for HD134 GOP hopeful Carlos Obando, each of which makes me do a double-take.) One way to tell that it really is voting season is the disappearance of truly empty lots - they've all sprouted signs like toadstools after a weeklong rain. The lot at the northeast corner of Shepherd and 59 is particularly overflowing as of this week.
I've gotten precious little direct mail so far, which is odd because as someone who's voted in every Democratic primary and runoff for the last decade or more, I should be drowning in it. I don't know if candidates are eschewing mail for other forms of contact, or maybe they're all in transit, but it's still a bit weird. Anyone else out there getting mail?
As our home TV viewing is excessively skewed towards commercial-free Noggin, I haven't seen many TV ads - I caught a snippet of an Obama ad while at a Comcast storefront to swap out our malfunctioning cable cards (don't get me started on that), and I saw one each for Hillary, Obama, and Ed Emmett while Tiffany had the Channel 11 6 o'clock news on last night. What else are you seeing out there?
And finally, one radio spot so far, for Obama on Jack FM. I'm particularly allergic to radio ads and tend to switch stations when the music stops, but this one got me. I figure the AM stations are where the action is, but I almost never tune those in.
So that's it for me so far. What's on your radar?
We are getting closer to a Dynamo Stadium deal.
The city of Houston has offered more than $15.5 million to buy five downtown blocks that could be the future site of a soccer stadium for the Houston Dynamo.The City Council will consider the deal Wednesday, but is expected to delay approval for at least a week.
The purchase price assumes the land is worth $49 per square foot, almost four times the assessed value of $12.50 per square foot set by the Harris County Appraisal District.
I'll simply note here my previous gripes about the disparity between assessed value and actual value, and move on.
The five blocks are owned by various corporate entities controlled by former Councilman Louis Macey. To acquire a sixth block, owned by a different company, the city has offered to swap a nearby block it already owns.The six-block tract is between Texas and Walker streets on the north and south, and Hutchins and Dowling streets, just east of U.S. 59 in the "warehouse district." The area recently has undergone some loft-style residential development.
The land will be used for a Dynamo stadium only if the city can reach an agreement with the soccer team owners, said Andy Icken, deputy director for Public Works and Engineering.
"They identified this tract of land as one in which they would be interested," Icken said Monday. Negotiations with the team are continuing. Mayor Bill White has said he does not want public funds used for the actual stadium construction.
City officials are not saying what the land's ultimate use will be. They have conceded that a soccer stadium is one possibility, but also have mentioned a new police headquarters, affordable housing or mixed-use development. The city also could sell the land if nothing works out.
Here's a Google map of the area, if that helps. There are issues and questions here, some of which Cory goes into. I'm neither surprised nor particularly upset that some city money is being spent here. Mayor White has been consistent in specifying that public money would not be spent on stadium construction, so as with talk about infrastructure improvements, that leaves a lot of room for other things. I'm not sure why the city wants to be in the landlord business here, given last year's Center Serving Persons with Mental Retardation saga, which involved the city wanting to get out of that business, though admittedly here the financial potential is much greater. Given that, I'm not sure why the Dynamo wants to have the city as its landlord, but that's their problem. I also note that it's still the case that this location might cause issues for the Southeast and Harrisburg light rail lines, as Christof pointed out last month.
That uncertainty troubles District C Councilwoman Anne Clutterbuck."Anytime we are spending taxpayer dollars ... I think we need to have some more clarity as to what it's for," she said. "I'm a firm believer that we shouldn't use property tax dollars to fund stadiums."
I respect CM Clutterbuck's position, and I certainly agree we need more clarity. However, I think this deal differs from the previous ones, and not just in magnitude. Here the potential for the city to get a real, tangible return on its expenditure, and not just some hand-wavey mumbo-jumbo about "economic revitalization", is pretty clear. Of course, that has to be part of the deal to address those concerns.
"My preference is to get a stadium," said Councilman James Rodriguez, whose District I contains the tract. If a soccer stadium does not materialize, Rodriguez said the purchase still is a good deal."We're in the driver's seat," he said, "We're extending the boundaries of downtown."
That's a valid point. Take 288 North to 59 some day, then take the Pierce/Gray exit and stay on Chartres till you get to I-10. It's very different east of 59 than west of it, and it makes sense to try and integrate the two. If nothing else, those two rail lines will link the two sides of the freeway, and the more attractions there are on the other side, the better.
"I think it's a good price," said Dan Nip, chairman of the East Downtown Redevelopment Authority, which operates Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone 15.That TIRZ eventually may pay the city back for the purchase of the land, said Robert Fiederlein, the mayor's TIRZ adviser.
And if the TIRZ does pay the city back, then again that changes the nature of this. And again, if that's the idea, it should be made part of the deal.
I think there's a lot of potential for good in this deal. This is a great location for a soccer stadium. I love that it's transit-friendly (maybe a bit too friendly). It may make great financial sense for the city. But all of this depends on the details, and we don't have those yet. I look forward to seeing the final plan, and I hope it lives up to all this potential.
The Chron has more about Chuck Rosenthal's overdue departure from the DA's office, which happened when he resigned on Friday after admitting to problems with prescription drugs.
Chuck Rosenthal's resignation last week came in response to a straightforward offer from the Texas Attorney General's Office, his lawyer said Monday: Step down, and we'll stop investigating you.Defense lawyer Ron Woods, a former U.S. attorney, said the now-former Harris County district attorney accepted the offer on Thursday, a day before Rosenthal rival Lloyd Kelley filed a lawsuit seeking to force him out of office for incompetence, misconduct or intoxication.
Woods said the investigation into improper computer use by Rosenthal was disruptive, and Rosenthal decided he'd had enough.
"I relayed the attorney general's position that they would end the removal investigation if he resigned, and he made the decision to resign on Thursday," Woods said.
I'm okay with this, with some reservations I'll get to in a minute. The bottom line is that Rosenthal needed to go, and now he's gone. I'm not going to quibble too much over the details.
Woods criticized media reports that Rosenthal resigned because of the lawsuit filed by Kelley, who unsuccessfully challenged Rosenthal for the county's chief prosecutorial post in 2000.Kelley is a friend and former law partner of former Houston Police Chief C.O. Bradford, the Democrat running for district attorney.
Kelley filed his lawsuit Friday morning; Rosenthal notified his staff and reporters that he was quitting hours later.
Well, you do have to admit that the timing was notable.
The scope of the attorney general's investigation included talking to computer technicians at the office. County Attorney Mike Stafford requested the inquiry last month after e-mails that included campaigning, racist jokes, sexually explicit images and lovelorn notes to Rosenthal's executive assistant surfaced."It was very disruptive to the office, and Chuck did not want to continue disrupting the office," Woods said.
Stafford specifically asked the Attorney General's Office to consider whether Rosenthal's use of a county computer for work on his re-election campaign amounted to a violation of the law. Had investigators reached such a conclusion, state lawyers could have filed a removal lawsuit similar to Kelley's.
My one reservation about all this is that I think it would be a good idea for the Attorney General to complete its investigation, so that whatever Rosenthal did do can then be held up as an example one way or the other. There's so much vagueness and ambiguity in our electoral codes that having some concrete examples would be a big help. Of course, actual elected officials may prefer to see that vagueness and abiguity as a feature and not a bug. So, you know, that's the way the cookie crumbles.
In related news, the motion to recuse the judge in the civil trial that was the underpinning for all the Rosenthal folderol has been dismissed.
The civil trial of four Harris County sheriff's deputies accused of violating the civil rights of two brothers in 2002 was cleared to resume after the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday denied the officers' request to change judges and lifted the stay it imposed last week."By this ruling, we do not condone the intemperate remarks by the district judge," the court's ruling stated, referring to statements made by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt in a Feb. 8 pre-trial conference that was not open to the public.
Attorneys for the deputies used Hoyt's comments, which have not been disclosed, as the basis of a last-minute effort to recuse him. They reportedly also cited past rulings and conduct in the case, which led Hoyt to scold them from the bench for going beyond the scope of the recusal motion. The motion was filed under seal, meaning its exact contents are not available to the public.
"It was basically a frivolous motion, designed to get time," said Lloyd Kelley, the lawyer for Sean Carlos Ibarra and Erik Adam Ibarra. "They got the record on Friday. By this afternoon they had a decision. It was a quick read and then an agreement."
Good. Let's get it on then.
Today is my forty-second birthday, which I feel should bring me one step closer to understanding what life, the Universe, and everything is all about. If I get any blinding insights, I'll be sure to share them. As always with my birthdays, the truly important things to note are that I share the date with Justine Bateman, and that I'm exactly one day older than Cindy Crawford. I mean hey, with references like those, how can I lose?
Today is also the first day of early voting in Texas for the March 4 primary. Those of you in Harris County, you can find early voting information and locations here (PDF). I highly recommend voting early this year, as turnout projections are incredibly high, and I wouldn't want to get caught in the chaos that's sure to occur on the fourth. Of course, that means you have to figure out who you're voting for once and for all. I'll post an incomplete list of people for whom I'll be pushing the button tomorrow, for what that will be worth to you. Some choices are easier than others, but they're all important. Please make sure your voice is heard.
Here's a sorted list of the candidate interviews and Q&As I've done for the Democratic primary. I hope this helps you make your decisions. Thanks very much, and go vote!
Interviews:
US Senate - Rick Noriega
US House, District 10 - Dan Grant and Larry Joe Doherty
Harris County Judge - David Mincberg
Harris County Sheriff - Adrian Garcia
Harris County Tax Assessor - Diane Trautman
State Senator, District 11 - Joe Jaworski
State Representative, District 27 - Ron Reynolds and Rep. Dora Olivo
State Representative, District 140 - Armando Walle
State Representative, District 145 - Carol Alvarado
State Representative, District 147 - Rep. Garnet Coleman
State Representative, District 148 - Rep. Jessica Farrar
Harris County Commissioners Court, Precinct 3 - Dexter Handy
Written Q&As:
State Supreme Court, Place 7 - Sam Houston and Baltasar D. Cruz
State Supreme Court, Place 8 - Judge Susan Criss and Judge Linda Yanez
80th District Court (Civil) - Larry Weiman
125th District Court (Civil) - Jim Wrotenbery and Kyle Carter
174th District Court (Criminal) - Ruben Guerrero
190th District Court (Civil) - Bruce Mosier and Andres Pereira
215th District Court (Civil) - Fred Cook and Steve Kirkland
Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Place 1 - Harold Landreneau
It's possible I'll get some more responses - I did send out more Q&As than this - and if so I'll print them when I get them.
Note: This entry is part of a series of written Q&As with judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates.
1. Who are you and what are you running for?
Ruben Guerrero, running for the 174th Criminal District Court Judge.
2. What kind of cases does this court hear?
This court hears felony criminal cases.
3. Why are you running for this particular bench?
I am running for this court because I am the most qualified candidate over all others who have filed for this bench. I have over 30 years experience in criminal law as a practioner and a judge and I believe that can bring integrity to this bench like no other.
4. What are your qualifications for this job?
I am an experienced jurist, having graduated from the University of Houston and Texas Southern School of Law. As I have said, I have 30 years experience as a lawyer and judge, having previously served as a Criminal District Court Judge for the 263rd Judicial District and as a visiting judge in many other courtrooms around Harris County. I have tried as a lawyer all cases from felony to misdemeanor and have presided as a judge in all such cases as well.
5. Why is this race important?
What makes this race so important is that the existing sitting judge on this bench is retiring, and the seat needs to be filled by an experienced judicial candidate who has demonstrated repeatedly as lawyer and judge that he or she is knowledgeable of the law, accountable to the people, and familiar with the county.
6. Why should people vote for you in the Democratic primary?
In this Democratic primary we need experience and knowledge. I have such and have always been a Democrat, unlike my opponent in the primary, who has run as a Republican before on multiple occasions. I have been tapped twice by Democratic leaders to high-level appointments: In 1992, by Texas Democratic Governor Ann Richards to fill an unexpired term for 263rd Judicial District Court, and by Former Democratic President Bill Clinton as the administrator of the Small Business Administration for the southwestern states of Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, and New Mexico.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Kyle Carter, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Dan Grant, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Bruce Mosier, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Rick Noriega, candidate for US Senate.
Judge Linda Yanez, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Larry Joe Doherty, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Harold Landreneau, candidate for Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Place 1.
State Rep. Dora Olivo, District 27.
Dexter Handy, candidate for Harris County Commissioners Court, Precinct 3.
As you know, I'm focused on the Democratic primary races, of which there are many in Harris County. But there are some interesting races on the Republican side as well, and up till now no one has tried to do candidate interviews and/or Q&As with those folks as I have with the Dems. I'm glad to note that Cory is attempting to fill that void, and he gets off to a nice start with this Q&A with GOP DA candidate Jim Leitner. Those of you reading this who will be voting in the Republican primary should check this out and bookmark Cory's site for future Q&As. I'll link to them as well as they come along.
Here's what the Chron has to say today at the start of early voting:
The Democratic and Republican parties of Texas will hold their primary elections on Tuesday, March 4. Early voting begins today.A complete list of Chronicle endorsements will run on election day. To date, the Chronicle has recommended the following candidates:
At which point they repeat their pathetically incomplete list of recommendations so far. Hey, don't wear yourselves out, fellas! In case you haven't noticed, every party official is exhorting people to vote early because of the expected high turnout. How much are some of those endorsements going to be worth when half the voters will have already cast their ballots by the time they read them? Sheesh.
I'm also still a bit cheesed about how skimpy the recommendations were in yesterday's piece. Two sentences for a Senate primary? What's up with that? And frankly, some of the judicial picks were a little weird, and not at all in line with the endorsements that many clubs have been giving. Finally, compare the lazy little blurb they wrote in favor of Republican Court of Criminal Appeals judge Paul Womack to the actually informative endorsements for his opponent, Robert Francis, that the Statesman, Morning News, Star-Telegram, and Express News all wrote. The phrase "mailing it in" comes to mind. Seriously, this is embarrassing.
Finally, the Caller Times waxes nostalgically for Mikal Watts and his money, then sighs and endorses Rick Noriega. At least they got it right in the end.
This ought to be interesting. From the Houston Politics blog:
In this corner, former Mayor Bob Lanier and consultant Wendell Cox. In that corner, Gulf Coast Institute President David Crossley and Virginia Tech planning professor Arthur Nelson.What's this fight about? Land use and growth in Houston, the nation's only major city without zoning.
As city officials struggle to devise policies that protect established neighborhoods while encouraging growth and development, experts representing opposing viewpoints will discuss local land use issues in a public forum Feb. 26 at the George R. Brown Convention Center.
The format for the event won't be a debate . . . more like a series of speeches, followed by questions from the audience. Crossley and Nelson will make the case for a general plan to guide the city's development and appropriate rules to enforce the plan. Lanier and Cox will argue that excessive regulations drive up housing costs and threaten the business- and development-friendly culture that has helped Houston to thrive.
The free event is sponsored by the Gulf Coast Institute, Houstonians for Responsible Growth, the Greater Houston Partnership and Blueprint Houston.
Be there if you can. Boyd has more.
Happy Start Of Early Voting Day! To help you celebrate, and to give you something to do as you wait on line to cast that early vote, here's this week's Texas Progressive Alliance blog roundup. Enjoy!
Burnt Orange Report is covering all kinds of races this week. In addition to their notable endorsement of Obama and analysis of how he can win and his Presidential primary poll numbers, Matt Glazer has reported that State Rep. Kino Flores has some ethics violation troubles, beyond the $50,000 he received from Craddick supporters.
Eye On Williamson has two posts on the upcoming Presidential Primary in Texas, Why I'm For Barack Obama and Barack can seal the deal in Williamson County. And locally, The Silly Season Is Upon Us - The WCGOP Machine Makes It's Choice.
TXsharon at Bluedaze, while not a football fan, reports on illegal gifts of SuperBowl tickets to Phil King and Michael Williams. Considering that the most recent pipeline explosion sent flames 600 -700 feet into the air, we need Railroad Commissioners without conflicts making decisions that will keep Texans safe.
WhosPlayin of WhosPlayin.com endorsed Obama for President and Aimlessness thinks Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia needs to go back to law school and get a refresher course on the U.S. Constitution. Talk about your "tortured" logic.
Musings endorses Hillary Clinton for President,citing her toughness, service, compassion, ability to work across the aisle and her solutions-oriented approach to governing as reasons why she is the choice for a new direction in Washington.
The Texas Cloverleaf digs up a report by the GAO that toll road public-private partnerships might not be the best thing for taxpayers. While at the same time, a new state rail system venture is brought back into the public spotlight in Texas.
The Texas Cloverleaf gets its hide chapped when the Dallas Morning News endorses the primary opponent of Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez. The endorsement is destroyed in typical Cloverleaf fashion.
CouldBeTrue at South Texas Chisme wonders if James Leininger is giving up the fight for school vouchers, i.e. destroying public schools in favor a theocratic education. In any case, Leininger is distancing himself from Tom Craddick.
Off the Kuff looks at the yard sign primary in his neighborhood.
Team McBlogger has decided to swim against the tide and endorse Senator Hillary Clinton in the Presidential Primary. Then they compounded the good decision making with a trip to the opening of her Texas HQ in Austin to see Bill Clinton. You know, the guy who's married to the candidate. Apparently, a couple of thousand people also had the same idea.
At Half Empty, with Edwards gone, Hal has thrown his support to Barack Obama. And, after a day of sAfter much soul searching, thought and input from great bloggers across the nation, Refinish69 has decided to endorse Obama for President in 2008.eething anger, Hal at Half Empty asks this question of the Republican Party of Texas, who are acting as surrogates for the John Cornyn senatorial campaign: Are you sure you want a dog in this hunt?
Open Source Dem at Brains and Eggs has`part two of "Texas in Play."
BossKittyat BlueBloggin shows us that voting is still a major problem in this country considering Washington DC Has 10,000 Mystery Voters.
Jaye at Winding Road in Urban Area endorses Hillary Clinton for President.
John Coby's mom is for Hillary Clinton. "I can't remember when our country was in such a horrible situation considering the war in Iraq, our debt, our status in the world. My country is in trouble and I believe Hillary Clinton can begin to solve the problems beginning on day one."
Vince at Capitol Annex notes that Marissa Marquez in House District 77 has been trashing bloggers, and endorses Hillary Clinton for president.
After much soul searching, thought and input from great bloggers across the nation, Refinish69 has decided to endorse Obama for President in 2008.
The Statesman becomes the first of the Big Five papers to endorse Judge Susan Criss for the Supreme Court in Place 8. They also join the crowd in endorsing Sam Houston for Place 7.
Democrats have a choice in two Supreme Court races that feature two good candidates in the Place 8 race and an easy pick in the Place 7 contest.In the Place 7 race, Houston lawyer Sam Houston, 44, is an easy choice over opponent Baltasar D. Cruz of Dallas. Cruz's focus is on a narrow point of law, but he expounds on it at interminable length.
Houston has a broader view and a distinguished 20-year legal career behind him. Houston says the court's general direction in favoring deep-pocketed defendants motivated him to run. It's a common complaint, but Houston isn't content to complain, he's running.
Though he has no judicial experience, Houston has the intellect and experience to bring to the November contest. Democrats would do well to choose him.
Sam Houston, by the way, is the candidate's given name and not a gimmick. He claims no relation to the general who was the president of the Texas Republic and also served as governor and U.S. senator from the state of Texas.
The winner of this race will face Republican incumbent Dale Wainwright in the November general election. Wainwright, a six-year incumbent, is not touched by the ethical and legal questions surrounding three other members of the Supreme Court.
Democrats face a much tougher choice in the race for Place 8 on the Supreme Court, in which two well-qualified jurists are vying for the nomination to challenge Republican incumbent Phil Johnson in November. Like Wainwright, Johnson is not involved in his colleagues' troubles and is unopposed in the GOP primary.
He will face a challenge in November from either Linda Yanez, 59, an appeals court judge who lives in Edinburgh, or Susan Criss, a district judge in Galveston. Yanez ran unsuccessfully for the Supreme Court in 2002. Besides solid legal experience, Yanez has a compelling personal story to tell. She picked cotton as a teenager and was an elementary school teacher before turning to the law. Though that background isn't uncommon, it's certainly uncommon on Texas appeals courts.
Criss, whose father Lloyd Criss served in the Texas House of Representatives in 1970s and '80s, has presided over the 212th District Court in Galveston County since 1986.
Like Houston, both cited the Supreme Court's tilt toward business interests as their motive for running.
It's a tough call on the endorsement because either would make a credible Democratic nominee. Criss is an intense competitor and, unfortunately, judicial races are political competitions. Criss has the potential of drawing attention to a judicial race that is usually low key and low interest.
Given the Supreme Court's recent troubles, Texans need to pay attention to who sits on those nine chairs.
That's an interesting justification for choosing Criss over Yanez, but not too far from the DMN's observation about fundraising ability in the Place 7 race. On that race, note the comment from Baltasar Cruz regarding the now frequently-repeated point about his verbosity. Does it strike you as a good idea for a non-endorsed candidate to respond to an endorsement editorial in this fashion? I'd have to say no, it's not.
Meanwhile, Houston completes the sweep by getting the nod from the Star-Telegram, while Judge Yanez goes four-for-five.
Place 7Houston lawyer Sam Houston claims no relation to the legendary Texas leader. However, he does say that he would bring balance to a court that seems to have swung too far in one direction.
"We need a trial lawyer back on to remind us about the jury system," he told the Editorial Board of the Star-Telegram.
Houston, 45, has spent 20 years as a civil litigator, mainly representing defendants such as insurance companies. But he said he also has represented plaintiffs and has support from lawyers on both sides of the docket. He is board-certified -- meaning specialized education and testing -- in personal injury law and trial advocacy.
Though he has no experience on the bench, the breadth of his work and demeanor seem suited for the state's highest civil court.
The primary winner faces incumbent Justice Dale Wainwright in November.
The other candidate, Baltasar Cruz, 42, of Dallas is almost frenetic in his advocacy for changing the court system. A previously unsuccessful candidate for a Dallas trial court seat, he has a slew of ideas for making the court system more efficient and less expensive to litigants. Some of them merit discussion. But he talks more about micromanaging the trial courts than deciding difficult legal issues, which is the Supreme Court's main responsibility.
The Star-Telegram Editorial Board recommends Sam Houston in the Democratic primary for Texas Supreme Court Place 7.
Place 8
Justice Linda Yañez has been on the 13th Court of Appeals since 1993, deciding many of the kinds of cases that come before the Supreme Court. She has written more than 800 opinions for the appellate court, which is based in Corpus Christi and covers a 20-county area.
Yañez says that the current justices are too like-minded and that she would not only help foster more debate but, as a Latina, would add a voice that the court never has had. Yañez, 59, started her career as a legal aid lawyer, worked for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund and has taught at the Harvard law school's immigration clinic and trial advocacy workshop.
The legal credentials of state District Judge Susan Criss of Galveston are more suited to the Court of Criminal Appeals than the Supreme Court's docket of business disputes, products liability, oil and gas cases, contracts, family law, medical malpractice and other civil matters.
Though her court hears criminal and civil matters, Criss, 46, is board-certified in criminal law, and her campaign materials tout her work as a prosecutor and "a tough advocate for stricter sanctions" against sex offenders.
In November, the primary winner will face Justice Phil Johnson, who was appointed in 2005 and will be running for his first six-year term.
The Star-Telegram Editorial Board recommends Linda Yañez in the Democratic primary for Texas Supreme Court Place 8.
The S-T isn't the first board to note that Criss' experience is more on the criminal side. I'm hoping the Democrats will do well enough this year to ensure a full slate of nominees for the Court of Criminal Appeals in 2010 that are as well-qualified across the board as the Supreme nominees are this year. This year, we have Susan Strawn, who is a good and well-qualified candidate, and JR Molina, who for better or worse is probably in the strongest position to actually get elected, thanks to his repeated campaigns.
Elsewhere, in addition to the Chron's by-the-way mention, Railroad Commissioner candidate Art Hall picks up the endorsement of his hometown paper.
Hall, 36, a lawyer and investment banker, is a quick study and demonstrated during his tenure at City Hall that he is a team player.He is focusing on clean, affordable energy as well as environmental concerns such as groundwater pollution spawned by oil and gas production. He also wants to nurture alternative energy programs.
Of the three Democrats seeking the post, Hall clearly is the best choice.
Hall got a mixed-blessing nod from the DMN, while Dale Henry got a more full-throated recommendation from the S-T, which also included some nice words for Hall. As far as I can tell, the Statesman has not yet weighed in on this race.
PoliTex notes the lone Texas newspaper among the five biggest to stump for someone other than John McCain in the Republican Presidential primary is the Dallas Morning News, who went for Mike Huckabee. The post says that they made this choice back in December, but the linked endorsement piece is dated February 7, so I'm not sure what to make of that. In any event, this bit of reasoning from their endorsement is interesting:
"I'm a conservative," he likes to say. "I'm just not mad about it." Along those lines, what sold us on Mr. Huckabee is a sense that of all the Republicans, he is the change agent the nation most needs. John McCain, whose candidacy is quite appealing despite concern about his age and temperament, was arguably that man once. But his moment has passed.
Does this set them up to endorse Barack Obama in November if he's the Democratic nominee? That would be a rivers-run-uphill, dogs-and-cats-living-together moment if it happens, but hey, the way this year is going, who knows what's in store. In any event, stash this one away for future reference.
Note: This entry is part of a series of recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing written Q&As with judicial candidates.
One race that I almost overlooked among the many contested primaries here in Harris County is for County Commissioner in Precinct 3. I had the pleasure of meeting candidate Dexter Handy at the Super Duper Tuesday watch party that Michael Skelly hosted, and after talking to him I knew I needed to pay attention to that race. Handy is a recently retired Air Force officer who's lived all around the world before settling in Houston and one of the nicer people I've encountered on the campaign trail. His opponent is a perennial candidate who had run exclusively as a Republican in various primaries before now. I'm happy to support Dexter Handy in this race, and I hope you will as well if you live in Precinct 3. My interview with Handy, which will be the last one for the primaries (I still have one judicial Q&A to run, which will appear tomorrow), is here. I hope this series has been useful to you and has helped you learn more about our candidates this March. As always, let me know what you think.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Kyle Carter, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Dan Grant, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Bruce Mosier, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Rick Noriega, candidate for US Senate.
Judge Linda Yanez, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Larry Joe Doherty, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Harold Landreneau, candidate for Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Place 1.
State Rep. Dora Olivo, House District 27.
Perhaps finally realizing that Early Voting starts tomorrow, the Chron throws out a bunch of endorsements to try and catch up. It's a fairly long list, so I'll put it beneath the fold. Three items to note: One, they did endorse Rick Noriega as expected, though you'd think that a Senate primary would merit more than two sentences per race. Two, they like Supreme Court candidate Sam Houston so much they endorse him again. And three, they've still got a lot to do. Here's my list of races where they had not endorsed as of last week, updated to reflect where we now stand:
1. President.- Done on Sunday
2. US Senate.- Done3. CDs 14, 18, and 22 on the GOP side, and CD10 on the Dem side. - Still not done
4. Railroad Commissioner (Dem) and Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 4 (GOP).- Done5. State Senate, Districts 4 (GOP) and 11 (Dem). - Still not done
6. State Rep, Districts 140, 145, 146, 147, and 148 (Dem); and Districts 127, 129, 130, 134, and 144 (GOP). - Still not done
7.
First Court of Appeals, Place 3, and 14th Court of Appeals, Place 6 (both GOP). - Half done8. District Judge in the following District Courts:
80, 125, 152, 174,190, 215, and 351(Dem); 55,174, 176,190, and 312(GOP). - The struck-through ones are done, the bolded ones aren't. I suppose this may mean they're not offering an endorsement in those races, but it would have been nice for them to make that clear.9. Harris County Sheriff (both parties), Tax Assessor (Dem), District Clerk (GOP), and County School Trustees, Positions 5 and 7 (GOP). - Still not done
10. County Commissioner, Precinct 3 (Dem). - Still not done
So there's a lot of races remaining. We'll see how much more catching up they do tomorrow.
- U.S. Senate, Republican John Cornyn -- The incumbent junior senator from Texas has showed courage and reason in supporting President Bush's call for immigration reform that would meet U.S. labor needs and offer undocumented residents an avenue to legal status. He faces only token opposition in the GOP primary.
- U.S. Senate, Democrat Rick Noriega -- A lieutenant colonel in the Texas Army National Guard, Noriega is a veteran of the war in Afghanistan. He served with distinction in the Texas Legislature for nine years and helped to manage the care of Hurricane Katrina victims evacuated to Houston.
- Justice, Texas Supreme Court, Place 7, Democrat Sam Houston -- No relation to the hero of the battle of San Jacinto, Houston is an experienced civil litigator. He's running for this office to bring balance to a court with a reputation of favoring big business over individuals, no matter the law and the facts.
- Judge, Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 4, Republican Paul Womack -- Womack is a voice of reason on a court that has been frequently indifferent or hostile to defendants who turn out to be innocent or who had their constitutional rights violated. A scholar, Womack teaches at the University of Texas Law School and is well-suited to serve on the state's highest court for criminal matters.
- Texas Railroad Commissioner, Democrat Art Hall -- A resident of San Antonio, Hall wants the commission to focus more on alternative energy sources. A Hempstead native, Hall is a graduate of Harvard and Texas Tech Law School. He served two terms as a San Antonio city councilman.
- 1st Court of Appeals, Place 3, Republican Sam Nuchia -- The incumbent in this seat on an important intermediate court, Nuchia is a former Houston police chief. Rarely reversed by the Texas Supreme Court, Nuchia wrote the admirable opinion reversing the wrongful conviction of Andrea Yates, who was mentally ill when she drowned her five children in the bath.
- Judge 80th Civil District Court, Democrat Larry Weiman -- Weiman has 16 years' experience as a civil trial lawyer. A mediator, he can see both sides of the case and rule fairly. Weiman says he wishes to bring balance to Harris County's district courts, which sometimes have stopped meritorious lawsuits and failed to correct miscarriages of justice.
- Judge, 125th Civil District Court, Democrat Kyle Carter -- A graduate of South Texas College of Law, Carter wants the courts to be nonpartisan and treat all citizens with respect. He would bring to the bench a refreshing passion for fairness and justice in a system that tends to favor litigants with the most resources, regardless of merit.
- Judge, 174th Criminal District Court, Republican Terrance Windham -- A retired Air Force judge advocate, Windham has extensive experience as both a prosecutor and defense lawyer. He pledged that he would never allow an innocent defendant to plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit.
- Judge, 190th Civil District Court, Republican Patricia Kerrigan -- The appointed incumbent on this bench, Kerrigan managed to be active in community service despite a demanding career as an honored trial lawyer with Fulbright & Jaworski and then with her own firm. She pledges to rule fairly and has the support of former Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Tom Phillips.
- Judge, 190th Civil District Court, Democrat Andres Pereira -- An experienced civil litigator, Pereira has argued cases before state and federal trial and appeals courts representing families and small and midsized businesses. An active community volunteer, Pereira is well-qualified to be his party's nominee for this bench.
- Judge, 215th Civil District Court, Democrat Steven Kirkland -- Highly favored in the Houston Bar Poll, Kirkland is a graduate of Rice and the University of Houston's law school. He has 12 years' experience in law practice and served as a Houston municipal judge.
- Judge, 312th Family District Court, Republican David Farr -- The incumbent, Farr has earned the respect of the family bar. An officer in the Texas Army National Guard, Farr's service to community and country recommends him to receive his party's nomination for this bench.
- Judge, 351st Criminal District Court, Democrat Sylvia Pubchara -- A Cuban immigrant, Pubchara has been a criminal defense lawyer and a Fort Bend County prosecutor. Her varied experience in her life and her career make her well-suited for this bench.
Christof and former City Council member Carroll Robinson have an op-ed in the Chron that's a response to the Bill King piece that called for Metro to do away with the fare box. They make some excellent points.
Eliminating the fare to ride Metro buses and the light-rail line will not increase options for transit riders, improve service or necessarily reduce congestion. Even if transit ridership were to increase, there is no evidence that every new rider would be someone getting out of their car to ride a bus or the rail line because it was free. Metro is already less expensive than driving.Moreover, a significant portion of the commuters using the Metro Park & Ride buses already ride for free. Their fare is fully or partially subsidized by their employer, so it is unlikely that Park & Ride ridership will increase significantly by making Metro "free." Many university students can also ride for free. As Metro moves to an electronic fare card it is making paying to ride easier and reducing delays.
"Choice" riders -- the ones with a car at home -- won't ride transit simply because it is cheap. They also want high-quality service.
On the matter of being cheaper than driving, consider this. At $3 per gallon for gas, if you get 18 MPG in the city, a trip of just six miles each way costs you the same $2 that a roundtrip on Metro would cost. When you factor in the cost of parking, which for most destinations along the Main Street line is significant, Metro is an easy win. And the cost of gas isn't going to go down any time soon.
As our region continues to grow, even if there is no cost to ride Metro buses or rail, there will be more cars on our roads and highways. Over the next seven to 27 years, we will add 3 million people, and most will own a car. Without the option of an integrated regional rail and bus system, they will add to congestion.We also need to look at congestion more holistically by adopting public policies that balance protecting our neighborhoods with enabling and managing increased residential and commercial growth in the neighborhoods inside Loop 610 and Beltway 8. These neighborhoods are already becoming densely developed. Without an integrated light-rail and bus system in Houston and the increased mobility it will provide, local roads will soon become as congested as our local highways.
As you know, I agree with that.
Anyway, read the whole thing. Christof has more here. I'm glad to see this dialog take place. I hope it continues.
Houston Intown magazine has an update on the impending Upper Kirby facelift/street widening, which will have the unfortunate side effect of dooming the existing trees, despite earlier hope otherwise. There's some details in there about what will replace those to-be-removed trees, and other features of the new streetscape. This is slated to begin in April, so if nothing else, get ready to avoid that area for the next year or so. Check it out.
As I expected, the Chron endorses Barack Obama and John McCain in their respective primaries for President. The Star-Telegram echoes those choices. According to Poll Dancing, that's a clean sweep for Obama (and McCain as well, as far as I can tell). And for good measure, the Corpus Christi Caller-Times stumps for Obama (and McCain), too. Given how much the papers here disliked Bill Clinton when he was President, I can't say that it's a big surprise none of them have endorsed Hillary Clinton. But I confess to being a little surprised at the ongoing shutout.
Anyway, that's one down, and a whole lot more to go for the Chron. I figure we'll get the Senate races tomorrow, and who knows what after that. Any guesses as to mow much of my list they'll make it through?
Several newspapers have their Senate endorsements up today, and as expected they all recommend Rick Noriega. Here's the Statesman:
Democrats in the March 4 primary have four choices in nominating a candidate to run in this fall's general election, and easily the most qualified is Rick Noriega of Houston, a state representative and Texas National Guard officer.The other three candidates are Ray McMurrey, an earnest Corpus Christi government teacher; Rhett Smith, a San Antonio security guard who ran as a Republican for governor in 2006; and Gene Kelly, a Universal City retiree and perennial candidate.
Noriega, 50, is a native Texan. He grew up in Houston and is a graduate of the University of Houston. He later earned a master's degree in public administration from Harvard University. He served in the Army and remains a lieutenant colonel in the Texas National Guard. He has served in Afghanistan and on border duty at Laredo.
Given his military credentials, it's not surprising that Noriega is in a better position than most Democrats to criticize the war in Iraq, which he says is the "key issue for us nationally." He has made it the centerpiece of his campaign, calling for U.S. troops to be brought home - not all at once, but in a steady withdrawal. He also says that "best exit strategy is to change the commander-in-chief," President Bush.
Cornyn, in contrast, remains a supporter of the war and is closely identified with the Bush administration.
Ultimately, Noriega said, the outcome of the war in Iraq will depend on political solutions, not military.
The most important domestic issue, he says, is health care. He wants to guarantee coverage through partnerships between the federal government, states, employers and health care providers, starting with an expansion of the Children's Health Insurance Program. However, he declined to say at this point whether he favored Hillary Clinton's or Barack Obama's health care plan.
On immigration, Noriega has seen first-hand its impact on the border with Mexico and favors some sensible steps: securing borders and ports and providing a strict but achievable path to citizenship for those here illegally; penalizing employers who use illegal immigrants to drive down wages; and improving our system for admitting immigrants legally.
The Express News:
Of the four Democrats vying for the party's nomination to the U.S. Senate, Rick Noriega is undoubtedly the best candidate.A five-term member of the Texas House, Noriega also is an Army veteran and lieutenant colonel in the Texas Army National Guard.
Noriega, a Houstonian who served in Afghanistan for 14 months, has strong feelings about the war in Iraq and can capably voice the Democratic view of the Bush administration's handling of the situation. Noriega supports a "phased military redeployment" that moves U.S. troops from "Iraq's civil wars."
Additionally, Noriega supports an "earned" way for undocumented immigrants to come out of the shadows.
Noriega's opponents include two perennials -- Gene Kelly and Rhett Smith -- who don't merit serious consideration, and Ray McMurrey, a Corpus Christi high school teacher.
McMurrey is idealistic and energetic, but he lacks Noriega's preparation and acumen.
Noriega represents a more pragmatic option for Democrats in the November campaign to unseat Republican Sen. John Cornyn.
The veteran lawmaker has his eyes open about the difficult general election campaign ahead, and he is not likely to shy away from taking tough stances.
We recommend that Democrats nominate Noriega.
The Star-Telegram:
A native Houstonian, Noriega is campaigning aggressively on his military service. He was deployed to Afghanistan for a total of 14 months and was the Laredo Border Sector commander in Operation Jump Start during the summer of 2006.Noriega's record as a five-term state representative also is appealing to Democrats. He strongly supports the Children's Health Insurance Program and thinks a wall along the Texas-Mexico border is not the way to stem illegal immigration.
As a state representative, Noriega authored House Bill 1403, which upon its passage made Texas the first state to provide in-state tuition rates and financial assistance for certain immigrant children.
He sees a need for comprehensive immigration policy reform that includes securing borders and ports, creating a "tough but reasonable" path to legalization, putting more resources into law enforcement agencies and penalizing employers who take advantage of the country's "broken system."
And the El Paso Times.
Democrats voting in the March 4 primary should choose Richard J. "Rick" Noriega as their candidate for U.S. Senate.With the country engaged in war and El Paso so heavily involved with active duty military and veterans, we like that Noriega is a lieutenant colonel in the Texas National Guard and also a veteran legislator, now in his fifth term as Houston state rep in the Texas House.
He also has front-line experience with border security, serving as Laredo Border Sector Commander in the Guard and working with state, local and federal officials in cracking down on smuggling of both drugs and humans.
He also has fought for accessible and affordable health care -- a huge concern along the border -- and is a great proponent of alternative, renewable energy sources.
We recommend that Democrats vote for Rick Noriega.
All of them equally unsurprisingly recommend John Cornyn for renomination as well.
In other endorsement news, in a race that the Chron ought to weigh in on, the Statesman gives a nod to Dan Grant in CD10.
Though either Grant or [Larry Joe] Doherty will give Republican incumbent Michael McCaul a good fight, Grant brings more to the primary election contest. He has youth, vigor and deep experience serving in some of the world's most dangerous places, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Kosovo. Grant has received virtually all of the endorsements from Democratic constituencies in the meandering district.Grant is a graduate of McCallum High School and Georgetown University, where he received a degree in foreign service. He also has a master's degree from the London School of Economics and served as a civilian in various positions overseas.
Grant has backing from several Democratic Party leaders and has raised nearly $200,000 for the primary battle. For a young man making his first run for office, Grant is extremely poised and informed. He knows the district and has studied the demographics that he and other Democrats believe make McCaul vulnerable in November.
In a congressional district drawn to represent a Republican majority, a huge percentage of the Democratic vote comes from Travis County. That should give Grant an edge in the Democratic primary next month.
On the issues, Grant is for gradually withdrawing troops from Iraq but leaving a garrison in the Middle East to help train Iraqi troops; he's against the fence on the Mexico border but for improved border security measures; and he's opposed to the national animal identification system. Grant also said he would vote against making President Bush's tax cut permanent.
Doherty is a strong candidate, as well. He built a career in Houston suing lawyers for malpractice and was the tough-talking "judge" on 600 episodes of the television show "Texas Justice." He is smart, savvy and speaks a brand of Texan straight talk that voters in the district can relate to. Doherty moved to Austin for his campaign, but he owns a ranch and wildlife refuge in Washington County, also in the 10th District.
Doherty likely will raise more money than Grant, but neither will be able to match McCaul, who is one of the wealthiest members of Congress. However, both Doherty and Grant believe McCaul is not popular with district residents and is vulnerable in the fall.
Grant is ideally poised to exploit those weaknesses and appeal to Democrats across the sprawling 10th District.
You can listen to my interview with Dan Grant here, and with Larry Joe Doherty here.
Finally, the Express News joins the Chron and the DMN in recommending Sam Houston and Judge Linda Yanez for the State Supreme Court.
In the Democratic primary for the seat held by Justice Dale Wainwright, Houston lawyer Sam Houston faces Baltasar Cruz of Dallas.We strongly recommend Houston. Although he has the type of familiar name often exploited by candidates in Texas, Houston's résumé has substance. He is a West Texas native who has been practicing law for 20 years and has a "mixed civil litigation background."
Houston said the state's all-Republican high court rules almost exclusively for defendants, a complaint echoed by other Democrats seeking a job on the court.
Cruz has an unorthodox platform. He focused at length on rewriting the state's code for civil procedures and other side issues in a recent interview. Also, Cruz has less appellate experience than Houston.
In the Democratic primary race for the seat held by Justice Phil Johnson, Justice Linda Yanez of the 13th Court of Criminal Appeals is our recommendation. She faces state District Judge Susan Criss of Galveston.
Both candidates are adequately qualified, but Yañez is an exceptionally good candidate. Yanez, who lives in Edinburg, is making her second bid for the state's high court. She was appointed to her current position in 1993 by Gov. Ann Richards and has been elected three times.
Yanez's 15 years of appellate experience is excellent preparation for the Supreme Court. She has written 850 opinions.
The studious, serious judge is a former Harvard Law School instructor.
Criss is a former prosecutor, and her private practice experience involved criminal defense. Her trial court hears criminal and civil cases.
While Criss has produced innovative ideas as a trial judge, her strength is in criminal law and the Supreme Court deals strictly with civil cases.
Yanez is the Democrats' strongest option in this race.
You can read my Q&As with Sam Houston here, Judge Linda Yanez here, Judge Susan Criss here, and Baltasar Cruz here.
A coalition of Houston plant operators filed a lawsuit Friday against the city of Houston, alleging an air quality ordinance adopted by the city last summer violates state law."We filed to get the court's review because we believe the ordinance conflicts with state law, and we believe it's very difficult for our members to have a patchwork of regulations to follow," said Business Coalition for Clean Air Appeal Group spokeswoman Elizabeth Hendler.
Hendler noted that the group spent "several months" working with the city without success to find a compromise after the ordinance was adopted.
She said the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, a state agency, has authority delegated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate air quality and previously regulated Houston facilities.
"Now, businesses could be facing enforcement by the city for things considered lawful by the state," said Hendler.
Under the ordinance adopted by the city last July, both civil and criminal penalties can be assessed to those found to be breaking the city law.
[...]
The petition seeks to keep the city from enforcing the ordinance and "interfering in any way with the TCEQ's exclusive authority to regulate air quality control in the state of Texas."
Though the ordinance affects numerous small businesses, the BCCA Appeal Group is comprised of and funded by large chemical plant operators.
The BCCA Appeal Group was established in 2001 by members of the Business Coalition for Clean Air, an offshoot of the Greater Houston Partnership.
I have no idea how this will turn out. While I'm certain this is a lot of FUD from polluters who can and should be doing better, that doesn't mean they don't have valid grounds to sue. We'll see what happens.
Good news!
You can purchase tickets here. I just think it's eminently fitting that the event takes place on February 29. Enjoy!
I swear, there have been so many ups and downs and twists and turns in the Astrodome Redevelopment story that I find it hard to guess at what's coming next. The latest development, which comes on the heels of some actions by County Judge Ed Emmett that made the plan seem doomed, now makes it sound like it's gaining traction.
A convention hotel at the Reliant Astrodome could net nearly $50 million annually four years after opening, a consultant said in a report released by Harris County Friday."Reliant Park is transforming into one of the largest, most versatile sports, entertainment and conversion complexes in the United States," hotel consultant John Keeling, vice president of PKF Consulting, wrote. "To our knowledge, there are no other hotels like the proposed (hotel) adjacent to" a major stadium and convention center.
Astrodome Redevelopment Co., which has proposed reinventing the Dome as a convention hotel, hired PKF to do the study last year.
A consulting firm hired by the county, Convention Sports & Leisure, found that PKF's study conformed with analyses of financial prospects for large hotels.
Dick Raycraft, county budget and management services director, said the PKF report sheds light on whether hotel analysts believe that a Dome hotel would be profitable.
Raycraft's office included it as part of an analysis of financial and legal issues related to the convention hotel plan.
The analyses were given to Commissioners Court as it prepares to discuss next week whether the county should continue pursuing the Dome hotel plan.
PKF estimated that the Dome hotel would have a 72 percent occupancy rate in its third year.
I suppose my way of looking at this is that if a bank is willing to throw a couple hundred million bucks at a project like this, they must feel there's some hope of recouping their investment. Doesn't mean their judgment is sound, of course, but it certainly counts as objective evidence of the thing's feasibility.
They may not feel quite the same way now, however:
In a letter to the county, Astrodome Redevelopment president Scott Hanson said the company had a letter of intent from a bank saying it would lend $360 million for the project, but that agreement expired in October.Since then, the economy has worsened, and some banks have tightened lending practices, Hanson said.
Astrodome Redevelopment still can obtain financing, but lenders may ask that the county rebate its share of hotel occupancy taxes generated by the hotel to the developers, Hanson said.
I don't think I'd realized that. It certainly explains Judge Emmett's negativity towards ARC's ability to gt financing lately. Of course, now Emmett is saying that condition for financing isn't necessarily a deal-breaker, so there we go on the roller coaster again.
City officials last month said they were exploring the idea of building or helping facilitate the building of a second downtown convention hotel. The idea could involve the city selling the Hilton Americas.
So I'll ask again: How many convention centers do we need in Houston? I can believe we're big enough for two, and I can certainly see reasons why there might be different purposes for a center downtown and a center near Reliant Stadium, but are we sure about this? We did ask an expert, and that expert said sure, it's viable, but what assumptions were they making about the two locations' ability to draw in business?
It's a mess. I guess I'm where I started on all this, which is that I don't care one way or the other if a private investor wants to spend a bunch of money rehabbing the Dome. I don't want the county to do that, but given that it's on the hook for $1.5 million a year to keep the place in mothballs, I'm okay with there being some public involvement in whatever happens. The rest is details. We'll see what happens.
Here's today's Chron story on Chuck Rosenthal's decision to finally walk away from the job as Harris County DA.
Rosenthal's decision marked a change of heart from his previous vows to finish out the remainder of his term even though he had abandoned his re-election plans because of the e-mail controversy. It was not immediately known Friday how quickly Gov. Rick Perry would appoint an interim replacement to lead the district attorney's office until Rosenthal's term expires Dec. 31.Rosenthal, 62, said a combination of prescription drugs had impaired his judgment, and constant media coverage of his controversial e-mails -- which included some sexually explicit and racist content, along with affectionate notes to his executive assistant -- had taken its toll on his family.
"Although I have enjoyed excellent medical and pharmacological treatment, I have come to learn that the particular combination of drugs prescribed for me in the past has caused some impairment in my judgment," Rosenthal wrote in his resignation letter.
"The federal court's release of my private e-mails around Christmas of last year brought a lot to bear on my wife and children. I have been trying to restore my family as a unit, but the constant media pressure has made that restoration more difficult. I am hopeful that, in my retirement, the media will accord my family the privacy we need to heal."
As recently as 10 days ago, Rosenthal publicly denied having any problems with medication to deal with pain.
At a Feb. 5 meeting with about 20 of his upper echelon administrators, Rosenthal addressed "rumors that he was addicted to painkillers" that he had heard was going around, said Julian Ramirez, a division chief.
Rosenthal said he didn't even take painkillers, Ramirez said.
Ramirez said most experienced attorneys in the office were sorry to see Rosenthal leave under these circumstances.
"Chuck tried hard to make the office a nicer place to work," Ramirez said.
[...]
What prescription drugs Rosenthal was taking -- and where he got them -- remains a mystery.
But his e-mails indicate he obtained some prescriptions from Sam Siegler, his personal physician and close friend, who is also the husband of Republican district attorney candidate Kelly Siegler.
In one e-mail last July, Rosenthal asked Sam Siegler to call in a prescription for sinus medication for Rosenthal's executive assistant, Kerry Stevens.
In a follow-up e-mail to Stevens, Rosenthal wrote that he'd spoken with one of Siegler's nurses. "I didn't feel good asking her about Ambien. Sam wasn't there," Rosenthal wrote. Ambien is a prescription sleeping pill.
Siegler did not respond to requests for comment Friday.
The removal lawsuit that Kelley filed on behalf of Erik Ibarra in state District Judge Martha Hill Jamison's court Friday did not mention prescription drugs, but alleged Rosenthal consumed alcohol at the office while performing his duties from 2001 to 2007.
The lawsuit did not cite specific instances, and Kelley would not elaborate on what evidence he had to support that claim.
I just have a funny feeling about the prescription drug claims. It's all very convenient. I don't really have any reason to doubt it, I just don't feel like I have any reason to believe anything Rosenthal says at this point. I don't suppose any of it matters any more. I'm just glad the Rosenthal era, and the Rosenthal saga, are behind us. Both are well past due. Mark Bennett, Cory, and The Professors have more.
The following is an announcement from the Houston Democratic Forum:
The Houston Democratic Forum invites you to our Casual Discussion of Presidential Politics with a Very Special GuestANTONIO R. VILLARAIGOSA
Mayor of Los Angeles and National Campaign Co-Chair for Hillary Clinton for President
http://www.lacity.org/mayor/bio1.htm
Monday, February 18th, 6pm to 7:30pmSoVino Bistro & Wine Bar
507 Westheimer, Downtown HoustonCash Bar
You can valet park, and there is ample self-parking in areaRSVP: dannyd713 -at- yahoo.com or 713.417.5400
Mayor Villaraigosa is the 41st mayor of Los Angeles. The Mayor is known for his exception skill at building broad bipartisan coalitions and is considered one of the leading progressive voices in the country. Mayor Villaraigosa is national campaign co-chair for Hillary Clinton for President and has been traveling across the nation on her behalf. Please come by to hear from him about the presidential campaign, his work in Los Angeles, and the future of the Democratic party.
Finally, a competitive presidential primary comes to Texas.
Let's discuss.
Hope you can make it!
Another request by the city of Houston to throw out ten remaining lawsuits stemming from the infamous 2002 K-Mart Kiddie Roundup has been denied by the judge.
In a decision this week, [U.S. District Judge Nancy] Atlas wrote that the more than 100 plaintiffs could sue about whether the Houston Police Department had a "custom of mass detention without individualized reasonable suspicion."A mediation is scheduled in the coming weeks. Without settlements, a joint trial is set for April 14. Other plaintiffs already settled with the city.
In 2005, the judge ruled that the police plan that led to the mass arrests was unconstitutional. In a scathing opinion, she called HPD tactics to detain and arrest people who were not observed violating the law "an unjustified, almost totalitarian, regime of suspicionless stops."
Civil rights lawsuits were filed after almost 300 people were arrested in August 2002 during a surprise raid on the Kmart parking lot in the 8400 block of Westheimer. The HPD operation was an attempt to combat street racing.
All of the cases name former HPD Chief Clarence C.O. Bradford, who is running as a Democrat for Harris County District Attorney, and allege he knew about the plan. The lawsuits also accused police of brandishing pistols and shotguns and verbal use during the incident.
Most of those arrested were charged with trespassing or curfew violations, but none was accused of street racing. The charges were dropped after public outcry. Three years later, Atlas said the city's efforts to shut down street racing that summer were unconstitutional.
In court filings, the city tried to avoid trial by arguing that issue was not the mass detentions, but the department's plan to pursue racing spectators through the use of trespassing laws.
[...]
The plaintiffs claimed that HPD maintained a pattern of mass detentions dating back to 1989. But in the most recent ruling, Atlas said those cases were not sufficiently similar to the incident in 2002.
She is allowing the plaintiffs to continue their cases on the disputed facts of the custom during the summer of 2002.
The judge also wrote that there is a genuine dispute about then-Chief Bradford's knowledge about that summer's plan.
Bradford lost his appeal of Atlas' decision to keep him as a defendant in the lawsuits.
You can peruse all my archives on this here. I thought back in 2005 that we'd never see these cases go to court, but that they'd all get settled one way or another. Looks like I may be proved wrong about that in two months. I presume the plaintiffs will get former HPD Captain Mark Aguirre to testify against his erstwhile boss. That ought to make for some compelling action. I don't know how credible he'll be - he wasn't particularly credible at the time; the cross-examination ought to be a doozy - but I'm sure he'll land a few blows, and he'll enjoy the heck out of doing so. Stock up on the popcorn now, and we'll see how it goes.
The lawsuit filed by grand jurors in the David Medina arson investigation is called "doubtful" by at least one expert interviewed by the Chronicle.
"I can't see any merit whatsoever to it," University of Houston law professor David Crump said of the unusual lawsuit. "It's so crazy that you have to ask, 'Where are they coming from?' "The lawsuit asks for a declaratory judgment from a court that would give the former grand jurors the right to discuss evidence supporting their indictments without fear of punishment. It argues that they have a right to use the evidence to "fairly respond" to statements made about their motives by prosecutors -- in contradiction of the oath of secrecy placed on them by state law.
"These grand jurors have done a great deal of harm," Crump said. "The prosecutor has the responsibility for making the decision about whether to go forward. The grand jurors do not understand the burden of proof, that it's on the state of Texas, and that it's beyond a reasonable doubt and that just having some evidence won't do."
Adam Gershowitz, who teaches criminal law and procedure at South Texas College of Law, said the assistant foreman who drafted the lawsuit, attorney Jeffrey Dorrell, may be right about one thing: There's never been a lawsuit quite like this in Texas history.
"I certainly have never heard of anything like it," Gershowitz said.
[...]
Dorrell argues that he and others have a right to talk about evidence brought before them because, for a portion of their term, they were not a legally constituted grand jury, and thus are not bound by the oath. The grand jury was finally disbanded when it was discovered that its term was improperly extended.
"It is an interesting argument, but I predict one that will not succeed," Crump said. "It's too cute. There are certain principles that can't be evaded in that manner. They still got the evidence in their capacity as grand jurors, and they got that under the color of law. The reason behind it applies with equal force."
By my count, that's one expert with actual doubts, and one expert making a sort of meta-comment. I'd have thought a story with a headline that says "Experts have doubts" would have printed statements expressing dubiousness from more than one expert, but maybe they were all out of the office that day. Whatever. For what it's worth, I think this is a convincing argument that this suit won't go anywhere, and as I said before I'm concerned about the precedent it might set, but I still want to see it play out. So stay tuned.
Given that nobody has liked any of the proposed Ashby highrise ordinances so far, and that we may not see any action taken by City Council for the next seven months or so anyway, perhaps we ought to start hoping for the developers and the neighborhood residents to come to some kind of accomodation about the project.
"We continue to make an honest effort to cooperate, to negotiate some kind of compromise," said Matthew Morgan, who with his partner, Kevin Kirton, has proposed building a 23-story mixed-use project at 1717 Bissonnet at Ashby."That process is ongoing."
Morgan acknowledged that the two sides remain far apart after a series of offers and counteroffers emerged in a Feb. 5 meeting between the developers and neighborhood leaders.
But the fact that the two sides are talking represents progress, he said.
[...]
Ever since residents of the Southampton and Boulevard Oaks neighborhoods began protesting the developers' plans last September, the idea of a private solution to the controversy has been attractive to a number of city officials, developers and neighborhood leaders.
Developers, worried that a high-density development ordinance the city was writing in response to the project might hurt their industry and Houston's economy, tried to arrange deals for someone else to buy the property and develop it in a way more palatable to the neighborhood.
Chris Amandes, co-chair of the Stop Ashby High-Rise task force, said he and his neighbors would welcome a negotiated settlement as an alternative to city government action.
"We're interested in the result, not the process," Amandes said.
In the Feb. 5 meeting, Morgan and Kirton offered to reduce the size of their building to 19 stories or to build a six-story project while accepting a $2.65 million payment to recoup their investment.
Neighborhood leaders rejected these ideas but suggested some alternatives.
I'm more interested in the process than the result, but I certainly understand Mr. Amandes' perspective. I don't know how feasible any of the proposed alternatives are, but given that scale has been the issue all along - the place may be called the "Tower of Traffic" on some of the ubiquitous yard signs, but that caricature of the tower emphasizes its sheer height for a reason - a smaller project is clearly the endpoint of any settlement. The best outcome I can imagine is something that Morgan and Kirton work out solely with the neighborhood, and then all the lessons learned and feedback received from this process goes into the creation of a workable and up-to-date revision of the city's form-based codes, thus avoiding similar problems elsewhere. How likely this is, I couldn't tell you, but it's my hope anyway.
After all this time, I figured he'd hang around till the bitter end. But apparently not, and what better time to announce one's resignation than the Friday afternoon before a holiday weekend?
Chuck Rosenthal resigned as Harris County district attorney today amid an e-mail scandal that recently forced him to abandon his re-election campaign and a lawsuit filed today that sought his removal from office.Bill Delmore, chief of the D.A.'s legal services bureau, which oversees the general counsel's office, confirmed that Rosenthal issued a press release in which he says he contacted the governor's office to tender his resignation.
"Although I have enjoyed excellent medical and pharmacological treatment, I have come to learn that the particular combination of drugs prescribed for me in the past has caused some impairment in my judgment," Rosenthal wrote in his resignation letter.
Well, some of us have been saying for awhile now that his judgment was and is questionable. For the time being, I'll just leave it at that.
His decision to resigns caps several weeks of intense scrutiny of the district attorney's office and follows the filing of a lawsuit today against him and Harris County Sheriff Tommy Thomas.That lawsuit, filed by attorney Lloyd Kelley, sought Rosenthal and Thomas' removal from office. State law allows for an elected official to be removed on any of three grounds official misconduct, incompetency or intoxication on or off duty -- and Kelley says Rosenthal is guilty of all three.
The lawsuit accuses Thomas of incompetency and misconduct.
Sheriff's spokesman Capt. John Martin said Sheriff Tommy Thomas is not in the office today. "No one has seen the the petition," he said, "and without knowing the allegations, it's hard to comment."
Rosenthal's decision to step down came just a short time after the filing of Kelley's lawsuit.
[...]
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott in January launched an investigation into whether Rosenthal violated state laws by using a government computer for campaign activities.
Abbott's office has declined to discuss the investigation, which could have led Rosenthal's ouster. In his resignation letter today, however, Rosenthal mentioned the AG's investigation.
"The Texas Attorney General's office has informed my attorney that they will not proceed with a removal action if I resign," he said. "Without commenting on the merits of any case the Attorney General may have pursued, to have yet another controversy surround this office is intolerable to me."
[...]
Kelley said he did not think Rosenthal would have stepped down had the lawsuit seeking his removal from office not been filed.
"I think it's a good thing," Kelley said of Rosenthal's resignation. "It's a little late, but it's a good thing ... No one should be happy about today."
Rosenthal might be admitting that pharmacological drugs impaired his judgment so he can raise intoxication as a possible defense against a future perjury charge in the contempt case pending against him, Kelley said.
"He's using that as a defense for perjury," Kelley said. "This just isn't his problem. This goes back to (Harris County Judge) Ed Emmett and the county commissioners -- they've known about this and haven't done anything about it. It's just shameful."
Emmett vehemently denied Kelley's assertion that he was aware of Rosenthal's drug issues, said Joe Stinebaker, the county judge's spokesman.
Voluntary intoxication is not normally a defense. But involuntary intoxication -- such as unawareness that a combination of drugs could have a certain effect -- is a fact issue that can be considered by a jury in a perjury case, said attorney Pat McCann, president of the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association.
"It is a circumstance that could make it difficult to prove you intended to lie," McCann said. "Intoxication is a circumstance that could go to undermine intent. It is something the jury would have to believe."
Defense attorney Jon Munier agreed that an admission of involuntary intoxication "helps a lot" in a contempt or perjury case.
"You don't realize that your judgment is in fact impaired" in such cases, Munier said. "Look at what (Rosenthal) testified to -- he said he deleted the e-mails thinking they were being stored some other place and would still be retrievable. It's obviously an error in logic that basically can be explained away by impairment. It gives a pretty good explanation as to why you're making errors in judgment and why you're not making logical decisions."
There's a whole lot to unpack in there. I'll be very interested in learning more about Kelley's lawsuit to force Rosenthal and Tommy Thomas' removal from office. Whatever the merits of that, my first thought in reading this was to connect the resignation to Rosenthal's contradictory testimony regarding the deleted emails. I have to agree with McCann and Munier's assessments here. That doesn't mean Rosenthal isn't being fully truthful here, but it is awfully convenient. Again, I look forward to seeing what the judge makes of all this.
Until the the governor appoints a new district attorney, the Government Code provides that the first assistant D.A. take over duties.Gov. Rick Perry had not received Rosenthal's resignation letter Friday afternoon and planned no immediate action to name a successor, spokewoman Krista Moody said. She declined comment on whether Perry would favor one of the candidates running for district attorney or look to a non-candidate to serve until the newly elected D.A. is sworn in next January.
I almost have sympathy for Governor Perry here. He's likely to come under a lot of pressure from folks who want to maintain the GOP hold on this office, and who are convinced that their preferred candidate is the one to do it. It's clear that the caretaker option is the fairest, but I sure won't be surprised if Perry plays favorites. If I had to pick a scenario, it'll be that he waits till there's a nominee in place, then names that person. Assuming the timing works in the event of a runoff, that's what I'd expect to happen.
Here's some reaction from officialdom. I note without comment that C.O. Bradford has finally made a public statement on this matter. Grits, Muse, Jaye, and State of Mine, who makes the most appropriate comparison I can think of, also weigh in. So long, Chuck. May you get whatever help you need, and may the DA's office get back to where it should be now that it can do so.
The Dallas Morning News makes the clear choice in the Democratic primary for US Senate.
Rick Noriega, a five-term state representative from Houston, wins our nod in the Democratic Senate primary. Mr. Noriega's legislative experience, military background and academic training easily make him the best candidate in the four-man Democratic field.[...]
Mr. Noriega has served in the Texas House since 1999 and knows how laws get made. Holding a Harvard master's degree in public administration is no hindrance, either.
This newspaper named Houston its 2005 Texan of the Year for the city's effective response to the Hurricane Katrina evacuee crisis. As Mayor Bill White's point man running the convention center shelter, Mr. Noriega deserves much of the credit.
He touts his military background, an impressive record of service. Mr. Noriega is a lieutenant colonel in the Texas Army National Guard, in which he's served for 28 years. In 2005, he completed a 14-month deployment to Afghanistan, which has made him a well-informed critic of U.S. policy there and strengthened his advocacy for veterans.
Having commanded Guard soldiers deployed to the Texas-Mexico border in 2006, Mr. Noriega intimately knows the difficulties of securing that area, which is partly why he backs comprehensive immigration reform. This is not just political theory for him.
Still nothing from the Chronicle. Perhaps their plan is to get whatever endorsements they plan to do from the long list of remaining races done before the end of Early Voting. They sure aren't going to get it done before Early Voting starts, that's for sure. And with every day of Early Voting that passes, whatever influence they might hope to have over a given race is dimished by that much.
Anyway. The DMN also recommends Sen. John Cornyn on the GOP side - no surprise there. In a race where I'm still unsure of my decision, the Morning News goes for Art Hall as the choice for Railroad Commissioner, while the Star Telegram backs Dale Henry. For Hall:
We recommend former San Antonio City Council member Art Hall over petroleum engineer Dale Henry and therapist for the blind Mark Thompson in the Democratic primary for railroad commissioner.
This wasn't an easy call, even after interviewing each candidate and assessing their backgrounds. For example, the 76-year-old Mr. Henry, of Lampasas, has ample knowledge of the oil and gas industry. We regret that Mr. Hall's not as knowledgeable as Mr. Henry regarding the many technical issues facing the energy-regulating commission.
Still, Mr. Hall, 37, is a stronger candidate. The attorney and investment banker has the support of Henry Cisneros and Garry Mauro. A graduate of Harvard University and Texas Tech School of Law, he has strong political skills that could help him build consensus on the three-member board.
Mr. Hall talks about using this post to emphasize energy conservation just as San Antonio made saving water a crusade. Given Texas' energy demands, that's a great goal.
There is a forum-shopping element to Mr. Hall's candidacy, and he admits he looked at other races before deciding to run for this statewide office. But he is not the first Texan to run for this board as a way to leapfrog to another post.
For Henry:
The Texas Railroad Commission is the chief regulator of the state's oil and gas industry. In that vein, Dale Henry says the commission's premier focus should be safeguarding the environment from water, soil and air pollution associated with the industry.That's particularly relevant to North Central Texas residents concerned about potential negative environmental consequences from the Barnett Shale natural gas drilling boom. The need for solid, sensible environmental protection is especially strong in heavily populated urban areas.
Henry, 76, of Lampasas speaks from extensive experience. He spent 40-plus years in the oil and gas industry, including contracting with the state for the cleanup and plugging of abandoned wells. A petroleum engineering graduate of the University of Texas, he also has been a small-town city manager and possesses considerable knowledge of water issues.
The Star-Telegram Editorial Board urges that voters in the March 4 Democratic primary election cast their ballots for Henry in the three-candidate race for the Railroad Commission seat held by Republican Michael Williams. The primary winner is to face Williams, who has no GOP opponent, in November.
We should add that Art Hall, 37, a former San Antonio City Council member, is an impressive, personable candidate who should offer himself for public office again if he isn't successful in the commission race. Hall, an attorney and investment banker who grew up in Lubbock, has a bachelor's degree from Harvard and a law degree from Texas Tech.
I was not impressed with Dale Henry's 2006 campaign. He knows his stuff, but he was completely invisible to me, and it's not like I wasn't paying attention. Hell, he didn't even have a campaign website in 06, which is beyond inexcusable. But a lot of people I know and respect are very passionate about Henry's candidacy, and that carries weight with me. As I expressed to one of those folks, the question is whether I think Hall can become a good Railroad Commish, or if Henry can learn to become a good candidate. So far, Henry has done fairly well on that latter score. He's got a website, he's got people working for him, and he's even sending out email - he's the only RR Commissioner candidate I've heard from in this campaign, as it happens. As such, I'm leaning his direction. I'm not all the way there yet, but he's winning me over. Henry also got the AusChron endorsement and some good press in this feature story.
Anti-red light camera crusader Michael Kubosh has dropped his lawsuit over the city's camera program.
Kubosh had sued the city about the red-light cameras and the administrative-hearing process for motorists who fight their tickets, which are considered civil fines.The judge in the case ruled that the red-light cameras were constitutional but that the city would have to better authenticate the photographs used as evidence in the administrative hearings.
The judge also said the city should not charge a non-refundable fee to citizens who wanted to appeal the tickets further after they lost in the administrative hearings.
The city now uses affidavits to authenticate the photographs and no longer charges the non-refundable fees, said Philip Fraissinet, an attorney with Bracewell & Giuliani, which represented the city in the lawsuit.
Kubosh said the city's changes led him to withdraw his appeal. However, he said he may again challenge the program's constitutionality.
As I noted before, those two relatively minor points were the only places on which Kubosh had won. (The ruling can still be seen here as a PDF file.) The bulk of Kubosh's complaint had already been dealt with by the Legislature last year when it passed SB1119. I have no idea what constitutional grounds Kubosh may have in mind at this point, but whatever. I don't see it as making any difference.
Note: This entry is part of a series of recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing written Q&As with judicial candidates.
Another hot local contest is out in Fort Bend County's HD27 between incumbent Rep. Dora Olivo and challenger Ron Reynolds. Rep. Olivo has a long record of public service, and is on most issues a strong and reliable progressive. I hadn't had the opportunity to meet and talk with her before this, so I'm glad that I got that chance. My conversation with Rep. Olivo is here, as always in MP3 format. Let me know what you think.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Kyle Carter, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Dan Grant, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Bruce Mosier, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Rick Noriega, candidate for US Senate.
Judge Linda Yanez, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Larry Joe Doherty, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Harold Landreneau, candidate for Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Place 1
Recently, Texans for Public Justice filed a criminal complaint against Tom Craddick, alleging that his funneling of PAC money to several primary-challenged Democratic legislators was an illegal attempt to influence the Speaker's race. Now a different coalition has filed a lawsuit to have that Speaker's race law overturned.
The Free Market Foundation, Texas Eagle Forum PAC and American Civil Liberties Union of Texas are asking a judge to prevent officials from enforcing the 1973 law banning organizations or groups of persons from expending anything of value to aid or defeat the election of a speaker candidate.The law allows individuals to make contributions to candidates for speaker, but they cannot spend more than $100 "for the cost of correspondence to aid or defeat the election of a speaker candidate."
Although the law was enacted to prevent lobbyists and special interests from meddling in speaker politics, the Free Market Foundation's Kelly Shackelford said wealthy individuals and political action committees can give as much as they want to any candidate.
Instead, citizens are effectively barred from grass-roots organizing to help elect a speaker, he said.
I guarantee you that Kelly Shackelford is not concerned about citizen grass-roots organizing. That's not his beat. It's funny in a painful way to see him go the concern troll route like that.
On the one hand, I feel like if we're not going to bother enforcing the Speaker's race statute in a meaningful way, we might as well be honest about it and remove the law from the books. On the other hand, I think it's pretty clear what kind of effect can be had in various races by the forces who have an interest in who the Speaker is, and what their payoff can be. As such, I'd much rather see this law remain in force; a review to see how it can be improved would be nice, too. I see no inherent conflict in there being this kind of restriction, so I'd prefer to see this effort fail. We'll see what happens.
And on that note, the TPJ has a more in-depth look at where all that Speaker-related money goes. Check it out.
A federal appeals court has overturned a Texas statute outlawing sex toy sales, leaving Alabama as the state with the strictest ban on such devices.The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Texas law making it illegal to sell or promote obscene devices, punishable by up to two years in jail, violated the Constitution's 14th Amendment on the right to privacy.
Companies that own Dreamer's and Le Rouge Boutique, which sell the devices in its Austin stores, and the retail distributor Adam & Eve, sued in Austin federal court in 2004 over the constitutionality of the law. They appealed after a federal judge dismissed the suit and said the constitution did not protect their right to publicly promote such devices.
In its decision Tuesday, the appeals court cited Lawrence and Garner v. Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court's 2003 opinion that struck down bans on consensual sex between gay couples.
"Just as in Lawrence, the state here wants to use its laws to enforce a public moral code by restricting private intimate conduct," the appeals judges wrote. "The case is not about public sex. It is not about controlling commerce in sex. It is about controlling what people do in the privacy of their own homes because the state is morally opposed to a certain type of consensual private intimate conduct. This is an insufficient justification after Lawrence."
Somewhere, Antonin Scalia is grinding his teeth. Which just makes this that much sweeter.
Phil Harvey, president of Adam & Eve Inc., said the 5th Circuit Court's decision was a big step forward. He said his business plans to expand to sell in stores and at home parties, something company consultants had been fearful to do because of the Texas law."I think it's wonderful, but it does seem to me that since Texas was one of three states in the country -- along with Mississippi and Alabama -- that continued to outlaw the sale of sex toys and vibrators, that it was probably past time," Harvey said Wednesday.
Better check with the Duncanville City Council before you throw a house party there. I'm just saying.
In 2004, a woman in Burleson, just south of Fort Worth, was arrested for selling two sex toys to undercover police officers posing as a couple. Passion Parties Inc. consultant Joanne Webb, who was not at one of her parties when she sold the devices, initially was charged with violating the state's obscenity law, but a judge later dismissed her case.Fort Worth attorney Beann Sisemore, who represented Webb, said "it's about time" the law was changed because it was outdated and unfairly targeted women.
"I'm glad we're expanding privacy rights rather than restricting them," Sisemore said.
Yes, of course I blogged about that when it happened. What's the point of having a blog if you can't use material like this?
I guess it depends on who you ask. Steve Campbell:
Clemens and his defenders can attack McNamee's credibility and motives all they want. But how can they explain away the damaging testimony of Pettitte?Clearly, Pettitte had no desire to speak evil about an old teammate, friend, workout partner and traveling buddy. Pettitte didn't want to have anything to do with discussing the Mitchell Report. He also didn't want to lie under oath in a congressional hearing.
Pettitte reluctantly implicated his friend. In a Feb. 4 deposition, Pettitte didn't merely tell of a 1999 conversation in which Clemens admitted to using HGH. Pettitte made embarrassing revelations about himself -- things no investigator could have uncovered. For instance, Pettitte told of using HGH furnished by his father again in 2004.
"I have to tell you all the truth," Pettitte said in his deposition. "I mean I told y'all the stuff about my dad because I have to live with myself. And one day I have to give an account to God and not to nobody else of what I've done in my life.
"And that's why I've said and shared the stuff with y'all that I've shared with y'all today that I wouldn't like to share with y'all."
Keep in mind, Pettitte could have claimed he didn't remember any conversations with Clemens about performance-enhancing drugs. Nobody could have proved otherwise.
"I believe Andy has mis-heard," Clemens said. "I think he mis-remembers."
Richard Justice:
To believe Clemens is to believe that Andy Pettitte is a liar.
Sounds bad. Unless you also read Will Carroll:
A potential key to yesterday's proceedings was the inexplicable absence of Andy Pettitte. Several Congressmen, most notably Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), pointed to Andy Pettitte's testimony in sworn affidavits as the tipping point for their divinations. However, Pettitte's testimony is hardly the slam-dunk takedown of Clemens that it was made out to be. Pettitte, in many places, actually corroborates Clemens's version. Pettitte himself says that after discussing the use of PEDs with Clemens, he felt that "when Roger told me that he didn't take it [HGH] and I misunderstood him, I took it for that, that I misunderstood him" (Pettitte, p. 28). Pettitte barely recalls the initial conversation, but states that it was in passing--that Clemens "heard that it worked." At no point--no point--does Pettitte ever state, even in passing, that he knew or saw the use of any substance by Clemens. There are certainly elements of Pettitte's testimony that are problematic for Clemens, but I think as much as anything, the opportunity to hear Pettitte in person could have made or broken yesterday's hearings.[...]
What is interesting is that the differences between Pettitte's statement and Clemens' statement are so easily reconciled. It's not without problems, but it's hardly the diametrically-opposed case that was presented.
Carroll, who is probably as knowledgeable about steroids and HGH as anyone writing about baseball today, would be my choice. He goes into some detail about other aspects of yesterday's testimony as well, including the matter of Clemens' gluteal abscess, which by his account sounds like nothing abnormal.
I'm ready for this to be over. I really don't see the point of all this. Tom, Steph, and Jay Jaffe have more.
As we know, the lawsuit against Harris County Sheriff Tommy Thomas has been delayed while the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rules on a motion from the defense to recuse presiding Judge Kenneth Hoyt. Here's some more information on that motion.
The effort to force the removal of a federal judge from a politically sensitive civil trial hinges not only on comments he made at a recent meeting with lawyers but also previous rulings and conduct in the case.The broader approach angered U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt. Speaking from the bench Wednesday, he chided attorneys for bolstering their arguments with material well beyond the scope of the original recusal motion, including details of sanctions he levied in 2005 against two lawyers from the Harris County Attorney's Office for "improper tactics" in the case.
"I think it's inappropriate to ask the 5th Circuit to look at that issue," Hoyt told the attorneys for four sheriff's deputies. The lawmen are being sued by two brothers, Sean Carlos and Erik Adam Ibarra, who say their rights were violated when they were arrested after one of them took photos of a drug bust in 2002.
"This issue is going to be a lot bigger than what you've indicated in your (recusal) motion," Hoyt said.
Hoyt's rebuke came moments before he brought in the jury that was expecting to hear opening statements Wednesday. He sent the jury home for the week while judges with the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals consider the recusal motion.
That motion, which is sealed from public view, concerns Hoyt's judicial philosophy, past rulings he has made in the case and comments he made during a pre-trial conference in chambers Feb. 8, said attorneys familiar with its contents.
The nature of those remarks is unknown since a transcript of that conference remains sealed.
I don't really know what to make of this. It feels like a reach to me, but that's an uninformed opinion, especially given that we don't know what the judge said in that pre-trial conference. But I don't seem to be alone in that assessment.
Legal experts said the tactic undertaken by the deputies' attorneys is inherently dangerous."The point of a recusal motion is when you shoot at a king you better hit him," said David Berg, a local attorney who has handled many federal cases. "I don't think it's a good idea unless you are dead certain you have the evidence that he would be unfair or appear to be. If you lose, you're in for a hell of a ride."
Seeking recusal as a tactic to get the case before a more sympathetic judge would be a bad idea, Berg said.
"It is a very poor strategy because there is a very high burden of proof," he said. "Judges don't like these motions. Appellate judges don't like them and they don't like granting them."
[...]
Guy Womack, a former Houston federal prosecutor who defended two of the Brazoria County deputies, said Hoyt would have voluntarily stepped aside in the Ibarras' case if he thought he had done something to give the appearance of bias, just as he did in 2000 when he removed himself from the Brazoria County case.
"The way he handled that was the very model of the way you should," Womack said. "I've not seen evidence of him being biased in general against law enforcement."
An appellate lawyer not connected to the Ibarras' trial suggested that lawyers for the deputies are "forum shopping" with their recusal request because they could not win the civil case on merits alone, adding that recent negative publicity about Rosenthal could affect the case.
"It's not about him being liberal or conservative -- they're just looking for a less fair judge who would be happy to look the other way when deputies act improperly," said attorney Pat McCann, president of the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association. "And tragically for them, Hoyt is not actually a judge who would do that. That's why they want to get rid of him -- no other reason."
Anybody else with actual experience in this sort of thing want to weigh in on it? Thanks.
The first step in solving a problem is to admit you have a problem.
City officials want to spend up to seven more months to consider ways to regulate traffic from high-density buildings, Mayor Bill White said Wednesday.The announcement was discouraging for residents who want a quick resolution to the controversy over the proposed Ashby high-rise near Rice University.
White said he would prefer City Council hold off passing a new traffic study ordinance so the city can hold public hearings that could run through September.
"I think it's a public debate that needs to happen," White said. "To make sure we do this and we do this right."
James Reeder, co-chair of the Stop Ashby High-Rise task force, said, "People would be very upset" at a delay.
With all due respect to the Stop Ashby folks, this person isn't upset at the delay. I'd much rather get this right slowly than get it wrong quickly. I'd rather we do nothing than pass a bad ordinance. Easy for me to say, I know, but I'm still going to say it. And I think I won't be the only person who'll be upset if an Ashby-specific ordinance exposes the city to a lawsuit that it ultimately loses.
In recent months, lobbying and negotiations had focused on drafting a new ordinance to regulate traffic from high-density complexes. But existing law may do the job, according to City Attorney Arturo Michel."There's a mechanism in place right now that we can use," Michel said. "Whether it's the Bissonnet (at Ashby) development or any development, we have a tool that we can apply."
The tool, a section of the city's street and sidewalk code, allows a city engineer to approve or deny a driveway permit for a development, said Andy Icken, the city's deputy director for planning and development.
[...]
Relying on an existing ordinance, rather than drafting a new one, may better protect the city should the developers of the Ashby project ever decide to sue, a legal expert said.
"If it's good law and it's been on the books all along, then the developers are presumed to have notice of it," said Matthew Festa, a professor of property rights and land use at the South Texas College of Law. "They can't come back and say they've been treated unjustly."
The city risks exposing itself to a "takings lawsuit" if it passes a new restrictive ordinance after the Ashby developers submit permit applications or site plans, Festa explained. The developer could argue that the city changed the rules after the fact, taking away value from their property.
White acknowledged that problem Wednesday.
"There are some legal doctrines that you can't change the rules in the middle of the game, once somebody has filed certain things," he said.
Maybe that existing law can accomplish what the neighborhood wants, and maybe it can't. I think the real problem here is that the city simply isn't equipped to do anything about this kind of development. What we need is a better approach to form-based codes, and to recognize that this is an evergreen process. The unfortunate consequence for the Ashby folks is that achieving that kind of broader fix won't do a damn thing to help them. But it will be better for the city, the neighborhoods, and the developers going forward. Maybe they can take comfort in that, I don't know. I just think we need to re-evaluate what we're trying to do here, and to do something that will be broadly beneficial. If that takes months to do, I have no problem with that.
Note: This entry is part of a series of written Q&As with judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates.
1. Who are you and what are you running for?
My name is Harold J. Landreneau, I am a Democrat, a proud father and an Attorney.
I am running for Harris County Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Place 1, and I will be on the Tuesday March 4, 2008 Democratic Primary Ballot. As Judge, I will bring a new vision, energy and leadership to the Court and represent all the constituents of Precinct One in a balanced, patient, dignified and courteous manner. I will work tirelessly for you as Judge and reestablish the ties of the Court with the community of Precinct One. People coming to our Court expect and deserve the best from their elected officials, and I will place the business of the people first and make our Court the most effective and efficient in the State.
2: What kind of cases does this court hear?
Justice of the Peace (JP) Courts in Texas handle several types of cases, both Criminal and Civil. The Criminal cases include: Class C Misdemeanor Criminal Cases such as truancy, issuance of bad checks, simple assault, traffic tickets and health department violations. The Civil Cases are Evictions, Small Claims cases and Justice Court Suits where the amount in controversy is $10,000 and less. JP's can also hold hearings for permits to carry concealed weapons, hold driver's license revocation hearings and perform weddings.
3: Why are you running for this particular bench?
I want to be the Judge at this Court and I know I am the most qualified candidate to do the job properly. This election is about change. This Court has lost its connection and responsiveness to the Community. The focus of this Court is no longer the business of the people and that calls for a change in leadership. I will bring a new vision, energy and leadership to the Court and represent all of the constituents of Precinct One in a balanced, patient, dignified and Courteous manner.
I was asked to run for this bench several times by the incumbent early last year because he was going to retire at the end of the current term. I was told he was tired; he could no longer do the job and didn't want to do it. He changed his mind apparently about retiring in October of 2007, but never shared that with me.
As with any public office, the incumbent should want their position and have a strong desire to provide the best service possible to their community. When that desire to lead the office and serve the public is no longer present, the public suffers and it is time for a change. Because of this leadership crisis created by the incumbent's inability and unwillingness to perform the job, I stepped up and filed to run for this bench as I was requested to do more than a year ago.
I will change the focus and direction of the Court and make Juvenile Crime and Truancy the top priorities of the Court. I will treat all who come before the bench with dignity and respect. I will reduce the wait time for cases to be heard, saving time and money for all involved. I will also work full time as a Judge to reduce the backlog in the Court. I intend to provide the constituents of Precinct One with an efficient, well-trained Court, responsive to the needs of the community.
4. What are your qualifications for this job?
I am highly experienced in Texas Justice Court, I am extremely qualified for this job and I will be a fair Jurist. I am a licensed Texas Attorney and a trained mediator. I have experience practicing in JP and Municipal Courts all over Harris, Fort Bend and Montgomery Counties. I am an Eagle Scout and Scout Leader and the only candidate in this race with real trial attorney experience. I am also a trained mediator and served as a Democratic Precinct Chair and Election Judge for 5 years.
I earned my J.D. Law degree from South Texas College of Law and my B.A. in Political Science from the University of Houston. I attended the Frank Evans Center for Conflict Resolution at South Texas College of Law and became a trained mediator and I am a Certified Justice Court Clerk through the Texas Justice Court Training Center.
I also have 14 years of experience working in this Court before I became an Attorney. I have held virtually every leadership position in this Court and I have managed the daily operations of this Court for the last eight years as the Chief Clerk. During that time I supervised the 26 Clerks in this Court and the collection of $3.4 million a year in county funds. I made frugal use of taxpayer dollars while operating the Court on a $1.5 million budget by saving taxpayer funds and cutting expenditures.
I was also responsible for hiring and firing employees and all other HR functions. I have prepared and worked thousands of Civil and Criminal trials in Court.
I am also well acquainted with how Harris County Government works and how to get
things done in the County. For many years I assisted Assistant District Attorneys in Court with disposing of misdemeanor cases, and performed legal research for them and the Court.
I was a 3rd generation Union Member of AFSCME for 8 years and I am a former Vice-President of the Heights Democrats. I am active in the Greater Houston Heights Bar Association and the Houston Bar Association where I serve on the Administration of Justice Committee.
I can step into this job tomorrow with no training and do an excellent job for the citizens of Precinct One.
5. Why is this race important?
This race is about the future for our children in Precinct One. Will the Court continue to hear truancy cases and expand the current "Stay in School Program," or will we allow this program to wither and die because the incumbent doesn't want to commit the resources of the Court to this most important priority? This Court needs a new direction, vision and leadership. We need a Judge on this bench who wants to serve others and who wants to work full time, not just 20 hours a week. We need a Judge who will consistently be on time for dockets and not keep litigants waiting for 30 minutes or more. We need a Judge who enjoys hearing Civil Cases and wants to be there and will not keep rescheduling them. We need a Judge who cares about the community and who wants to eliminate the backlog in the Court. I will be that Judge and I am the future for this Court.
6. Why should people vote for you in the Democratic primary?
Because I want to serve the people and I want the job. I have worked in and around these types of Courts during the last 16 years as an attorney, court clerk and an educator. I know what the job requires, how to get things done and the proper way to treat litigants and their attorneys before the bench.
I have been endorsed in this race by State Representatives Jessica Farrar & Borris Miles and by the Mexican-American Bar Association.
I am extremely qualified for this job and I will be a fair Jurist. I can step into this job tomorrow with no training and do an excellent job for the citizens of Precinct One.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Kyle Carter, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Dan Grant, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Bruce Mosier, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Rick Noriega, candidate for US Senate.
Judge Linda Yanez, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Larry Joe Doherty, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Here is an incomplete list of primary races in which the Houston Chronicle has not yet offered an endorsement:
1. President. Just a guess here, but I'd peg this one for Sunday. And if it's not Obama and McCain, I may keel over from the shock.
2. US Senate. Maybe Saturday, maybe Monday. Even more obviously than the Presidentials, this one will be Rick Noriega and John Cornyn.
3. CDs 14, 18, and 22 on the GOP side, and CD10 on the Dem side.
4. Railroad Commissioner (Dem) and Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 4 (GOP).
5. State Senate, Districts 4 (GOP) and 11 (Dem).
6. State Rep, Districts 140, 145, 146, 147, and 148 (Dem); and Districts 127, 129, 130, 134, and 144 (GOP).
7. First Court of Appeals, Place 3, and 14th Court of Appeals, Place 6 (both GOP).
8. District Judge in the following District Courts: 80, 125, 152, 174, 190, 215, and 351 (Dem); 55, 174, 176, 190, and 312 (GOP).
9. Harris County Sheriff (both parties), Tax Assessor (Dem), District Clerk (GOP), and County School Trustees, Positions 5 and 7 (GOP).
10. County Commissioner, Precinct 3 (Dem).
OK, that's actually a pretty complete list, for Harris County at least. CD14 isn't Harris County, but I think it's worthy of inclusion as it covers parts of Fort Bend, Brazoria, and Galveston Counties, all of which (plus Montgomery, Waller, and others) may have races of interest to the Chron and its readers. Have I mentioned that Early Voting starts in five days? I have no idea what they're waiting for, but they have their work cut out for them. If they need some inspiration, here's the Austin Chronicle's endorsements. If one Chronicle can do it, surely the other can.
I somehow managed to miss the news that one of my favorite shows, The 4400, was not renewed for a new season. This is annoying to me on several levels, not the least of which is that now I'll never know how the overall story arc was going to be resolved. I am glad to see that the shows' fans are not taking this lying down.
A sunflower seed company says it has shipped nearly 6,000 bags of its salty snacks to USA Network to try to save a science fiction show. And the actor whose seed-spitting character inspired the campaign is loving every minute of it.Fans of "The 4400" asked Wahpeton-based Giants Snacks LLC to help with the campaign after the cable network dumped the show in December. Many of the sales of Giants Sunflower Seeds are international orders, which the company does not normally accept.
"I'm sure by Monday afternoon, the mailroom at USA Network will be getting somewhat full," said Tom Schuler, who handles Internet sales for Giants.
The campaign, modeled after one by fans who sent peanuts to keep the CBS show "Jericho" alive, has the support of 4400 actor Jeffrey Combs. His character, Dr. Kevin Burkhoff, was the inspiration for the sunflower send-off.
[...]
Network spokeswoman Kristin Schulman said its New York offices had received about 30 pounds of seeds by Wednesday, before Giants sent its first shipment. The company has since shipped about 650 pounds of seeds, with orders from about 30 states and a dozen countries, Schuler said.
"We love hearing from our viewers and appreciate their enthusiasm for `The 4400,' a series we're extremely proud of, but it would be very difficult logistically to bring the show back," network officials said in a statement.
More here. I have no idea how well this is likely to work, but what the hell, it's just a bag of sunflower seeds. Send USA Network a message and hope for the best, I say. If you want to help out, go here, or straight to the source.
M1EK takes to the virtual pages of Austinist to help us understand once again how much better Houston is positioned for transit than Austin is. At times like these, it's always refreshing to get a reminder once again of how far we've come. Check it out.
Boy howdy does this open a can of worms. This is a press release that hit my inbox a few minutes ago:
MEDINA GRAND JURY SUES DA TO GO PUBLICIn what is believed to be the first suit of its kind in Texas history, members of a Harris County grand jury who indicted Texas Supreme Court Justice David Medina and his wife, Francisca Medina, for charges stemming from the June 28, 2007, arson of their Houston area home have sued for the right to publicly disclose evidence they considered in handing down the indictments. By law, proceedings before grand juries are usually required to be kept secret.
On January 17, 2008, the 263rd District Court Grand Jury indicted Francisca Medina for arson and Judge David Medina for evidence tampering. Within an hour, Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal announced that the Medinas would not be prosecuted for the crimes due to "insufficient evidence." On January 18, 2008, State District Judge Brian Rains dismissed both indictments at the request of Assistant District Attorney Vic Wisner.
"This suit is necessary because we want the truth to come out," said Jeffrey L. Dorrell, assistant foreman of the Medina grand jury, an attorney whose firm, Dorrell & Farris, L.P., is representing grand jurors free of charge. "However, out of a decent respect for the rights of the Medinas and for the integrity of the grand jury system, we believe it is proper to seek a judicial determination of our duties before we speak." The suit seeks no monetary damages or attorney's fees.
According to the suit filed in the 190th State District Court of Harris County today, after grand jurors criticized Rosenthal's dismissal of the cases without any further investigation, Medina defense lawyers accused grand jurors of "making a mockery of the system," and being "drunk with power," a "runaway grand jury," and "activists with a political agenda." On January 18, 2008, attorneys for Justice David Medina asked State District Judge Jim Wallace to hold grand jury foreman Robert Ryan and Dorrell in contempt of court, fine them $500.00 each, and jail them for 30 days. Wallace has not ruled on the motion. Now, grand jurors are fighting back."Repeatedly accused of base and corrupt motives and hidden political agendas, grand jurors have been obliged to sit close-mouthed while District Attorney Rosenthal and his assistants trumpet to media that the evidence was 'insufficient' to support either a criminal prosecution of the Medinas or even any further investigation of the charges," the suit says. The grand jurors want a chance to "respond to the attacks on their character."
"Only disclosing the evidence will allow Plaintiffs to show convincingly that they were not animated by the vile and contemptible motives of which they have been publicly accused by truly the strangest of bedfellows--the Medinas' criminal defense attorneys and the Harris County District Attorney's office," the suit says.
Adding a twist to the case, the Medina grand jury was disbanded by Judge Wallace on January 18, 2008, when a defect in the order extending their term was discovered. Wallace ruled that the grand jury was not properly empanelled after November 2, 2007, and nullified over 30 indictments handed down after that time. The ruling also invalidated grand jury subpoenas issued for more witnesses and evidence in the Medina case, and "stopped the grand jury investigation in its tracks," according to the suit. As a result, the members of the grand jury argue that they were not "in the course of the official duties of the grand jury" after November 2, 2007, and should be "free to disclose anything transpiring before what was, in legal effect, merely a meeting of 12 ordinary citizens." The suit also asks the court to declare grand jurors free to present the evidence they considered in the Medina case to another grand jury.
"Given the highly unusual defense of the Medinas mounted by the District Attorney's office in this case, the citizens of Harris County can hardly expect that their District Attorney will present the evidence in a fair and accurate manner," said Dorrell. "Therefore, we are willing to do it," said Dorrell. Texas law allows any "credible person" to present a case to a grand jury and ask for an indictment.
Another public dispute between a Houston grand jury and a Harris County District Attorney 85 years ago has many parallels to the Medina case. The Harris County District Attorney in 1923, Dixie Smith, had been elected on the Ku Klux Klan ticket. After Smith publicly accused grand jurors of failing to follow their oath, grand jurors accused Smith of failing to prosecute fellow Klansmen who were suspected of crimes, including an arson. Smith sued for libel. The appellate court in that case wrote:
Every man has the right to defend his character against false aspersion. It is one of the duties which he owes to himself and his family. Therefore communications made in fair self-defense are privileged.
The Medina grand jury's suit asks the court to declare that the privilege allows jurors to discuss the evidence publicly in order to rebut claims that the evidence was "insufficient" and that they were a "runaway grand jury."
I'm not qualified to address the legal matters raised here. My layman's sensibilities have some sympathy for the jurors, who aren't able as things stand to defend themselves from what has been said about them and their motives, but I fear this would set a bad precedent. Beyond that, I have no idea what to make of this. What do you think?
UPDATE: Here's the Chron story on this suit. I look forward to seeing how this plays out.
Looks like we may have to wait awhile for any further action in the lawsuit against the Sheriff's office that launched Chuck Rosenthal and his infamous emails into the public consciousness.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted a stay temporarily halting the trial for a federal lawsuit that unearthed the e-mails -- and could delay a Feb. 25 hearing to decide whether Rosenthal should be held in contempt for deleting e-mails after they had been subpoenaed.If U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt is recused, another judge would preside over the trial and the Rosenthal contempt hearing. Hoyt began hearing evidence on the contempt motion nearly two weeks ago, but temporarily halted it at the request of Rosenthal's lawyer. On the witness stand, Rosenthal acknowledged making erroneous statements during previous sworn testimony.
The decision came just hours after a jury had been seated in Hoyt's court to determine whether two Houston brothers' civil rights were violated when they were arrested after one of them photographed a Harris County sheriff's deputy at a drug raid. Opening arguments were set to begin today.
Attorneys for four sheriff's deputies targeted in the brothers' federal lawsuit had appealed to the Fifth Circuit, seeking Hoyt's recusal, based on remarks the judge made in chambers during a pre-trial conference last week.
The higher court granted the delay so it could review a transcript of that conference after the deputies' attorneys questioned whether Hoyt could fairly and impartially preside over the civil case, filed by Sean Carlos Ibarra and Erik Adam Ibarra. The substance of Hoyt's remarks is not known since that transcript and the motion seeking his recusal are sealed. The deputies' attorneys also would not comment on why the judge's words concerned them.
But when Hoyt denied their recusal motion and proceeded with jury selection Tuesday, the deputies' attorneys appealed to the Fifth Circuit.
[...]
The Fifth Circuit also granted a request to place all motions under seal, shielding them from public view.
Civil attorneys who spoke to the Chronicle on background said they expect the Fifth Circuit to act quickly on the recusal matter.
They said the Fifth Circuit is typically hostile to recusal motions and rarely grants them, even when a strong case for it can be made. With Hoyt, however, there is precedent. Comments he made during the middle of a 1997 toxic tort trial led the Fifth Circuit to remove him from the case.
Well, unless this gets pushed back past November, it's still going to be a potential time bomb for the Sheriff and DA and the rest of the local GOP power structure. I still believe there are revelations about questionable acts to come. We'll see.
On a related note, Mark Bennett had sent in a request for "all documents related to the Harris County Sheriff's Office's email retention policy, including emails and other correspondence discussing the policy and changes to the policy [for the time period from January 9, 2008, through January 18, 2008]", and got a response. You can view what he got here (PDF). Looks to me like this would conflict with Willie Mata's assertions about the policy and the way it was implemented, but you be the judge.
When Roger Clemens goes before Congress today, he may be faced with eivdence that his buddy Andy Pettite has testified that Clemens has used HGH.
According to last week's sworn affidavit from Pettitte, Clemens told Pettitte in either 1999 or 2000 that he used human growth hormone, the Associated Press reported Tuesday, citing a person who spoke on the condition of anonymity.Clemens, who along with McNamee will testify in today's public hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in Washington, has denied using performance-enhancing drugs and has said he and Pettitte didn't talk about their own use of drugs.
According to the person familiar with the affidavit, who said it was signed Friday night, Pettitte also said Clemens backtracked when the subject of HGH came up again in conversation in 2005, before the same House committee held the first hearing on steroids in baseball.
Pettitte said in the affidavit that he asked Clemens in 2005 what he would do if asked by the media about HGH, given his admission years earlier. According to the account told to the AP, the affidavit said Clemens responded by saying Pettitte misunderstood the exchange from five or six years earlier and that, in fact, Clemens had been talking about HGH use by his wife in the original conversation.
Responding to the latest development, Clemens' attorney Rusty Hardin told the Chronicle: "Everybody needs to just relax and wait and see what the testimony shows (today). We do not know what Andy has said to the committee, and I am somewhat surprised that people continue to write stories about what he confidentially said, whatever that is.
"We don't know what he has said, and we're waiting to see. What Roger would testify to is, if Andy's memory is that somehow Roger ever suggested that he used steroids or human growth hormone, Andy's memory is mistaken.
"Andy is a good friend of Roger's. We're convinced he would never intentionally misstate anything. But if he believes Roger said that, he's mistaken."
Hardin's point about not getting ahead of what has been made public is well-taken. That said, testimony from Pettite in support of allegations about Clemens using so-called PEDs would be a major hit to Clemens' credibility. It's been pretty easy so far to have doubts about what Brian McNamee has said. But Pettite is a friend of Clemens, and has no known motive to lie about this, having already admitted his own limited use of HGH. His words will be taken seriously, and will be harder to dismiss. It still won't be proof of anything, but it will be another piece of the puzzle, and if we were in a courtroom, it would be a step towards a conviction.
Having said that, even if Pettite offers evidence to suggest Clemens has not been fully truthful, that doesn't necessarily mean McNamee has been telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth, either. Unless Pettite directly corroborates McNamee, it's entirely possible that Clemens did use HGH, but did so without McNamee's assistance or intervention. Clemens picked up some defense against McNamee's claims from an unexpected quarter the other day.
Retired slugger Jose Canseco says Roger Clemens' former trainer, Brian McNamee, lied in the Mitchell Report and is lying when he says Clemens used steroids and human growth hormone."Absolutely, he's lying and he's a dirty liar," Canseco said in a phone interview Sunday.
Former senator George Mitchell's report on performance-enhancing drugs in baseball includes a passage in which McNamee describes a 1998 party Canseco hosted at his Miami home.
"McNamee stated that, during this luncheon, he observed Clemens, Canseco, and another person he did not know meeting inside Canseco's house, although McNamee did not personally attend that meeting," the Mitchell Report says.
McNamee says Clemens, who has denied using steroids or HGH, brought up steroids for the first time shortly after the trip to Florida, according to the Mitchell Report.
"McNamee is a point-blank liar because Roger never showed up at my house," Canseco said. "It's up to Roger's people to find out why McNamee is saying these things. I think he was pressured by someone into saying them. ...
"I'm 1,000% sure Roger never showed up at the party. We didn't talk then."
[...]
Canseco said Clemens is a friend and he doesn't think Clemens took steroids. "If he had taken steroids," he said, "he would have gotten them from me, just like everyone else."
Now, I'm certainly not going to claim that Jose Canseco is a font of veracity. But he has been cited as proof of various players' alleged usage of steroids by some members of the press. I do think that if you believed him then, you ought to believe him now. In the meantime, I hope we all wait to see what Clemens and McNamee have to say today before we draw any further conclusions. Will Carroll has more.
Note: This entry is part of a series of recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing written Q&As with judicial candidates.
As I said in my intro for Dan Grant, the 10th Congressional District has come a long way since it was first redrawn for the 2004 elections, when it was perceived as so hopelessly Republican that no Democrat filed for the race. This year, after 2006 candidate Ted Ankrum held incumbent Rep. Mike McCaul to an unimpressive 55% showing, two strong yet strongly contrasting candidates have stepped up to take a crack at McCaul.
Larry Joe Doherty is an attorney and TV judge who brings a lot of experience and a pretty decent capacity for fundraising to the race. Like Grant, he had some very interesting things to say about his candidacy, the district, the issues, and the incumbent. You can hear it all here. Now that you've had a chance to hear them both, I'll be very interested to hear what you think about each of them.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Kyle Carter, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Dan Grant, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Bruce Mosier, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Rick Noriega, candidate for US Senate.
Judge Linda Yanez, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
This is just too freaking funny.
[H]undreds of Harris County Republican Party precinct chairmen [last night] decided that the answers the party elicited from its candidates about their loyalty to the state party platform will not see the light of day, at least for now.The decision came with some drama in the auditorium of the Houston Community College West Loop campus. Perhaps lulled by the mundane nature of some official party business, precinct chairs appeared to have voted to adopt a committee report that might have led to the publication of candidates' responses to the 100 or so questions on the quiz.
Then Paul Bettencourt, a de facto party leader as well as the county tax assessor-collector, delivered a stemwinder of a speech as he paced with the microphone in his hand like a cross between Dr. Phil and a sales motivation speaker.
Bettencourt's message: If we let the answers out, we'll be giving the Democrats and the press ammunition with which to define the Republican candidates right down to which house of worship they attend (which was one of the questions).
So they want to know where their candidates stand on the issues that matter to them, but they'd rather not let the rest of us know, because it might make them look like a bunch of kooks. Never mind that they've done this before, and have especially used those questionnaire answers in the past to alert Republican voters about gay candidates so they won't accidentally vote for them. This year, they're (rightfully) worried about losing countywide races, and they know that their positions on issues won't help them in that regard. And so they obfuscate. I don't think I could define them any better than their own actions just did.
Christof reads what the GOP County Judge candidates have been saying about rail, and tries to make some sense of it all. Check it out.
Just some collected miscellania from my inbox and the blogs...
- The Texas League of Conservation Voters endorsed Brian Thompson in the HD46 primary.
"Brian Thompson is a voice for real change and is committed to making the environment a priority for the voters in District 46. He has pledged to be the kind of environmental leader and champion that the voters in Austin demand and deserve," said TLCV Executive Director, Colin Leyden.Thompson's opponent, Dawnna Dukes, has failed to make the environment a priority in the Texas House, and her voting record from the 2007 legislative session was particularly troubling. Dukes voted against a proposal to clean up diesel emissions in Texas school buses that children in District 46 breathe everyday they ride the bus to and from school.
"Voters should be dismayed that Dukes voted against funding a program to clean up toxic fumes that our school children breathe every time they ride their school bus," said Leyden.
They kicked in $10,000 to his campaign as well. Not too shabby.
- TJ Baker-Holm, running for the Republican nomination in CD18, had some interesting things to say about immigration at a campaign forum over the weekend.
You could put all the borders you wish, a tall wall or a long gate, if that will make you sleep at night. You can put lots of border police officers if that will make you sleep at night. You could keep discussing this issue as long as you like if that will make you sleep at night....But immigrants, especially those that risk their lives crossing our borders, is someone's loving husband back in Mexico. I want you to hear me; is someone's loving son back in Mexico. These immigrants, men, just want to work, just like you and I, who are trying to feed their families, they risk their lives, not to steal, not to rape or do any foolhardiness of any sort.
I have talked to these immigrant men and my conclusion, my surprise, is that if they could vote, they would vote Republican, for one of their views is when it comes to economics, it is to be independent as much as possible. They are not trying to get over here to get on welfare.
And it's not just the immigrants' fault, it is also the corporations and the employers who are hiring these immigrants. If we give these big corporations that's hiring these immigrants a citation, we don't have so much of a headache. I have some pity on these immigrants who get paid lower than minimum wages, do not receive any health insurance, who can't receive a 401k plan or raises or sick pay or any work benefits that we gladly enjoy right now in the state of Texas.
I think she's wrong about how they'd vote, but I admire her willingness to deliver such a message to a Republican crowd. Her opponent, not surprisingly, toed the party line on immigration and border security.
- Sandr Rodriguez runs a devastating ad against Craddick D incumbent Kino Flores. BOR has the video.
- David Mincberg is looking for volunteers. Email [email protected] with your full name, address, and phone number to sign up.
- Paul Burka has been collecting some news and notes from various State Rep primaries. See here and here for some interesting ones.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Tom DeLay.
DeLay sounded confident about the crowded field of Republicans running for his old Houston-area seat, which is now held by Democrat Nick Lampson. He said he's not endorsing in the race because he has too many friends in it."I'm sure there's going to be a runoff, and whoever comes out of it is going to be a good strong conservative and a good representative for the 22nd District, and probably a very good candidate to knock off Nick Lampson," DeLay said.
But he also sounded less than convinced that his party would win the seat back in November.
"It depends. There's a lot of stuff going on in Harris County. (U.S. Rep.) John Culberson was just telling me, all kinds of corruption stuff and investigations, Republicans are taking it on the chin left and right. That can have an impact on that race, as well as John Culberson's and Harris County countywide races."
Boy, if anyone knows anything about "all kinds of corruption stuff and investigations", it would be Tom DeLay. Maybe it's a good thing he hasn't completely vanished from the scene. Where else could we get such insights?
I'm amused by this story, in which an intrepid Channel 2 reporter investigated various rumors and conspiracy theories regarding the red light cameras here, eventually concluding there's nothing to them. Not that this is likely to change anyone's mind, especially someone who was caught by a camera running a light.
Are the yellow lights long enough to give you a fair shot at getting through those intersections?Steve Ivy says no.
"It doesn't give you enough time to stop your vehicle," Ivy told Local 2.
Cameras caught Ivy running the red light on FM 1960 at West Townsend in Humble. But Ivy believes he was shortchanged by a short yellow light.
"I realize as short as this time is, you can't stop in the amount of time it allows you before it turns red," explained Ivy.
That particular yellow light stays yellow for 3.6 seconds. The speed limit is 50 mph.
Ivy put those numbers into a Texas Department of Transportation formula that roughly recommends five seconds of yellow for an intersection with a speed limit of 50 mph, four seconds of yellow for 40 mph and so on.
"If they're not what they should be, they should be corrected," said Ivy.
Here's an alternate theory for you: Maybe he was speeding. Seems to me that however many red light runners the cameras catch, there's a lot more people who do manage to stop in time. One presumes a fair number of them are driving at (or more likely, a bit above) the posted speed limit. How is it they manage to stop in time? I'm just asking.
To put it another way: Everybody thinks they're an above-average driver, and nobody thinks they drive too fast. When those opinions bump up against an objective metric, it can be jarring. But that doesn't mean it's wrong.
Note: This entry is part of a series of written Q&As with judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates.
1. Who are you and what are you running for?
My name is Justice Linda Reyna Yanez and I am running for Place 8 on the Texas Supreme Court. I am the Senior Justice on the 13th Court of Appeals. The 13th Court, which is comprised of 20 counties along the Texas Coastal Bend, is an intermediate appellate court that hears both civil and criminal cases. In addition to the 13th Court's 20 counties, it also sits and hears cases for the appellate courts in Houston, Dallas, Beaumont, San Antonio and Austin.
2. What kind of cases does the court hear?
Texas has two courts of last resort: the Texas Supreme Court addresses civil matters and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals addresses criminal matters. The Texas Supreme Court, as opposed to my court, has what is called discretionary jurisdiction, which means that the Supreme Court is allowed to decide what cases it hears among those that are filed. On my court, we must address every case that is filed and issue a disposition. The Supreme Court hears cases deemed important to the jurisprudence of the State (e.g., when two courts of appeals' decisions are inconsistent with each other or when statutory interpretation is at issue), and decides questions of law that are of critical importance to the people of the State.
3. Why are you running for this particular bench?
I believe the Texas Supreme Court, as an institution, was created as a multi-member court because it is charged with the duty of having a true debate on the serious issues that come before it. A true debate takes place when different perspectives are brought to the table. Given the current make-up of the Supreme Court, this debate is not taking place. All nine members of the Supreme Court are from the same political party, which has unfortunately translated into a "groupthink" mentality in their deliberative process. While they may appear to have differing backgrounds, they are actually of one mindset in their approach to legal analysis and seemingly result oriented decision making.
This reality has influenced my decision to answer the call to run for the Texas Supreme Court. I know that in order for the citizens of Texas to have confidence in the decisions of our highest court, they must have confidence in the process that led to those decisions. I will help rejuvenate public confidence in the Supreme Court by spurring true debate among fellow justices. I will spur debate by bringing to the table a legal and judicial perspective that does not exist now, or ever before, on the Supreme Court.
4. What are your qualifications for this job?
While a law student, I worked as a legal intern at the Legal Assistance Foundation of Chicago (LAF). During that time, I worked on LAF's Migrant Project, assisting farmworkers with wage and hour claims, in addition to claims for decent working conditions. After finishing law school in 1976, I returned to LAF to begin my legal career. As a lawyer with LAF, I represented clients who did not have the economic resources to acquire legal representation. I subsequently returned to Texas, my home state, to work for Texas Rural Legal Aid (TRLA), where I again assisted economically disadvantaged clients. While at TRLA, I became part of the legal team that took a case all the way to the United States Supreme Court, where my team successfully argued that all children have a right to a public school education.
In the 1980's, the federal government cut funds to TRLA and other similar organizations; these cuts made it especially difficult for immigrants to acquire legal representation. This prompted me to enter private practice, where I represented clients in immigration matters, in addition to family and federal criminal matters. My success in private practice eventually led me to become the first woman partner in the highly respected law firm of Weich and Black in Brownsville (now Roerig, Oliveira & Fisher, LLP).
I later returned to Chicago to become Regional Counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), where I worked on employment, education, immigration, and voting rights issues. While at MALDEF I concentrated on voting rights issues, which afforded me the privilege of heading the legal team that drew the municipal wards, state legislative districts, and the Congressional district that resulted in the first Latino elected to Congress from the Midwest. I was then appointed as a Clinical Instructor at the Harvard School of Law, where I headed the Immigration Clinic, teaching and supervising students who represented clients from literally every corner of the world. While at Harvard, I was appointed to head newly elected President Bill Clinton's Immigration Transition Team; this led me to Washington, D.C., where I drafted a book that briefed President Clinton on immigration issues.
In 1993, Ann Richards appointed me to the Court of Appeals and I became the first Latina to serve on an appellate court in Texas and the first woman to serve on the 13th Court of Appeals. I have been elected to my position three times and now serve as the Senior Justice on the 13th Court of Appeals. During my fourteen year tenure at the court, I have authored more than 800 opinions and have served on panel for over 3,500 opinions.
5. Why is this race important?
The Supreme Court races, if adequately funded, can positively impact the rest of the Democratic ticket. In the past, Democrats, unfortunately, have failed to appreciate the importance of the statewide judiciary in our lives. The Texas Supreme Court decides the most important legal issues in the State. Those decisions affect workers, patients, consumers, small businesses, large corporations, insurance companies--all aspects of our lives are affected. The most insidious conduct of the supreme court in recent history has been in decisions that exhibit a lack of appreciation for the sanctity of jury verdicts. In my opinion, one of the worst decisions is City of Keller, through which the Supreme Court has usurped the fact finding authority of the lower courts and juries. I aim to turn the tide created by opinions like City of Keller after I am elected to the supreme court.
6. Why should people vote for you in the Democratic primary?
In this race, Democratic voters have a real choice. There are fundamental and important differences between me and my opponent, with respect to our life experiences and our legal and judicial records.
As my career has evolved, I have become more convinced that Oliver Wendell Holmes got it right when he stated, "The life of the law is not logic, it is experience." My journey to this day began in the cotton fields of South Texas and the vegetable fields of Northern Illinois. I defied the odds; statistics for my generation would have pegged me as a high school drop-out. I took advantage of my opportunity to get an education and became an elementary school teacher. When I went to law school I had a purpose--that law degree was going to allow me to advocate for members of my community who had a history of being marginalized. As a lawyer, I was the voice of the voiceless; my advocacy skills were put into service for those who were unfamiliar and fearful of the legal system. I thus understand the plight of consumers, patients, and workers--both in their daily lives and when confronted with challenging corporate America in the courts. Furthermore, I have and will continue to represent the rule of law, while fully appreciating that as a judge, I also bring my life experiences to the bench. As one journalist described me, I am "a farmworker, who became a teacher, who became a lawyer, who became a judge." In addition to these roles, I am a mother (of two lawyers) and a grandmother. And it is with great pride that I bring all of these experiences to the table.
I am the only candidate that has a proven appellate record. My judicial resume is contained within several volumes of the South Western Reporter; it is there for anyone to read and digest. Within these volumes are some of my 800 appellate opinions that I authored during my fourteen years as an appellate judge. These fourteen years have prepared me to serve on the Supreme Court. As an appellate judge (as opposed to a trial judge), I make decisions in a collaborative environment. I am intimately aware of the fact that an appellate judge must be able to persuade a majority of the court's members in order to productively contribute to the legal landscape of this state. I have utilized my legal analytical skills to accomplish this task for over a decade and I will continue to use these skills while on the Supreme Court.
I take my place in the legal community very seriously. I was elected to the American Law Institute, I have been appointed to the National Judicial College faculty, and I have a second law degree, a Master of Laws, from the University of Virginia Law School.
I bring a breadth of life and legal experience to the race that my opponent does not. I provide Democratic voters with an opportunity to elect someone with a voice that is sorely needed in the supreme court; it's a voice that, in many respects, has never before been heard at our highest court. I am the Democratic candidate in this race who has the experience necessary to go head-to-head and toe-to-toe with the Republicans. I trust the Democratic voters to make the right choice for balance, experience that counts, and a voice that has and will continue to resonate for ordinary Texans.
PERSONAL PROFILES and AWARDS:
First Latina appellate court judge in the history of the state of Texas, appointed by Governor Ann Richards.
Faculty, National Judicial College: 2006
American Law Institute: 2003
Mexican American Bar Asso. Foundation - Service Award - 2007
Extraordinary Woman Award - Women Together Foundation - 2006
Judicial Pioneer Award - Hispanic Issues Section - State Bar of Texas - 2006
Distinguished Judicial Career - Hispanic Women's Network of Texas - 2001
Reynaldo G. Garza, Lifetime Achievement Award - Hispanic Issues Section, State Bar of Texas - 2001
Lifetime Achievement Award - Hispanic Bar Asso. -1996
Houston Latino Lawyers and Law Students -Outstanding Alumnus - 1994
Lawyer of the Year - 1990 - Mexican American Bar Asso. of Texas
Outstanding Lawyer - 1989 - Mexican American Bar Asso. of Texas
Woman of the Year - Brownsville Professional Women's Asso. - 1988
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Kyle Carter, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Dan Grant, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Bruce Mosier, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Rick Noriega, candidate for US Senate.
So I've been driving around the neighborhood a bit to see how many yard signs are out there for the March primary, and for whom they support. Here's what I've observed:
- By far, the biggest show of support in my neighborhood is for Rep. Jessica Farrar. There are dozens of her signs around, all in actual yards. By my count, she has more than forty signs, which puts her an order of magnitude ahead of her opponent, for whom I've seen four. Nobody else is close to Farrar in signage.
- Next, also by a wide margin, is Justice of the Peace candidate Harold Landreneau, who has about 25 signs or so. I'm more than a little surprised, not just at how many signs Landreneau has, but at how few there are out there for the incumbent JP, Dale Gorczynski - I've spotted one sign for Gorczynski. By contrast, Precinct 1 Constable Jack Abercia, whose primary opposition is less serious than Landreneau, has decent sign coverage out there, mostly at business locations. I don't know if this bodes poorly for Gorczynski or not, but the difference is striking.
- For Presidential candidates, it's a whole lot of not much right now. Two yard signs for Ron Paul, plus one in a vacant lot, and one for Hillary Clinton are all I've seen. There had been a big sign for Rudy Giuliani earlier in the cycle at one house, but I've noticed that it's gone away now, with no replacement yet. I figure with the local campaign headquarters opening up for Obama and Clinton, we'll see more signs soon. I'll let you know.
- Various singletons for other local campaigns. One each for GOP DA candidates Kelly Siegler and Jim Leitner. One for GOP County Judge candidate Charles Bacarisse. That one shares a lawn with a Jessica Farrar sign. I don't know if that indicates a mixed marriage or a lack of understanding of how Texas' primary system works, but whatever. One misplaced but still appreciated sign for Armando Walle. One each for judicial candidates David Farr (GOP), Bruce Mosier, and Silvia Pubchara (Dems).
So with a week to go before early voting, that's what I see in my neighbors' yards. What are you seeing?
As you may recall, some of Governor Perry's emails have been released for public inspection, thanks to the ongoing work of open government activist John Washburn. But not all of them. The Observer blog reports.
Washburn said he received an estimated 1,900 documents out of a total of 5-6,000 -- meaning that Perry's office has asked that roughly 4,000 documents/emails be ruled exempt from open records requirements. The AG's office now has 45 business days to rule.Problem is, the governor's office seemingly contacted the AG's office too late. According to Texas' open records law, state agencies have 10 business days after they receive a request for documents to ask the AG for a ruling.
[...]
However, Perry 's office is taking advantage of another, little-used section of open records law that monkeys with the definition of "received."
Under a rarely used provision, Perry's office asserts that it can consider the request "received" upon receipt of payment.
Nice little loophole, eh? If you make sure the upfront fees are sufficiently high, you'll never have to worry about fulfilling those requests in the first place. You have to admire the ingenuity, if nothing else.
Can you believe early voting for the March primary starts next week? To get you in the right frame of mind for that, here's this week blog highlights from the Texas Progressive Alliance. Click on for more.
Gary at Easter Lemming Liberal News urges Texans to NOT give to veterans by mail. At least not without some investigation. Read about the fake veteran's charities scam supported by Republicans in Cheating Charitable Givers and Veterans.
Mayor McSleaze at McBlogger takes some time out of his busy schedule to ask a few important questions of Michael Moore and our friends at MoveOn.Org.
What is Congress to do?! The Texas Cloverleaf looks at how the Bush administration continues to ignore the US House and hurt Texas, in it's blatant disregard of the Congressional order to end the DOT's plan for Mexican trucks in America.
Plastic bags are now extinct in Ireland. TXsharon at Bluedaze wants to know why the U.S. can't do the same.
How much was the Katy Freeway expansion in Houston supposed to cost? Off the Kuff digs through some story archives to show that what TxDOT is saying now about initial cost estimates is not what it was saying then.
Open Source Dem at Brains and Eggs comments on the possibility of brokered conventions in both Austin and Denver this summer, and how the March 4 primary in Texas will clarify -- or muddy -- the outlook.
CouldBeTrue at South Texas Chisme cautions reasonable people to be wary about arguing over that d*mn fence! Republicans are building a monument to racism and fear not trying to solve any problems with a coherent policy.
Hal has a a couple of postings this week at Half Empty, this one is the main event, a new theory on whether there is a new canary about to sing to the Feds about Tom DeLay's past indiscretions, and this one is about some motivation for that.
WCNews at Eye On Williamson has this wrap up from last week's hearings on TxDOT at the capitol, Without Williamson, TxDOT Becomes Scapegoat.
Phillip Martin at Burnt Orange Report has done an exhaustively comprehensive analysis of how Texas hybrid primary/caucus system works, as well as looked at some of the politics of each of Texas' 31 Senate Districts that will award delegates on March 4. Read the two-part series here: Part 1 (caucus explanation) and Part 2 (delegate analysis).
BossKitty at BlueBloggin looks into Customs:
"Hand Over That Cell Phone, iPod & Laptop" and just how intrusive the government has become putting travelers and their company's private information at risk.
As we get ever nearer to the most important Texas primary in recent memory, The Texas Blue thinks potential prognosticators should keep five things in mind when it comes to making predictions.
In addition to a ton of Texas presidential race coverage, Vince at Capitol Annex reveals that State Rep. Phil King (R-Weatherford) has taken an illegal contribution from an energy lobbyist.
House Speaker Tom Craddick recently threw a bunch of money to three of his Democratic supporters in their efforts to fend off primary challengers - Rick Casey made note of it last week - and he may have landed himself in some trouble for it. The watchdog group Texans for Public Justice has filed a complaint with the Travis County DA's office, alleging that Craddick is illegally trying to influence the Speaker's race.
At issue are three $50,000 donations from Craddick, a Midland Republican, through a political committee to three House members, all Democrats and Craddick supporters facing re-election challenges within their party. A fourth Democrat, Austin Rep. Dawnna Dukes, turned down the money.Craig McDonald with Texans for Public Justice, a campaign finance watchdog group, filed the complaint with Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle.
[...]
McDonald's complaint suggests Craddick violated state law by channeling money to the three Democrats last month.
On Jan. 10, according to campaign finance reports, Craddick revitalized a dormant political committee, Texans for Jobs & Opportunity Build a Secure Future, with a $250,000 donation from his campaign account.
It was the only money the political committee had when it made the $50,000 donations the next day to Reps. Aaron Pena of Edinburg, Ismael "Kino" Flores of Palmville and Kevin Bailey of Houston, according to campaign finance reports cited in the complaint. The three men are past supporters of Craddick, who appointed them chairmen of House committees.
McDonald's complaint suggests the transaction violated the so-called speaker's statute that prohibits anyone, including a speaker's candidate, from spending campaign donations to aid or defeat a speaker candidate.
The law also lists acceptable expenditures for a speaker's candidate to make with his campaign money. Donations to other candidates, according to the complaint, is not one of them.
In essence, McDonald is suggesting Craddick made the donations through the committee to aid his own re-election as speaker and not just to support the three Democrats.
A copy of the complaint is here (PDF). BOR has more on this. I confess I'm not getting my hopes up about this, because similar complaints were raised in 2003 in the wake of the TAB/TRMPAC scandals, and Craddick got off scot-free. I thought at the time that the goods existed against Craddick (as did Craig McDonald), but he was no-billed. So, let's just say I'll take a wait and see attitude on this one.
A federal judge has ordered District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal back to court to finish a hearing to decide whether to hold Harris County's top prosecutor in contempt for deleting several thousand e-mails after they were subpoenaed in a civil rights lawsuit.U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt is expected to will hear testimony from Rosenthal, and any other evidence on Feb. 25.
Attorneys for Rosenthal abruptly halted the contempt hearing during his testimony after he admitted making erroneous statements in a sworn affidavit about deleting several hundred e-mails.
Attorneys who aren't involved in the case but were in the courtroom Feb. 1 to hear the testimony have suggested Rosenthal's lawyers want time to review his sworn statements and shield him from a possible perjury charge.
Last update was here. I can't wait to hear what his revised story is. Stay tuned.
Note: This entry is part of a series of recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing written Q&As with judicial candidates.
I don't really have to give an introduction to Rick Noriega, or an accounting of why I support Rick Noriega, or to note Rick's crossover appeal, do I? Suffice it to say I was glad when he announced, I'm glad he's running now, and I expect to be glad to be on his side when Election Day arrives. But of course, before we get the chance to vote for Rick Noriega in November, we have to get him on the ballot in March, and that means making sure he can beat back the name-recognition nihilism of Gene "the Undead Dancer" Kelly. When you vote in this primary, please cast that vote for Rick Noriega, and please encourage your friends to do so as well. This is the first step of that thousand-mile journey, so let's do it right.
The interview is here. As with most of these other candidates, I expect to do a followup later in the campaign.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Kyle Carter, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Dan Grant, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Bruce Mosier, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Today is Audrey's first birthday. She is very mobile and active, though not quite walking yet. She is basically fearless about climbing on furniture, which points out to us just how little actual baby-proofing we had to do with Olivia. We're starting to hear some recognizable word-like sounds in her babbling - she got a little plastic baseball and bat for Christmas, and she clearly says "bah" and "baw" to indicate one or the other. Like her older sister at that age, she eats just about everything (avocadoes are a notable exception), and in truly awesome quantities. She fights taking naps with determined fierceness, but usually goes to sleep at night without too much difficulty. She loves her big sister Olivia, and the feeling is mutual. She also loves us, as we do her. Our lives are more complex with her around, but they are also far richer and more rewarding. We are blessed to have her in our family.
Happy birthday, Audrey!
2009 Mayoral candidate Kemah Mayor Bill King has a suggestion for Metro: Do away with the fare box.
Today, the Metropolitan Transit Authority reports slightly under 300,000 daily "boardings." Because of transfers, it is a little bit of guesswork to determine how many commuters are actually using transit. But it is probably something in the 120,000-130,000 range. For every commuter we can convince to take a train or bus to work, we get one car off our roads. That means less congestion and fewer emissions and collisions. Clearly a good thing.Metro has developed a far-ranging, multibillion-dollar plan dubbed Metro Solutions that it hopes will increase transit ridership. Phase 2 of that plan consists of five light rail lines and will cost about $2.2 billion. The ultimate cost will undoubtedly be higher. Metro projects that its Phase 2 lines will have about 140,000 daily boardings. However, these lines will replace existing bus service along the same routes, so not all of the boardings will represent an increase in transit ridership. The net increase on the Main Street line from switching to light rail has been about 19 percent.
If this ratio holds on the Phase 2 lines, we should pick up an increase in daily boardings of about 20,000 to 30,000 or something like 10,000 to 12,000 new transit riders. This is a very small increase compared to well over 1 million daily commuters in Houston.
The traffic models indicate that this relatively small increase will be about offset by the lost street lanes the rail lines will use and the scores of new street level crossings. As a result, there will be no meaningful reduction in traffic congestion from the Phase 2 lines.
[...]
Is there another way to increase transit ridership and do it now? I think there may be. Make it free.
Now, before you think I am proposing we give away the store, you need to know that Metro recovers a very small percentage of its costs through fares. In fiscal year 2006, Metro only collected about $54 million in fares compared to $435 million in operating expenses, or only about 12 percent. That is because Metro gets the overwhelming majority of its funds from a 1 percent sales tax. And Metro is currently enjoying a boom in its sales tax revenues. In the past two years, sale tax receipts have increased by approximately $84 million and are on track this year to increase almost another $40 million. Metro currently is sitting on nearly $400 million in cash, receivables and short term investments.
Also, Metro spends about $5 million a year collecting its fares and advertising, expenses that could be dramatically reduced if fares were eliminated. So eliminating fares would probably only cost us around $50 million annually.
[...]
If we assume a 50 percent increase in ridership, we would pick up about 50,000-60,000 new transit riders each day. This increase is easily more than four times that projected for Phase 2 and at a fraction of the cost. The operating costs alone for Phase 2 are projected to be $64 million, well above what we would lose from eliminating fares, not to mention repaying the principal and interest on whatever portion of the $2.2 billion construction cost is not covered by the FTA.
More importantly, this could happen immediately. Phase 2, even by Metro's optimistic projections, is four to five years away. If we realized a 50 percent increase in ridership, some other advantages would be:
- The new Metro commuters would save about $100 million per year in commuting costs. Current Metro customers would save the $50 million they are now paying in fares. That is $150 million annually in the pockets of working families, many of whom have been facing increasingly difficult financial circumstances with rising gas prices.
- A reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of about 500 million pounds a year with corresponding decreases in nitrogen oxide and volatile organic compounds.
- A reduction in the traffic congestion for the rest of the folks still on the road. The actual reduction is impossible to predict with any precision and it would vary substantially by roadway.
- More Metro buses would run on schedule. Metro bus drivers tell me that many of their delays come from fare "hassles" as riders get on the bus, e.g., not having the correct change, not being able to find their wallet, etc.
I'm not sure I agree with King's ridership projections for the expanded rail system. One could argue that they're too low, based on 1) increasing amounts of increasingly dense development near rail lines; 2) a network effect as the system's greater reach draws people who need to make a connection to ride; and 3) the fact that the Main Street Line vastly outperformed its projected ridership numbers. This is all someone's best guess of what will happen, like a Vegas line on a football game. King is betting the under, which may turn out to be correct, but there's no guarantee of it. He could very easily be wrong.
One more point is that it's not just about offering an alternative to one's commute to work. I can't take the Main Street line to work, but I can and do for other purposes, and when I do that's one less car on the streets contributing to congestion and pollution. A more comprehensive light rail network will make it easier for people who live in the suburbs to take commuter buses to work, because they will feel like they can still get places they need to go during the day while their cars are back home. People need alternatives outside of rush hour, too.
That said, I think there's merit to his suggestion. Metro doesn't depend on fares for its revenues, so relatively speaking this is a cheap idea. Not having to worry about having the fare, or to mess with the Q Card, will surely make some people give transit a second thought. It probably will speed boarding on buses, as without the need for a fare box you can open the back doors to let people embark as well. It won't cost much of anything to try this, and it won't cost much of anything to reverse course if it doesn't lead to more boardings. I'm willing to give it a shot. What do you think? Greg has more.
UPDATE: Rad Sallee also addresses this. I think his point about jeopardizing federal funds, which Greg also alludes to, is a strong one, one that certainly gives me pause. I still think that a pilot test would be worthwhile, just to test his hypothesis about the benefits, but a systemwide implementation in the event it was found to be worthwhile may require a fair bit of planning.
Tom Coleman, the undercover cop whose testimony led to the unjust convictions of dozens of citizens of Tulia, Texas, lost his last appeal.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled Tom Coleman's aggravated perjury conviction in 2005 should stand.In 2006, the 7th Court of Appeals in Amarillo upheld the conviction.
Coleman was sentenced to 10 years probation after a jury found him guilty of falsely testifying in a 2003 hearing that he did not learn of a theft charge against him until August 1998. Court documents showed that Coleman had earlier learned of the accusation that he stole gasoline while working for the Cochran County Sheriff's Office.
Not much else out there, but this KVII story says "His appeal was based on many things but the biggest is whether or not the state had the right to use special prosecutors in Coleman's trial." I noted other issues in my last entry. I presume this will be the last we hear from Tom Coleman for awhile, at least until the Tulia movie hits the screens. And while I'm glad that Coleman will finally face justice, I still think he got off too easy.
Today the Chron takes a look at the Democratic primary for County Judge, with profiles of David Mincberg and Ahmad Hassan. Here's a bit from the Mincberg story:
Mincberg is in one of many political contests that have illegal immigration as a raging issue. But he approaches the topic only in brief as he campaigns for the March 4 Democratic nomination.He said the partly taxpayer-funded Harris County Hospital District, which treats county residents regardless of citizenship or immigration status, "is doing what it ought to be doing by taking care of the least able among us."
He added, "I don't know of a broader perspective at this time that the county could bring to the immigration issue."
Instead, Mincberg's campaign pitch is that he can apply hefty experience in business and charity causes to the daily administration of county government and craft long-range plans for what he calls quality-of-life issues, such as mass transit and the environment.
"It's absolutely essential," he said, "that the leader of the county have a vision for where they want the county to be in 20 or 30 years."
He said Commissioners Court's reduction of the property tax rate by 1 cent for $100 of value obscured problems with the operations of the Harris County Appraisal District, which sets the taxable values of properties. He called the appraisal agency "totally out of touch" with the public.
Some of that will be familiar to you if you listened to my interview with him. I don't really have much to add except to say that if you're not familiar with David Mincberg, I hope you'll take a moment to learn more about him. I think he'll do a great job as County Judge.
Obviously, I think Mincberg is the clear choice in the primary. But let's take a little look at his opponent anyway.
The multiethnic stew of suburban southwest Houston is Ahmad Hassan's base for commerce and conversation. On a recent day, he spiced lunch at a Persian restaurant with his everyman's approach to the Democratic race for Harris County judge.[...]
And with chicken kebab: "They keep each other in balance," he said of the Democratic and Republican parties. "They are like cousins."
That last morsel was by way of explaining why he is running for the Democratic nomination March 4 after running as a Republican in 2006 against U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Houston.
Also, he said, many of his acquaintances and customers told him two years ago that he had to become a Democrat. According to Hassan, they advised him, "Do you see this word 'Republican'? That's why we are not going to vote for you."
So why county judge rather than councilman or president?
In many parts of the county, "it is a big mess, and there are so many local people talking about it," he said. "There are some communities in Harris County, a dog would not live in them."
[...]
His prescriptions for improving county government include conducting Commissioners Court meetings throughout the county rather than downtown, concentrating flood-control efforts on traffic intersections that always seem to flood first during heavy rain, and providing law enforcement and other services in the spirit of equal treatment for all residents.
"Fair is fair," the candidate said. "I think they need education in all (government) departments on sensitivity."
He also said that as county judge, he would publicize his personal cell phone number and hardly ever wear a suit and tie so he can be more accessible to average constituents.
Okay then. I welcome Mr. Hassan to the Democratic Party, but this isn't the race for him. Perhaps we can find a better fit for him in 2010. In the meantime, I say stick with David Mincberg,
The Chron stumps for Pat Lykos in the GOP primary for District Attorney. I am not surprised by this - I figured it'd be a choice for them between Lykos and Jim Leitner; I assumed they'd find Kelly Siegler to be too close to Chuck Rosenthal to recommend her. All this is my speculation, as the Chron reverts to form and says nothing whatsoever about the other contenders in that primary. Given that the Chron has offered a decent amount of coverage to this race, in particular candidate forums at which we get to see what they do and don't stand for, I think it would have been really useful to have gotten a feel for why the Chron board went with Lykos and not someone else. By how much is she "the Republicans' best choice"? Who's the second best? Where in particular did she distinguish herself, and where did someone else really challenge her? Did any of the others truly fail to measure up? How do they see her in comparison to Siegler, whom I believe will wind up in a runoff with Lykos? I wish I knew, but alas, I don't.
This was weird. This is truly bizarre.
Brian McNamee took aim at another member of Roger Clemens' family Friday, reportedly telling congressional investigators he injected the pitcher's wife with human growth hormone for a photo session five years ago.The New York Daily News, quoting an anonymous Washington source, reported that Clemens' former trainer testified Thursday on Capitol Hill that he injected Debbie Clemens at her husband's direction for a 2003 Sports Illustrated photo shoot.
You can see that picture here. And you're welcome.
McNamee, the former New York Yankees trainer who claims in the Mitchell Report that he injected Roger Clemens with steroids and the growth hormone, called HGH, gave a seven-hour deposition Thursday with lawyers from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.McNamee's lawyers presented two color photos of needles, vials of testosterone, gauze and other evidence they claim links Clemens to steroids shortly after the trainer's testimony.
Pictures of the alleged evidence? We all understand that would never make it into a courtroom, right? And again, since Clemens says he was injected by McNamee, it's not clear to me what the actual needles would prove. I guess maybe if all a needle had were traces of Clemens' DNA and a steroid, without any trace of vitamin B12, that might be something. Maybe. But it's still far from convincing, given everything else I've seen. And really, was it necessary to drag Debbie Clemens into this? Unless there's a crime being alleged here, to which McNamee would then be an accessory, last I checked she was not subject to MLB rules about HGH. What will McNamee say next?
Meanwhile, Clemens is counterattacking.
A lawyer for Roger Clemens said Saturday the pitcher can prove he didn't attend a June 1998 party at Jose Canseco's home described by Brian McNamee in the Mitchell Report.According to McNamee, Clemens first raised the subject of steroids not long after McNamee saw Canseco and Clemens meeting during the party.
Clemens' side has turned over evidence to congressional investigators, including an affidavit from Canseco, to support that the pitcher wasn't present at Canseco's home that day, the attorney, Rusty Hardin, said in a telephone interview with the Associated Press.
Hardin said video footage from telecasts of baseball games around the time of the party also were given to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. In the telecasts, Hardin said, TV announcers can be heard discussing Canseco's party and noting that Clemens wasn't there.
Looks to me like Team Clemens is ahead on points here. Now of course there will be more revelations and accusations and so on, and who knows how this will turn out. But I wonder at what point the "An Accusation Is Good Enough To Prove Guilt To Me!" crowd, like Bob Feller and Hal Bodley will think that maybe they were a bit hasty to judge. Assuming they're capable of such reflection, of course.
EarthLink Inc., the company hired by the city of Houston to build a wireless network, plans to sell its municipal WiFi business, effectively pulling the plug on its project here.While city officials will not say they are abandoning hope of eventually having a citywide network, they are moving ahead with an alternative plan to build free WiFi hotspots in 10 low-income neighborhoods.
The hotspot project will be funded with the $5 million that EarthLink paid the city months ago as a penalty for missing its initial deadline to begin the buildout. That payment bought EarthLink nine months to decide how to proceed and allows the company to back out altogether without further penalty.
The first neighborhood to benefit from free WiFi will be Gulfton, just outside the West Loop and south of the Southwest Freeway. It could be completed as early as this spring, said Nicole Robinson, the city's digital inclusion project director.
The city has not decided which other neighborhoods may also get free WiFi, she said.
"(Gulfton) is really kind of our pilot," Robinson said. "That may impact (which) neighborhoods that we implement it in."
There was a story about this hotspot project a few days ago in the Chron, but I've lost the link. From what I recall, it sounded like a pretty decent backup plan to the original vision, in that it would still bring WiFi to poorer neighborhoods - "bridging the digital divide", as the catchphrase goes. Having it paid for by the EarthLink default money isn't bad, either. Though I still think the original idea was a worthwhile one, maybe this is the best way to go now. It's not like it couldn't be added on to later, if that becomes feasible.
It's not just the feds suing property owners along the border. Property owners are suing the feds, too.
A lawsuit by University of Texas-Brownsville Professor Eloisa Tamez and San Benito resident Benito J. Garza claims the Homeland Security Department disregarded the law by filing "declarations of taking" before negotiating a price for their land.The government sued both for six months of access to plot the fence.
During a two-hour hearing before U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen on the government's lawsuit, attorney Peter Schey said two acts of Congress prohibited the declarations of taking, or expedited condemnation, for the fence.
"The judge was very patient, very receptive," Schey said. "He made very clear that this was the first time anybody has brought this to his attention and he's really going to have to step back and contemplate."
After a previous hearing, Hanen granted government access the same day.
Tamez said she is a descendant of the Lipan Apache and Basque peoples and her acre of land has been in the family for 265 years.
According to the complaint against Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Robert F. Janson, acting executive director of asset management for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 precluded the government from using expedited condemnation for border fencing. It says expedited condemnation was again ruled out by an amendment to the federal budget bill requiring consultation with locals.
The government's reply to the complaint, filed Wednesday, says government officials are seeking only "minimally intrusive, non-exclusive" temporary access to plan the fence.
"Whatever concerns might be applicable to the actual permanent taking of land in fee for fence construction are simply not relevant at this time," it says.
It'll be very interesting to see what the judge makes of this. Maybe it'll force the feds to be a bit more flexible about finding alternate solutions to the fence, which is already happening in some other counties.
The federal government and local officials in one border county announced today they had reached a compromise that would eliminate the need for the much-maligned border fencing there.Private land in Hidalgo County border towns such as Granjeno, where dozens of homes could have been lost behind the fence in a no-man's land between Mexico and the United States, would no longer be threatened by a land grab, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said.
[...]
Since the Department of Homeland Security is responsible for border security and natural disasters such as flooding, the Hidalgo County solution to modify levees along the Rio Grande with an 18-foot sheer face on the river side satisfied Chertoff.
"When completed at the end of the year, they will serve both functions," Chertoff said at a border patrol station in Edinburg, the Hidalgo County seat. "It's a great example of where we are able to dovetail what we need with what the community needs."
Gov. Rick Perry, who with local officials has opposed the fence, thanked Chertoff for being receptive to local feedback.
Chertoff noted that a "legislative fix" allowing the local and federal funding contributions to the project would be required for the agreement to move forward.
It was the most conciliatory atmosphere between border communities and Homeland Security since the border fence dispute began more than a year ago, and an about-face from last month, when Chertoff said people worried about the impact of increased security on cross-border travel should "grow up."
[...]
Hidalgo County chief executive J.D. Salinas said the levee improvements would also save property owners who faced millions of dollars in insurance premium increases because of poor flood control in the area.
But most significant is that the border wall-levee system will stay along the river's edge. Earlier plans had the fence winding through towns like Granjeno as far as two miles inland from the Rio Grande, cutting off huge swaths of property into a no-man's land between the fence and the river. The fence also would have cut off water access to farmers and ranchers in the area.
"The people of Granjeno should not be concerned," Salinas said.
Residents and elected leaders throughout the Rio Grande Valley had bristled at the idea of a border fence, fearing both the loss of private land and the message it would send to their sister communities in Mexico.
But last fall, Salinas and his Cameron County counterpart, Carlos Cascos, suggested the levee compromise, figuring they could fix two problems at the same time.
"I think that's a big victory for all of us here," Cascos said.
That all sounds good, but there are some concerns as well.
The No Border Wall Coalition says the Department of Homeland Security should begin a new Environmental Impact Statement for the Rio Grande Valley if it intends to back the so-called "vertical levee" plan."We are concerned that DHS intends to push through the idea of a wall-levee combination in the Rio Grande Valley before it has been thoroughly evaluated," said NBW spokesperson Stefanie Herweck.
"If DHS is serious about their plan they must prove the efficacy and safety of the wall-levee combo with the appropriate engineering and hydrological studies."
[...]
Herweck said new engineering and hydrological studies on the levee-fence combo plan should be made available for public review in a new draft EIS for the Valley.
"Construction should not begin unless we can be assured that this will not put the safety of Texas residents at risk," she said.
"DHS should not start tearing the sides off of our levees, and possibly destabilizing them ahead of hurricane season, until they know how the wall will impact the levees' structural integrity."
Herweck said a cautious approach would see DHS abandon the plan to begin fence or levee-fence construction in the spring, so that Valley residents do not go into hurricane season with the levees in a compromised state.
Sounds reasonable to me. This whole process has moved much too fast anyway, so a little slowing down is in order. Link via South Texas Chisme.
The Chron makes its choices in the two primaries for County Judge. First is an easy one:
David Mincberg, Democrat: Mincberg, a former leader of the Harris County Democratic party, says quality of life -- including problems of traffic congestion and transportation, flood control and clean air -- is the most significant issue facing the county today. "The decisions we make today will be critical to the quality of life of ourselves, our children and our grandchildren," Mincberg says.Ethics in county governance is an issue elevated in the minds of county residents lately, and it's a matter Mincberg pledges to give his full attention. However, he contends, having high ethical standards is not the basis for a campaign but a basic criterion for the job and for how the county conducts its business. Mincberg, who has amassed a personal fortune in real estate investments, promises to completely separate his financial interests from county business, to place voluntary caps on contributions to his campaigns and never to use campaign contributions for personal expenditures.
Mincberg says he is in the process of liquidating his company holdings and will make running Harris County his full-time job. It's a job to which he'll bring the experience of having run an operation employing 750 workers and representing more than $1 billion worth of economic activity owned or invested primarily in this county.
Mincberg, who served more than a year as Houston Mayor Bill White's $1-a-year executive on affordable housing, says he has a good working relationship with White and understands the need to work closely with mayors of the 32 cities incorporated in Harris County, as well as with leaders of neighboring counties.
An attorney by training, Mincberg is conversant in budgeting, large-stakes finance arrangements and high-dollar bonding transactions. He intends to turn his attention to the finances of the Harris County Hospital District, as one example, to ensure that taxpayers receive the most value for the hundreds of millions in public health-care dollars they invest there.
There's a huge disparity in candidate quality here, but Mincberg would be tough to beat for the endorsement regardless. Here's the interview I did with him if you haven't had a chance to listen to it.
On the other side, the choice was tougher, but I would argue still obvious for the Chron:
Ed Emmett, Republican: Emmett, who currently holds this seat, was appointed last year to fill the unexpired county judge term of Robert Eckels, who left the position for the private sector. He faces a strong political challenge in former District Clerk Charles Bacarisse for the Republican nomination, but the Chronicle believes Emmett is the better candidate.Emmett is a former four-term state representative (1979 to 1987) and was a George H.W. Bush appointee to the U.S. Interstate Commerce Commission. In addition to his extensive government service, Emmett has strong private sector business experience in the transportation industry.
As an internationally recognized expert on transportation policy and issues, Emmett is well-qualified to deal with this region's thorny traffic congestion and mobility issues. He intends to continue working regionally to find solutions -- both mass transit and road projects -- to abet Houston's traffic woes. Also, the Chronicle believes that Emmett's support of the Metropolitan Transit Authority's plan to put light rail along Richmond Avenue is the correct stance on this controversial issue.
"That's where the people are, that's where the businesses are," Emmett told members of the Chronicle editorial board this week.
Emmett sees good judgment as one of his strongest suits, which will put county residents in good stead in any emergency scenario, from a natural disaster to a terrorist attack. And he touts the fact that under his administration, commissioners approved the largest tax-rate cut in Harris County history. He promises to make crafting a stronger county ethics policy a high priority of his tenure.
Having endeavored over the past year to earn a reputation as a consensus builder on Commissioner's Court, Emmett pledges to work hard to support his party while recognizing that the county judge must serve the diverse needs of this dense, urban/suburban and growing county.
Given Bacarisse's position on Richmond rail, I'd have been amazed if the Chron had endorsed him over Emmett. They feel strongly enough about this that they specified it as a reason for their endorsement instead of simply repeating the candidate's points as they so often do. That last paragraph can also be read as a criticism of Bacarisse's overall campaign tone and rhetoric. Which is interesting, because as far as I can see, Bacarisse is clearly speaking the language of Republican primary voters, while Emmett seems to be in November campaign mode. Call me crazy, but I don't think that - or this endorsement - will serve him all that well in March.
After the recent spate of outside experts telling us that Planning Is Eeeeevil, it's refreshing to hear from a different group of outside experts saying it's not so bad after all.
Houston needs a regional growth plan to compete globally with cities such as Chicago, Los Angeles and Dubai.That was the warning -- and challenge -- issued by land-use experts Thursday at a panel convened by the Center for Houston's Future.
By 2015, 1 million additional people are expected to settle in the eight-county region. Three million more are expected by 2035. To cope, the region needs rail links to airports, more housing downtown, and a plan for its aging, ad-hoc sewage systems, the panelists said. Some better marketing would help, too.
[...]
Houstonians have evolved other effective methods to guide land use, such as special improvement districts or tax-increment financing, said Scott Polikov, a principal with the Gateway Planning Group in Fort Worth. Polikov said different types of financing, such as title transfer fees, could be used to raise capital for rail projects.
"When you don't want government involved, it's called 'regulation,' " Polikov observed, drawing knowing chuckles from the audience at the Hyatt Regency Hotel. "When you do want government involved, but don't want to admit it, you call it 'public-private partnerships' or 'special districts.' "
Polikov said the Houston region can achieve the positive effects of zoning through better urban design and voluntary "livability" standards adopted by builders. He cited The Woodlands as a good example of both. Voluntary development standards are currently being developed by a task force headed by Roger Galatas, the former CEO of the Woodlands Operating Co.
To discourage sprawl and encourage a higher quality of life, the Houston-Galveston Area Council could reassess how it distributes federal transportation dollars, Polikov said.
One idea is for HGAC to put some of the money into a "competitive pot," Polikov said. Various transportation projects would then have to compete for the money. Funds would be awarded if the projects supported closer connections between home and workplaces, green building practices, affordability, habitat protection and neighborhood schools.
Take that, Randal O'Toole.
Look out, Pearland, here they come!
It's official: The first U.S. presidents whose busts will be installed at the planned Presidential Park and Gardens WaterLights District have been announced.Houston-based Historic Real Estate, developer of the project at Texas 288, south of Beltway 8, conducted an online poll where they asked citizens to pick which of the 42 busts to bring in first to the site.
Here are the results of the poll, which ended Feb. 1:
- Abraham Lincoln - 433 votes
- George Washington - 411 votes
- John F. Kennedy - 388 votes
- Franklin D. Roosevelt - 349 votes
- Thomas Jefferson - 316 votes.
[...]
A groundbreaking for the project will take place on Feb. 18, but will be closed to the public because of the lack of parking accommodations at the site, Browne said.
Construction is set to begin this spring on Presidential Park at WaterLights, a mixed-use development that will feature a winding waterway lined with the 42 U.S. presidents.
The sixth statue is of Poppy Bush. That's a fairly eclectic grouping if you ask me, but that's okay. Enjoy them, Pearland. I've certainly enjoyed having them all near where I live.
By the way, who else has noticed the four statues near the junction of I-10 and I-45? I've been trying to figure out a spot where I can take a picture of them, but so far I haven't identified any. One of these days, one of these days.
Having read this, we are not surprised by this.
The Republican contenders for Harris County judge disagreed Thursday over Metro's plan to put a light rail line along Richmond Avenue near southwest Houston."Unless the courts overturn it, I think the logical place to put it is down Richmond," said incumbent Ed Emmett, a transportation consultant. "That's where the people are, that's where the businesses are."
Challenger Charles Bacarisse, the former district clerk, took the opposite side.
"The county judge should listen to the people of Harris County," he said. "There has been a loud and long call for no rail on Richmond, and not only because it would destroy the neighborhoods it would run through."
Agreeing with opponents of the transit project, Bacarisse said the route plan does not conform to Metro's 2003 ballot referendum, which mentioned the nearby Westpark corridor.
"The word 'Richmond' is never mentioned in the ballot language," Bacarisse added, "and if they want to change it they should just go back to the voters and ask for permission."
Emmett countered that the voice of the public has been expressed by neighborhood associations along the transit route, which he said support the light rail line as a bloc.
"If these people don't speak for the people, then I don't know who does," the county government chief said.
You all know where I stand on this, so I won't belabor that. But I will note again that the only people I see who are pushing this Westpark-centric argument are precisely those who fought against the 2003 referendum in the first place. This isn't about where Metro chooses to build a particular line, it's about stopping Metro from building any more lines by whatever means necessary. I firmly believe that if Metro gave in to their demands, or is forced to by the judge in the aforementioned lawsuit, and wins yet another vote, they'll just come up with another trumped-up rationale for why that vote didn't really represent the will of the people and needs to be done again. They don't want rail, and that's all there is to it.
The Chron makes the same endorsements for the Texas Supreme Court as the Dallas Morning News.
Sam Houston, Place 7. A highly experienced trial lawyer, Houston has been an attorney practicing mostly civil law at the state and federal level for 20 years. He says the high court is stacked with justices who take a "results-oriented" and "activist" approach to the cases they review and cites legal studies showing large corporations are far more likely to win favorable rulings than the individuals who challenge them. A Baylor Law School graduate, Houston says he will work to restore balance by working hard and following the law. If he wins in March, Houston faces Republican incumbent Justice Dale Wainwright in the November general election.Linda Yanez, Place 8. Currently a senior justice on the 13th Court of Appeals, Yanez pledges to work to bring the court, which is often criticized for being ideologically conservative to the detriment of justice, back to the center. She says that will happen through discussions emanating from her position as a centrist, rather than from a far left perspective. Yanez has a strong work ethic, is widely respected in the legal community and has the practical experience formulating legal opinions that is the mainstay of a job on the state's highest court for civil matters. A win in March will pit her against Republican incumbent Justice Phil Johnson when voters go to the polls in the November general election.
That's two for two for Houston and Yanez. And comparing the Chron endorsement to the DMN's, I prefer the latter's style, in which they give their reasoning behind their choice, instead of simply stating what that person says he or she is for. I like the fact that they directly compare the contenders, which is something the Chron hardly ever does. Whether I agree with the choice or not, I like knowing why that choice was made.
The follow list of ten random songs has nothing whatsoever to do with the Presidential primary, and very little to do with politics of any sort.
1. "Turn the Beat Around" - Vickie Sue Robinson. Resolved: Every disco song ever written is in some sense about disco itself. Discuss.
2. "Rock Lobster" - The B-52s. I've mentioned before how it can be disconcerting to finally hear the original version of a song for which you'd only heard the Weird Al Yankovic parody previously. The same is true for MOB-arranged songs, of which this is one. I'd probably played the MOB version for a decade before I ever heard the B-52s rendition. Let's just say that Ken Dye does an amazingly good job at distilling tunes like this to their essential core, and then quitting while he's ahead.
3. "Everybody's Everything" - Santana. Another MOB song, with an even longer interval before I heard the original. Having now heard it, I wonder why it took so long. This is a hot little tune, and I can't quite understand how after twenty years of Classic Rock prevalence, it never once made it onto any station's playlist. What do "Black Magic Woman" and "Oye Como Va" have that this song doesn't?
4. "Quartet (A Model Of Decorum and Tranquility)" - from the "Chess" soundtrack. I love contrapuntal music.
5. "We Will All Go Together When We Go" - Tom Lehrer. There are days in which I think this is a hopeful song. Those are not good days.
6. "Train Train" - Blackfoot. I'm pretty sure the opening harmonica riff was the inspiration for Eddie From Ohio's "Train Song". Everybody's got a folk song about a train, after all.
7. "I Know A Little" - Lynyrd Skynyrd. Is it just me or does anyone else think it's a little weird that the same group that blithely told Neil Young to kiss its redneck ass also did one of the more strident pro-gun control songs out there? That has nothing to do with this song, but it seemd like as good a time as any to bring it up.
8. "Bustin' Loose" - Chuck Brown and the Soul Searchers. Nothing like a little good funk.
9. "All the Way to Memphis" - Mott the Hoople. I know we're all inured to the Dave Barry concept of thus-and-such making a great band name, but I'd always wondered about this one. Turns out it's taken from a novel, much like Steppenwolf and (after a fashion) Steely Dan. Does anyone still name their bands this way?
10. "Your Racist Friend" - They Might Be Giants. Just a guess, but I don't think this song is on Kelly Siegler's iPod right now.
That's all for now. You may begin mocking in the comments at your leisure.
Here are a couple of slates from groups I highly respect that bear close examination. The Houston GLBT Political Caucus, which is the oldest such civil rights organization in the South, has its recommendations on the Caucus blog. The Harris County Democrats, a progressive organization that's been around since 1953 and should not be confused with a johnny-come-lately group with a similar moniker, has its choices here. HCD limited itself to contested primaries, while the HGLBT Caucus went down the full list, with some omissions that I presume were mostly due to the candidate not screening with them in time. The two lists largely agree with each other, so if you're like me and need a little guidance on some of these races - even for a junkie such as myself, I don't know enough about all of these people to feel fully comfortable in some races - they're a great place to start. Check 'em out.
Via Juanita, I see that John McCain is using John Mellencamp songs in his campaign. And Mellencamp isn't happy about that.
Uplifting heartland rock must have seemed like a smart pick, but there's just one problem: Mellencamp is an ardent Democrat. And, until recently, he supported John Edwards - who had been playing "Our Country" and "Small Town" at his rallies. Mellencamp hasn't yet made a public response, but his reps are quietly reaching out to McCain and asking him to stop playing his tunes. (McCain's press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)
Who remembers when Ronald Reagan used Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the USA", until The Boss told him to knock it off? I can't decide which was funnier, when Springsteen suggested that "Johnny 99" would be more a more appropriate song for Reagan to use, or the fact that no one in Reagan's team understood the lyrics to "Born in the USA" enough to realize how ill-fitting that song was for their purposes. Take a lesson from this, Republican Presidential candidates, especially those of you over 65: Leave the rock music to the kids. The songs are about you, just not in the way you want them to be.
Another lawsuit has been filed against Farmers Branch and its continuing anti-immigrant assault, this one on the grounds that its City Council violated open meetings laws when it considered the new ordinance that banned undocumented aliens from renting apartments or houses but shifted the burden of proof from landlords to the city.
The new lawsuit, filed by the Bickel & Brewer Storefront on behalf of resident Guillermo Ramos, alleges that city officials improperly met behind closed doors about the new ordinance before the City Council adopted it Jan. 22.The city has exhibited a "sustained and deliberate" course of conduct violating open meetings laws, said William A. Brewer III of Bickel & Brewer.
The firm and Mr. Ramos also filed state district court suits alleging open meetings violations in the city's consideration of two earlier versions of the rental ban. And Bickel & Brewer is representing apartment owners and tenants in a federal suit challenging the constitutionality of the version that voters approved last May.
The new lawsuit alleges that the ordinance couldn't have been drafted and presented without direction from the council and that, because that direction didn't occur during public meetings, it had to have happened in private consultation with attorneys. That, the suit says, was a violation of state open meetings law.
Lawyer Michael Jung, who drafted the newest ordinance for the city, didn't return phone messages seeking comment Tuesday.
When city officials announced Jan. 17 that the council would consider the latest rental measure, City Manager Gary Greer said that council members hadn't seen or discussed the proposal and that they had received copies of it just that day.
In addition to blocking the new ordinance, the suit asks the court to require the city to keep all council meetings, in their entirety, open to the public and to refrain from open meetings violations.
This is the second such lawsuit filed by Mr. Ramos and the Bickel & Brewer Storefront, also over the open meetings issue. The first one is still being litigated. Stay tuned.
With all the Presidential primary stuff dominating the news, you may have overlooked the stories of the devastating storms that ripped through several Southern states on Tuesday night, killing over 50 people. I know I didn't notice the accounts, but have since seen postings on various blogs pointing it out. As is always the case in disasters like these, relief organizations and local first responders can use all the help they can get. This blog has the details of where to direct your dollars to make the biggest and fastest impact. Please take a minute and take a look, and help if you can. Thanks very much.
Barack Obama pledged Thursday to meet Hillary Rodham Clinton in Democratic presidential debates in Texas and Ohio before the March 4 primaries.But the Illinois senator stopped short of committing to attend an event planned for Feb. 28 in Houston at the George R. Brown Convention Center.
"We're committing to the concept of doing a debate in Texas before the primary," said Josh Earnest, a spokesman for the Obama campaign.
Obama also announced he had accepted an invitation to participate in a debate at Cleveland State University on Feb. 26. That debate, the campaign said, will be hosted by NBC News and WKYC, NBC's Cleveland affiliate.
Clinton, a senator from New York, quickly accepted that offer as well.
[...]
Whether NBC's landing the Ohio debate might scuttle plans for a Houston forum two days later remained unclear Thursday.
"We hope that both candidates will agree to participate in both debates," MSNBC spokesman Jeremy Gaines said.
Thursday's announcement caught the Partnership off guard: "The Greater Houston Partnership has not independently confirmed any of this and is not in a position to comment," it said in a prepared statement.
[...]
Earlier Thursday, Obama took fire in Texas for not committing to the Houston debate. Former Texas Land Commissioner Garry Mauro, a Clinton supporter, called Obama's position "disappointing and possibly even disrespectful.
"It looks like he's trying to dodge the debates," Mauro said in a conference call with reporters.
The Partnership has been trying for months to lure the presidential hopefuls to Houston.
"This is not new," said Clinton supporter Carol Alvarado, a former Houston City Council member who also spoke on the conference call.
She noted that Houston is home to a large Hispanic community, whose members are "very anxious to see this take place."
It doesn't make sense to have debates elsewhere but not in the largest city in a state with over 120 delegates at stake. I'm hopeful this will happen. Stay tuned.
The Roger Clemens/Brian McNamee saga has taken another weird turn.
The lawyers for trainer Brian McNamee dropped a bombshell Wednesday, claiming they gave federal prosecutors physical evidence that proves Roger Clemens used performance-enhancing drugs.The New York Daily News, citing an anonymous source close to McNamee, reported the evidence will include syringes McNamee says were used to inject Clemens with human growth hormone and steroids, in addition to empty bottles and gauze.
"I think this is a significant point in the case," said McNamee's lead lawyer, Earl Ward. "We believe that this is significant corroboration."
Clemens attorney Lanny Breuer attacked McNamee's credibility in a statement.
"Brian McNamee is obviously a troubled man who is obsessed with doing everything possible to destroy Roger Clemens," Breuer said.
[...]
Clemens could open himself up to prosecution if it's proved he lied under oath about using performance-enhancing drugs. Richard Emery, another of McNamee's lawyers, said the committee will be given a description of the evidence that was turned over to prosecutors.
"It does change the nature of the case from a 'he said, she said' to something about physical evidence," Emery said.
[...]
Emery said McNamee's legal team planned to hold a news conference after their client's deposition in Washington today and will discuss the evidence in greater detail then. Clemens' camp could contend the evidence was tampered with, considering it was alleged to have been collected seven years ago.
"(McNamee) has changed his story repeatedly on this matter," Breuer said. "He claims to love Roger Clemens. He says he modeled being a father on Roger Clemens. He said Roger treated him like family -- but he now claims he kept blood, gauze and needles from Roger Clemens for seven years. It defies all sensibility. It is just not credible. Who in their right mind does such a thing?"
As noted by the commenters in David Pinto's post, there are multiple problems with McNamee's claim. Who can vouch for the chain of custody? What does this actually prove, given that Clemens admits McNamee injected him, just not with steroids? What kind of person holds onto this stuff? And why wasn't it mentioned in the Mitchell Report? Strange, very strange.
One more thing, as noted by FanHouse: You may be able to tell what's in those syringes, but you can't say when it got there.
Scientific experts said there was no known method to date steroids or human growth hormone.The syringes, vials and gauze pads are said to date from 2000 and 2001, part of a four-year period in which McNamee contends he gave Clemens drug injections. But even if the physical evidence tests positive for Clemens's DNA and, say, steroids, Clemens's lawyers could argue that McNamee added steroid traces to the original evidence in a bid to incriminate Clemens, experts say.
"You can test to figure out what the substance is, but you cannot figure out how old it is," Dr. Don Catlin, the former director of the Olympic testing lab at U.C.L.A., said in a telephone interview.
There is no way to date blood either, Catlin said, which means there may not be a conclusive way to establish that the syringes, vials and pads were from 2000 and 2001.
It's certainly possible that this is what McNamee says it is. But on its face, this evidence does little to advance the case against Clemens.
It doesn't mean much in practice, but it's still a win.
In an ongoing legal battle that could have a major impact on Texas taxpayers and school districts, a Travis County judge refused Wednesday to grant a new bond validation hearing for opponents of the Houston district's $805 million bond package.State District Judge Gisela Triana declined to vacate her December ruling that validated the election process, a decision needed before the bonds can be sold.
Leaders in the Houston Independent School District called the ruling a big win, saying they hope the state attorney general will decide soon on whether to sign off on the bond money. The funds are planned for projects including construction of 24 schools and repair of 134 others.
I'm having a little trouble keeping up with all this. Far as I knew, it was Judge John Dietz who made the ruling in the bond validation lawsuit. Am I missing a lawsuit, or was it just a different judge ruling on the same matter?
Like its neighbors in the much smaller Waller school district, HISD faces state and federal challenges to its recent bond election. While opponents in both districts have had little legal success, their challenges have blocked sale of the bonds.In Waller, lawyers estimate that the delays are costing taxpayers $40,000 a week because of inflation in construction costs. HISD's loss could be several times higher, an attorney said.
Still, Ty Clevenger, the lawyer for opponents to both bond issues, said he will appeal Triana's decision and continue his fight in federal court, where critics accuse HISD of shortchanging minority students. HISD disputes that, saying about 90 percent of its students are black or Hispanic.
"This is a partial victory because (the judge) does not construe her order to prevent us from proceeding in federal court," Clevenger said. "So that prevents the school district from waving this order in front of the attorney general and saying, 'You have to approve these bonds.' "
Triana told Clevenger and HISD's attorney, Pat Mizell, that her order doesn't prevent a federal court from reviewing civil rights claims raised by bond opponents. She said she would be extremely upset if either one misrepresented her position in federal court.
[...]
In the Waller case, Mizell is asking the Texas Supreme Court to order the attorney general to release the bond money.
In rare cases, the high court has ordered the attorney general to approve bonds. The attorney general also has signed off on bonds after concluding that pending litigation was frivolous, say attorneys who specialize in bonds.
I don't expect AG Abbott to do anything to help HISD in any way. I will be happy to be proven wrong about this.
Note: This entry is part of a series of written Q&As with judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates.
1. Who are you, and what are you running for?
I am Bruce Mosier, candidate for Judge of the 190th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas (a civil, trial court), in the March 4, 2008, Democratic Primary Election. I am a native Houstonian, born, raised and educated in Houston, Texas. I graduated from Stephen F. Austin High School, the University of Houston College of Business Administration and the University of Houston College of Law. I am married to Diane Mosier and have 4 grown children and 7 very bright grandchildren.
2. What kind of cases does this court hear?
Article V, Section 8 of the Texas Constitution provides the following: "District Court jurisdiction consists of exclusive, appellate, and original jurisdiction of all actions, proceedings, and remedies, except in cases where exclusive, appellate, or original jurisdiction may be conferred by this Constitution or other law on some other court, tribunal, or administrative body. District Court judges shall have the power to issue writs necessary to enforce their jurisdiction. The District Court shall have appellate jurisdiction and general supervisory control over the County Commissioners Court, with such exceptions and under such regulations as may be prescribed by law."
In general, the 190th Judicial District Court is a trial court authorized to hear and determine civil matters only. Its geographical jurisdiction is all of Harris County. Its monetary jurisdiction is unlimited. In Harris County, the Civil District Courts have jurisdiction to hear and decide all civil cases except those, the jurisdiction of which has not been exclusively assigned by legislative action to other courts, i.e. family matters, probate matters. Included in that jurisdiction are cases in which individuals claim damages because of an injury caused by another individual or a company, whether the injury is physical, mental or emotional; collection of debts; commercial matters, including disputes between owners of a business and contract claims; real estate disputes, including boundary disputes, ownership claims, and injunctive suits to stop foreclosures; and much more.
3. Why are you running for this particular bench?
It has been often said that there exists a great imbalance in the judicial system of Harris County, Texas, because there are no Democrat Judges in our county, except for a few Justices of the Peace. But the imbalance does not stop there. In a partisan system in which Judges are elected and must declare themselves to be members of a particular political party, they must declare their allegiance to that party or suffer the negative consequences, i.e. defeat at the hands of their own party. I am a Democrat and believe in the Texas Democratic Party Platform affords the best approach to protecting the rights of all of our citizens. (see http://www.hcdp.org/Demo2006.pdf)
I have run for the office of Judge several times, during the years when a candidate for a countywide race had no hope of success in Harris County, Texas. I carried the message of the Democratic Party and campaigned for change of our judicial system. I was encouraged by many Democratic activists and Elected Officials to run for office (see my web site at www.mosierforjudge.com) and announced that I would seek the very next "open bench." When the Judge of the 190th was confirmed to the Fifth Circuit, I announced my candidacy.
4. What are your qualifications for this job?
I have practiced law continuously, in Harris County, Texas, for 43 years, handling many, many types of civil cases, on both sides of most of the areas in which I practiced. In 1983, I earned Certificates of Special Competence from the Texas Board of Legal Specialization (known as Board Certifications) in Residential Real Estate Law and in Commercial Real Estate Law. In 1994, I earned a certification as Mediator from the American Arbitration Association. My practice has always been a litigation and appellate practice, concentrating on real estate litigation, but handling a wide variety of other types of cases. I have also served as a Mediator in many cases, assisting other attorneys and their clients in the resolution of their disputes. I have broad "life experiences," having raised 4 children and 1 granddaughter, having represented hundreds and hundreds of individual clients, and having been active in many community activities, all of which enables me to understand the problems confronting people in their lives.
5. Why is this race important?
Beginning in the late 1980s and into the 1990s, the Republican party took control of the judicial system in the State of Texas, controlling every trial court (except a few Justices of the Peace) and every appellate court in Harris County, Texas. This imbalance has enabled the institution of rules and procedures that have changed the administration of justice without any consideration of an opposing view - in many ways to the detriment of all persons seeking justice. The demographics of Harris County (and the State of Texas) and the attitudes of its citizens is changing and the justice system must also change.
Further, changing the status quo at the courthouse will once again give the courtroom back to the people (who own it, after all) and the lawyers who represent them. Jury verdicts will once again be respected.
6. Why should people vote for you in the Democratic primary?
I began my work with as a Democrat in 1953, operating mail room equipment as a teenager for the Harris County Democrats, an organization working for the defeat of Republican candidates. My Dad was its County Precinct Organizer and I worked with such stalwarts as Mrs. R. D."Frankie" Randolph, Eddie Ball, J. Edwin Smith, Chris Dixie, Judge Woodrow Seals, Judge Miron Love, and a host of other activists. Billie Carr and I were volunteers in the efforts. She went on to become one of the leading activists in the Texas Democratic Party. I became an attorney, representing the rights of individuals.
I have practiced law more than three times as long as my opponent. I have a much broader and much more varied experience with life than he does. My demeanor, my knowledge of the law and procedures, my experience in the law and my attitudes toward and experience with people will enable me to understand the disputes brought before me and to decide the cases in accordance with principles of fairness, justice and compasion. I have represented individuals and companies one at a time, examining every detail of each case, from both sides of each of them. I will decide every case that comes before me in the manner required of every Judge, i.e. 'not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.'" see Lawrence v. Texas, 41 S.W.3d 349 (Tex. App. - 14th Dist. - 2001)
In closing, having carried the message of change in this County 5 times, during the dark years, I believe that I have the name recognition, the reputation and the experience that will enable me to become one of the first Democrats to be elected Judge of a District Court in Harris County, Texas, in many, many years.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Kyle Carter, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Dan Grant, candidate for US Congress, District 10.
Ah, TxDOT. What would we do without them?
The Texas Department of Transportation made a billion-dollar error, officials of the agency admitted Tuesday under stern questioning from legislators, a mistake they said contributed significantly to TxDOT's sudden cash crunch.TxDOT officials say agency planners inadvertently counted $1.1 billion of revenue twice, a mistake that caused them to commit to more road projects than the agency could handle.
But lawmakers, always skeptical, were often openly hostile during a lengthy Senate committee hearing that amounted to a thorough wood-shedding of TxDOT. They let department officials know that they remain suspicious about the legitimacy of the fiscal crisis.
Texas Transportation Commission members, said state Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, "have an agenda. And that's to privatize the second-largest (highway) system in the world. And you are hell-bent-for-leather to do that."
State Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, pushed for a third party to look at TxDOT's books.
"It's important to me that we get the state auditor's office in there as quickly as possible," said Williams, who carried legislation last year that substantially curtailed TxDOT's authority to agree to long-term leases with private companies to build and run tollways.
[...]
TxDOT officials first announced a money shortage in November, ascribing it to a number of factors: inflation, reduced federal transportation grants, increased road maintenance needs and, most tellingly to legislators, the loss of revenue from those private toll road leases. Until Tuesday, top TxDOT officials had said nothing publicly about having made a serious bureaucratic error.
According to [TxDOT's executive director, Amadeo Saenz, and TxDOT Chief Financial Officer James Bass], the $1.1 billion that was counted twice was money borrowed through selling bonds. As a consequence, top agency officials told TxDOT's various divisions and districts that they had $4.2 billion to spend this fiscal year.
"As soon as I heard that number," Bass said, "I knew it was an overestimate."
Soon after, with so-called "lettings" for 2008 trimmed to $3.1 billion, TxDOT officials announced huge cuts in spending on right of way and project design, as well as a freeze on the start of many road projects that were ready to go. That sudden halt to projects got legislators' attention -- and their goat. The Legislature and voters last year gave the agency authorization to borrow an additional $8 billion -- though $5 billion of that will require further legislative action in 2009 -- and so legislators don't like that crucial road projects are suddenly up on blocks.
It didn't take long after the freeze announcement for the idea to take hold that TxDOT was manufacturing a crisis to coerce legislators into backing away from the limits on private toll road contracts.
Tuesday's alternative explanation may have been only partially helpful to the agency.
"So, what you're saying is, it's not a political effort on your part," Watson said. "It's a lack of competence."
Heh. You'd think it'd be hard to make that kind of mistake, but apparently it's not beyond TxDOT's range. Eye on Williamson has more.
Seeing the state auditor being invoked reminded me of this Chron story from July of 2005, which I blogged about here, in which said auditor chided TxDOT for not taking care of its money better, once again having to do with the Katy Freeway expansion.
The cost of expanding the Katy Freeway has gone up almost another $300 million, according to a state audit that faults the Texas Department of Transportation for failing to "take the necessary and appropriate steps to estimate total project costs."Auditor John Keel's report notes TxDOT's latest cost estimate is $2.67 billion, up 78 percent from the October 2001 estimate of $1.5 billion. The last estimate released by TxDOT was $2.4 billion.
Go back through those stories I pulled from the 2001 archives - heck, do your own search - and see if you can find a single instance in which $1.5 billion was cited as the estimated cost of that job. All I ever found were $1 billion and $1.2 billion figures. Even back then, the low end crept upwards as if by magic.
Keel criticizes TxDOT for basing the 2001 Katy expansion estimate on preliminary engineering work and failing to update the projection as further design work revealed substantially higher costs. He cites about $100 million added after the department determined it would need to rebuild the Beltway 8 interchange to accommodate the four High Occupancy Toll lanes being built in the center of the freeway.According to the report, the highway department did not originally include $56 million for moving Houston water and sewer lines, failed to include the project's administrative costs of more than $100 million, didn't adjust costs for inflation or include contingencies to cover rising materials prices.
The auditor identifies another $121 million in unanticipated cost increases for land needed to widen the freeway, and suggests transportation officials raced to get the bulldozers out there before having the necessary right of way.
"TxDOT did not follow its standard practice of purchasing the majority of right of way before letting contracts," the report states. "TxDOT made a decision to forgo acquiring right of way in advance in order to manage the project on an accelerated construction schedule."
There's a nice breakdown at the end of the story as to where all the extra costs went; they totaled a bit over $1.1 billion. Maybe that's just an unlucky number for TxDOT. I look at this stuff, and I see people like John Culberson and Charles Bacarisse complain about Metro's costs, and I say to myself if these guys did half that much griping about TxDOT's fiscal follies, maybe we'd start to see that agency get better at that sort of thing. If only.
One of the more interesting comments I got on this post about the Legacy at Memorial highrise construction was to say that the Archstone Memorial apartments on Washington between Studemont and Waugh were going to be torn down in favor of something more high-end. Which feels a little odd, since those apartments were one of the true pioneers for that area and its ongoing gentrification. It's like the passing of an era.
Anyway, a few days later I received this PDF file of a newsletter for Super Neighborhood 22, which encompasses that part of town. Apparently, Archstone wants to get the city to abandon the right turn lane from eastbound Washington to southbound Studemont, which is actually a continuation of Court Street, and the triangular green strip that bounds it. The SN22 people, who support the new development, oppose this aspect of it. Here's some info from the newsletter:
With the support of Councilmember Adrian Garcia, our recent action to deny a variance request for a major unrestricted reserve re-plat on Washington Avenue received a favorable vote from the Planning Commission. Through the action of Commissioner Kay Crooker, Superneighborhood 22 has been presented a rare opportunity to work in cooperation with Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone 5 (TIRZ 5) - Memorial/Heights and the developer of Archstone Properties.We support Archstone's re-development concept for the 28.10 acres fronting on Washington Avenue, Studemont, and Waugh Drive. The current plan to be realized over a 5-year period features mid-rise mixed-use at the Washington/Studemont corner, and a series of six mid-rise residential nodes with incorporated garages on a new internal central Paseo that will parallel Washington Avenue mid-way through the complex.
[...]
In addition to the denied variance request, Archstone is asking for abandonment of two City properties - the small Studemont Spaceway just south of Washington on the west side of Studemont, and the Court Street right-of-way that creates a right turn lane from eastbound Washington to southbound Studemont and the long triangular splitter island that separates Court Street from the Studemont main lanes. The second will require rebuilding the intersection to conform with a standard four-way signalized intersection format. Archstone suggests visiting their nearly completed Esplanade project on Hermann Drive west of Almeda for a representation of product quality.
[...]
TIRZ 5, in exchange for these COH properties, offers to create a linear park in the former rail spur right-of-way running along the west side of Memorial-Heights Boulevard between Washington Avenue and the north side of the former Ed Sacks property on which permits have recently been let for a 25-floor residential tower, a group of cabana apartment units and a parking structure.
We have been asked by Archstone to provide a letter of support for these abandonments. While we are inclined to support the Spaceway abandonment in exchange for the new linear park, we find the Court Street right-of-way abandonment unnecessary, unwise and not in the best public interest.
In concurrence with a suggestion from Planning Commission Chair, Dr. Carol Lewis, SN22 has requested that COH/PWE evaluate the safety of the Court Street turn lane, and install appropriate signage to eliminate the confusion and misdirection of traffic.
It is our opinion that attractively landscaped large splitter islands with mature trees add unique character and a sense of place to our urban streetscape - qualities that should be preserved and encouraged along Washington Avenue, and that are consistent with the precedent set by the Washington on Westcott (WOW) Roundabout. Splitter islands enhance pedestrian mobility in active mixed-use areas by enabling safer crossings of the entire intersection.
Interesting stuff, and still a little amazing to someone like me who remembers what that area used to look like. I should note that SN22 has been gathering information about this proposed abandonment and other related matters affecting that area, and are seeking public input, especially from people who pass through the Washington/Studemont intersection. Obviously, when abandonments are being sought, the more input, the better. There's a lot of quality of life issues at play - mobility, green space, drainage - in an increasingly dense part of town. You can go to this link to offer your feedback: http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/nbhd_svces/TechCntrInfo/SN_22.htm. Thanks very much.
On a side note, while Googling around for more info about this, I found this Nancy Sarnoff column from August which notes that the same folks now building on the Ed Sacks site also own all the land on the east side of Montrose from Allen Parkway to West Dallas, which includes where the Robinson Warehouse used to be. Though there was talk in that column about integrating the two properties somehow, I'd say that's off the table now.
As we know, SD10 Democratic candidate Wendy Davis won a challenge to her ballot eligibility brought by some Fort Worth firefighters, on the grounds that they didn't have to sue. Only an opposing candidate had such standing, the court ruled. So will her eventual opponent, State Sen. Kim Brimer, take up the legal baton? PoliTex asked him that very question.
Apparently, he's still waiting to see whether the firefighters appeal the decision to the Texas Supreme Court."The firefighters have to decide what they're going to do," Brimer said. "They're the ones that have the action going, and I'm going to respect what they're doing at this time."
We asked again, but Brimer wouldn't say whether he was even considering formally challenging Davis' eligibility.
It's unclear to me if it's in his best interests to pursue this. While the ultimate prize of knocking a strong contender off the ballot is unquestionably alluring, there can be a lot of blowback if you try and fail, which is no doubt why he's hoping that a third party can do the dirty work for him. I thought Davis had a pretty good argument on the merits, and I'm sure he's asked an attorney or two for some offhand advice. If he thinks he has a good shot at it, I don't see why he wouldn't take it. We'll see what happens.
BOR brings the good news that the Texas State Teachers Association (TSTA) is endorsing Rick Noriega in the primary. This is no surprise, despite the fact that one of Noriega's opponents is himself a teacher. Look at his record: Anyone can say they support the public schools, Noriega has been there and done that. And really, if there ever was going to be a Mister Smith Goes To Washington story in 2008, it'll be with Noriega in the Jimmy Stewart role. Anyway, kudos to Noriega for getting the endorsement, and to the TSTA for getting this one right.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday challenged Sen. Barack Obama to meet in four separate Democratic debates before the March 4 primaries in Texas and Ohio -- including an event scheduled for Feb. 28 in Houston.But Obama, of Illinois, did not immediately commit to travel to Houston to take on Clinton just five days before what could be a crucial Texas primary.
As voters in 22 states went to polls in the primary avalanche known as Super Tuesday, Clinton, of New York, called on her Democratic rival to agree to several debates.
"Senator Clinton has enjoyed the opportunities to debate and the chance to get her message out," said Mark Penn, Clinton's chief strategist, in a conference call with reporters. "Voters ought to have the opportunity to see these two candidates compete against each other in a one-on-one setting."
Clinton has accepted invitations to appear on ABC's This Week on Sunday; Fox News in Washington on Monday; CNN from Ohio on Feb. 27; and MSNBC from the George R. Brown Convention Center on Feb. 28, her campaign said.
The Greater Houston Partnership, the sponsor of the Houston debate, has been trying for months to lure the candidates to the Bayou City.
NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams and the network's Washington bureau chief, Tim Russert, have agreed to moderate the Houston event.
Debate organizers have not said how tickets for the event would be distributed.
As long as it's not via Ticketmaster, I'm okay with whatever they decide. I forget now where I saw this, but apparently some people paid upwards of a thousand dollars to attend the California debate. I'd bet that this will be a very hot ticket. I wonder if they'll accredit me as a journalist if I ask.
Side note #1: Please, Hillary, reconsider the Fox News debate decision. There's no need to enable that propaganda outlet. I hope Obama's response to all this is "I'll debate you any time, any place, except on Fox News".
Side note #2: Boy, was I wrong to root for Texas to move the primary up to February. Our votes sure do matter now, and we'll get even more attention than we would have had we been involved in Super Duper Tuesday. I'm happy to have been mistaken about this.
Side note #3: Glenn Smith and the Observer blog look at the Texas primary process. Vince has an exhaustive list of who has endorsed whom - for all the talk about how Hillary is supposed to be downballot death to Democrats here, a heck of a lot of Dem officeholders and candidates have endorsed her - and who is still up for grabs.
On to March! And as the last word on this, get ready to start zapping a bunch of campaign commercials. That's an aspect of this that we won't miss when it's all over.
Here's an update on the lawsuit that was filed against the $5-per-customer strip club fee that the Lege passed last session for a sexual assault prevention fund.
A new $5-per-patron fee the state is charging strip clubs is really a tax and should be declared unconstitutional, a lawyer for the clubs argued in court Tuesday."They are simply taking money from my clients and funding other purposes," said Stewart Whitehead.
[...]
Whitehead, said a fee must be related to regulation, and the state is not using the fee to "abate an alleged nuisance" or benefit the industry.
He said the sponsor of the law enacting the fee, Rep. Ellen Cohen, D-Houston, said at a committee hearing that there was no link between the clubs and sexual assaults.
The fee really is an occupation tax, Whitehead said, and the Texas Constitution requires that one-fourth of occupation tax revenue be used to fund public schools.
Christine Monzingo, an assistant attorney general, said the Legislature has authority to charge a fee to a sexually exploitative industry. Even if the $5 charge is an occupation tax, she said, the state comptroller has authority to set aside a quarter of the revenue for education. She urged denial of the motion.
In December, another Travis County judge denied a temporary injunction to prevent the tax from being assessed.
The suit was filed in December. I said at the time I didn't think this was going to get anywhere, and I still think that. Of course, I also didn't think the bill requiring the surcharge would make it through the Lege, so take my assessment with an appropriate amount of salt.
Note: This entry is part of a series of recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing written Q&As with judicial candidates.
The 10th Congressional District has come a long way since it was first redrawn for the 2004 elections, when it was perceived as so hopelessly Republican that no Democrat filed for the race. This year, after 2006 candidate Ted Ankrum held incumbent Rep. Mike McCaul to an unimpressive 55% showing, two strong yet strongly contrasting candidates have stepped up to take a crack at McCaul.
First up is Dan Grant, who spent over a year in Iraq as deputy director of its largest out-of-country voting program. He's impressed a lot of people with the knowledge and experience he gained from that tenure, and he's very passionate about it, as you'll hear in the interview. Among his supporters are 2006 candidate Ankrum, and 2004 write-in candidate Lorenzo Sadun. We had quite a spirited chat, which you can find here.
I will be publishing an interview with Grant's primary opponent Larry Joe Doherty next week. This is a very important race, without an obvious frontrunner, so if you live in CD10 I hope you'll learn as much as you can about each candidate.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Kyle Carter, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
A few links of interest for legislative primary races:
- Vince takes a close look at the spotty voting record of Craddick D Rep. Dawnna Dukes. On the other side of the coin, Refinish69 gives an overview of Dukes' TPA-endorsed challenger, Brian Thompson.
- Hal writes about the upcoming fundraiser for the Fort Bend Democrats, at which the featured speaker will be the hoped-for Speaker of the 81st Lege, Rep. Senfronia Thompson.
- Vince also contributes a piece on Craddick-D-in-the-making Tara Rios Ybarra, who is running against State Rep. Juan Escobar in HD43. She has quite the collection of Republican donors in her corner.
- And finally, since I haven't gotten around to taking a picture of the Jessica Farrar sign in my front yard yet, I'll encourage you again to read why I support Rep. Farrar, and to listen to the interview I did with her if you haven't already. We can't move forward if we're not supporting the good guys, and Rep. Farrar is one of the good guys.
Rad Sallee visits an oldie but goodie: How much was the Katy Freeway expansion really supposed to cost? In other words, how much over budget should they be considered to be?
Barry Klein, a free-markets advocate and watchdog of the public purse, raised a good point in response to a Jan. 13 story about the Katy Freeway widening being completed in October.In the story, project spokeswoman Raquelle Lewis said the latest cost estimate was $2.8 billion, with $1.7 billion of that spent on construction. It also said the construction figure is about $300 million higher than initially projected. Klein recalled Chronicle reports of much lower early estimates.
The story was correct, according to Lewis, who explained that she was comparing the current estimates to those made when construction began, not the lower numbers cited during planning.
The expansion had been on the planning table for years when, in April 2001, U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, and then-County Judge Robert Eckels announced a plan to jump-start it by using county toll revenue to plug funding gaps.
But engineers still were in the preliminary design stage and actual construction would not begin until June 2003. When workers started digging up the earth and laying concrete, and property owners began to fight TxDOT in court, the numbers started to climb.
"At that time, our projected construction cost was $1.4 billion and for the total program it was $2.4 billion," Lewis said. "The change has been to $1.7 construction and $2.8 billion for the total program."
It's interesting to track the changes. A Houston Chronicle story in July 2003 gave the total estimated cost as $1.71 billion, with $1.4 billion for construction, but by then TxDOT was revising its estimates rapidly. In June 2004, the estimated total had climbed to $2.2 billion, with $1.4 billion for construction.
Asked about that at the time, TxDOT contended that these were not real overruns because the early figures were only rough estimates, done without benefit of the knowledge to be gained later in final design and construction.
Lewis agreed and said the start-of-construction figures -- not those from 2001 -- are the fair ones to compare with current estimates.
But in March 2005, the state auditor, John Keel, took a different view. Total costs by then were estimated at $2.67 billion, with $1.65 billion for construction, and Keel was sharply critical of TxDOT.
His report cited $100 million that had been added to the initial estimates after the agency determined it would need to rebuild the Beltway 8 interchange.
Keel also said the cost of utility relocation had soared $156 million over original estimates, right-of-way costs had risen by $121 million and $234 million had been added for various design and administrative costs.
Lewis said last week that road builders are in something of a bind in the early stages of a project, when many of its unknowns cannot possibly be resolved. She said it is common practice to rely largely on preliminary data at that point. The alternative, she said, is to add a large and vague sum for contingencies, which invites accusations of padding the bill in advance.
It's easy to sympathize. Taxpayers and reporters want to know what it's going to cost, and supportive politicians want good news.
Here's my blog post about that 2004 story, and here's the July 2003 Chron story; I could have sworn I'd blogged about the 2003 story as well, but I can't find it in my archives. Regardless, in the 2004 story TxDOT spokesperson Janelle Gbur did indeed note the distinction between the 2001 pre-construction estimate and the later ones, just as Raquelle Lewis does here; there was no mention of this in the 2003 story. The real question is whether TxDOT was making this distinction back in 2001, when it was releasing those now-discredited pre-construction numbers. Did they say at the time something like "Hey, y'all, we're just taking a wild guess here, and we're likely to be way low, because there's all kinds of stuff that comes up once you get down to the nitty gritty of it. Please don't take these numbers too seriously, because we're going to throw them out and start fresh once we actually begin construction." If they did, then I can accept their explanation now. If not, or if they just gave those numbers out with the assumption that "everyone would know" they're given with a wink and crossed fingers, then this is baloney, and they should be held accountable for the full difference.
So with that in mind, I embarked on a Chronicle archive search, using "katy freeway estimate", and "katy freeway billion" as my search terms, for the two year period from January 1, 2000, to January 1, 2002. I've included links and excerpts from the relevant results I found beneath the fold, all from 2001. To sum up, the answer is no, there was no indication from TxDOT or anyone else that $1 billion (sometimes cited as $1.2 billion) was anything other than The Number. I can't completely pin this on TxDOT, because nowhere in any story did I see the number cited by a TxDOT spokesperson. It's as if the figure bubbled up from the collective consciousness, and was simply quoted as what everyone seemed to agree was the actual dollar amount. In some cases, the number was simply part of the reported story, but in some cases it was specifically given by people involved in the project. The most damning example is this one, from an April 6, 2001 story about how the Harris County Toll Road Authority was going to help move this project along:
Faced with the prospect of waiting years for the state to ease traffic congestion on the west side, Harris County officials are pushing a plan to turn the Katy Freeway into a mega 24-lane roadway with a toll road down the middle.The plan has been discussed for years, County Judge Robert Eckels said Thursday. But the county is now ready to gauge the Texas Department of Transportation's interest in joining the Harris County Toll Road Authority to finish the entire project by 2006 - years before the state's $1 billion Katy Freeway expansion would be complete.
The county's plan is still a murky concept with a myriad of factors to address. But, on Tuesday, Commissioners Court gave toll road officials the green light to start talks with the state.
[...]
The plan formulated by the Toll Road Authority, which would extend about the same distance, calls for five general use lanes in each direction, two diamond lanes, four frontage lanes on each side and four toll lanes in the middle, two going each direction.
Toll Road Authority Executive Director Bernard Koudelka said the plan for now doesn't include any barrier-separated HOV lanes.
"This is just a preliminary proposal," he said. "With this, we're just trying to open the doors to discussions. We'd be open to any suggestions. We haven't finalized anything."
There has been no financing plan worked out, no hard examination of what would be involved in acquiring land and no discussion of the roles each agency would take, Koudelka said.
In addition, officials will need to get federal approval to put toll roads on the Katy Freeway.
County officials have had positive preliminary meetings with the Transportation Department, Koudelka said. But, he added, a timetable for putting together a deal is unclear.
"We think we can work out agreements and do our studies and everybody can come to some understanding to finalize an agreement, probably by the end of the year," he said.
Eckels said the cost of the project would probably still be around $1 billion.
If Robert Eckels is tossing that $1 billion figure around - and note he said "project", and not "construction", which to me signals a total-cost amount - then I think it's safe to say that it was the accepted estimate for the project. At the very least, in none of the relevant stories, did I see any attempt by TxDOT to point out that this was sure to change once construction actually began. As such, I reject the subsequent attempts by TxDOT to claim that the starting figures were $1.4 billion for construction and $2.4 billion overall. If that's what they're saying now, they should have been saying it in 2001 as well.
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2001_3330624
Paper: Houston Chronicle
Date: FRI 08/31/2001
Section: A
Page: 37 Metfront
Edition: 3 STARState gives green light to speeding Katy work
By RAD SALLEE
StaffThe Texas Transportation Commission in Austin approved an accelerated funding plan Thursday for the Katy Freeway's long-awaited expansion.
Texas Highway Commissioner John W. "Johnny" Johnson of Houston said the action, approved 3-0, will nearly double the number of traffic lanes in a 21-mile stretch of the congested roadway, from the West Loop to Fort Bend County, by 2009.
[...]
Construction is scheduled to start in 2003 after the design is finalized. As yet undecided is whether there will be a 24-lane freeway with a four-lane toll road down the middle or a 22-lane freeway with two high-occupancy vehicle lanes.
Construction was previously expected to stretch over 10 years or longer because of the usual gaps in the traditional piecemeal funding process.
In interstate highway projects - the Katy is part of Interstate 10 - the federal government pays 80 percent of construction costs, the state 20 percent.
Under usual funding methods, the state's 20 percent match must be paid as work progresses. The plan approved Thursday, made possible by changes in federal regulations last year, will let the state delay paying its share until all the federal dollars are spent.
The commission's vote allots $492 million to the $1 billion project. The remainder was allocated earlier.
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2001_3320189
Paper: Houston Chronicle
Date: THU 07/12/2001
Section: ThisWeek
Page: 2
Edition: 2 STARKaty Freeway to get new look as part of expansion
By MIKE WARREN, Houston Chronicle correspondent
First there were designer jeans, followed by designer sunglasses and hats. Now Houston will have its first designer freeway.The Texas Department of Transportation has designated the Katy Freeway a Green Ribbon freeway, meaning that special landscaping, patterns in retaining walls, colors and other aesthetic enhancements will be incorporated into the Interstate 10 expansion project set to begin in 2003.
All freeways in Houston are considered Green Ribbon corridors, but the Katy Freeway will be the first one with the aesthetic enhancements incorporated into a major construction project, said Dana Cote, the transportation department's district landscape architect.
[...]
The overall cost of the improvements is about 1 percent of the estimated $1 billion cost for the freeway expansion, Cote said.
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2001_3314629
Paper: Houston Chronicle
Date: SUN 06/24/2001
Section: A
Page: 29 Metfront
Edition: 4 STARMore toll roads expected in city / Westpark Tollway's construction may mark pay roads' resurgence
By RAD SALLEE
StaffWhen elected officials and others who pushed for the Westpark Tollway celebrated the start of work Thursday by pushing ceremonial shovels into a sandbox, the event was significant for more than the traffic-weary residents on the city's western reaches.
[...]
Roger Hord, executive director of the West Houston Association, told the crowd that using tolls to finance road construction will "propagate throughout the area" as traditional funding becomes harder to obtain.
A major selling point for the proposed Katy Freeway toll road is that toll revenues could speed completion of the overall widening by seven years and save $65 million on the $1.2 billion job.
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2001_3304345
Paper: Houston Chronicle
Date: MON 05/14/2001
Section: A
Page: 17 Metfront
Edition: 3 STARThe man behind diamond lanes
By JOHN WILLIAMS
StaffEDD HENDEE is having the time of his life.
His Taste of Texas restaurant makes big money. He hosts a radio talk show on KSEV (700 AM).
And for west Houstonians, he has become the diamond man. Diamond-lane man, that is.
He almost single-handedly pushed local transportation officials to adopt the diamond lanes for the proposed expansion of the Katy Freeway rather than the more restrictive HOV approach originally proposed.
When the $1 billion project is complete, the concrete barriers isolating general traffic from a reversible HOV lane will be gone. In their place will be at least two and possibly more lanes marked with diamonds, limited to vehicles with three or more passengers, but letting them exit at will.
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2001_3297580
Paper: Houston Chronicle
Date: WED 04/18/2001
Section: ThisWeek
Page: 01
Edition: 2 STARFaster way to widen freeway? / Plan for toll lanes aired at meeting
By TERRY KLIEWER
StaffMore than 250 Katy-area residents heard freshman U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-west Houston, and Harris County Judge Robert Eckels vow to almost double the capacity of congested Katy Freeway as soon as possible.
Culberson promised to "bird-dog" the planned $1.2 billion expansion project through federal funding channels, while Eckels pitched a novel tollway option that could cut project cost and completion time.
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2001_3294651
Paper: Houston Chronicle
Date: FRI 04/06/2001
Section: A
Page: 1
Edition: 3 STARLANES, LANES & AUTOMOBILES / Welcome to the wide, wide west? Maybe, it's a plan that has been in the talking stage for many years, and there are many literal and figurative bridges to cross. But Harris County officials are now ready to test the waters on widening the overburdened Katy Freeway to 24 lanes.
By STEVE BREWER, RAD SALLEE, BILL DAWSON
StaffFaced with the prospect of waiting years for the state to ease traffic congestion on the west side, Harris County officials are pushing a plan to turn the Katy Freeway into a mega 24-lane roadway with a toll road down the middle.
The plan has been discussed for years, County Judge Robert Eckels said Thursday. But the county is now ready to gauge the Texas Department of Transportation's interest in joining the Harris County Toll Road Authority to finish the entire project by 2006 - years before the state's $1 billion Katy Freeway expansion would be complete.
The county's plan is still a murky concept with a myriad of factors to address. But, on Tuesday, Commissioners Court gave toll road officials the green light to start talks with the state.
[...]
The plan formulated by the Toll Road Authority, which would extend about the same distance, calls for five general use lanes in each direction, two diamond lanes, four frontage lanes on each side and four toll lanes in the middle, two going each direction.
Toll Road Authority Executive Director Bernard Koudelka said the plan for now doesn't include any barrier-separated HOV lanes.
"This is just a preliminary proposal," he said. "With this, we're just trying to open the doors to discussions. We'd be open to any suggestions. We haven't finalized anything."
There has been no financing plan worked out, no hard examination of what would be involved in acquiring land and no discussion of the roles each agency would take, Koudelka said.
In addition, officials will need to get federal approval to put toll roads on the Katy Freeway.
County officials have had positive preliminary meetings with the Transportation Department, Koudelka said. But, he added, a timetable for putting together a deal is unclear.
"We think we can work out agreements and do our studies and everybody can come to some understanding to finalize an agreement, probably by the end of the year," he said.
Eckels said the cost of the project would probably still be around $1 billion.
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2001_3296768
Paper: Houston Chronicle
Date: SAT 04/14/2001
Section: A
Page: 1
Edition: 3 STARWide approval greets I-10 plan
By RAD SALLEE, TERRY KLIEWER
StaffTo the surprise of few, a plan to almost double the congested Katy Freeway and to speed funding for the project with a toll road down the middle scored a hit at two town hall meetings this week.
[...]
Both the state and the toll road plans for widening the freeway call for increasing its "footprint" from 275 feet to 475 feet in a 38-mile stretch from the West Loop to the Brazos River.
But the toll road plan offers an additional two traffic lanes, a completion date up to seven years sooner than the Transportation Department plan, and would shave an estimated $65 million off the $1 billion project.
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2001_3288871
Paper: Houston Chronicle
Date: WED 03/14/2001
Section: ThisWeek
Page: 8
Edition: 2 STARGroup seeks rapid I-10 expansion / New clean-air plan may threaten reconstruction of Katy Freeway
By KIM CANON
StaffA west Houston delegation has appealed to the state transportation commission to speed up the Interstate 10 reconstruction project, calling it "the most congested, dangerous freeway in Texas."
The group, led by West Houston Association President and Chief Executive Officer Roger Hord, presented two requests to the commission in Austin last month.
First, the association asked that the entire I-10 project - 21 miles from Loop 610 to Fort Bend County - be considered priority-one status. Under such status the state would adopt an aggressive schedule that would have the project completed by 2010.
"By not adopting the project's aggressive schedule, we would be proposing the project to a construction schedule that would needlessly cause costs to rise $65 million over a four-year period," Hord said.
Hord said the delay would also expose I-10 travelers to $85 million in travel delay costs.
Right now, only two sections of the I-10 project have been given priority-one status by the commission: the Texas 6 to Mason Road segment and the Loop 610/I-10 interchange segment.
The delegation also requested that the commission come up with about half of the $1.2 billion required to fund the project.
The Chron took Tuesday off from endorsements, but the Dallas Morning News had a twofer from the Democratic primaries for State Supreme Court. In Place 7, they recommended Sam Houston:
[W]e're comfortable recommending Houston attorney Sam Houston, whose law partnership and background in business-related legal affairs equips him for the types of cases that dominate the Supreme Court's docket.Meanwhile, his opponent, Dallas attorney Baltasar D. Cruz, displays a shocking penchant for verbosity. If he were to win a judicial seat, we worry that his difficulty keeping statements brief and focused would threaten to overwhelm a court already facing a significant backlog.
Where Mr. Cruz expounds at convoluted length to seemingly simple questions, Mr. Houston responds with clarity, thoughtfulness and brevity.
Mr. Houston also has an impressive list of high-profile endorsements, and his campaign war chest - $111,650 vs. Mr. Cruz's $2,500 - shows he is prepared for a statewide race.
Here's the Q&A I did with Sam Houston, and with Baltasar Cruz. I can't say I disagree with the DMN's assessment here. I thought both Cruz and Houston came across well when I heard them speak to the Harris County Democratic Lawyers Association last month, but I also think Houston is clearly the better candidate, and I'll be casting my vote for him.
And in Place 8, they go for Linda Yanez.
As impressed as we are with both candidates, the well-considered and cautious responses we received from Justice Linda R. Yanez convinced us that she's the better-suited candidate for this job. The Supreme Court is no place for showboaters, and our concern with Galveston District Court Judge Susan Criss, 46, is that she might be too outspoken for a position that requires justices to measure their words.Justice Yanez, 59, of Edinburg, was first appointed to the 13th Court of Appeals by then-Gov. Ann Richards and has since won election three times to the post, making her the court's senior justice. She holds a noteworthy list of honors and awards as a trail-blazing Hispanic lawyer and judge, including serving on President Bill Clinton's transition team.
Judge Criss has an impressive record in Galveston, particularly handling the ongoing court cases related to the 2005 BP refinery explosion in Texas City. She speaks frankly about her involvement in the case and her disagreement with the Supreme Court's decision to overturn one of her earlier BP rulings.
That's problematic, since her comments concern a still-pending case. She boasts about being known as the "blogging judge," even though it seems to be of dubious advisability for any judge to maintain an active blog on judicial and legal matters.
Just as troubling is a failure to closely monitor the blog. We checked it out, only to find the blog empty. Asked about it, Judge Criss said she was not aware there was a problem; she found out later that her Web manager had dismantled it without telling her.
Overall, we felt that Justice Yanez has a tighter grasp of the law and projects the more disciplined judicial demeanor, qualities that are mandatory for someone seeking a seat on the state Supreme Court.
My Q&A with Judge Criss is here; I have one from Judge Yanez in the queue and will publish it next week. I've known Judge Criss for several years, and plan to vote for her in the primary. I agree with the DMN that both candidates are well qualified, and I'm very glad that the Democrats will have all three Supreme Court ballot slots filled, rather than have one of these two talented candidates be forced to the sidelines while a race goes uncontested.
Now for the big question: Will the DMN support any of these candidates (plus Dallas judge Jim Jordan, running unopposed for the Chief Justice seat) for election in November? They went with Bill Moody in 2006, as so many other papers did, but that was an easy choice, given Moody's extensive experience, and Don Willet's lack of same. I'm hopeful for this time around, but we'll see. What do you think?
Swamplot and the Houston Architecture Info Forum both point to this subscription-only HBJ article that says there may be another highrise in our future, this one on Shepherd near Alabama, where the eclectic jewelry store Fly High Little Bunny now stands. I'm not sure what I think of this. There's no other highrise particularly close to this location - Shepherd Place, just north of Fairview, and the Frost Bank building on Norfolk and Greenbriar, each of which are about ten stories tall, are the nearest such neighbors. On the other hand, once Weingarten has completed its evil plans for the Alabama Bookstop, who knows what might be right across the street from this thing.
To put the best face on this, if we're talking something not too towering - say, about what Shepherd Place and Frost Bank are like - and if it's mixed-use with ground level retail as suggested in the HAIF thread, so that the area maintains its generally pedestrian-friendly feel, then given its reasonable proximity to Richmond and the Universities line, I can see this making some sense. It's not completely out of place in the way that the Ashby highrise is, in any event.
On the other hand, between this and the Gables expansion just down the block, that's going to be a lot of dense development in an area that's already pretty heavily trafficked - I've seen the line of cars waiting for the northbound light on Shepherd at Alabama reach almost all the way back to Richmond during afternoon drive time. There's far from any guarantee that what will be built will fit in to the space. And to the extent that anything could affect Weingarten's evil plans for the Alabama Bookstop, this kind of development so close by certainly won't discourage them in any way. So while I have hope that this won't be bad, I can't say I have a whole lot of faith. I hope I'll be pleasantly surprised.
Missed this yesterday...As with the Constables, there's a lot of primary action in the Justice of the Peace races. The Chron gives its endorsements in those races, and as with the Constables they go with incumbents across the board; the one exception is Precinct 8, Place 1, where the incumbent Republican is not running.
The most interesting of these races is the one I'll be voting in, for Precinct 1, Place 1, where Harold Landreneau is challenging his former boss, JP Dale Gorczynski, whom Landreneau says told him he'd be retiring and would support him as his replacement, then changed his mind. Gorczynski disputes this, saying he did not tell Landreneau that he was not going to run again. I'll be publishing a Q&A with Landreneau in a few days, and I hope to get one from Judge Gorczynski soon as well. I haven't made up my mind in this race yet. I'm open to persuasion here if anyone wants to make a case for or against either one of these fellows. Please keep it clean - I won't approve any hit pieces in the comments. Thanks very much.
Previously, I had observed that Republican candidate for Harris County Judge Charles Bacarisse had as a plank in his platform the following:
As county judge, I pledge to use every tool at my disposal to demand that METRO either (1) adhere to the clear terms of the 2003 Referendum, or (2) take a revised plan to the voters for their consent.
I wanted to know what exactly he meant by that, so I sent a query to his campaign. Today I received a response, which I'm printing in its entirity. Here it is:
Charles:Thanks for your interest in my position and the opportunity to comment.
When I say I want METRO to honor the November 2003 ballot, let me first direct your attention to Page 8, Section 14 of the attached Resolution No. 2003-77 where it states " ... the following agreements will be binding on METRO and will constitute contracts with the voters in accordance with the terms and may not be repealed, altered or rescinded by any succeeding Board without voter approval at a subsequent election."
Now, in light of this clear language, let me then ask you to consider the fact that METRO has changed each of the routes that appear on the 2003 ballot including the North Hardy route, Southeast route, Harrisburg route and the Westpark route. The "Westpark" route, of course, has received the most attention because the word "Richmond" is never mentioned on the ballot -- and now they want to build a significant chunk of the Westpark route going down Richmond. Most reasonable people can and should agree that this is a big enough change or new development to warrant voter approval.
Like many others, I am also deeply concerned that METRO seems intent on building a line that runs down Richmond despite a recently uncovered City of Houston report which warns of serious structural risks to a 66-inch water pipe under the street that services over 2,000,000 Houstonians.
My other concerns include:
- In Exhibit A of this 2003 resolution, METRO promises 44 new bus routes and a total of 50 percent more bus service. Since 2003, however, METRO has violated this agreement by canceling approximately 30 percent of their bus service.
- METRO owes City of Houston and Harris County hundreds of millions of dollars in General Mobility Funds. METRO promised to pay contributing Cities and Counties 25 percent of the 1-cent sales tax they collect for street improvements. METRO continues to dance around this financial liability stating that it must pay only when the job is "completed."
- METRO is required to get federal approval BEFORE they begin construction on all but one of the Light Rail routes. In November of 2007, however, the Federal Transit Administration denied METRO the opportunity for funding on two of their routes.
- The 2003 resolution states very clearly that METRO can only borrow $640 million in bonds; yet, construction costs have skyrocketed in the past five years -- and like many, I am doubtful that METRO can pay for this construction on 2003 estimates. As if to emphasize my point, DART (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) has had to cancel a line form Irving to Dallas because DART has just surmised that the 2005 construction estimate of roughly $900 million has doubled to $1.8 billion. Obviously, METRO's construction costs have endured similar increases, but we have yet to have an honest public review of METRO's current constructions costs.
- I am suspicious as to why METRO is starting to develop strip centers, hotels and condos. They should stick to the transportation business, and leave the real estate ventures to others.
- Many believe METRO has been reporting false data concerning their ridership. I am troubled that METRO continues to refuse to divulge their fare box, which would be a truer measure of their performance.
To sum it up, Charles, if METRO's agreement with the voters was subject to the same rules as a private contract, it would have been declared null and void some time ago. How can any local leader stand idly by while one provision after another of this "contract with the voters" is ignored or, in some case, outright violated? METRO may have sound reasons for why they have drastically altered the plan from the way it was presented to voters in 2003; but in my view, they must honor their clearly worded agreement and go back and seek voter approval.
Long story short: since METRO went back to the drawing board, they must go back to the voters.
Good luck with the blog!
Sincerely,
Charles Bacarisse
So there you have it, and my thanks to Mr. Bacarisse for his response. I'll leave it to you to comment on for now. I'll have something to say about it later.
In December, I mentioned that Infernal Bridegroom Productions, which had unfortunately shut its doors due to financial woes, had been reborn as The Catastrophic Theater. I'm pleased to announce that they are gearing up for the launch of their first season in Houston, and they'll be kicking it off the good old-fashioned way with a launch party that sounds like it'll be a lot of fun. From their press release:
After several months of busy planning, The Catastrophic Theatre - Houston's newest and most exciting theatre company - will launch in late March with a celebration of the most ambitious programming ever from local artists Jason Nodler and Tamarie Cooper, whom the Houston Chronicle recently described as "two of Houston's most intrepid pioneers of venturesome theater."BRACE YOURSELF...
It's Going to Be a Wonderful Catastrophe!
On Friday, March 28th at 8 pm, The Catastrophic Theatre will celebrate its new beginning in the surreal warehouse space of Houston restaurant owner and personality Dawn Fudge. Packed to the ceiling with wedding gowns, golf carts, Mexican folk art, pick-up trucks, mattresses, a watermelon stand and the entire contents of a Chinese restaurant, Dawn's warehouse was the subject of a multi-page spread in a recent issue of Paper City magazine, but the Catastrophic launch party will be the first time the eclectic space has ever been open to the public.
Survival kits will be handed out at the door. Protective gear will be encouraged. And great food, plentiful beer, wine and spirits, and wild performances will aid in the festivities. The launch party is being thrown by Catastrophic co-chief and party girl Tamarie Cooper - with the aid of co-chairs Paul Brockman, Marty Hricik, and Jennifer Elkins and Jack Waymire. And, as anyone who's ever attended one of Tamarie's parties in the past can attest, it will be one of the most fun, talked about events of the season. For more information contact Tamarie at (713) 880-5216 or [email protected].
I've got the rest of the release, which describes their initial productions, beneath the fold. I also have it and its companion release about their Austin production, called "Speeding Motorcycle", as Word docs. I will note that Tiffany and I have signed on to the Host Committee for this launch party, so we'll be there for the spectacle. If you want to know more, contact Tamarie Cooper as described above, or me. Thanks very much.
THE CATASTROPHIC THEATRE IS HERE!TCT Announces Launch Party, Inaugural Production, Speeding Motorcycle in Austin
After several months of busy planning, The Catastrophic Theatre - Houston's newest and most exciting theatre company - will launch in late March with a celebration of the most ambitious programming ever from local artists Jason Nodler and Tamarie Cooper, whom the Houston Chronicle recently described as "two of Houston's most intrepid pioneers of venturesome theater."
BRACE YOURSELF...
It's Going to Be a Wonderful Catastrophe!
On Friday, March 28th at 8 pm, The Catastrophic Theatre will celebrate its new beginning in the surreal warehouse space of Houston restaurant owner and personality Dawn Fudge. Packed to the ceiling with wedding gowns, golf carts, Mexican folk art, pick-up trucks, mattresses, a watermelon stand and the entire contents of a Chinese restaurant, Dawn's warehouse was the subject of a multi-page spread in a recent issue of Paper City magazine, but the Catastrophic launch party will be the first time the eclectic space has ever been open to the public.
Survival kits will be handed out at the door. Protective gear will be encouraged. And great food, plentiful beer, wine and spirits, and wild performances will aid in the festivities. The launch party is being thrown by Catastrophic co-chief and party girlTamarie Cooper - with the aid of co-chairs Paul Brockman, Marty Hricik, and Jennifer Elkins and Jack Waymire. And, as anyone who's ever attended one of Tamarie's parties in the past can attest, it will be one of the most fun, talked about events of the season. For more information contact Tamarie at (713) 880-5216 or [email protected].
BIG DEATH AND LITTLE DEATH"Should I Go to College Out of State or Destroy the Universe?"
When Catastrophic honcho Jason Nodler directed Mickey Birnbaum's Big Death and Little Death in Providence, RI, it was described by The Providence Phoenix as "a high point of [the] theatregoing year." Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright Paula Vogel led one of many wildly enthusiastic standing ovations. And Birnbaum described the production of his wickedly dark coming of age story, which received its premiere at Woolly Mammoth in Washington, D.C., as "definitive." The play has since enjoyed extremely successful renditions in San Francisco and Los Angeles. Catastrophic's production, produced in collaboration with The University of Houston's School of Theatre and Dance, will be the Southwest premiere.
Big Death and Little Death is the story of Gary, Kristi and Harley - disaffected and traumatized teens with a taste in all things to do with death. Expect unhealthy doses of car crashes, pit bulls, sex, drugs, death metal and the end of the world as we know it.According to director Jason Nodler, "Big Death and Little Death is one of the funniest, most irreverent, surprising and surprisingly moving scripts I've ever encountered. It has the flavor of a big budget, major motion picture but it's as theatrical as any play I know. And, while it occupies very dark territory, it is also extraordinarily uplifting; it will break your heart in two before returning it to you better than new and sending you home with a renewed sense of hope."
16 year old Gary smokes weed, sniffs meth, breeds pit bulls and weighs the pros and cons of destroying the universe (he knows how). His sister, 14 year old Kristi, hasn't eaten in weeks. Her most prized possession is the photo album of car accident victims she got from her dad. Dad's just back from the Gulf War and something's not right with him. His day job is photographing car accidents, though it's unclear whether he does so for money or some other reason. Mom's a foul mouthed wreck; she can't stop talking, in detail, about the affairs she had when Dad was away. And Gary's 'girlfriend' Miss Endor is "the worst guidance counselor ever."
Big Death and Little Death is directed by Catastrophic artistic director Jason Nodler and designed by John Gow (set and lights), Jodi Bobrovsky (props) and Chris Bakos (sound). The cast is a mix of U of H undergraduate and graduate students (John DeLoach and Elissa Levitt), Catastrophic company members (Tamarie Cooper, Walt Zipprian, Noel Bowers and Jeff Miller) and U of H professor Mikelle Johnson, who will make her Houston debut in Big Death before starring in Mr. Marmalade at Stages Repertory Theatre later this season.
Big Death and Little Death opens Friday, April 4 at 8pm, at The University of Houston's Jose Quintero Theatre and runs April 5, 10, 11, 12, 17, 18, 19 and 20. For ticket information, call the U of H box office at 713-743-2929.
COMING SOON TO THEATRES NEAR YOUTroy Schulze's Splasher at DiverseWorks! The Tamarie Cooper Show at Stages!
What happens when anarchists and artists become embroiled in a turf war over who owns the streets? And how does society determine the winners and the losers?When mysterious paint splatterings begin appearing around the city, targeting the work of prominent street artists, an ironic cat-and-mouse game threatens to expose the toxic truth at the heart of today's graffiti culture. And a vigilante finds redemption and justice, but not the way he expected.
Based on true, recent events, The Splasher is a funny, intriguing and visually dynamic exploration of art, crime and punishment, by Troy Schulze, the award-winning writer/adapter/director of Me-sci-ah, Jerry's World and Actual Air.
The Splasher opens Thursday, May 29 at 8pm, at DiverseWorks Artspace and runs May 30 and 31 and June 5, 6, 7, 12, 13 and 14. For ticket information, call The Catastrophic Theatre at 713-880-5216.
What can we say about Tamarie Cooper that hasn't been said? How's this for starters? She's back at Stages Repertory Theatre with a brand show entitled (what else?) The Tamarie Cooper Show. More info to follow, but Tamarie's shows always sell out fast so be sure to book tickets early and often. This show is sure to be the hit of the summer.
The Tamarie Cooper Show opens Thursday, June 19 at 8pm, at Stages Repertory Theatre and runs June 20, 21, 26, 27, 28; and July 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 17, 18 and 19. For ticket information, call Stages Repertory Theatre at 713-52STAGE.
SPEEDING MOTORCYCLE
Won't You Change Me....
Speeding Motorcycle makes it's Austin premiere at Zachary Scott Theatre Center NEXT WEEK!!!
Created and directed by Catastrophic artistic director with songs and concepts by Daniel Johnston, the Austin version stars Catastrophic company members Cary Winscott, Kyle Sturdivant and Joe Folladori in the role they originated in Houston. Zach's also brought our old friend and yours, Anthony Barilla, all the way from Kosovo to direct the music.
Roger Clemens' situation in a nutshell: Damned if he talks, and damned if he doesn't.
Roger Clemens might be known for answering the call when it's his turn to pitch, but several legal experts believe he should invoke the Fifth Amendment and refuse to testify about steroid abuse before Congress today and next week. Otherwise, he risks the chance lawmakers could refer him to the Justice Department for criminal investigation."As a lawyer, I'd recommend he take the Fifth and be overcautious," said high-profile criminal defense attorney Alan Dershowitz, who also is a Harvard Law School professor. "When Clemens was pitching, he never took the cautious way. He's being consistent with his personality. Of course, his world isn't a legal world; it's the world of halls of fame and reputation."
Clemens, who was linked to steroid use in baseball's Mitchell Report but has maintained he never took performance-enhancing drugs, is scheduled to be privately deposed today by staffers for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. He and other witnesses, including Brian McNamee, a former trainer for Clemens who said he injected the pitcher with steroids, are scheduled to testify in public to the full committee Feb. 13.
Dershowitz said Monday that even people who testify truthfully can be prosecuted if the government believes they are lying. If Clemens invokes his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, he could avoid a congressional referral for possible perjury or false-statement criminal charges, Dershowitz said.
Clemens' lawyer, Rusty Hardin, agreed that his client logically should invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege to protect himself.
"Dershowitz is right, and just about every attorney in the world will tell you he should take the Fifth because of the risks," Hardin said.
But that's not what Clemens will do, Hardin said Monday.
"Roger is saying (that) what the public thinks of him and his career are important," Hardin said. "And if he takes the Fifth, he lets the Mitchell committee do to him by omission what they've essentially done by commission."
That this is the path he's chosen to take isn't surprising. It's who he is. And let's be honest, being perceived as evasive didn't do Mark McGwire any favors. Of course, denying everything didn't help Rafael Palmeiro much, either - it does help to tell the truth, at least as far as the truth is what people want to hear. I wish him the best of luck, and hope he's not setting himself up for a fate worse than public suspicion.
Note: This entry is part of a series of written Q&As with judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates.
1: Who are you and what are you running for?
My name is Kyle Carter. I am a Democrat running for the 125th Civil District Court in Harris County Texas. My experience begins with having been a lifelong resident of Houston. I was born here in 1976 and have made this town my home for me and my family. I am the son of an attorney, who has mentored me and helped pass on the knowledge that an experienced lawyer can provide. My mother is a Methodist Minister, the Reverend Doctor Suzan Carter.
Growing up in Sharpstown, I attended Pat Neff Elementary and Sharpstown Middle School, before going to high school at Strake Jesuit College Preparatory, where I graduated in 1994. Next, I attended the University of Texas at Austin, graduating with a B.A. degree in Government in 1998. Finally, I attended South Texas College of Law, graduating in December, 2000. I passed the February, 2001 bar exam, and began practicing law in May, 2001.
Immediately, I was given the task of being lead lawyer on a number of cases. Over the years, I have worked countless cases over the past six years, arguing countless motions. I have tried several jury cases, bench trials and administrative cases, all to verdict. I have represented a group of Lincoln Mercury Automobile dealers in a case before the Department of Transportation also involving Ford Motor Company. I have been general counsel to the State Committee on General Investigating and Ethics, as well as, General Counsel to the State Committee on Urban Affairs.
I have also worked to with health care providers to insure the highest level of service, credentialing, reporting, and compliance. Most recently, I along with my law firm have been successfully taking on the Workers Compensation insurance companies before the State Office of Administrative Hearings, and the Travis County District Courts, regarding reimbursements that ultimately affect the ability of working people to have access to quality healthcare in Texas.
2: What kind of cases does this court hear?
This Court hears civil cases. This Court does not hear criminal, family, or probate matters.
3: Why are you running for this particular bench?
I am running for the 125th Judicial District Court bench because I believe that the current Judge has lost its way. Having been instilled with the value of being a "man for others" and I believe that my duty is to serve the people of this community, not just the big business interests.
The current judge is a remnant of the George Bush governorship, as he was appointed by the then Governor in 1999. Further, this Judge has particularly low marks from the Houston Bar Association judicial poll, as completed by attorneys practicing in the Houston area.
My candidacy is going to change this. Harris County deserves better. I will be a Judge who is honest, has integrity, and is reasonable and fair. Harris County needs a Judge like me.
4. What are your qualifications for this job?
Please see the response to Question 1 above.
Additionally, I am a member of the Houston Bar Association, the Houston Young Lawyers Association, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, the Texas trial Lawyers Association, and Who's Who's International Historical Society.
I believe in service to my community as I am a Freemason and a member of the Shrine of North America. I believe in philanthropy and have participated in the HBA Habitat for Humanity project, as well as, Operation Compassion, where I served food to people that were impacted by the Katrina disaster. Additionally, I am the only Democrat running in this race that has voted in a Democratic Primary.
Finally, I am married and have two children that deserve the best, as all children do, and I am committed to making Houston, my hometown, the best place on earth to live and raise a family.
5. Why is this race important?
This race is important because we need a Judge that is of the people, by the people, and for the people. Harris County has been mired in ethical complaints and other issue that has cost elected officials their credibility. I am running to restore this credibility. My experience with the Legislature and particularly the Committee on General Investigating and Ethics has shown me that very bad things can happen when people do not get involved. We need to all get involved with this election and insure that we have the right people elected for the job.
6. Why should people vote for you in the Democratic primary?
People should vote for me in the Harris County Democratic Primary because I am the only Democrat running. I am a loyal Democrat, and have been my entire life. I have been endorsed by Congressman Gene Green, and former State Democratic Party Chair, Charles Soechting.
My primary opponent is not a primary voter, and going back as far as 1996, my opponent has not participated in any Democratic primary election. Finally, my opponent has made a career as a defense lawyer for Wal-mart.
While we all choose our paths in life, I believe that I better represent the Democratic constituency than my opponent. I have chosen a path, as an attorney, to fight insurance companies so that we can ultimately all have a better health care system in Texas. My goal is to become a Judge that is representative of not only Democrats, but of all working people and citizens of Harris County. This race is crucial to ending the rule of the Republican party, where might beats right, and I am the man for the job.
Finally, I have lived in Houston my entire life. I was there on Richmond when the Rockets won it all, both times. I was there Enron collapsed and lots of innocent people lost their jobs and retirements. And finally, I was there to help provide assistance to those who lost their homes in Hurricane Katrina. I have been a proud Houstonian through it all, good times and bad. I have chosen to raise my family here and am dedicated to making Houston, and Harris County the best place to live, period. That is why I deserve your vote.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
David Mincberg, candidate for Harris County Judge.
Here's the updated version of last night's story in which Assistant DA/DA candidate Kelly Siegler calls on Chuck Rosenthal to resign.
Another candidate, former judge Pat Lykos, hours later joined the call for Rosenthal to resign and criticized Siegler's remarks."It is interesting that Kelly Siegler has been part of the district attorney's office working side by side with Chuck Rosenthal for years, and now when Mr. Rosenthal is a political liability, she tries to separate herself from him and demand his resignation," Lykos said. "It is political theatrics and skilled tactics."
To answer your question again, Kelly: Yes, people think you're the same as Chuck. You're going to have to deal with that if you want to get elected. Maybe that's not fair, but it is how it is.
Monday was the first time that Siegler, who volunteered in Rosenthal's 2000 and 2004 campaigns and rose to chief of his special crimes bureau, took the stance that Rosenthal should quit now. His four-year term runs through this year."I can change what needs to be changed in that office and ... can start tomorrow because I know everybody there," Siegler, an assistant district attorney for 21 years, told the Memorial West Republican Women.
Yes, nothing says "agent of change" to me like someone who's comfortably familiar with everyone and everything. This is one of those times where experience is not necessarily a plus.
Defense lawyer and former prosecutor Jim Leitner, another candidate for district attorney, already has said Rosenthal should step down. Candidate and police Capt. Doug Perry said Rosenthal should follow his conscience.The Republican primary winner will face Democrat C.O. Bradford, a former Houston police chief, in the November general election. Bradford, who was prosecuted by Rosenthal's staff on perjury charges that a judge later dismissed, declined to comment Monday.
SIGH
Is one Super Tuesday watch party not enough for you? Here's another one for you then:
Come join the Houston Legislative Staff Caucus for politics, conversation and election returns on "Super Tuesday". You don't have to be a staffer to attend.The Legislative Staff Caucus is an informal group of staff members from various federal, state, county and local municipal offices.
Location: Cotton Exchange Bar and Lounge, 202 Travis, Houston, TX 77002
Date: Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Time 6:00pm - till the last return
I guarantee you there'll be some excellent insider stuff at that party. Happy return-watching!
The Chron has a fairly nuanced article about the tribulations of Rep. Borris Miles.
At first glance, the June 30 concert at Reliant Arena might have seemed just a routine hip-hop affair. But this one was different. Even though 7,500 teens and young adults turned out to hear Lil' Wayne, J Xavier, Mista Madd and a host of other hip-hop celebrities, the only way to get into this event was to be tested for HIV.Hip Hop 4 HIV was the brainchild of freshman state Rep. Borris Miles, a flamboyant insurance agent-turned-politician whose heavily black District 146 accounts for three-fourths of Harris County's HIV infections.
To Miles' supporters, the concert was characteristic of the fresh thinking the legislator had brought to his inner-city district after a surprise 2006 runoff victory over 27-year incumbent Al Edwards. But even as backers celebrate Miles' innovations, others are concerned about a series of incidents involving the lawmaker that ranged from awkward to frightening.
[...]
Aggressiveness is a point of pride for Miles, an athletic man who strikes a stylish pose with close-cropped hair and a taste for Gucci shoes and expensive suits. But beneath the confident exterior, the 42-year-old lawmaker wrestles with the knowledge that he suffers from an illness -- sickle cell anemia -- that often claims its victims in mid-life. Miles spent more than a week in January hospitalized with pneumonia.
"Because of the short mortality rate," he said in an interview after his release, "I've tried to get things done, not tomorrow, but today."
City Councilman Ronald Green, who has known Miles for 18 years, characterized the lawmaker as "passionate about his work in the district."
His credits include stints on the local board of the Urban League and the United Negro College Fund. In 2003, he received the YMCA's Super Achievers Award. Two years later, he won the Houston Citizens Chamber of Commerce's Pinnacle Award, in part for moving his business to the Third Ward and redeveloping its rundown location.
"He's very bright, young and wealthy," said Francis Cook, an official with the Across the Track PAC, which typically supports minority candidates. "It might come off as brash, depending on circumstances. He's extremely confident. He's a 'free Negro' and can't be bought. He's a little hard to deal with, hard to intimidate unless you can convince him to your way of thinking."
[...]
During his first term, Miles said, he authored, joint authored or amended 25 pieces of legislation, among them bills creating an ombudsman for the Texas Youth Commission and ensuring college admission to the children of firefighters or law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty.
Edwards, who will face Miles again in next month's primary, countered that his experience and legislative connections trump the freshman's first-year triumphs, which he minimized. "I don't know what he has done that wasn't already being done," Edwards said.
Miles' whole career has been characterized by energy, State Rep. Garnet Coleman said.
"He has a certain energy that bursts out at times," Coleman said. "You can deal with it through anger management, through lessening the amount of alcohol you take."
Sometimes the trait that makes a person good at what they do is also a negative for them. There's a fine line between aggressiveness and recklessness. People who are lauded for their aggressiveness when they're getting stuff done get criticized for their recklessness when they inevitably do something dumb. We see this all the time, in many places. You can accept the bad that comes with the good as all part of the same package, or you can decide the bad is too much and reject the good as well.
I'm not going to excuse Rep. Miles' bad behavior, the latest example of which is still for now just an allegation. (One wonders if the DA's office will be more decisive in its investigation of the complaint filed against him than it has been so far regarding David Medina.) He can face whatever consequences there may be for it when and if it comes to that. I support Miles' candidacy in the March primary because I think he's been a good State Rep, and because Al Edwards would be a disastrous step backwards. If it turns out that the allegations against Miles have merit, then after he's secured the nomination for HD146, we can revisit the matter, and put pressure on him if needed to step aside so that someone else who can ably represent that district may replace him. The best option is still for Rep. Miles to see his name cleared and get back to Austin to continue his good work. The unacceptable option is for Al Edwards to get a second chance to enable Tom Craddick's iron hand. That's pretty much all there is to it.
Still recovering from the Super Bowl and whatever party you attended to watch it? Here's the weekly Texas Progressive Alliance blog roundup to help you ease back into the swing of things. Click on for the highlights.
Why would Bill Peacock write a commercial for the energy industry? Find out on Bluedaze as TXsharon shines a light into the dark corners of Texas Public Policy Foundation.
Off the Kuff takes a look at the messy finances of State Supreme Court Justice David Medina, and wonders what else is out there that we haven't heard about yet.
Phillip Martin at Burnt Orange Report says thank you to John Edwards.
McBlogger at McBlogger takes a look at the Free Market Foundation's campaign against the Parent PAC and it's leader, Carolyn Boyle. Apparently, they are unhappy that we endorsed her in 2006. And that she's been beating them and their lame candidates.
Nat-Wu of Three Wise Men tells us why free trade isn't everything it's cracked up to be, at least for the American worker.
WCNews at Eye On Williamson has more from the recent House Elections Committee hearing on voterr fraud, Abbott May Have To Explain His Partisan Voter Fraud Record.
XicanoPwr begins a Politics of Humanity series. The first one takes a look the Department of Homeland Security recent decision to eliminate the Violence Against Women Act's domestic violence program that was meant to protect undocumented immigrants from abusive spouses who use their position as citizens to intimidate their spouses who did not have legal immigrant status in the United States. The second post in the series takes a look at Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) inhumane policy of of drugging immigrants and their recent settlement case.
We recently passed the "one-year mark," meaning President Bush now has less than one year left in his job. Is he planning on coming home to roost when his tenure ends? Not everyone in DFW thinks that's the best idea.
Open Source Dem at Brains and Eggs has the inside dope on the Harris County Democratic Party's efforts to turn the county blue (and why the partners-in-charge may be shooting themselves in the feet).
Gary at Easter Lemming Liberal News sent people to his other blog for a lesson in how to put someone to sleep with government lies about economics, among other items.
Vince at Capitol Annex wonders if State Rep. Leo Berman (R-Tyler) will actually make good on his claim that he will ask AG Greg Abbott to answer to charges that his "voter fraud" prosecutions are race-based.
This is not a surprise.
Prosecutor Kelly Siegler, Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal's best-known assistant, called on him to resign today as she campaigned for election to his job.Rosenthal "has made a lot of serious mistakes. Everybody here knows that, everybody in my office knows that," Siegler said at a Republican candidate forum. "It's sad, it's tragic. It is time for Chuck to resign.
"He's also my friend. He's not a bad man. He needs to go."
Two out of three. Not too bad there.
Siegler, known nationally for her trial techniques, made the comment when asked what weaknesses she might have as a candidate. She indicated that she is grappling with the perception that she shares responsibility for his errors."But do you really think Chuck is me?" she said. "And if you could only know how many conversations I have had with him to try to get him to do things differently or to listen. The problem is Chuck quit listening to all of us a long time ago."
Well, yeah, I think people think Chuck is you. You're one of his top lieutenants. His actions do reflect on you, and to the extent that you could have done something about some of his more egregious mistakes, you should have. If he really hasn't been listening to anyone in his office for a long time, maybe someone in that office should have blown a whistle on him. That's not an easy thing to do by any stretch, but it is easy to say now that this is a longstanding problem and it's not really your responsibility. I'm not trying to be harsh, and I'm certainly not saying I'd have done better had I been in Kelly Siegler's position, but I am saying that she can't just absolve herself here. She was a part of this problem, and she needs to own that. Mark Bennett has more, while he and Tom have an interesting discussion about whether or not criminal contempt applies to Chuck Rosenthal here. Check it out.
Vince has a nice piece about TPA-endorsed State Rep. Paul Moreno, who is being opposed by a Craddick-backed challenger in El Paso. We can't take any election for granted, and we can't take a step backwards by allowing Craddick to gain a larger foothold in the Democratic caucus, without which he'd already be on the scrap heap of Speaker history. Check out what Vince wrote, and please consider giving some support to Rep. Moreno and the rest of the TPA slate.
If you're dying to vote for something and just can't wait till March, take a look at four new (and one old) potential license plate designs and pick your favorite. For the next week, Texans can vote on which design they'd like to grace their vehicles when the new plates (with a new 7th digit) roll out.
Here's a description of the plates, from the Chron:
• New Texas: This red, white and blue plate features a composite of skylines from several Texas cities at the bottom and the word "Texas" in black script. • Traditional Texas: This plate features blue highlights and a stark, white background with a gold Texas star at the bottom and a bold, red "Texas" in capital letters. • Lone Star Texas: A white star stands out in the top left-hand corner of the plate along with wide brushes of red and blue against a Texas sky. Along the bottom of the plate is a low-lying mountain range. • Natural Texas: The entire plate is covered with a picture of wildflowers. For the purposes of the vote, TxDOT named the current plate "My Texas."
Personally, I'm not a fan of Natural Texas or Lone Star Texas, which has already taken a commanding lead. I could go either way on the other three, but right now I'm leaning towards sticking with the old cowboy/space shuttle design. I like the concept of "New Texas" a lot, but the execution is so-so. The Chron says TXDoT is changing the plates to accommodate the new 7th digit because they're running out of unique patterns with only 6 digits.
The long-awaited highrise ordinance, which was put off by City Council back in November, is still on the drawing board because it apparently satisfies no one and doesn't actually impact any existing development projects, including the Ashby highrise itself. But other than that, it's just fine.
"It seems to me that the current draft is going to make no one happy," said Kendall Miller, a shopping center owner who serves on a committee advising the city about the ordinance.Jane Cahill, a neighborhood activist who also serves on the panel, said the costs of enforcing the latest draft would far outweigh any benefits.
Cahill said she was dismayed to hear Andy Icken, a deputy city public works director, say recently that the ordinance represents a "rifle" rather than a "shotgun" approach to development issues.
"A rifle aims a single bullet at a single target," Cahill said. "Aiming an ordinance at a single project is not a good way to develop public policy."
Miller is with Houstonians for Responsible Growth, the developers' astroturf group. And I agree with Cahill.
The goal of the measure is to limit traffic congestion caused by dense developments on streets with limited capacity in single-family residential neighborhoods. Finding ways to capture only projects that fit this narrow definition has required hours of discussions of fine points such as the meaning of the word "abutting" and whether individual buildings or total square footage should be used to define a residential neighborhood.Developers of projects that met the criteria would have to conduct a detailed traffic impact analysis. If it showed congestion would increase beyond specified levels, the developers would have to reduce the project's size or take other steps, such as adding traffic lanes or signals, to reduce the impact.
May I just suggest that we all go back and read Christof's post on why issues of scale should not be dealt with by traffic ordinances? Thank you.
City officials have tested the various drafts of the ordinance against 15 to 20 existing or proposed Houston development projects. Each time, the only project that meets all the criteria is the Ashby high-rise.Several people monitoring or working on the ordinance, however, said it would permit the developers to build a high-rise building on the site.
By eliminating commercial uses from the building and reducing the number of apartments from 226 to 133, it appears that the developers could comply with the latest draft of the ordinance, said Chris Amandes, the co-chair of the Stop Ashby High-Rise organization. This might translate into a 13- or 14-story building rather than the planned 23-story tower, Amandes said.
This again points out the problem with this approach. The problem is that a highrise doesn't fit in at that location. It doesn't make sense to squeeze in a thirteen- or 26-story building in an area that's all houses and low-rise apartments. Let's admit the problem, and then have a more fruitful conversation about what (if anything) should be done about it. What we're doing now is spinning our wheels.
The week before last, County Judge Ed Emmett asked the Harris County Sports and Convention Corps' board not to give an extension to Astrodome Redevelopment to negotiate a lease (which they eventually finished anyway). He was critical of their ability to secure financing for the project, and thought it was time for someone else to have a crack at doing something with the Dome. Turns out some of his colleagues on Commissioners Court don't appreciate what he did.
Commissioners El Franco Lee, Sylvia Garcia and Jerry Eversole said they are awaiting reports from county financial analysts and the county attorney's office on the proposed 1,300-room hotel.Lee said he does not want the county to walk away too quickly from a project that could create as many as 1,500 jobs, create more convention business for Reliant Center and generate tax revenue.
"If you are going to be in the convention business, you have to have a large hotel to accommodate these people," he said. "Anytime you can stimulate your local economy with job creation is a plus. Hotel taxes and retail taxes help relieve the overall tax burden."
At Emmett's urging, the Harris County Sports and Convention Corp. voted last month not to extend Astrodome Redevelopment Co.'s letter of intent by 90 days. The letter of intent granted the company exclusive rights to negotiate a deal to find a second life for the Dome.
Commissioner Garcia said the judge was not speaking for the court and had not informed other members that he would try to influence the sports corporation's decision.
"I felt totally blindsided by that," she said.
County Attorney Mike Stafford wrote Commissioners Court that it would be appropriate to grant a 90-day extension because the county's budget and financial management office wanted more time to analyze Astrodome Redevelopment's deal.
"To me, it was important to let the process work," Garcia said. "As long as we don't have to use public money, this convention hotel may be the best deal we can get."
So the point of contention is Emmett speaking on behalf of the Court without consulting them first. I'm a little curious as to what took them so long to air that particular grievance, but not surprised that they would.
Emmett said Astrodome Redevelopment has not obtained financing and that it is time to entertain other proposals.The county still can consider Astrodome Redevelopment's plan, but it has lost the exclusive right to negotiate a deal with the sports corporation, he said.
"These people were given the opportunity to come to us with a plan and financing," he said. "We do not have a proposal. I was not comfortable with the way things were drifting along."
Astrodome Redevelopment chief executive John Clanton called Emmett's remarks about the company's financing misleading.
He said county officials, including Emmett, have been shown plenty of evidence of the financing plan, including:
- A term sheet from a major lender saying that it would loan $360 million.
- A letter from the Texas Historical Commission indicating that it had approved the company's renovation plans, qualifying it for federal historic rehabilitation tax credits.
- An offer from a parking garage company saying it would pay for building a $32 million garage around two-thirds of the Dome in exchange for the rights to operate it.
The term sheet for the $360 million loan expired in the fall, but Clanton said Astrodome Redevelopment can obtain similar financing.Hanson said the company is caught in a Catch-22: It cannot obtain final financing and have $360 million in escrow until the county finalizes a lease with Astrodome Redevelopment.
If what Clanton says is true, that sure looks like they have financing to me. Which makes me wonder what Emmett has become suspicious about. Is he disputing their evidence, or does he just think that this isn't such a hot idea any more? It's not clear to me.
Note: This entry is part of a series of recorded interviews with non-judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. I am also doing written Q&As with judicial candidates.
I know you've been reading a lot about the Republican primary for County Judge, but the Democrats have a contested primary for that office as well. It's very different, in that there's one candidate who was last seen running as a Republican against Sheila Jackson Lee, and then there's David Mincberg, who brings a ton of experience and qualifications to the job, as well as a long Democratic history. There hasn't been a countywide campaign around here in my memory as remotely high profile as the one for Harris County Judge is going to be, and David Mincberg is the right person to take on that challenge. Please remember that in order to ensure he gets to do that, you have to vote for him in March first.
The interview is here. I plan to revisit candidates like Mincberg again as the November election season heats up, but for now I hope this helps you make your decision for March. As always, feedback is welcome.
PREVIOUSLY:
Jim Wrotenbery, candidate for 125th District Court (Civil).
Diane Trautman, candidate for Harris County Tax Assessor.
Judge Susan Criss, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 8.
Joe Jaworski, candidate for State Senate, District 11.
Baltasar D. Cruz, candidate for Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, District 147.
Armando Walle, candidate for State Representative, District 140.
Carol Alvarado, candidate for State Representative, District 145.
Andres Pereira, candidate for 190th District Court (Civil).
Ron Reynolds, candidate for State Representative, District 27.
Sam Houston, candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, Position 7.
State Rep. Jessica Farrar, District 148.
Fred Cook, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Adrian Garcia, candidate for Harris County Sheriff.
Steve Kirkland, candidate for 215th District Court (Civil).
Today is the deadline to register to vote in the March 4 primary. I think it goes without saying that this is the biggest and most important primary we've seen in a generation in Texas, and that's regardless of the status of the Presidential races, so I'm going to rerun this post from Saturday. If you haven't registered yet, or recently moved and need to re-register, here's an announcement from HoustonVotes.org:
Houston Votes, a collaborative partnership of organizations and individuals strengthening the voice of Houston through voter registration, will be registering voters at more than a dozen locations across Houston on Saturday Feb. 2nd and Monday Feb. 4th. List of locations and times is attached and can be found at Houstonvotes.org.Houstonians who plan to vote in Texas' historical Presidential primary on March 4th in either the Republican or Democratic Party must register by February 4th. Harris County residents can register by visiting any of the Houston Votes community registration sites.
The full list of registration sites and participating organizations is beneath the fold. Get registered and have a voice in who we'll be voting for in November. Here's more from the Chron:
- Those with active voter registrations do not have to register again. Updated registration cards were mailed to voters in early January.
- To register, fill out a voter registration card at state agency buildings, county court annexes, public libraries and marriage license offices. Or download a registration form at the Harris County Tax Office Web site -- www.tax.co.harris.tx.us -- and mail it postage-free by Monday.
- Not sure if you are registered? Use the Web site to see if your name is already on the voter rolls.
- Information required on a registration card is name, address and an identifying number such as a driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. Applications are available in English, Spanish and Vietnamese.
- In Harris County, call the Voter Registration Department at 713-368-VOTE (8683) for more information.
- Texas does not register voters by party affiliation. Voters can participate in a major party primary of their choice regardless of how or whether they voted in the past.
- In-person early voting starts Feb. 19.
There you have it. Check to make sure you're registered, and get registered by Monday if you're not. It's important. Thanks very much.
Participating Organizations:* ACLU - Texas
* Black Youth Vote!
* Equality Texas
* Houston GLBT Political Caucus
* League of Women Voters - Houston
* NARAL Pro-Choice Texas
* People for the American Way
* Planned Parenthood Houston
* Texas Freedom Network
* Texans Together
Houston Votes Voter Registration SitesSaturday and Monday
Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
11242 S. Gessner @ BelfortWal-Mart Neighbourhood Mkt #3578 (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
7960 Longpoint@ Wirt Rd.Wal-Mart Spr Ctr. (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
2700 S. Kirkwood DriveWal-Mart Spr Ctr.#3302 (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
9460 W. Sam Houston Toll
Between Beechnut & BissonnetWal-Mart Super Center (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
10750 Westview @ Beltway 8Foodarama (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
11502 Wilcrest Dr.Work Source (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
1550 FoxlakeWal-Mart Super Center.# 1279 (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
Greenspoint
10411 N Fwy, 45Alief Community Park (Sat. 10am - 6pm; Mon. 10am - 9pm)
11903 Bellaire Blvd.Hong Kong City Market (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
11205 Bellaire BlvdMonday Only
Breakfast Klub (Monday 7am-7pm)
3711 TravisHouston Community College -Alief (Monday 11 - 6pm)
13303 BissonnetUniversity of Houston
Butler Plaza, Located just outside the M.D. Anderson Memorial Library @ University Drive
Time TBD, check HoustonVotes.org for updatePrairie View A&M
MSC Building (Monday 8am - 5pm)
For those of you who like to watch election returns among friends, here's an event to attend tomorrow night, courtesy of the Michael Skelly campaign:
Join Us!Super Tuesday Watch Party
February 5th 7 - 9pm
Cafe Adobe - 2111 Westheimer at ShepherdNo matter who you are rooting for this November, join the Michael Skelly Campaign for a "Super Tuesday Watch Party" on February 5th at Cafe Adobe 2111 Westheimer at Shepherd from 7 to 9 pm.
Meet Michael, his family, and supporters from all across Houston ready to help bring "New Energy to Congress."
For questions, feel free to email us at [email protected] or call our office at 713-247-9600.
We hope to see you on Super Tuesday!
Michael Skelly
Candidate for Texas' Seventh Congressional District
SkellyForCongress.com
Look at it this way - whether your candidate wins or loses, either way you'll want to have a drink. Have fun!
We've talked about recycling and voluntary reduction as a way of dealing with the plastic bag problem. Here's another approach, taken by Ireland, which has been very successful.
There is something missing from this otherwise typical bustling cityscape. There are taxis and buses. There are hip bars and pollution. But there are no plastic shopping bags, the ubiquitous symbol of urban life.In 2002, Ireland passed a tax on plastic bags; customers who want them for their purchases must now pay 22 cents per bag at the register.
Within weeks, plastic bag use dropped 94 percent. Within a year, nearly everyone had bought reusable cloth bags, keeping them in offices and in the backs of cars. Plastic bags were not outlawed, but carrying them became socially unacceptable -- on a par with wearing a fur coat or not cleaning up after one's dog.
[...]
Efforts to tax plastic bags have failed in many places because of heated opposition from manufacturers. In Britain, Los Angeles and San Francisco, proposed taxes failed to gain political approval, though San Francisco passed a ban last year.
Today, Ireland's retailers are great promoters of taxing the bags. "I spent many months arguing against this tax with the minister; I thought customers wouldn't accept it," said Sen. Feargal Quinn, founder of Ireland's largest homegrown chain of supermarkets. "But I have become a big, big enthusiast."
Hard to argue with that kind of result. I think as the use of plastic bags becomes increasingly frowned upon, it's inevitable that the same kind of tax will be passed here somewhere, and then once that happens, it'll spread the same way anti-smoking laws have done.
GIANTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May I never hear another word about how freaking great the Patriots, Tom Brady, and Bill Belichick are.
UPDATE: Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.
Early voting for the March 4 primaries begins in 16 days, and so the Chron has kicked off its endorsements with recommendations in the Constable primaries, for which there are six contested races. They went with incumbents across the board, for which I have no particular quarrel.
I'll be very interested to see what the Chron's schedule for endorsements is. If they intend to make a recommendation in all contested primaries, they've got their work cut out for them, and their recent history isn't that encouraging for getting it done by the 19th. If they don't intend to make a recommendation in all contested primaries, well, I'll be disappointed. We'll see how it goes.
The Chron today has candidate profiles of GOP County Judge hopefuls Ed Emmett and Charles Bacarisse. They had a similar set of stories last Sunday for the GOP candidates for DA. I certainly hope this means that at the very least we'll also get such stories for the candidates in the three contested Democratic countywide non-judicial offices - if they're doing these one Sunday at a time, there's not a lot of these left before March 4. I suppose it's too much to hope for profiles in the judicial races, the State Rep races, CD10 (I seem to recall there's been one for the CD22 GOP jumble), the various constable and JP races, and of course the Senate, Railroad Commissioner, Supreme Court, and Court of Criminal Appeals races as well. Lots of decisions need to be made, and there's not nearly enough information out there.
Be that as it may, one thing caught my eye in these stories, from the piece on Bacarisse:
For Bacarisse, the future of county government should involve cutting property taxes, reforming juvenile justice, forcing Metro to alter its mass transit plans and looking for ways to lessen the financial burden of health care and other services provided to immigrants, legal and illegal.
Forcing Metro to do what now? Unfortunately, the article doesn't mention Metro again, and a search through the Chron archives for Bacarisse and Metro yielded zip. Admittedly, there's been plenty of other things for the County Judge candidates to be talking about, but still. This sounds like a major thing to me, and I'd like to know what he means. The one clue I could find is from Bacarisse's webpage, in which he outlines his platform:
As county judge, I pledge to use every tool at my disposal to demand that METRO either (1) adhere to the clear terms of the 2003 Referendum, or (2) take a revised plan to the voters for their consent.
Now, that sort of language used to be code for "No rail on Richmond!", but since Metro has made its announcement of the route for the Universities line, it would seem that this is a dead horse issue. Not that there aren't still people fighting over it, of course, which makes me wonder if it's his intent to be a roadblock to Metro until they do something about that decision. There were other items on the 2003 referendum, including things to do with bus service, so perhaps this is what he has in mind. What I'm saying is that it would be nice to have some clarity on this. I'm going to contact the Bacarisse campaign to see if I can get a statement as to what, specifically, he means by this. I'll let you know what I find out.
Back in October, I observed that there was some ground-leveling going on at the old Ed Sacks Waste Paper site on Montrose/Studemont just north of Allen Parkway/Memorial. I thought it meant construction would start real soon. I suppose that's true, if three months later is still considered "soon". Here's what's been going on since roughly mid-January:
I had assumed this was going to be an extension of the existing Memorial Heights development, but via Swamplot, it turns out it's going to be a bigass apartment tower instead.
Legacy Partners Residential Development Inc. and equity partner CalPERS have cleared the site and are preparing to break ground on their 330-unit Legacy at Memorial. The project, which will exceed $75 million of all-in costs, has 15% of the apartments dedicated for affordable housing.[...]
Legacy at Memorial will have a three-bedroom penthouse, totaling 3,568 sf, and the balance will be one- and two-bedroom units, starting at 868 sf. Projected rents are $1.26 per sf to $2.20 per sf.
For what it's worth, the guys building the place have a different name for it.
The grand opening is slated for November of 2009. That's a lot of units in an area that's already pretty dense. I foresee traffic on that stretch of Studemont/Montrose getting quite a bit worse, and now I'm really worried that there will be another stoplight put in at the shared entrance point for Legacy/Memorial Heights, and the Park at Memorial on the other side of Montrose. When is that future rail extension down Washington Avenue supposed to get built again?
Please note, just so we're all clear here, I'm not arguing for an Ashby Highrise-style traffic ordinance here. This is a perfectly fine location for a highrise, and besides I want to see a comprehensive review of how we regulate and approve construction projects, not a case-by-case review. I'm just amazed at how dense the less-than-a-mile stretch of Montrose from West Gray to Washington has become and is still becoming, and I am concerned as someone who drives that way a lot what effect it will ultimately have on traffic. This area has undergone a massive, dramatic change in the last ten years. Who knows what the next ten will bring?
If you want to get an idea for how busy the hurricane season is going to be, check the water temperature.
When the water in the hurricane breeding grounds of the Atlantic warms one degree in the dead of summer, overall hurricane activity jumps by half, according to a new study.Scientists have long known that hurricanes get their enormous energy from warm waters, so the warmer the water, the more fuel a storm has to either start up or get stronger. The study calculates how much storm frequency and strength is due to warmer sea water, said author Mark Saunders, professor of climate prediction at the University College London.
Saunders found a distinct numerical connection between the ups and downs of water temperatures and how nasty hurricane season gets. That helps explain why hurricanes have been so much worse in the past dozen years, and even why 2007 -- with waters slightly cooler than normal -- was an exception and not that bad a hurricane year, Saunders said.
"It's very surprisingly sensitive to small changes in sea surface temperature," he said.
[...]
Saunders focused on the water temperature in a band of tropical sea that stretches from around Puerto Rico and the northern coast of South America east to near the coast of Africa since 1950. He looked at hurricane activity since 1965.
The average August-September water temperature in the region is about 81 degrees. Saunders calculated that for every one degree Fahrenheit increase:
-- Overall hurricane activity -- a combination of frequency and hurricane strength -- increases 49 percent.
-- The number of intense hurricanes, with winds over 110 mph, increases 45 percent.
-- The number of hurricanes of any size increases 36 percent.
-- The number of tropical storms increase 31 percent.
For example, 2005 was the most active hurricane season on record, and Atlantic water temperatures were the warmest, about 1.4 degrees above normal. That hurricane season set a new high with 28 storms and 13 hurricanes. Seven of the hurricanes were major storms.
In 1971, when the water temperatures were the coolest, there were 13 storms and six hurricanes, including one major one.
That's as good a reason as any I can think of to root for a cold winter.
You may recall the recent story about Sheriff Tommy Thomas' abrupt change in email retention policy, which came about during the recent unpleasantness for DA Chuck Rosenthal. Thomas' email admin Willie Mata wrote a letter to the editor disputing some of the assertions made in that story.
In response to Rick Casey's column on Jan. 27, "Dems: Quit gloating over the scandals," I must take issue with his comment: "The sheriff overnight erases thousands of e-mails on all his department's computers without warning." In actuality, I moved 5 1/2 months worth of e-mail from nearly 4,000 mailboxes onto archive tape. At no time were e-mails erased from computers as Casey asserts, and all of these e-mail messages, attachments included, are recoverable. It must also be noted that no investigative information has been lost, as suggested by some deputies, and the deputies who have made such suggestions are not assigned to investigative functions.Casey was correct in his statement that the users were given no warning. Let me explain why. As our public information officer, Capt. John Martin, has stated to the media on numerous occasions, we have a critical storage problem on our servers. If I had taken the time to warn our users, they would have off-loaded their mail from the mail servers to our file servers. As both mail and file operations are served by the same storage system, there was insufficient storage to allow this. The storage system, placed into operation in March 2006, was sized to serve us for approximately two years before needing an expansion.
Following my attendance at a training seminar in August 2007, I had several meetings with our business manager regarding an expansion of our storage. In a budget forecast document for technology spending for fiscal year 2008, submitted on Oct. 31, 2007, I requested approximately $100,000 to expand and enhance our storage system. In the document, I predicted that we would run out of storage before the summer of 2008. Unfortunately, we have run out much quicker than I anticipated.
Our new e-mail retention policy went into effect on Jan. 9. To date, we have restored enough space to recover archived mail to the mail server; however, we are not out of the woods on the file system. We cannot recover mail that we anticipate will end up on the file servers until we have the added capacity. Each day that we are under the temporary restraining order placed upon us on Jan. 18, we continue to eat away at our storage because we are not allowed to delete mail, a normal process. As technical professionals, my staff and I will continue to take whatever measures necessary to keep our systems running without violating the order. Guidance from our county attorney's office on retention policies will help prevent this from happening again.
As Sheriff Tommy Thomas stated in earlier remarks to a reporter, "if our policy is found to be illegal, we will change it." Implementing a 14-day retention policy on e-mail and revising our internal procedures to change the manner in which our employees use this valuable tool was the best option we had at the time to regain needed storage.
These facts and the timing of the memo have been publicly discussed at length. The removal of mail from our mailboxes did not start until Jan. 12, after completely satisfying an open records request from KTRK (Channel 13), and certainly not without the knowledge and confidence that those messages were backed up. The command staff made a decision, and it was up to me to make it so. As much as Casey and his colleagues would like to believe otherwise, our storage issue existed long before and is unrelated to the problems at the Harris County district attorney's office.
WILLIE MATA
network administrator, Harris County sheriff's office
Good to hear. But that there appears to have been some kind of breakdown in communications in here, because the original Chron story said:
When he turned on his computer at the Harris County Jail this week, Sgt. Richard Newby was greeted with a flashing message announcing that all e-mail automatically would be deleted after 14 days.Items such as personnel rosters, employee work schedules and tasks from his commanders had been wiped clean from his e-mail account.
"It was a little unsettling. We had no warning," Newby said this week. "I was looking for stuff, and it was gone."
If Sgt. Newby is typical, then the users didn't understand what was happening. And I suspect he was typical, because as Mark Bennett shows, the memo and accompanying documentation (both PDFs) that Sgt. Newby and his coworkers would have received makes no mention of moving emails to archive tape, where presumably it can be retrieved as needed. It baldly says "Please consider this memorandum as authorization for the immediate deletion of all departmental email that is, as of the date of this memorandum, older than 14 days". There may have been some confusion here about what the Sheriff's office was doing, but I don't think it was Rick Casey who was the cause of it.
So Chuck Rosenthal's testimony came to an abrupt halt yesterday after his attorney requested and was granted a recess. It would appear that Rosenthal and his attorney have a few things to discuss before Chuck goes back under oath.
Rosenthal acknowledged in testimony that he made some "errors" in previous sworn explanations for why he deleted the e-mails.Defense attorney Brian Wice, who isn't involved in the case but observed the hearing, guessed that Rosenthal and his lawyers asked for the recess to get a copy of the transcript.
"They want to go over it with a fine-tooth comb for any statements that need to be retracted or corrected before the hearing ends to avoid a possible charge of aggravated perjury," Wice said. "You don't have to work really hard to perjure yourself."
The irony of Rosenthal possibly perjuring himself, given how he once brought his eventual Democratic rival CO Bradford up on a bogus perjury charge, is pretty thick. If this were a work of fiction, such a plot twist would feel contrived. But here we are, faced with the real possibility of it happening. How crazy is that?
The inconsistent statements made by Rosenthal in affidavits and depositions filed with the court made for a contentious round of questions as the embattled DA came under fire while defending his Nov. 5 deletion of more than 2,000 e-mails from his office computer.Kelley established in court that Rosenthal swore that he deleted e-mails from his inbox, his sent box and his trash box in bulk by their dates.
Rosenthal testified that he selectively deleted e-mails as he read the subject line on each one. He said he opened a few of the e-mails to reread them before deciding whether to delete them.
Kelley also established that Rosenthal said in a deposition that he had tried to delete all but the past month's e-mails.
"If that was true, then this is false," Kelley said pointing to a large notepad on an easel in the courtroom on which he wrote out Rosenthal's prior statements.
Rosenthal said there were "errors" in his affidavit. He also said that some of his statements were false when confronted with the inconsistent statements.
[...]
Will Outlaw, who has been a lawyer for 33 years, sat through most of the hearing and said Rosenthal opened himself up to allegations of perjury.
"I'm not saying he perjured himself, but he opened himself up to those allegations," Outlaw said. "It's pure speculation, but if there has been perjury, this would be an opportunity to clean it up."
Criminal defense lawyer Todd Dupont said he was surprised Rosenthal didn't invoke his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself.
"If he was my client, he would have pleaded the Fifth," Dupont said. "It didn't make any sense."
Dupont said Rosenthal's testimony amounted to an admission of a material misrepresentation of a fact in a sworn affidavit -- the definition of perjury.
In court, Rosenthal also told Hoyt that he understood that his actions could be likened to obstruction of justice or tampering with evidence.
I don't know what I was expecting from Rosenthal's testimony - most likely a bunch of lame excuses - but this wasn't something I'd seriously considered. Remember again, the emails in question were evidence in a lawsuit that alleged Rosenthal looked the other way at malfeasance by the Sheriff's office. I don't think it's possible to overstate how bad this all looks. Mark Bennett has more.
Monday is the deadline to register to vote in the March 4 primary. I think it goes without saying that this is the biggest and most important primary we've seen in a generation in Texas, and that's regardless of the status of the Presidential races. If you haven't registered yet, or recently moved and need to re-register, here's an announcement from HoustonVotes.org:
Houston Votes, a collaborative partnership of organizations and individuals strengthening the voice of Houston through voter registration, will be registering voters at more than a dozen locations across Houston on Saturday Feb. 2nd and Monday Feb. 4th. List of locations and times is attached and can be found at Houstonvotes.org.Houstonians who plan to vote in Texas' historical Presidential primary on March 4th in either the Republican or Democratic Party must register by February 4th. Harris County residents can register by visiting any of the Houston Votes community registration sites.
The full list of registration sites and participating organizations is beneath the fold. Get registered and have a voice in who we'll be voting for in November.
UPDATE: More from the Chron:
- Those with active voter registrations do not have to register again. Updated registration cards were mailed to voters in early January.
- To register, fill out a voter registration card at state agency buildings, county court annexes, public libraries and marriage license offices. Or download a registration form at the Harris County Tax Office Web site -- www.tax.co.harris.tx.us -- and mail it postage-free by Monday.
- Not sure if you are registered? Use the Web site to see if your name is already on the voter rolls.
- Information required on a registration card is name, address and an identifying number such as a driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. Applications are available in English, Spanish and Vietnamese.
- In Harris County, call the Voter Registration Department at 713-368-VOTE (8683) for more information.
- Texas does not register voters by party affiliation. Voters can participate in a major party primary of their choice regardless of how or whether they voted in the past.
- In-person early voting starts Feb. 19.
There you have it. Check to make sure you're registered, and get registered by Monday if you're not. It's important. Thanks very much.
Participating Organizations:* ACLU - Texas
* Black Youth Vote!
* Equality Texas
* Houston GLBT Political Caucus
* League of Women Voters - Houston
* NARAL Pro-Choice Texas
* People for the American Way
* Planned Parenthood Houston
* Texas Freedom Network
* Texans Together
Houston Votes Voter Registration SitesSaturday and Monday
Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
11242 S. Gessner @ BelfortWal-Mart Neighbourhood Mkt #3578 (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
7960 Longpoint@ Wirt Rd.Wal-Mart Spr Ctr. (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
2700 S. Kirkwood DriveWal-Mart Spr Ctr.#3302 (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
9460 W. Sam Houston Toll
Between Beechnut & BissonnetWal-Mart Super Center (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
10750 Westview @ Beltway 8Foodarama (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
11502 Wilcrest Dr.Work Source (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
1550 FoxlakeWal-Mart Super Center.# 1279 (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
Greenspoint
10411 N Fwy, 45Alief Community Park (Sat. 10am - 6pm; Mon. 10am - 9pm)
11903 Bellaire Blvd.Hong Kong City Market (Sat. & Mon. 10am - 6pm)
11205 Bellaire BlvdMonday Only
Breakfast Klub (Monday 7am-7pm)
3711 TravisHouston Community College -Alief (Monday 11 - 6pm)
13303 BissonnetUniversity of Houston
Butler Plaza, Located just outside the M.D. Anderson Memorial Library @ University Drive
Time TBD, check HoustonVotes.org for updatePrairie View A&M
MSC Building (Monday 8am - 5pm)Saturday Only
Wal-Mart Super Center (Saturday 10am - 6pm)
3506 S. Hwy 6 (outside)Wal-Mart Super Center (Saturday 10am- 6pm)
9460 W. Sam Houston Toll (Between Beechnut & Bissonnet)Food Town (Saturday (10am - 6pm)
12655 Bissonnet (Alief)Aldine Flea Market (Saturday)
658 Aldine Mail Rt, 77037 (Aldine)North East Houston Community Center (Saturday 10am - 6pm)
205 W. Crosstimbers, Ste 180Katy Community Center (Saturday 10am - 6pm)
Work Source - I10 and Fry RoadHennington Alief Reg Library (Saturday 10:30am - Noon)
7979 S. Kirkwood Rd.
The Chron's Newswatch: City Hall blog is moving to a new location, where it will now be called Houston Politics. Carolyn Feibel explains:
You'll also see some new contributors joining me there: Alan Bernstein, our local political writer, and some of the county and cops reporters. Matt Stiles should make an appearance now and then, too.What this means is that you'll still get all the irreverent wit and penetrating insight you've come to expect from the City Hall blog. Plus more!
Sounds good to me. Update your bookmarks and feed readers accordingly.
As you know, I think Houston's term limits law, which restricts municipal officeholders to three two-year terms, is a bad idea. But it's still better than what they've got in San Antonio, which is two two-year terms. San Antonio's popular Mayor, Phil Hardberger, called for a change to that law in his State of the City speech.
I'm proud of what we've accomplished as a team in two and a half years, but I am aware that the biggest impediment I face as Mayor is time. My hope is that in my four years as Mayor, we will move this city forward 25 years. That will be a credit to people like you who have joined us to work for the betterment of all. In the life of a city, four years is not a lot of time. Not enough time to start many things, much less finish them.Leadership matters. Our elected leadership, Mayor and Council, are handcuffed by strict term limits - among the strictest in the nation. We've recently had another reminder of the downside of term limits as two out of our four returning Council members left to pursue other offices because of these term limits.
When this community voted overwhelmingly to pass the largest bond in our history, it was a vote of confidence in ourselves. Term limits also speak to our confidence, and whether we believe in ourselves, and indeed, in democracy itself. I believe people are intelligent enough to vote people out of office who are not doing a satisfactory job.
I do not advocate doing away with term limits altogether, but we should at least allow our elected representatives enough time to get something done. I will lead the fight to extend our present term limits from two 2-year terms to four 2-year terms and place it on the November ballot. This is a reasonable compromise and will allow us to have a more effective city government. I have appointed Christian Archer, the campaign manager for the bond election, to be the campaign manager for this critical task. I ask your help in this reasonable reform.
The Express News liked what he had to say.
Citizens have always had the ultimate term limit device, however -- the ballot box. It's sad that strict term limits proponents have so much distrust not of politicians, but instead of voters to make the right decisions. What they're saying is that voters simply lack the ability to determine whether a City Council member deserves to serve more than two terms.That's not a very ringing endorsement of the democratic process. Moreover, by perpetuating a constant shuffle of council members and short-circuiting the development of expertise among elected officials, San Antonio's strict term limits confer greater power on unelected city staff. Eight of the current ten City Council district representatives have been in office for seven months or less.
Hardberger's proposal is a reasonable one. It still requires council members to go back to the voters every two years to seek reelection. But it wisely gives voters the option of keeping a good representative on council for a third and possible fourth term.
Predictably, as noted by the E-N, the pro-term limit forces have had a conniption over this.
"The Homeowner Taxpayer Association will fight back," says Homeowner Taxpayer Association President Bob Martin.The HTA led the drive to win approval of the term limits law, the strictest in the nation, under the leadership of founder C.A. Stubbs, and Stubbs says Hardberger may be catering to the elites in the Chamber of Commerce and in City Hall, but changes in the term limits law are not supported by the people.
"I frankly cannot figure out what part of 'no' the mayor and the other people down there don't understand," Stubbs said.
Ah, CA Stubbs and the HTA. What memories that brings back from my college days, when that bunch of reactionaries opposed fluoridizing San Antonio's water on the grounds that it was a socialist ploy. They finally lost that battle in 2000, after 35 years of fighting it. I hope it won't take that long to beat them back on this one. WOAI link via The Walker Report.
The federal judge hearing testimony in Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal's contempt hearing abruptly postponed the case this afternoon at the request of the DA's lawyer.U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt did not give a reason for his decision and admonished lawyers on both sides against discussing the case with reporters. Hoyt did not say when the hearing might resume.
Attorney Lloyd Kelley, who has asked that Rosenthal be held in contempt for deleting thousands of e-mails subpoenaed for a civil lawsuit, said he was "stupified" by the delay.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: At this point, nothing about these proceedings surprises me. Earlier versions of the story are here. We'll see what happens next.
And after my four-week foray into covers and pseudo-covers, it's time again to talk about songs that came up on the iPod shuffle. Let's roll...
1. "Silent E" - Tom Lehrer. "Who can turn a can into a cane? Who can turn a pan into a pane? It's not too hard to see it's Silent E!" I cannot wait till Olivia is old enough to want to watch the "Best of The Electric Company" DVD that I got some time ago.
2. "Jocko Homo" - Devo. Resolved: Gnarls Barkley is this generation's Devo. Discuss.
3. "One Night In Bangkok" - from the "Chess" soundtrack. Listening to this after the recent death of Bobby Fischer makes me think that they knew what they were doing when they wrote the character of the American champion.
4. "Dixie Chicken" - Trout Fishing in America. Yes, it's a cover. You didn't think I'd get too far away from that, did you? I don't even know who does the original, but it doesn't matter. I like this version just fine.
5. "Boogie Oogie Oogie" - A Taste of Honey. Exactly how much can one boogie oogie oogie before one is incapable of boogie-ing any more? Sadly, science has failed us on this question.
6. "Last Night" - Travelling Wilburys. Oh, Roy Orbison, why did you have to die so young?
7. "Playground In My Mind" - Clint Holmes. Possibly the most annoying song I have in my entire collection. I love the 70s, but man, some of what passed for a hit back then was truly bizarre.
8. "Would I Lie To You?" - The Eurythmics. Freshly acquired from iTunes via that still-not-fully-depleted gift card. There was an air guitar contest at Trinity back in the day in which two different people, Kim and Karl, did this song. Kim was a natural redhead, but Karl had an authentic Annie Lennox buzz-do, so he scored higher.
9. "Lucretia Mac Evil" - Blood, Sweat, and Tears. Has there ever been another band quite like BS&T? I guess Chicago's earlier stuff is similar, but without David Clayton-Thomas' vocals, it just isn't quite the same.
10. "Born At The Right Time" - Paul Simon. The song that was going through my head when Olivia was born. I still get a little verklempt when I hear it. Give me a minute here, willya?
OK, I'm back. More randomy goodness next week. Happy Friday!
Well, we didn't get Chuck Rosenthal's testimony yesterday, but we are getting it today.
Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal took the stand this morning to defend the deletion of thousands of e-mails after they were subpoenaed in a federal civil rights case.Rosenthal said he's had minimal training with computers and often asks his secretary or his IT department to fix mistakes he makes with computers.
He said he has never paid bills online, never made a chart or graph on the computer and the letters he writes are short.
"I still don't know how to type," Rosenthal said.
Ah, the "I'm an idiot" defense. Certainly time-honored, and often very believable. And it goes well with the "no independent recollection" defense.
OK, it's easy to make fun (and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say there's more where this came from), but Rosenthal's goal here is 1) not to get cited for contempt, and 2) not to give the plaintiff's case any extra ammunition. On the former score, at least, while it's never flattering to admit that you don't know your ass from your Delete key, it does offer evidence that you weren't being malicious. It won't surprise me if this works for him.
More testimony:
Earlier this morning, Brian Rose, an assistant district attorney in the office testified that he was charged with explaining the situation to Lloyd Kelley, the attorney representing two brothers who are suing the Sheriffs office for wrongful arrest.Rosenthal, who is a witness in the case, had his e-mails subpoenaed to flesh out a legal theory about the DA's investigation of the deputies.
Rose said Rosenthal deleted the e-mails after he thought they had been saved and separated out for Kelley. Rose also said computer personnel were working to retrieve the deleted e-mails.
On Thursday, one of Rosenthal's top lieutenants told a federal judge that the prosecutor should have known better than to delete some 2,500 e-mails after they were officially requested for a civil rights case.
"The better practice would have been to not delete them," Scott Durfee, Rosenthal's general counsel, said in a hearing to determine whether the county's top prosecutor should be held in contempt. "He said he deleted the e-mails and assumed I had saved them or that they were saved in the system."
The district attorney should have known not to delete the e-mails because they were evidence, Durfee told Hoyt.
"This is not something that would be foreign to a practicing attorney?" Hoyt asked Durfee.
"It would not," Durfee replied.
This, unfortunately, is not something that can be glossed over with claims of computer illiteracy. If we were talking about paper documents, would Chuck Rosenthal have shredded them under the assumption that someone else had saved a copy? Surely not while the matter was still being litigated. He should have treated his email similarly. It's not like email is some newfangled not-well-understood technology. If Judge Hoyt nails him for this, that will be the reason for it: He didn't sufficiently respect the evidence. We'll see what happens.
[Rosenthal's e-mail administrator, Gary] Zallar's testimony to clear up how many e-mails Rosenthal is accused of deleting only seemed to muddy the waters as he explained the intricacies of the office's e-mail backup system. The issue was further confused because Zallar continues to work to retrieve e-mails that are responsive to the subpoena.
I really wish I knew more about their system and procedures. Email is harder than you think to permanently destroy, but depending on how people stored their emails, it may be difficult to impossible to find what you're looking for. I've got old Exchange PST files dating back to 1996 on CD somewhere in my desk. Finding a specific piece of email from them would be the proverbial needle in a haystack, but given enough time and determination it could be done. Of course, an admin would have to know about their existence first, since none of this stuff is likely to be on any backup tape any more. I don't envy Mr. Zallar his task, that's for sure.
One more thing:
Earlier in the day a Republican candidate in the district attorney race answered questions about her e-mail use while working in the upper echelon of Rosenthal's administration.During brief questioning by Hoyt, Kelly Siegler said she never saves her e-mails, deleting each one after she deals with it.
"I never saved e-mails, since the beginning of e-mail," Siegler said.
Um, has the DA's office had an email retention policy before now, and would it not have applied to ADAs like Kelly Siegler? If so, isn't this just a teensy bit problematic? I'm just saying.
UPDATE: Too many updates, not enough time. Here's the lede to that story now:
Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal acknowledged in testimony today that he made some "errors" in previous sworn explanations for why he deleted thousands of e-mails that had been subpoenaed for a civil rights lawsuit.The inconsistent statements made by Rosenthal in affidavits and depositions filed with the court made for a bumpy morning as the embattled DA came under fire while defending his Nov. 5 deletion of more than 2,000 e-mails from his office computer.
[...]
Opposing attorney Lloyd Kelley established that Rosenthal swore to the court that he deleted e-mails from his inbox, his sent box and his delete box in bulk by their dates.
Rosenthal testified today he selectively deleted e-mails as he read the subject line on each one. He said he opened a few of the e-mails to re-read them before deciding whether to save or delete them.
Kelley also established that Rosenthal said in a deposition that he had tried to delete all but the past months e-mails.
"If that was true, then this is false," Kelley said pointing to a large notepad on an easel in the courtroom on which he wrote out Rosenthal's prior statements.
Rosenthal said there were "errors" in his affidavit. He also said that some of his statements were false when confronted with the inconsistent statements.
Rosenthal said he had been asked by his information technology department to periodically clean out his e-mails because of storage space. He said he decided to delete e-mails after his general counsel, Scott Durfee, printed a log of all his e-mails.
That log has been the guide in determining how many e-mails Rosenthal permanently deleted.
Rosenthal told Hoyt that he thought his e-mails, even deleted, were infinitely retrievable on the system.
He said he has since learned that his office's capabilities only hold deleted e-mails from the past five to 10 days.
Needless to say, this sounds worse for him. We'll see what else happens.
Talking about border wall stuff is as good a segue as any to Rick Noriega's latest liveblog session at Firedoglake, which is all about border issues. Go see what he's got to say, and if you like what you see, you can show your appreciation the old-fashioned way.
And that's as good a segue as any to remind you that in less than three weeks, early voting for the primaries will begin. We hope you'll remember our slate of TPA-endorsed candidates, of which Rick Noriega is one, and consider giving them a little support, too. If we want the strongest candidates running in November, we've got to help them win in March first. Thanks very much.
This sounds encouraging.
WOAI news radio has learned that U.S Customs and Border Protection will likely combine their fencing plan with a levee improvement project. There would be fencing in some areas, and in other, the levee's would be built up, so they would act like a wall.It's a plan that border mayors, like Richard Cortez of McAllen have been demanding.
"I think it makes all the sense in the world," says McAllen Mayor Richard Cortez. "It gives them a line of sight, it gives them a barrier and it helps us here."
The 180-mile levee system is in disrepair. Cortez says, in some spots, it could not protect the area from flooding if there were torrential rains.
He's happy the federal government is actually paying attention to their suggestions.
"I'm happy that the government is seeing some value that there could be some alternative solutions to just a physical barrier."
The Monitor also has a story about this, so this is a good sign. It doesn't make the wall a good idea, mind you, but it might mitigate some of the damage, and it's perhaps the first sign that Homeland Security has listened to anything the locals have been saying.
On a related note, Grits notes the not-new phenomenon of fake Fed Ex trucks being used by smugglers. Check it out.
There was one bit of news, from this Texas Politics blog post, about last week's VoterIDPalooza hearings that offers a small ray of hope:
A Texas legislative subcommittee will look for solutions intended to reduce fraud involving mail-in, or absentee voter ballots.Most experts agree that problems exist with those ballots, which photo ID requirements would not fix.
House Elections Chairman Leo Berman, R-Tyler, appointed Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, to chair a three-member subcommittee, which has been instructed to report back to his full committee in six months.
I'm glad to finally see some small recognition that absentee balloting, which needless to say is completely outside the scope of the photo ID debate, is the place where vote fraud really happens. There's nobody better than Rafael Anchia to look into that, too. This may just be cover for whatever voter ID bill the Republicans try to cram through the Lege next year, but it's still good that the issue is being studied. Maybe it'll help everyone get a little perspective on where the problems really are.
Elsewhere, Eye on Williamson points to this Harvey Kronberg op-ed, in which he finds his dad's old poll tax receipts, and sums up the current situation succinctly:
Advocates of photo ID claim we currently suffer massive election fraud.And pretty much everyone does agree there is a problem with mail-in ballot fraud and voter registration lists that include non-citizens and the dead.
But a photo ID wouldn't deal with those frauds.
The only problem a photo ID solves is someone impersonating a voter at a polling place, something that every one agrees is all but non-existent.
While race and illegal immigrants may be a subtext of the argument in 2008, it's really mostly about partisan advantage.
And finally, Martin Frost writes that the photo ID requirement in voter ID laws may be even more pernicious than it first appears:
An Indiana law imposing such a requirement has been challenged, and its fate will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in a case that was argued before the court on Jan. 9.[...]
This case is intertwined with an unpopular law passed by Congress several years ago called "Real ID," which requires states to dramatically increase the documentation required to obtain a driver's license.
A number of states are resisting implementation of this new law because it is an "unfunded mandate" that would force states to spend millions of dollars of their own tax revenue (no federal funds provided) to comply with its provisions.
In those states that are complying, citizens are finding it much harder to obtain a driver's license, thus further reducing the pool of individuals who will have the type of state ID required to vote by laws like the one being challenged in the Supreme Court.
According to the brief submitted to the Supreme Court by the individuals challenging the constitutionality of this Indiana law, the statute clearly is aimed straight at these groups.
The brief notes that "about 12 percent of voting-age Americans lack a driver's license.
"And about 11 percent of voting-age United States citizens -- more than 21 million individuals -- lack any form of current government-issued photo ID.
"That 11 percent figure grows to 15 percent for voting-age citizens earning less than $35,000 per year, 18 percent for citizens at least 65 years old and 25 percent for African-American voting-age citizens."
This is what is called in the law a "disparate effect."
We can only hope the Supreme Court sees it that way.
UPDATE: Forgot to link to the AusChron's coverage of the voter ID hearings, which among other things show Anchia taking on Paul Bettencourt's bamboozlements. And via BOR, some charges about selective enforcement of absentee ballot laws have been leveled against AG Greg Abbott.
House Elections Chairman Leo Berman, R-Tyler said he plans to ask Attorney General Greg Abbott to respond to allegations of partisan favoritism presented to his committee by Gerald Hebert, head of litigation at the Campaign Legal Center.Hebert complained to Berman's committee last week that Abbott has prosecuted Texans "who appear to have done little more than mistakenly help senior citizens by delivering already completed and sealed ballots to the post office or an elections administrative office."
Of 13 voter fraud-related indictments, virtually all are African Americans or Hispanic senior citizens, Hebert noted.
He told the committee: "What is especially troubling is that while Greg Abbott's office has prosecuted minority seniors for simply mailing ballots, he has not prosecuted anyone on the other side of the aisle for what appear to be open and shut cases of real voter fraud."
Hebert told the committee about alleged voter fraud in heavily Republican Highland Park involving the mishandling of over 100 ballots and a memo from local prosecutors calling on Abbott to investigate the 2005 complaint. He explained that the attorney general's office handed off the complaint to the Texas secretary of state "for evaluation of as potential criminal prosecution."
He called that "a stalling tactic" because it is the AG's office that evaluates criminal prosecution.
Nothing has happened, according to Hebert.
[...]
Hebert is a former federal prosecutor in the U.S. Department of Justice. He also is an attorney in a pending lawsuit challenging several Texas laws passed in 2003, including one that makes it a crime to possess a mail-in ballot of another person. And he also represented Democrats who fought the redistricting efforts of GOP leaders in 2003.
Hebert told Berman's committee:
"One can only conclude that Greg Abbott is using the official resources of the State of Texas to relentlessly pursue and prosecute minorities and Democrats who may have unknowingly violated a narrow, flawed and controversial provision in Texas law. None of the 10 persons prosecuted have been charged with or admitted to defrauding a single voter.
"At the same time, Abbott's office has failed to seek prosecution of a single Republican or any individual involved with Republican election activities, even after being provided clear evidence that Republican office holders and Republican election officials engaged in improper activities that may have 100 or more ballots."
Hebert said, "There is a fraud being perpetrated on Texas voters, but it's not what you think. It is being perpetrated on Texas votes by Attorney General Greg Abbott, Lt. Governor David Dewhurst, and others who claim that voter fraud in Texas has reached epidemic proportions. Their false and unsubstantiated claims are the real fraud."
Pretty heavy stuff. We'll see what Abbott has to say for himself.