Molly Ivins has passed away.

Molly Ivins, the irreverent nationally syndicated columnist from Texas who rankled conservatives and delighted liberals, died late this afternoon after a seven-year battle with breast cancer. She was 62.

A self-described leftist agitator, she infused her writings with both passion and wit. Her career spanned some 40 years, and in that time she thought nothing of calling President George W. Bush "Billy Bob Forehead," and current Texas Gov. Rick Perry "Governor Goodhair." Her columns drew such attention that her picture once graced billboards in North Texas above the words, 'Molly Ivins Can't Really Say That, Can She?' (That later became the title of one of her best-selling books).

Read on for an obituary from her friends and colleagues at the Texas Observer, and click the Observer link for much more.

UPDATE: OK, one story I can think of, since Julia brought up "gang pluck". In "Molly Ivins Can't Say That, Can She?", Ivins wrote that she hated being copy-edited by the NYT. The capper for her was when they changed her description of a man "with a beer gut that belonged in the Smithsonian" to a man "with a protuberant abdomen". Can't say I blame her at all.

Statement from The Texas Observer (obituary follows)

To Our Readers and Friends

Molly Ivins left her editor's chair at The Texas Observer more than 30 years ago and went on to play a larger stage. But she never left us behind. She remained convinced that Texas needed a progressive, independent voice to call the powerful to account and to stand up for the common folk. She kept our voice alive. More than once, when the paper was on the brink of insolvency, she delivered speeches and gave us the honorariums. She donated royalties from her best-selling book Shrub to keep the doors open. Her determination and efforts sustained the Observer as a magazine, as a family, and as a community.

Molly was a hero. She was a mentor. She was a liberal. She was a patriot. She was a friend. And she always will be. With Molly's death we have lost someone we hold dear. What she has left behind we will hold dearer still.

Despite her failing health, and an impending ice storm, Molly insisted on being driven to the Observer's most recent public event in early January so she could thank our supporters.

Observer writers are useful, she explained to the crowd, in much the same way as good hunting dogs. Turn them loose, let them hunt. When they return with their prey, pat them on the head, say a few words of praise, and set them loose to hunt again.

For the time being, The Texas Observer's web site (www.texasobserver.org) will be dedicated to remembering Molly, her work, her wit, her contributions to the political discourse of a nation. We invite readers to submit their own thoughts and recollections, to say a few words of praise.

Then, we will return to the hunt.

Obituary for Molly Ivins

Syndicated political columnist Molly Ivins died of breast cancer Wednesday evening at her home in Austin. She was 62 years old, and had much, much more to give this world.
She remained cheerful despite Texas politics. She emphasized the more hilarious aspects of both state and national government, and consequently never had to write fiction. She said, "Good thing we've still got politics--finest form of free entertainment ever invented."
Molly had a large family, many namesakes, hundreds of close friends, thousands of colleagues and hundreds of thousands of readers.

She and her two siblings, Sara (Ivins) Maley of Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Andy Ivins of London, Texas, grew up in Houston. Her father, James Ivins, was a corporate lawyer and a Republican, which meant she always had someone to disagree with over the dinner table. Her mother, Margot, was a homemaker with a B.A. in psychology from Smith College.

In addition to her brother and sister, Molly is survived by sister-in-law Carla Ivins, nephew Drew and niece Darby; niece Margot Hutchison and her husband, Neil, and their children Sam, Andy and Charlie of San Diego, Calif. and nephew Paul Maley and his wife, Karianna, and their children Marty, Anneli and Finnbar of Eltham, Victoria, Australia.

Molly followed her mother to Smith and received a B.A. in 1966, followed by an M.A. from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and an honorary doctorate from Haverford College.

Her full list of books and awards will be abbreviated here. In addition to compilations of her brilliant, hilarious liberal columns, she wrote with Lou Dubose Shrub: The Short But Happy Political Life of George W. Bush (Random House 2000) and Bushwhacked: Life in George W. Bush's America (Random House 2003). She was working on a Random House book documenting the Bush administration's assault on the Bill of Rights when she died.

Molly, being practical, used many of her most prestigious awards as trivets while serving exquisite French dishes at her dinner parties. Her awards include the William Allen White Award from the University of Kansas, the Eugene V. Debs award in the field of journalism, many awards for advocacy of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the David Nyhan Prize from the Shorenstein Center at the Kennedy School at Harvard.

Although short, Molly's life was writ large. She was as eloquent a speaker and teacher as she was a writer, and her quips will last at least as long as Will Rogers'. She dubbed George W. Bush "Shrub" and Texas Governor Rick Perry "Good Hair."

Molly always said in her official resume that the two honors she valued the most were (1) when the Minneapolis Police Department named their mascot pig after her (She was covering the police beat at the time.) and (2) when she was banned from speaking on the Texas A&M University campus at least once during her years as co-editor of The Texas Observer (1970-76). However, she said with great sincerity that she would be proudest of all to die sober, and she did.

She worked as a reporter for The New York Times (1976-82) in New York and Albany and later as Rocky Mountain Bureau Chief covering nine mountain states by herself. After working for the staid Times where she was heavily edited, Molly cut loose and became a columnist for the Dallas Times Herald. When the Herald folded, she signed on as a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. In 2001, she became syndicated, eventually appearing in 400 newspapers.

She never lost her love for The Texas Observer or her conviction that a free society relies on public-interest journalism. She found that brand of journalism the most fun.

In recent years she shamelessly used her national and international contacts to raise funds for the Observer, which has always survived on a shoestring. More than $400,000 was contributed to the feisty little journal at a roast honoring Molly in Austin October 8.

Molly's enduring message is, "Raise more hell."

To read more about Molly Ivins or to make a comment about her, go to www.texasobserver.org. Tax-deductible contributions in her honor may be made to The Texas Observer, 307 West Seventh Street, Austin, TX 78701 or the American Civil Liberties Union, 127 Broad Street, 18th floor, New York, NY 10004, www.aclu.org.

Memorial services will be announced in the coming days.

You may recall back in March that NASA Administrator Michael Griffin stirred up some trouble when he gave a public address that included an exhortation to the audience to keep Tom DeLay in office. This is because of the Hatch Act, which forbids government employees from endorsing political candidates. It took awhile, but the federal Office of Special Counsel, which investigates and enforces alleged violations of the Hatch Act has reprimanded Griffin for his statements. Muse and Bay Area Houston have the details.

I see that Metro is cracking down on HOV violators.

Metro police officer Scott Ashmore parked his motorcycle at the top of the T-shaped ramp of the Northwest Freeway HOV lane at Dacoma and waited. But not for long.

A woman in a silver Hyundai topped the ramp and slowed down to make the sharp turn as Ashmore -- one of 10 Metropolitan Transit Authority motorcycle officers who enforce occupancy rules on the lanes -- waved her over to the shoulder.

The driver, in a brief conversation through the window, explained that she was pregnant.

"But the state of Texas doesn't count you as an individual until you're born," Ashmore said. He issued her a citation.

Minutes later it was a black SUV. The driver "said she had been late to work twice already and she didn't want it to happen again," Ashmore said.

Metro police took the news media along this morning to show how they enforce the lane regulations, and some of the problems they encounter.

[...]

A rough count showed about two out of three vehicles that passed Ashmore appeared to have no more than one occupant. The Northwest HOV requires three or more riders from 6:45 a.m. to 8 a.m., and two or more at other times. Fines average $125 and can be as steep as $200, Metro says.

Metro gets none of this revenue, which goes to the city or county, depending on location. "Our goal is to get compliance," said Metro Police Chief Tom Lambert.

Police allow some to slip past because they're busy issuing someone else a ticket. And officers don't want to create a jam at the HOV exit, since that can cause accidents as motorists crest the rise and encounter the stopped traffic.

Some single-occupant vehicles are driven by on-duty law officers and others who can ride the lanes alone, and others have toddlers in car seats in the back, hard to spot unless the window is opened.

"Without tinted glass and kids my job would be easier," Ashmore said.

OK, I'm not really advocating cameras here. I'd have the same concerns about data privacy that I have with red light cameras - even more so, since by definition you'd need images that could fully capture each vehicle's interior. I'm simply noting that for all their flaws, cameras do ensure that the law is applied universally rather than by fate, and that there is a side benefit of enhanced officer safety. I don't think either of those points really gets discussed when red light cameras are the subject. Houstonist has more.

Time to gear up for the May special election. Click the More link for an invitation to Melissa Noriega's campaign kickoff event, to which all are welcome.

The pile of comic strip retirements is about to get bigger. Well, sort of.

First, the bad news: Lynn Johnston needs a break.

The cartoonist has, after all, written and drawn the popular comic strip For Better or for Worse for 28 years, in sickness and in health, without complaint, while Aaron McGruder (Boondocks), Bill Watterson (Calvin and Hobbes) and others griped, took extended hiatuses and retired.

"What wusses!" she exclaims.

But Johnston turns 60 this year, and she wants to do things in life that are difficult to do while producing 365 comic strips a year.

"I want to travel and study and paint, and I want to spend some time with friends and family," Johnston says.

"We're starting to get to the stage when you go to funerals and that's where you reunite with friends," she continues. "I want to be able to spend time with friends while they're still alive."

The good news, however, is that Johnston isn't retiring. Instead, the strip -- which appears in more than 2,000 newspapers, including the Houston Chronicle -- will be transformed in September into what Johnston calls "a hybrid" of new and old material.

She will continue to write and draw, but the new material will serve to frame flashbacks consisting primarily of recycled material. These strolls down memory lane also sometimes will contain new material that amplifies, embellishes or completes story lines of old.

For instance, Johnston mentions a character, Deena, who was absent from the strip for a long time without explanation. In her head she knew why Deena disappeared, but she never got around to drawing it. Now she will.

For the most part, however, the continuing saga of the Patterson family will end. Characters will stop aging. Existing story lines will be wrapped up before the change. Think of the new format as a long goodbye.

Just guessing here, but I suppose we'll see Michael and family move into new digs; Elizabeth finally find the right guy (I'm betting Anthony gets his wish); and maybe John join Ellie in retirement. I presume we'll be spared seeing Ellie's dad die as her mom did some years ago. That's about it in terms of major story lines. Anybody want to add to that?

Switch away from Sprint, that is.

State Comptroller Susan Combs on Monday asked Sprint to quit charging customers a fee reflecting Texas' expanded business tax, but a spokesman for the wireless phone company said the surcharge will stay.

Sprint in January began charging a surcharge totaling 1 percent of each customer's wireless rate plan called the "Texas Margin Fee Reimbursement."

The fee is meant to cover part of the money that Sprint will owe next year under the business tax expansion, said John Taylor, senior manager of public affairs for Sprint Nextel Corp.

"There is nothing in Texas or federal law that precludes us from making this business decision, which we fully disclosed to our customers and to the public," Taylor said.

[...]

Perry spokesman Robert Black called the company's surcharge "a political stunt trying to poke their finger in the eye of the Legislature. ... Why don't they put other charges on their bill? Why don't they ask their ratepayers to pay their utility bill or their CEO's bar bill?"

Putting aside any political points that may or may not be scored by this little stunt, it seems to me that unless Sprint backs off (or is forced to back off) from this, it opens a competitive opportunity for its competitors. The ad copy practically writes itself. Will Verizon, Cingular, T-Mobile et al follow Sprint's lead, or will they distinguish themselves as the provider with lower fees? We'll see.

It seems that Sen. Patrick has made his choice: The constitutional spending cap outweighs property tax cuts.

Patrick said the folks in his district told him over the weekend not to break the cap.

"The people I talked to fully understood that such a vote might mean the promised property tax relief may not be fully realized," he said. "However, to them and to me, a fiscally responsible state government is more important than the property tax relief that has been promised to them."

He said he's open to an idea that would allow voters to decide if the cap needs to be broken, which is essentially what some lawmakers and Gov. Rick Perry are proposing. But he only wants to do that if the Legislature puts before voters a plan to lower the state's cap on increases in residential property values. The appraisal cap is now 10 percent, but Patrick wants it lowered to 3 percent.

"Let the voters decide on both or let them decide on neither," he said.

The Legislature is almost certain not to approve a constitutional amendment calling for a 3 percent appraisal cap.

Other conservatives, like Patrick, are making noise about sticking to the spending cap, which would force cuts in state spending in the neighborhood of 20 percent. Meanwhile, some liberal Democrats chafe at the idea that it's worth busting the cap to cut property taxes but not put more money into programs such as Medicaid or public education. Isn't there an old saying about politics and strange bed fellows?

Long as we're discussing Danno, I want to comment on this observation by Karen Brooks.

The debate on the suspension of the rules today in the House brought to mind the Senate's now-famous "Rule of 21."

First made popular, of course, when Lt. Gov. Dewhurst revoked it during the Congressional redistricting fight and Dem senators' flight to Albuquerque.

Came to us next via Sen. Dan Patrick, a conservative R from Houston who ran - in part - on how much he hates the rule that lets the minority have some swat in the Senate.

He tried to revoke it a few weeks ago but got voted down 30-1.

The House vote that happened today, using only 34 votes to kill a routine motion to suspend the constution, gives the minority a little sway for a little while. So people were kind of buzzing about the Senate deal when someone noticed Sen. Dan Patrick on the House floor. Near the front. Shaking someone's hand, I forget who.

I didn't ask him what he was doing there, but could it really be a coincendence?
I mean ... really?

The vote on HR4, the resolution to suspend the constitutional rule against bringing bills to the floor in the first 60 days of a legislative session, has been conducted, and the resolution has failed, with 34 votes against, more than enough to sink it. Given that only 142 votes total were cast, 23 nays would have been sufficient, as the 4/5ths provision refers to total membership, not those present. Looks like the debate got a little contentious - see here, here, and here for examples. That last link contains some data that I think gives the whole debate some perspective:

[Democratic Rep. Jim] Dunnam is up now. Says look at the facts of what we are really talking about. "We are told if we don't pass this, the whole House will come to gridlock. I have the calendars from the last several sessions. In the 76th legislature, do you know how many were brought up in the first 60 days? Two! In the 77th, we brought up six. In the 78th session, six came to the House floor, and in the 79th session, ten bills. Those include the emergency bills. So you are being told if we can't bring up ten bills in the next 60 days the Senate is going to rule the world and the sky is going to fall. If we can't take up 6-10 bills in the next 60 days, nobody's bills are going to be passed. That's not credible. You know that."

UPDATE: Looking at the list of nays, I'm struck by a couple of things: Six freshman Democrats voted against Craddick. Several members not known for being agitators - I'm thinking people like Scott Hochberg and Mike Villarreal in particular, but there are others - voted against Craddick. Rick Noriega, who was named to Appropriations despite being a vote against Craddick for Speaker, voted against Craddick. Make of that what you will.

I'm told that this vote in years past has been conducted on the same day as the Speaker vote. While it's easy to see why that didn't happen this time, you have to wonder if holding it after committee assignments came out was a smart move by Team Craddick. Maybe he should have kept the leverage he had. On the other hand, maybe he'll spin this as "I didn't retaliate in committee assignments, and this is the thanks I get." Who knows? This session has already been more interesting than the two (regular) ones that preceeded it.

Miya Shay posted something this morning that got my heart racing:

What's former Congressman, Mayoral and Gubernatorial Candidate Chris Bell up to these days? It appears that he's ready for his next political adventure. Several sources say that Bell is ready to take on Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal. Former journalist-turned-lawyer-turned-politician Bell is the quintessential Democrat. Much can be said for the perennial prosecutor Chuck Rosenthal on the Republican side. If this battle indeed shapes up, should be an interesting one to watch! Stay tuned.

Like I said, I wish this were true, but it's not. I'm sure we'll be hearing about another candidate soon, since this is not only an eminently winnable race for a Democrat, it'll be the top race in the county next year. Feel free to speculate about who else might be talked about in the comments.

UPDATE: Miya prints Chris' denial of the rumors.

Two weeks ago, the city of Bellaire declined to join Houston in banning smoking in restaurants. Turns out that it may not matter much, because one of the few places inside Bellaire that allows smoking (I could swear I read there were two of them somewhere, but can't remember where), the venerable Bellaire Broiler Burger, has decided on its own to ban it.

Starting Feb. 1, the only thing smoking at the Bellaire Broiler Burger will be a sizzling-hot grill, frying up the legendary patties.

The dining institution known for both its retro appearance and cuisine will ban smoking, even though Bellaire's City Council bucked requests by the city of Houston and a restaurant association Jan. 15 and turned down a no-smoking ordinance by a vote of 2-5.

Loyal customers' opinions were what made the decision for the eatery. And their affection for the nostalgia didn't extend to the eras when smoking was socially acceptable.

"Because this place is so old, we have very little ventilation in the dining room," said manager Pamela Howard, who says she's a smoker herself. "We've talked to our customers, and we definitely are losing some or are in danger of losing some because we allow smoking.

"The people who do smoke say they like our food so much, they'd come even if they can't smoke here."

A prominent sign warning of the impending ban has been posted, and Howard said she and servers are trying to take the time to explain the decision to customers and ask for their continued business.

"We tried to accommodate everyone for a long time, but we just can't any longer," she said.

I'm only blogging about this Rad Sallee column today because it took me all day yesterday to quit being so PO'ed about it.

"The OST segment between Texas 288 and Fannin may be one of the slowest projects I've ever witnessed, and I've been living in Houston for a long time," writes L. Kian Granmayeh.

He lives near the Texas Medical Center and drives daily on Old Spanish Trail, often referred to by its initials.

"It seems like more than a year ago they began working on this less-than-two-mile segment, and about six months ago they stripped off the top layer, leaving a horrible driving surface.

"Since then, they have repaved half of the lanes but the others have been untouched and have manhole covers that protrude from the ground."

Granmayeh said he seldom sees work being done there, and when he does it's only a couple of trucks.

"I'd be shocked if this project finishes before rodeo time," he said.

The Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo at Reliant Park will draw lots of additional traffic to the area Feb. 27-March 18.

Old Spanish Trail is a Houston street, but it's also part of U.S. 90A (as is South Main), so Texas Department of Transportation district engineer Maureen Wakeland fielded this one.

The project has about four more weeks to go, weather cooperating, she said, but given the time of year, "six to eight weeks is more likely."

Grab leather and brace for more hard riding, rodeo fans.

Wakeland said some of the earlier delay was caused by change orders on the project, but more recently it was the rain and cold. A dry surface and temperatures at least 60 degrees are needed for pouring asphalt, she said.

"When I visit the project for inspection on good consecutive weather days, I see multiple crews working," Wakeland said.

"I am sensitive to the writer's inquiry, as I travel the area very regularly. I assure you that I am monitoring the work, and that I am working toward completing the project."

Let's clarify a few things first. As near as I can tell, the main work that has been done along this stretch of road was to install new sidewalks. Which is fine - there's actually a decent amount of pedestrian traffic - but why they had to tear up the street to do this is a mystery to me. They didn't do that all at once - they tore up the right lanes (it's three lanes each direction) first, then did the sidewalk work, then tore up the other lanes and some of the medians, and finally have done some paving. And yes, it has been months. And months. And months since they started.

When Mr. Granmayeh says "they have repaved half of the lanes", he means it literally: For at least the stretch near where I work at Greenbriar, the left lane and half of the middle lane on each side is paved. Yes, one and a half paved lanes in each direction. Why? Who knows. But it's been that way for weeks. What's especially frustrating is that like many other aspects of this job, that paving occurred very rapidly, then nothing more happened for a long time. Whatever was in those "change orders" Wakeland refers to, they had a hell of an effect.

The icing on the cake for me is that at the intersection of OST and Stadium, which is the entrance I usually take to get to work, the unpaved right lanes on OST are about two inches lower than the paving on Stadium, which means that every time I cross OST at Stadium, I put my car's suspension at risk. And once again, it's been this way for many weeks.

Monday was the first day in a long time that I saw some actual work being done. I couldn't tell you what they were doing, other than blocking two lanes on the westbound side from 288 to Almeda, but they were there. I think it had to do with the medians, both there and nearer to Fannin, where at least they only blocked one lane of traffic.

Far as I can tell, the city is making faster progress on the Kirby storm sewer project than TxDOT is here. Whoever is actually managing this construction effort has done a crappy job.

I already know some bloggers who are or have been teachers, so this is no surprise to me.

After long days of grading papers and disciplining rowdy children, a growing number of tech-savvy teachers are creating online journals to vent about the stresses of the profession.

Educators who have already embraced the technology -- called blogs (short for web logs) -- find themselves walking a fine, virtual line of conduct. They strive to entertain and inform, but can't violate their school districts' ethics policies or federal laws designed to protect students' confidentiality.

Most teachers who blog have opted to do so underground -- refusing to cite their names, workplaces or other identifying details -- to avoid potential professional pitfalls.

"School administrators tend to be pretty vindictive and they don't like people with different ideas from them. People who speak out are not regarded very highly," said Mike in Texas, an elementary school science teacher from East Texas, who started an online diary two years ago as a way of defending public education.

Some teacher-bloggers predict that their districts may soon draft rules outlining what employees can and can't say online.

Most Houston-area districts have remained silent on the issue of what teachers may post on their blogs, although the Katy school district issued a stern warning to employees last fall after some expressed concern about educators and students chatting online.

"While the district does not have the authority to prevent district employees from subscribing to these types of applications from their homes or from exercising their rights to free speech, employees are held accountable for adhering to the state code of ethics for educators," wrote Lenny Schad, Katy's deputy superintendent for information and technology services.

Gayle Fallon, president of the Houston Federation of Teachers, said districts can't restrict teachers from commenting on public matters.

They can, however, forbid teachers from revealing students' identities or from using taxpayer resources for personal pursuits.

"They have an absolute right to blog," Fallon said. "Just not on school time, not on school computers -- even if it's lunch, it's still a school computer."

"The bohemians and hippies might not be so bad, if they don't drive," a caller from Southampton Place said. "But, this community simply can't handle any more lawyers -- with or without cars." Perhaps fearing litigation from a future neighbor, the source asked not to be identified.

While construction of the project awaits the establishment of a sales price from the city of Houston to complete the street abandonment, Randall Davis, who is handling the disposition of the 225 condominiums, said a sales office will open March 1.

[...]

According to Davis, work on Phase 1 of the project along the north side of Bolsover will tentatively begin in late July and be completed in January 2009. When finished it will be comprised of 80,000 square feet of retail space and 125 condominiums.

Phase 2, which be located on the opposite side of the street, has no current timetable and will add 50,000 square feet for merchants and 100 living spaces.

Asked about the "bohemians, attorneys and hippies" reference in his sign, Davis said, "it means whatever you want it to mean."

He declined to comment on how many bohemians and hippies he thought could afford to live in Sonoma.

"I think advertising is about making people read a sign," Davis said.

In related news, the Chron somewhat belatedly came out against the proposal to close off Bolsover. I'm not sure why they wrote about it at this time, and I'm not sure I agree with them. The problem in that area is more with north-south traffic - Kirby is a mess and it's going to get much worse in the short term - not so much the one block of east-west traffic that stretch of Bolsover represents. The project includes some improvements on Kelvin and Morningside, which would help the north-south traffic flow a little bit. I can't say I'm in love with the idea of selling off public streets, but I don't think the traffic concerns the Chron raises are the issue here.

As you know, the Lege will be back in Austin tomorrow for what would normally be a pro forma vote to suspend the Constitutional rule against bringing non-emergency legislation to the floor in the first 60 days of the session. And as you also know, the vote will be anything but a formality. I've heard from a source that it's a sure thing that this vote goes against Speaker Craddick, and that it will be a bipartisan vote to boot, but I figure it never hurts to let your representative know how you feel about stuff like this. It's not like he or she is going to get flooded with calls about this otherwise obscure procedural vote, so at least you know you'll be heard.

In the interest of saving space, I'll point you to Vince, Boadicea, and Muse, who lay out the case for voting against Craddick's wishes. If you have a moment, please contact your Rep and ask him or her to join in on that. And tune in tomorrow to see how this plays out.

UPDATE: My take on the pros and cons of this vote for Democrats is here.

UPDATE: Former State Rep. Glen Maxey has more.

Let me see if I've got this straight. The budget surplus isn't as big as we thought it might have been. Thanks to our obsessive desire to feed the property tax cut beast, we've got $2.5 billion in unallocated money for $4 billion worth of priorities. The ballyhooed business tax, centerpiece to Governor Perry's plan to reform school finance reduce property taxes, is riddled with loopholes that will likely have negative repercussions for future revenue collection, which in turn will put even more strain on the budget as we try to pay for future property tax reductions.

And amid all that, Governor Perry is actually talking about tax rebates? Is he nuts?

Gov. Rick Perry thinks lawmakers should be allowed to rebate money directly to taxpayers, but the check is far from being in the mail.

Legislative leaders, miles short of embracing the idea, are concerned about the state's ability to make good on already-promised school property tax relief and other obligations, despite billions in projected new revenue. Some wonder how rebates could be fairly calculated.

Asked what he thinks about the rebate idea, which Perry declared an emergency item more than two weeks ago, Senate Finance Chairman Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, replied, "Not much."

"The big issue to me in this session is to make sure that we set aside enough of the surplus to guarantee that we'll be able to meet our property tax promises in future years," Ogden said.

Looks like the new business tax may need to be fixed even before it gets put into effect.

The law dramatically expands the number of business taxpayers. But it's also riddled with errors and in some cases created new loopholes that, if not fixed, could cost the state dearly in lost revenue; in other cases it's been drawn so tightly that companies' tax liabilities could go from almost nothing to thousands or millions of dollars, experts say.

In one glaring error, lawmakers botched the fix to one of the most popular tax shelters: Limited liability partnerships that doctors and lawyers often use to avoid business taxes were left off a list of taxable entities. State officials say such partnerships can still be taxed. But without a rewrite, that part of the law could invite a lawsuit.

"If they can clearly put that in a statute, then it may save us a court case down the road," said Jerry Oxford, supervisor of the franchise tax policy section in the state comptroller's office.

[...]

"The devil's always in the detail," said state Sen. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, who describes keeping the tax law intact as his most important job this session. "What exactly do you mean by 'technical problem'?"

For example, one glitch -- the product of what has been described as a typographical error -- gives certain real estate investors a huge tax break by granting them deductions no other entity can get.

Other passages give breaks to one industry but not to others doing virtually the same thing. [Bob Owen, a legislative expert at the Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants], said that in one case manufacturers can take deductions for subcontractor payments that the service industry cannot.

In another section, he said, a "flow-through" provision unfairly allows only a handful of industries to exempt from taxes certain revenues that pass in and then pass right back out.

Lawyers who win a legal judgment, for example, could use the provision to remove from the taxable equation the award given to the client and the money paid to outside attorneys -- leaving only their fees. But travel agencies, which get a lot of money that goes right back out to airlines, tour operators and the like, would have to include the entire amount they took in, Owen said.

"I think it is a major issue," he said. "It will probably have a major revenue impact."

I don't know for sure, but I presume that when the Sunday Chron runs two op-eds on more or less the same subject from opposing perspectives it was planned, as in they invited the two point/counterpointers to submit the pieces in question. Sometimes these things work better than other times, but usually it's a decent enough way to try and give equal time in a debate.

Unfortunately, one of the times when it doesn't work so well is when one participant argues for a specific point, which the other person doesn't address. Such as yesterday's examples, in which Rep. John Culberson gave his usual talking points on the Universities rail route, while Ed Wulfe wrote this feel-good executive summary of the whole plan. It fails as a point/counterpoint (if it was planned as such - maybe it was just coincidence that these two pieces shared the Opinion section yesterday) because Wulfe only mentioned the Richmond/Westpark issue in passing, while Culberson made it his central thesis. Well, and because Wulfe didn't really say anything remotely objectionable. If Wulfe intended his piece as an argument, it wasn't Culberson he was arguing against; at least, not the 2007 post-referendum Culberson.

And I feel a little cheated by that, because I think there should have been a forceful pro-Richmond statement to accompany Culberson's piece and counter his misleading spin regarding the election results. Again, assuming this was a deliberate setup, either Wulfe got the wrong instructions or he was the wrong person for the job. Either way, it's a shame. There's no shortage of pro-Richmond rail supporters. They deserve to have their voices heard.

Like I said, maybe it was just a coincidence that these two pieces appeared simultaneously. If so, then maybe there'll be a followup by someone who was also expecting something else and was disappointed with what we got. That would be nice, since you can't have a debate if the two people involved are not talking about the same thing.

UPDATE: This is what I'm talking about. That's a genuine counterpoint to the Culberson piece. If I were to boil it down to a soundbite, it'd be something like "What do you want Metro to serve: the people of Houston, or ballot language as interpreted by the people who lost the referendum?"

Texas' oldest rail line may ride again soon.

The group of consultants, engineers and planners envisions a train running from an as-yet-undecided station in Houston at 59 mph along the 140-year-old Galveston, Houston & Henderson Railroad, said consultant Barry Goodman, Goodman Corp. president.

The passenger line would make four to six stops before arriving at the Galveston Railroad Museum, housed in the former Galveston passenger terminal. Debarking passengers would exit through the museum to board a trolly, electric bus, horse-drawn carriage or cruiseship shuttle.

Goodman, whose company is leading the study, said Galveston plans to build a transportation hub next to the railroad museum to allow connections with buses and taxis.

The passenger line might be built in two stages, the first running from League City to Galveston and later extending to Houston, [study-group member John Bertini, chairman of the Galveston Railroad Museum board,] said.

"For the leadership of the region to ignore the possibility to rebuild a rail corridor that has been there 100 years, that can be done at a fraction of the cost of building highway capacity and would reduce pollution ... it would be irresponsible for that opportunity to be ignored," Goodman said.

The Houston-Galveston corridor is better suited for passenger rail than other routes because it has heavy traffic in both directions morning and evening, Bertini said. Other routes have heavy traffic in one direction in the morning and the opposite direction in the evening, he said.

Unlike other traffic corridors, the Houston-Galveston route is heavily traveled on weekends as well because Galveston is a prime tourist destination for Houstonians, he said.

Two, four, six, eight, welfare reform wasn't so great.

When Texas became one of the first states in the nation to overhaul welfare by insisting the poor work, the governor made a bold prediction.

"I believe this bill will make Texas a much better place," Gov. George W. Bush said at the June 1995 bill signing.

If issuing fewer welfare checks means better, then Texas has succeeded. But Texas' welfare-to-work success masks a growing poverty problem that, critics say, has little to do with the writing of paltry checks and much to do with the state's historical resistance to offering services to those in need.

More than a decade after Bush signed the bill into law, the number of people receiving a Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, check has fallen 73 percent.

Today, fewer than 5 percent, or about 173,000 of the state's 4 million poor children and adults, receive checks, a maximum of $223 monthly for a mother and two children.

[...]

"We've ended welfare as we know it, but we haven't done anything about poverty," said Barbara Best, Texas executive director of the Children's Defense Fund. "I can't imagine what the future of this state will be like if we don't start investing in families and children."

Texas has moved thousands of poor single mothers into the work force, but their average wage of $7.19 an hour isn't lifting them out of poverty. Officials say that benefits, including child care, Medicaid, federal tax credits and food stamps, help provide a safety net, but charities often have to fill the needs of these women, who represent the majority of those on welfare.

Five years ago, 3.1 million individuals were living below federal poverty levels.

By 2005, more than 17 percent of Texans were living below federal poverty levels, with 800,000 more living in poverty than in 2000, pushing the total Texas poverty picture toward 4 million. And nearly one in four children now lives in a poor household, making Texas the fifth-worst state for child poverty.

Poorer children are more likely to arrive at school unprepared to learn. If they fail and drop out, their job prospects are severely limited. Or, they may become parents who are unable to properly care for their children.

One out of three Texas students don't graduate, and more students drop out than finish high school in the state's largest cities, according to education experts.

Statewide, more than 2.5 million students have dropped out of Texas high schools in the last 20 years, and each graduating class loses about 120,000 students from freshman year to senior year, according to the San Antonio-based Intercultural Development Research Association.

The research group says more than half of students in Texas' largest cities drop out. The dropout rate among blacks, Hispanics and low-income students is about 60 percent, according to the Center for Education at Rice University.

The statewide dropout rate is about 33 percent -- or 20 points higher than what the Texas Education Agency reports.

Experts warn that the high dropout rate will lead to economic and social problems.

"If you live in a city like Dallas or Houston and half of your kids are not finishing high school, it's a social crisis," said Eileen Coppola, a researcher at Rice.

Dropouts are more likely to live in poverty, have health problems and end up in jail, Coppola said.

Dropouts on average earn about $9,200 per year less than high school graduates, said Frances Deviney, director for Texas Kids Count. That means dropouts give up about $900 million per year in wages.

The 2.5 million dropouts over the last 20 years represent $730 billion in lost revenue and costs for the state, Deviney said, citing a report from the research association.

"We have a huge problem," Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said.

Back to the original story:

Rep. Harvey Hilderbran, a Kerrville Republican who authored the 1995 bill, said he's satisfied that lawmakers did change the culture of dependence and replace it with one that relied on work.

"At this point, the reduction in welfare rolls is a resounding and unquestionable success," he said.

Two words: Caffeinated doughnuts.

Dr. Robert Bohannon, a molecular scientist, says he has developed a way to add caffeine to baked goods, without the bitter taste. Each piece of pastry is the equivalent of about two cups of coffee.

You can't buy the amped up doughnuts yet, but Bohannon says he's been approached some heavyweight companies, including Krispy Kreme, Dunkin' Donuts and Starbucks about carrying it.

Tory recently had the opportunity to meet with the management of the Harris County Toll Road Authority and ask them a bunch of questions. The notes he took make for some very interesting reading. Check it out.

In the immortal words of Dogbert, sometimes no sarcastic remark seems adequate.

A restaurant trade group says it is insulted by an insurance company's planned Super Bowl ad that stars Kevin Federline as a fast-food worker.

Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co.'s 30-second spot shows Federline, who is estranged from pop princess Britney Spears, performing in a glitzy music video. However, the punch line is that he's daydreaming - while cooking french fries at a fast-food joint.

The ad amounts to a "strong and direct insult to the 12.8 million Americans who work in the restaurant industry," wrote National Restaurant Association President and Chief Executive Steven Anderson in a letter to Nationwide CEO Jerry Jurgensen.

The commercial "would give the impression that working in a restaurant is demeaning and unpleasant," Anderson wrote.

If the Columbus-based insurer airs the spot during the televised Feb. 4 Super Bowl, Anderson said his organization will "make sure that our membership - many of whom are customers of Nationwide - know the negative implications this ad portrays of the restaurant industry."

A Nationwide executive shrugged off the criticism, saying that where humor is involved, there always will be somebody who doesn't get it.

The company doesn't mean to offend restaurant employees, said Steven Schreibman, vice president of advertising and brand management.

"We're not making fun of anybody, except maybe Kevin Federline."

Are you one of those people who always runs a little late? Do you set your clock ahead a few minutes in an effort to be on time, only to be thwarted because you mentally adjust for the fact that your clock is known to be fast? If so, here's a solution for you: a clock that runs an undefined number of minutes fast, with the exact amount changing within a defined range. As such, you know you're a bit ahead but you don't know how much, so you'd better be on the safe side and leave now just in case. Hey, it could work. Link via Crooked Timber.

Get well soon, Molly!

Nationally syndicated columnist Molly Ivins has been hospitalized in her recurring battle with breast cancer.

"I think she's tough as a metal boot," her brother, Andy Ivins, said Friday after a visit with her at Seton Medical Center in Austin.

Andy Ivins said his sister was admitted to Seton on Thursday. She spent Friday morning with longtime colleagues and friends, and was "sleeping peacefully" when he arrived later in the day.

A self-described leftist agitator, Ivins, 62, completed a round of radiation treatment in August, but the cancer "came back with a vengeance," and has spread through her body, Andy Ivins said.

According to the Houston Roundball Review, the Houston Comets are going to have a press conference on Wednesday, January 31, to announce that the proposed sale of the franchise to Hilton Koch has been approved and will go through. The Women's Hoops blog has more on this.

According to HRR, the timing of this announcement (which has apparently been delayed twice) is important because free agent signings begin February 1. The Comets also can't hire their new coach until the sale has been completed. In other words, it's time to get this done and move on. Stay tuned.

According to the Examiner, folks living near West Alabama want their old street back. You may recall that back in 2003 when Spur 527 was taken offline for construction, changes were made to Alabama to help it serve as an alternate route into downtown. Now that the spur is open again, some residents want those changes unmade.

The street originally had one primary lane going in each direction, with a middle turning lane and designated bicycle lanes on either side.

With the new plan, new traffic signals were installed along the corridor, turning the central lane into a reversible contraflow lane. The bicycle lanes were removed, and new ones were designated along Fairview Drive.

For residents in the neighborhoods through which West Alabama runs, perhaps the most noticeable changes were new signals and signs prohibiting left turns onto and off of the street, and prohibiting right turns on red lights. Longtime residents had to devise new ways to navigate to and from their homes.

[...]

Neil McKenna, a five-year resident of the 1700 block of Harold Lane, said that before the changes, West Alabama had a much more "residential" character.

"It was quieter, there were more pedestrians," said McKenna, a research scientist who works in the Texas Medical Center. A bicyclist, McKenna also bemoans the removal of West Alabama's bicycle lanes.

Both McKenna and Ray Jones, the founder of the West Alabama Quality of Life Coalition, say they heard officials say during a hearing in the federal proceeding prior to the spur reconstruction project that once it was completed, West Alabama would be restored to its original configuration.

District D Councilwoman Ada Edwards, who had only recently taken office when the spur project began, said she doesn't specifically recall who may have said that the street would be returned to its original status, but that was her understanding of what would happen.

However, Wes Johnson, spokesman for the city's Public Works Department, said that commitment was never made.

In any event, McKenna and Jones say it's time for the street to be changed back.

"As a local resident, it's an issue of great concern," McKenna said. "The city needs to act on it."

There is, however, another issue involved:

[S]ince the spur project controversy has come and gone, Johnson said, a new element has entered the picture -- METRO's plans to build the University Line light rail line. For months, METRO officials, residents and politicians have wrangled over where the line will go, including along Richmond Avenue, a few blocks from West Alabama.

Johnson said the traffic management plan that resulted in West Alabama's reconfiguration cost the city about $1 million. He said it would not be prudent to restore the original configuration of the street before a final decision on the rail line.

Edwards, however, said she would like to see West Alabama's restored.

"This is what the community wants," she said.

Having said that, we ought to have a pretty good idea by now what Metro has in mind to do to alleviate the construction woes on Richmond for the event that it needs them. Surely Metro will tout its amelioration plans (and likely already has been touting them) as part of its push to get whatever route it chooses completed. So how about all stakeholders here get together with Metro and talk about what Metro foresees as the impact of its possible future construction will be on Alabama? Maybe you'll find that they think it won't be so bad, just as the spur construction turned out to have less impact on the surface roads than people expected. Wouldn't that make more sense than waiting till all the pieces are in place, however many months from now that is?

The Houston GLBT Political Caucus takes a look at the five-so-far declared candidates for the open City Council seat, and adds some details that I had forgotten or hadn't know. Despite some low profiles, this is an interesting and diverse group that we will have on the ballot. Check it out.

This just arrived in my Inbox. Gotta love late Friday afternoon news. Hot off the presses, here are the committee assignments for the 80th Lege (PDF). Read and enjoy, commentary will follow later.

UPDATE: Jim Pitts fires back.

Christof has a couple of Metro rail-related posts up, about how the overall system is shaping up, and how the Southeast BRT line will interact with the Main Street line. He's about to start doing a lot of posts related to the Universities line alignment, and how it will fit with the rest of what Metro has to offer, so get ready to read up on all this.

In related news, the Chron reports that a pair of local Congressfolk will try to help Metro fulfill its original promise from the 2003 referendum by upgrading the BRT routes with real light rail lines.

[Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee and Al Green] attended the meeting at which the Metropolitan Transit Authority board approved negotiating with a team headed by Washington Group International for the $1 billion project to design and build the planned North, East End, Southeast and Uptown lines and a north side "intermodal terminal" for buses and trains.

Metro hopes federal dollars will fund half that cost, said spokeswoman Sandra Salazar, and the agency has permission to count $326 million already spent on its Main Street line toward local matching funds.

Metro CEO and President Frank Wilson reaffirmed Thursday that the agency plans to lay rails in the right-of-way, commonly called a guideway, from the outset.

And Metro has changed its terminology from BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) to GRT (Guided Rapid Transit) to include both options.

Jackson Lee said she and congressional colleagues who represent affected neighborhoods hope that "a GRT will be an LRT -- a light rail."

Board Chairman David Wolff said Jackson Lee's appointment last week to chair the transportation and infrastructure subcommittee of the House Homeland Security Committee gives her "a very important role to play in the future of transit all around the country and particularly in Houston."

Jackson Lee said she would meet with federal agency heads and try to expedite funding.
"The message will have to be reinforced in Washington that Houston is now serious about moving forward with a Metro system," she said. "But because of the competitiveness of federal funding and the numbers seeking federal funds, we will have to be both bipartisan and strong."

One thing to highlight from the article:

The new Democratic edge in Congress does not guarantee success, even if Metro has support for its plans from powerful Texas Republicans, including U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.

U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, sits on a subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee that holds transportation purse strings, and he could oppose funding for routes that deviate, in his view, from those described in the 2003 resolution approved by voters.

His aide Nick Swyka said Culberson would not comment on the projects in Wednesday's vote.

However, he said, Culberson has not changed his mind that Metro is bound by a 2003 transit referendum to build the University light rail line on Westpark and not Richmond. Contracts for that project were not on Thursday's agenda.

And the good news is that my impression was not correct. I called Nick Swyka, and he said that the reason Culberson did not comment on the projects in question here was precisely because he doesn't get involved, and doesn't plan to get involved, in matters like this that are not in his district. He may or may not vote for any future appropriations to Metro that Jackson Lee and/or Green may propose (I didn't ask about this, and I daresay it would have been premature for Swyka to comment anyway had I asked), but he won't try to block what they're doing. That's all I could ask, and I'm glad to hear it. One less thing to worry about.

Via Houstonist, there are now ten more red light cameras around the town. Here they are, so you'll know where to behave yourself:

• West Loop at San Felipe (east frontage road)


• Southwest Freeway at Bellaire (west frontage road)


• Bissonnet westbound at Southwest Freeway east frontage road


• Southwest Freeway at Beechnut (east frontage road)


• Southwest Freeway at Fondren (east frontage road)


• Chartres northbound at St. Joseph's Parkway


• El Dorado northbound at Gulf Freeway


• Hollister northbound at 290 west frontage road


• West Road eastbound at North Freeway west frontage road


• North Wayside southbound at East Freeway north frontage road

About a quarter of drivers ticketed from September through December had paid the fine by the end of the year, Houston Police Department records show.

The actual collection rate may be higher because of a lag time between when a driver receives a violation and pays the fine, said Adam Tuton, vice president of American Traffic Solutions Inc., the camera vendor.

Violators have 45 days to pay or request a hearing to contest the citation. So some drivers ticketed in December still have time to pay, or payments already made may be recorded in January statistics.

More than 14,000 citations were issued between September, when the program went into effect, and December. That includes 10 city intersections where cameras were first installed, as well as 10 more locations where cameras began photographing violators' license plates in November.

"The program is working much like we anticipated," said Sgt. Michael Muench, who oversees it.

[...]

When the camera-monitoring program began, police estimated a quarter of violators would pay their tickets.

Houston Police Department Budget Director Larry Yium said then that the estimate was low and somewhat arbitrary. Jim Tuton, Adam Tuton's brother and the CEO of ATS, said previously that he expected the collection rate to be as high as 90 percent, based on collections in other cities.

Unpaid citations are referred to collection agencies, so nonpayment could show up on credit reports. But because camera-generated citations are civil, not criminal, courts can't issue arrest warrants for those who don't pay, as they can for drivers who don't pay speeding tickets -- or red-light tickets issued by police who witness violations.

The lack of that criminal tool against violators caught on camera may partly explain why the city hasn't been able to dragoon more violators into paying.

Questions: How long does it take before a second notice goes out, and how does that affect the payment rate? When will the collection agencies get involved? And how much of a revenue generator can this thing be if three out of four people ignore the tickets they get?

Well, we were promised committee assignments for the House by yesterday, but we didn't get them. The Statesman blog has the best summary of the situation.

"The speaker promised too much to too many people," said Waco Rep. Jim Dunnam who leads the House Democratic caucus.

Given that 68 House members signaled their opposition to Craddick's re-election on Jan. 9, Craddick promised in the election aftermath to be kinder-and-gentler in running the House, listening more to the members than ramrodding his agenda.

The delay, according to Craddick loyalists who sought anonymity because their committee assignments are in play, is prompted more by his longest-serving allies feeling they are not getting enough in return for their loyalty. As Craddick told members of his new team what their assignments would be, the word trickled out to other members.

Some weren't satisfied.

Craddick is finding it hard to please everyone--or at least the 80 members who stuck with him.

Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, is questioning Craddick's motives.

"He's not kinder and gentler," said Talton, who voted against Craddick. "He's just trying to be smarter."

And worse for Craddick, he's run into some resistance on a vote that's normally pro forma:

Craddick asked all members to be present Tuesday for a vote on suspending a constitutional rule prohibiting consideration of legislation--not designated by the governor as emergency items--on the House floor within the first 60 days of the session.

It would take four-fifths of the House's 150 members to suspend the rules. Craddick reminded members Thursday that the rule had been suspended every legislative session but one.

But Tuesday's vote might be more difficult because as few as 31 members can kill it.

Dunnam said he sees no reason to give Craddick, criticized for being autocratic, a "blank check" to speed any legislation he choses with very little committee input.

Dunnam said Craddick used the rule suspension in 2003 to ram his pro-business agenda, including curbing the ability of people to sue companies.

Instead, given the level of distrust in the House, Dunnam said the members should suspend the rules for specific legislation instead of giving the speaker control over the early agenda.

Wanna be a tour guide at the Saint Arnold brewery? Houstonist tells you how and why:

Brewery tours are held each Saturday at one o'clock in the PM. Volunteer duties include handing out those nifty wooden beer tokens, pouring brews and cleaning up after the tourees. The perks include discounts, exclusive event invites and of course enjoying a tasty beverage or seven at the conclusion of each tour.

The catch is that all volunteers must attend a TABC course. The next one is at the brewery on Tuesday, the 30th. It'll cost you $25 and take four hours of your time to have an instructor tell you to use common sense about serving folks, as in if they drink to much and hurt themselves you and the establishment may be liable. There's other lessons, too, but that's the main one.

Contact the brewery if you're interested and have some Saturdays to spare. Be sure to let us know if you need help polishing off a sixer.

Saint Arnold Brewing Company
www.saintarnold.com
Ann@saintarnold.com
713-686-9494

Well, that's a relief.

The death penalty cannot be used against doctors who perform abortions without parental approval or during the third trimester, according to an opinion released Wednesday by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott.

A state lawmaker asked Abbott to clarify the available punishments after a prosecutors group contended that a law passed in 2005 had the unintended consequence of allowing doctors to be charged with capital murder in those scenarios. In Texas, capital murder is punishable by life in prison or the death sentence.

No doctors have been charged with capital murder, and it's difficult to imagine a prosecutor using that tactic, said Shannon Edmonds, the Texas District and County Attorneys Association official who came up with the interpretation.

But Rep. David Swinford said he wanted Abbott to clarify the law before any cases arose because he did not think the Legislature wanted doctors to be prosecuted in that way.

"We never discussed a capital murder deal at any time, so I know that was not anybody's opinion about the thing," said Swinford, R-Amarillo.

From the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition:

State Representative Eddie Rodriguez in collaboration with the University Leadership Initiative, will conduct Austin's Citizenship Drive on Saturday, January 27th, 2007 starting at 8:00 am at the LBJ School of Public Affairs located 2315 Red River, (inside the Sid Richardson building) in the city of Austin, TX 78705. The goal of the workshop is to help eligible legal permanent residents apply for U.S. citizenship.

Last spring, millions of immigrants and their supporters marched in cities throughout the United States in support of comprehensive immigration reform. The unprecedented levels of participation has motivated thousand of individuals to seek other avenues to continue their civic engagement, including more direct democratic actions such as voting, which requires legal permanent residents to first become naturalized citizens.

"The message is loud and clear: Immigrants are an integral part of the American community" said State Representative Eddie Rodriguez. "There is no better way to demonstrate our community's patriotism and commitment to this country than by becoming full participants in its democracy. U.S. citizenship and voting are clearly the next steps."

Approximately four out of ten Latino adults living in the U.S. are not citizens, of which 5 million are eligible for naturalization. In Texas, there are approximately 800,000 Latinos potentially eligible to become U.S. Citizens. Research demonstrates that Latino naturalized citizens, are voting at higher rates than native born Latinos in many states," notes Rebecca Acuna, Policy Analyst with ULI. "Our community can continue to change the political landscape of our country through increased electoral participation."

Eligible applicants for U.S. citizenship are encouraged to arrive early, as the first 300 legal permanent residents who arrive and meet the requirements to solicit citizenship will be ensured assistance. To apply, applicants must be:

* At least 18 years old
* A legal permanent resident for at least five years (3-Years if married to U.S. Citizen)
* Able to read, write, speak, and understand basic English, and have basic knowledge of U.S. History and government
* Of good moral character.

In addition, the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services requires citizenship applicants to submit a $400 money order along with the application. "So if possible," Acuna stressed, "applicants should consider bringing the money order and complete the full application process on the day of the workshop."

For more information, applicants may call 441-8123 ext 101 or 113.

Organizers estimate that 70 bilingual volunteers are needed to conduct the event. Persons interested in volunteering are encouraged to call 441-8123 ext 101 or 113. Training will be provided.

Yesterday, we discussed how there's $2.5 billion in the state budget for $4 billion worth of priorities, at least once you factor in the sacred and all-consuming property tax cuts. Today, Lt. Gov. Davis Dewhurst shows that he wants that money spent on the wrong things.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said Wednesday that Texas needs to build prisons to hold 5,000 new beds, a view at odds with a major report key lawmakers will release next week that will stress treatment programs and prison alternatives.

"We respect the lieutenant governor, but we respectfully disagree with him on this one if he's talking about building maximum-security facilities," said Rep. Jerry Madden, R-Plano, chairman of the House Corrections Committee.

Senate Criminal Justice Committee Chairman John Whitmire, D-Houston, said Texas could ease crowded prisons and save money by increasing treatment options and returning fewer parolees to prison for minor infractions.

Even if some of Whitmire's suggestions for treating substance abusers are adopted, Dewhurst argues that the state still needs more prison space for a growing population.

"We haven't built any new prison beds in Texas for a number of years, and our population is exploding," Dewhurst said.

"I don't -- and the people of Texas don't -- want to have dangerous people on our streets, and that's what we're going to prevent. I've been looking at a number of 4,000 to 5,000" over the next four years, he said.

That projection is in line with the budget request by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, which wants to add three prisons to hold 5,000 prisoners. That would cost $440 million just for construction, a state expense opposed by the Texas Public Policy Foundation, which advocates limited government.

"We've suggested a number of reforms in terms of probation, parole and sentencing. By adopting those, we would certainly not need more beds," said Marc Levin, director of the foundation's Center for Effective Justice.

I'm going to keep harping on this because there's one priority competing for those dollars that already has sufficient funds allocated for it, if only our mulish state leaders would let them be spent. I am of course talking about CHIP.

"Back in 2003, you heard that we had a $10 billion deficit and the state of Texas couldn't afford to pay for things like health insurance," said Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston. "Now, here we are four years later with a $14.1 billion surplus. There is no excuse."

BOR has more on yesterday's CHIP press conference, including some embedded video. Check it out.

Following up on yesterday's post, here's the story about the arguments made in the Court of Criminal Appeals in the DeLay case, over whether or not the conspiracy charge that was tossed should be reinstated.

Rick Reed, an assistant to Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, told the appeals court that the state's conspiracy statute under the penal code has applied to all felonies in Texas since 1974. Reed said the fact the Legislature in 2003 passed a law adding conspiracy language to the election code did not matter.

Reed also said the appeals court erred in two 1970s-era opinions that said the conspiracy statute only applied to crimes that are listed in the penal code. He said those opinions should be overturned or their rulings limited to cases involving the controlled-substances act. Both rulings were in drug cases.

DeGuerin told the court that the earlier cases were "brilliantly decided." He noted that at the time, the controlled-substances act was the only law that created a crime outside the penal code.

"The trend of the last 50 years has been to write all sorts of other codes," DeGuerin said. "You can't just look at one set of books anymore. That's a problem."

[...]

Earle afterward said he thinks the court should overturn the earlier rulings and uphold the indictments.

He said if the current case law logic is followed, prosecutors would have a difficult time pursuing conspiracy charges in cases involving many crimes against children, the elderly or the environment because those crimes are in other state laws and are not listed in the penal code.

Easily the funniest thing ever written about this case from the beginning:

From the questioning Wednesday, it was difficult to tell whether the judges were inclined to agree with prosecutors.

Even if they overturn the earlier opinions, the judges appeared to be disinclined to reinstate the indictments. Several indicated they believe that would violate the due process rights of DeLay, Ellis and Colyandro.

The trial on related money-laundering charges cannot go forward until the appeals court rules on the conspiracy indictment. The Court of Criminal Appeals has no deadline for ruling.

However, Ellis and Colyandro have appealed similar money-laundering charges against them. That case is pending before the 3rd Court of Appeals. Its outcome also could affect the DeLay prosecution.

"We may be in the appellate orbit for some time," [Joe] Turner, Colyandro's lawyer, told the high criminal court on Wednesday.

This hit my mailbox yesterday, and since the event in question is this evening and here in Houston, I thought I'd pass it along for those who might be interested:

Ethan Hawke Stars in Short Film on Texas Parks Crisis

Environment Texas To Screen Film at Houston Coffeeshop

WHAT: Environment Texas Research and Policy Center will premiere Texas Parks at Risk, a short film narrated by two-time Oscar nominee and Texas native Ethan Hawke. The film reveals a magnificent parks system beleaguered by budget cuts, lay-offs, dilapidated infrastructure, and proposals to sell or close as any as 18 parks. After the screening, the Environment Texas staff will discuss plans to get the Texas Legislature to save Texas parks.

WHEN: Thursday, January 25, 7 PM

WHERE: Cafe Brasil/Domy Books at 1709 Westheimer in Houston

As noted by commenter KH here and as reported in the Chron, the next well known structure to go on the bulldozer hit list is the Allen House apartment complex on Allen Parkway.

On Tuesday, residents there were told that the Boston-based real estate firm that has owned the complex for two decades plans to turn the 24 acres of prime land into Regent Square, a mixed-use urban village housing apartments, condominiums, shops and a boutique hotel.

For Houston, known for its suburban sprawl, Regent Square will be something different: an open, walkable neighborhood for living, working, shopping and dining.

The developer, GID Urban Development Group, a division of the General Investment and Development Cos., has hired seven architecture firms to design the project.

GID owns 12,000 apartment units nationally.

The first phase, scheduled to start construction in September and to be completed in 2010, will offer 740 apartment units, 230,000 square feet of retail, 60,000 square feet of office space and a hotel on two city blocks.

A future phase of the project GID hopes to complete by 2014 could have 1,000 more residential units, including three condominium towers, more apartments and another 100,000 square feet of retail space.

[...]

John Darrah, vice president, GID Urban Development Group, said he hopes to create a "symbiotic relationship" with nearby River Oaks Shopping Center to encourage shoppers to visit both districts on the same trip.

Regent Square will be bordered on the north by Allen Parkway, south by West Clay, east by Dunlavy and west by Tirrell.

A mixed-use project like Regent Square goes against the conventional wisdom of Houston developers, said Michael Swartz, a project manager at David M. Schwarz/Architectural Services, the Washington, D.C., firm that is doing the master plan.

"In Houston, there's a mind-set of: You make your return on investment in three years," but with Regent Square, Swartz said, "you have an owner who's committed to a project for a very long term. They've owned the property for 20 years and expect to keep it for 20 years or more.

"An early exit strategy wouldn't work with a project like this."

"I think it will be very exciting for the northern end of Montrose. The design, from what I saw, is really very exciting," said Sue Lovell, at-large city council member.

The city will likely have to grant variances for the project, she said. It will look at potential negative effects from the new development, such as more traffic congestion.

"The beauty of their project is there's a lot of entrances and exits, as opposed to other projects in Montrose sending lots of traffic out one way into very busy streets," she said.

I'll keep an eye on this one. It'll be nice to have a project now that the Robinson Warehouse demolition is basically done.

How stuff gets done in the Lege, in a nutshell.

Liquor wholesalers dumped nearly $1.7 million on Texas lawmakers in the weeks leading up to the 2007 Legislature while pushing for changes that would allow them to sell booze directly to restaurants and bars.

The law now allows only package liquor stores - not wholesalers - to supply establishments where patrons drink on the premises. Wholesalers say that's not fair; package stores say giant wholesalers would undercut their prices to monopolize the market, potentially costing thousands of people their jobs.

The wholesale giants, Dallas-based Glazer's Distributors and San Antonio's Republic Beverage Co., are placing a big bet on getting the law changed.

They spent nearly five times more on lawmakers in the past 10 weeks than they did in the entire year before the 2005 session. According to Texas Ethics Commission filings released last week, Gov. Rick Perry and House Speaker Tom Craddick each took $100,000 and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst got $75,000 from officers of the wholesalers and their political committees.

There also were $20,000 donations to 23 of 31 Texas senators, $40,000 apiece to three other influential senators and at least $1,000 each to 130 of 150 House members. Almost half received $5,000 to $10,000 apiece.

The effort provides a clear snapshot of how money makes the Capitol go round.

"It shows that in Texas, we have a pay-to-play system," said Suzy Woodford of Common Cause Texas, which tracks ethics in government. "We have no limits on the amount of money that these individuals, their PACs and their officers can contribute. So it clearly demonstrates to the average Joe that if you don't have the big bucks ... the item you care about is not even going to be considered."

The wholesalers make no bones about what they want. Alan Gray, a spokesman for the Glazer's-controlled Licensed Beverage Distributors PAC, said it's unfair that liquor wholesalers can't sell directly to bars and restaurants when wine and beer wholesalers can.

"We think it's an inefficient and archaic system for the distribution of distilled spirits, and we're going to seek a change," the spokesman said. Asked if the $1.7 million was given to lawmakers expressly to change the law, Mr. Gray said: "We participate in the political process, but we don't comment on our political giving."

(See how magnanimous I'm being here to you liquor wholesalers? Maybe you could do me a solid in return and put in a good word to your beer wholesaling brethren about Friends of Texas Microbreweries. I appreciate it.)

Of course, the crux of the matter here is the money. The reason why Glazer and Republic are likely to succeed while the microbrewers are basically a sideshow is that Brock Wagner et al don't have $1.7 million in small unmarked bills to distribute around the Capitol like so much grass seed. Imagine a world in which they and every other high roller had to build a grassroots movement to lobby the Lege for laws they wanted. At least in this case, the liquor wholesalers have the virtue of a good argument for the legislation they want. If only that were the situation all the time.

Link via Dig Deeper Texas.

I'm not sure why this has come up right now, but both Perry and Stace are using the case of Janette Sexton in HD144 to make a point in a larger argument about who did and didn't do what to help Democratic candidates up and down the ballot in 2006. I don't have any quibble with their basic point, that there wasn't nearly enough support being given by the various power brokers within the party to candidates who were not in races deemed top tier, but I have a serious disagreement with the way they're using the data to make their point. Perry, who ranks all Democratic State House challengers from Harris and Montgomery Counties by their vote percentage, says:

It's worth noting that Cohen raised $500,000 for her campaign, with the assistance of many of the previously named legislators, an army of volunteers and the wherewithal to take a ten-month leave of absence from her position as the director of the Houston Area Women's Center. Thibaut, an adroit fundraiser, collected $150,000 and also a core of vigorous volunteer support. Matula, who ran in neighboring HD-129, benefited from the teachers PAC and strong efforts from the Bay Area New Democrats, Area 5 Democrats and Battleground Democrats -- all clubs that could have chipped in volunteer assistance to Padilla-Sexton as well -- enabling her to have extensive blockwalking and phonebanking. BAND, to their credit, provided robocalls to Janette's campaign. John Cobarruvias, the president of the club, admitted that BAND's efforts were stretched too thin over the Bell, Lampson and Matula campaigns to provide much in the way of anything extra. So with virtually no help and no resources - no money, no volunteers, consequently no direct mail, blockwalking or phonebanking, not even any campaign literature - Padilla-Sexton performed fourth of eleven political novices. Trautman, McDavid, and Khan all had greater resources and performed less well in their districts.

Considering we had other "favorites" that raised so much more and performed just as well as Padilla-Sexton I wonder if they did as well because of effective campaigning, or just for being the alternative on the ballot.

I say if you really want to know how a State House candidate did, you need to compare her to her peers on the ballot. Here's how the nine Harris County State House challengers did relative to the other countywide Democrats in their districts:

Candidate     Dist    Pct County%   Diff  Rank

==============================================

Trautman       127  40.78   32.25  +8.53     1

Cohen          134  55.75   48.42  +7.33     1

Matula         129  42.31   37.55  +4.76     1

Thibaut        133  42.80   42.05  +0.75     8

Brann          136  29.89   29.96  -0.07     9

Khan           126  33.47   33.83  -0.36    12

Sexton         144  41.87   43.04  -1.17    17

Nelson-Turnier 150  29.71   31.67  -1.86    18

McDavid        138  39.86   42.77  -2.91    18

These numbers speak for themselves. Trautman, Cohen, and Matula significantly overperformed relative to their districts, as I showed before. Sexton ran a little more than a point worse than average, and did better than only two others on the ballot - John Shike and Goodwille Pierre. Thibaut, who did have significant resources but barely beat average, can fairly be said to have underperformed, but to say Sexton did better than Trautman is just wrong.

Again, none of this obviates the point Perry and Stace made about the commitment or lack thereof made by the powers that be to the candidates on the ballot. I'm disputing the notion that Sexton's performance is comparable to those of the candidates who did get insitutional backing of some kind. Maybe she would have done better if she'd had that kind of backing; maybe the same is true for Scott Brann, Mark McDavid, Dot Nelson-Turnier, and Chad Khan as well. They didn't get it, so we'll never know. I have a lot of respect for these folks and the effort they put forth. But as we criticize the establishment for abandoning these candidates, bear in mind the possibility that the real abdication was in not recruiting candidates they were willing to support and thus leaving the race to unfunded novices.

The Chron's RG Ratcliffe explores the "are bloggers journalists?" question in the context of some recent actions by the Lege: possibly credentialling bloggers for the Lege floor, the blogger libel bill, and the proposed journalist shield law, among other things. All this and more is in podcast form, which includes a few words of wisdom from yours truly, along with Eileen, Evan, Matt, and Rep. Pena. (It's easy to see why Eileen always gets called for these things - she's a great interview subject.)

One point to add to this: If the criteria for offering expanded shield law protections for online journalists involves revenue in some form, then I'm out of luck. I don't take ads, and I make no money off of this thing. I realize that it would require a more subjective approach to include folks like me, and that such a thing is impractical to say the least. I just wanted to note that for the record.

Anyway, it's a good listen. Check it out.

Let's talk state budget priorities for a moment, shall we?

Legislative leaders outlined a starting-point spending plan for the next two years that puts a priority on local school property-tax rate cuts but doesn't earmark money for new prisons, increased border security or reducing college tuition.

Those three areas are among the ones that would be left to duke it out for $2.5 billion remaining after leaders set aside most of the nearly $14.3 billion in new revenue to cover the promised cut in tax rates and basic needs such as growth in Medicaid caseloads and school enrollment.

"Our increased spending is very, very modest. We've all seen reports about a $14 billion surplus. It's not a surplus. It's new revenue. Of that new revenue, we've got about $12 billion in obligations," said Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who heads the Senate.

Sen. Judith Zaffirini, a Laredo Democrat who is vice chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, noted that as lawmakers look at the $2.5 billion that's unallocated, "Let us always recognize that there are at least $4 billion in competing interests" for that money.

House Speaker Tom Craddick, R-Midland, said lawmakers want to be sure they keep a promise to continue reducing school property tax rates from the current $1.33 per $100 valuation to $1.

The two-year spending plan -- divided between two bills -- not only would cover the immediate cost of the local tax cuts but would leave at least $3 billion unspent to ensure lawmakers can again pay for the local tax cuts in the following two years.

Meanwhile, there's an even bigger priority for which the money actually exists, and that's CHIP. Nearly $400 million in state funds for CHIP were allocated but not spent because the onerous requirements for eligibility that were adopted in 2003's HB2292 have pared the rolls so drastically. House Democrats are going to make a big push to restore less rigid rules for CHIP. They had a big press conference today, for which a bunch of Dems (but, sadly, no Republicans showed up, to announce their intentions. Nearly every member of the caucus has filed or co-authored a bill to roll back some of the excessive CHIP restrictions. They'll still have to hurdle the GOP leadership to get this done, but at least they'll be heard in the process. And I want to highlight this link again, because it covers pretty much all of the things the Dems want to address.

Vince was the man on the spot for the press conference - see here, here, and here for his coverage. I love this bit from Rep. Borris Miles, as transcribed by Vince:

"In Harris County, we had the largest disenrollment of any county in Texas. I will be filing my bill...my legislation will take it one step further...to prevent us from repeating past mistakes, my bill will require the state calculate the interest lost on these funds...and create an outreach program designed to reach those parents of children eligible but not yet enrolled in CHIPs....Our Lieutenant Governor in his inaugural speech, said this was going to be the session of children. Let's put our money where our mouth is."

I've received a couple of press releases from various legislators on this, which are reprinted beneath the fold. I'm sure there will be much more on this soon. Stay tuned.

Press release from State Rep. Solomon Ortiz, Jr.

State Representative Solomon Ortiz Jr. today filed House Bill 710 to restore health coverage through the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for hundreds of thousands of children in Texas. In 2003, the Texas Legislature reduced state funding for CHIP and passed House Bill 2292, which created significant barriers to enrollment. Since the restrictive policies were enacted in 2003, almost two hundred thousand children have lost their health coverage.

"Providing health coverage for our children is the most important thing the legislature should do this session," Rep. Ortiz said. "My constituents sent me here to put our children and our families first. Over 3,400 children in Nueces County have lost CHIP coverage since 2003. My bill will repeal restrictive policies that have needlessly kicked thousands of children in our community off the CHIP program."

According to data collected from the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC), during the 2006 budget year, the State of Texas left unspent $400 million in state funds dedicated for CHIP and Children's Medicaid. Those dollars could easily cover every child that has lost CHIP coverage since 2003.

"It would take no more than a small fraction of our $14 billion surplus each year to restore CHIP for our children," Rep. Ortiz said. "We have the money -- there's no question about that. The only question is if we have the will to put our money where our mouth is and stand up for Texas children."

Rep. Ortiz joined dozens of other House members from across the state on Wednesday to advocate and raise awareness for the repeal of the restrictive CHIP policies. As of today, at least 61 house members have signaled their intention to fight for the restoration of CHIP.

"People in District 33 and across Texas are demanding common sense policies - like reducing paperwork, deducting child care costs when determining eligibility and not counting families' savings against them. These policies will ensure that more of our kids have health care," Rep. Ortiz said. "We need to restore CHIP now. The health of our children and the future of our state depend on it."

Rep. Ortiz encourages constituents to contact his office on this or any issue of interest at (512) 463-0578, email him at district33_ortiz@house.state.tx.us or visit the State of Texas House website at www.house.state.tx.us.

State Representative Veronica Gonzales filed House Bill 701 to restore health coverage through the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for hundreds of thousands of children in Texas. In 2003, the Texas Legislature reduced state funding for CHIP and passed House Bill 2292, which significantly increased the difficulty for enrollment. Since the restrictive policies were enacted in 2003, almost two hundred thousand children have lost their health coverage.

"Providing health coverage for our children is one of my top priorities," Rep. Gonzales said. "I believe we must put our children and our families first. Lets remember CHIP is not free; it was created to help families who are helping themselves. My bill will move forward with positive change for our children's health coverage by repealing restrictive policies that have needlessly kicked children in our community off the CHIP program."

Restoring the CHIP program to the enrollment levels that existed before 2003 would not cost the state any money. According to data collected from the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC), during the 2006 budget year, the State of Texas left unspent $400 million in state funds dedicated for CHIP and Children's Medicaid. Those dollars could easily cover every child that has lost CHIP coverage since 2003.

"It would take no more than 1/100th of our $14 billion surplus each year to restore CHIP for our children," Rep. Gonzales said. "We have the money -- there's no question about that. The only question is if we have the will."

Rep. Gonzales joined dozens of other House members on Wednesday to advocate and raise awareness for the repealing of the restrictive CHIP policies.

"Common sense policies - like reducing paperwork, deducting child care costs when determining eligibility and not counting families' savings against them - will ensure that more of our kids have health care," Rep. Gonzales said. "We've heard it time again, Children are an asset to our state; a healthy child is a successful child."

Rep. Gonzales encourages constituents to contact her office on this or any issue of interest at (512) 463-0578, email her at Veronica.Gonzales@house.state.tx.us or visit the State of Texas House website at www.house.state.tx.us.

State Representative Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) and other House members filed legislation to restore health coverage through the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for hundreds of thousands of children in Texas.

"We must restore CHIP coverage for our children," Rep. Coleman said. "This is a no-brainer. The people of Texas have spoken, and it's time for us to act."

In 2003, the Texas Legislature reduced state funding for CHIP and passed House Bill 2292, which significantly increased the difficulty for enrollment. Since the restrictive policies were enacted in 2003, almost two hundred thousand children have lost their health coverage.

"The policies that were enacted by the 78th Legislature in September 2003 have -- by far -- had the greatest impact on CHIP disenrollment," Rep. Elliott Naishtat said.

Restoring the CHIP program to the enrollment levels that existed before 2003 would not cost the state any money. According to data collected from the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC), during the 2006 budget year, the State of Texas left unspent $400 million in state funds dedicated for CHIP and Children's Medicaid. Those dollars could easily cover every child that has lost CHIP coverage since 2003.

"I believe we must put our children and our families first, and my bill will move forward with positive change for CHIP," Rep. Veronica Gonzales said.

Rep. Coleman joined dozens of other House members on Wednesday to advocate and raise awareness for the repealing of the restrictive CHIP policies.

"Not restoring CHIP to its previous levels is fiscally irresponsible," Rep. Paula Pierson said.

"The average loss of CHIP coverage of the counties in my district is 62% -- that is a huge loss," Rep. Joe Heflin said.

"In Harris County, we saw a decrease in enrollment from 93,901 in 2003, to 66,696, a total loss of over 27,205," Rep. Borris Miles said. "This is unacceptable."

More than four months after agreeing to hear an appeal from the Travis County DA's office over the dismissal of a conspiracy charge against Tom DeLay, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals will actually hear arguments in the case today.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is set to hear arguments Wednesday on the conspiracy charge -- part of the criminal case that helped drive DeLay from office.

Prosecutors want the charge reinstated, but attorneys for DeLay and two co-defendants contend a lower appellate court correctly ruled that the law was not in effect when the alleged conspiracy occurred in 2002.

DeLay's trial on remaining felony conspiracy and money laundering charges must wait until the state's highest criminal court rules, which could be weeks or months after Wednesday's hearing.

In a brief filed with the court, prosecutors reject defense lawyers' contention that the state's conspiracy law didn't apply to the Texas Election Code until 2003. They outlined a series of steps in legislative history to back up their argument.

"The plain language ... is clear and unambiguous: the offense of criminal conspiracy applies to all felony offenses defined by Texas law, including the offense of unlawfully making a corporate political contribution," prosecutors wrote.

But [DeLay's defense attorney Dick] DeGuerin disputed that. He also said the law is clear.

"There was no conspiracy to violate the election code on the books at the time that the conduct took place. There's no such crime, in other words," DeGuerin said.

The good news, as we already knew, is that the Governor's Task Force on Appraisal Reform will not recommend another attempt at mandating a lower appraisal cap for property taxes. The bad news is that they've chosen an even more insidious approach - revenue caps.

The panel, chaired by Dallas businessman Tom Pauken, proposed that all local governments, except school districts, be prohibited from increasing tax collections by more than 5 percent a year without voter approval.

At present, voters can petition for a rollback election if taxes increase by more than 8 percent a year. The new rollback election would be automatic, and, unlike now, the value of new construction would count against the 5 percent limit.

The task force also proposed that counties be given the option of increasing local sales taxes by one-half cent per dollar in exchange for lowering local residential appraisal caps from the current 10 percent a year to 5 percent and providing other forms of property tax relief.

The sales tax option was designed to soften local officials' opposition to new limits on their property taxes. But even Gov. Rick Perry, who appointed the panel and endorsed its report, conceded proposed limits will continue to generate controversy.

"I'm under no illusion there is a complete and absolute consensus on this issue," Perry said.

The Texas Association of Counties, which has helped kill previous efforts to lower the appraisal cap, said the lower revenue limit would fly in the face of ever-increasing costs of county governments.

The group said the task force recommendations wouldn't adequately address unfunded mandates and said the proposal to let taxpayers calculate their property taxes on a five-year rolling average would hurt fast-growing suburban communities because the average would include lower values from previous years.

Rep. Mike Villarreal, D-San Antonio, said he liked the sales price disclosure recommendation, which is similar to a bill he is sponsoring. But overall, he said, the task force report, including the sales tax proposal, would transfer the tax burden from "families of higher income to families of lower income."

In August, the Governor appointed the Texas Task Force on Appraisal Reform, chaired by Tom Pauken, to address complaints about the property tax appraisal system. The Pauken Commission has now released its final report, but it is not really about the appraisal system. In fact, the report offers no evidence that the appraisal system is overvaluing property. Instead, the report is about two things: 1) keeping taxes unrealistically low, leaving local officials unable to meet local needs; and 2) shifting those taxes that we do pay off those with higher income and onto those with lower-incomes.

Now then. I had a chance to speak to Rep. Villarreal yesterday about the task force report, and he made several points that I want to highlight:

1. On the question of why we don't need revenue caps, Villarreal said "We elect people to make these decisions, we give them the power to tax. Along with that comes our commitment to pool our tax dollars together and make public investments." In other words, if you don't like what your Mayor and City Council are doing with tax revenues, vote 'em out of office.

2. For most homes, local tax assessors can do a pretty good job of determining their true value. This is because there's plenty of publicly available data, from things like MLS listings, that provide clues for them. It's the high-end properties that are bought and sold through private transactions that are much harder to evaluate. This is the rationale behind sales price disclosure requirements - to improve the quality of data available for tax assessors on top of the market homes, which will enable them to more fairly assess those properties.

3. This is even more the case with commercial properties, where undervaluations can mean a lot of lost tax revenue - this Statesman editorial cites an estimate of $4 billion annually. Villarreal noted the case of La Mansion hotel in San Antonio (which he mentions in this Statesman op-ed), which he said had fought its assessment by the county and eventually settled for a $25 million price tag, then was sold a few days later for $100 million. It doesn't make sense for commercial real estate to be so improperly assessed; the effect of such distortions is to put a bigger burden on homeowners. This is why Villarreal supports sales price disclosures (he has submitted HB133 to address that), and there's bipartisan support for that. Which of course the task force doesn't want - they're recommending that purchasers submit an estimate of the property's value along with a justification of it. Why they consider that a better answer than simply supplying the actual price is left as an exercise for the reader.

4. While there's been much noise made, by the task force and others, about how much property tax collections have gone up, other factors affecting homeowners have been remarkably un-commented on. Rick Casey noted how state sales taxes went up a nearly equivalent amount as property taxes during the 1985-2004 time period cited by the task force, while state fees went up more than twice as much. Villarreal told me that in the past four years - which is to say, since deregulation - the average homeowner in Houston has seen a 17.5% annual increase in utility bills. Yet that's not on Governor Perry's radar screen.

5. The big question is whether any of this can pass. Nobody thinks that anything requiring a constitutional amendment will get the requisite 2/3 support, which is why appraisal caps are off the table. Revenue caps need just a majority, but Villarreal thinks the gains made by the Democrats this cycle will help them to kill this proposal. It will definitely be a fight, however, and it could go either way.

That's all I have for now. I expect there will be much more to be said in the coming weeks. Stay tuned.

The preservationist urge has come to River Oaks, whose stately old mansions are slowly being replaced by not-so-stately newer ones.

"This community is an historical area, with each of the homes having a history from the owners and residents who were the city's founding fathers, which we want to preserve," said Deborah Salvo, a member of the River Oaks Preservation Society whose home in the 2100 block of Brentwood was the third house in River Oaks to be classified as an historical landmark.

"The homes were built by nationally known architects and craftsmen for Houston's business, professional, political and social leaders that provided the city with much of its civic, cultural, philanthropic and social direction, as well as leaving legacies in Houston and Texas' history."

Yet, Salvo said every time a For Sale sign goes up, neighbors wonder if the new owners will tear the home down or preserve it.

"That is why we are asking homeowners in the area to file for the historical landmark status, so the homes will not be torn down. Each time a home is torn down, it is like tearing a page out of the history book, which we do not want to see happen," Salvo said.

Salvo said almost one-third of the homes in River Oaks have been demolished, which diminishes the neighborhood as a whole. And with each For Sale sign, the threat of losing another home is possible.

Said Jill Jewett, Mayor Bill White's assistant on Cultural Affairs, "We have spent so much time tearing down buildings and building new that we are now celebrating our past and where we came from. We also realize preserving our past adds to the quality of life, which is a mark of a mature city. Some of the reasons people want to stay in a place are good green spaces, culture and history. Part of that history are the homes in River Oaks, which have a great story to tell."

Jewett said there are two types of historical designations: Landmark and Protected Landmark.

"A protected landmark cannot be torn down, whereas a landmark can only be demolished with the approval of the Houston Archeological and Historical Commission appointed by the mayor," Jewett said.

To qualify for historical landmark status, the site or structure must be more than 50 years old; must be identified with a person or group that contributed significantly to the city's cultural or historical development; and must possess distinctive characteristics of architecture, building type, construction period, or method that is representative of an area.

According to the city's Web site, the benefits of a historic designated home include city property tax exemptions, special recognition for the property and a move to maintain neighborhood character.

The property tax exemption from a landmark-designated property is transferable to a new owner.

Thanks to Houstonist for the link.

The city of New Braunfels has continued its crusade to crack down on rowdy river revellers by passing several new ordinances, including on that bans big coolers.

The restriction on the size of coolers generated the most discussion, with council members promising to study the exact size that will be allowed before the second vote. As it reads, the ordinance would allow each tuber one small cooler, big enough to fit six 12-ounce drinks, but some council members were concerned that is too small.

Councilman Pat Wiggins said the River Activities Committee spent a lot of time and effort generating its recommendations.

"I think we owe them a chance to let them try it for a season," he said.

Much of the debate on the cooler size rule focused on the details.

"It's not enough room to take what you have to take," said resident Amber Heitkamp. "It's 105 degrees out there. You need a lot of liquid."

Others pointed out that besides cans, people also put sunscreen, glasses, ice, food, cigarettes, medicine, ice and other items in their coolers, further restricting how many cans they can fit inside. And water bottles, being longer and skinnier, would not fit in the little coolers easily.

Also, many tubers start their Guadalupe River trips outside the city limits and then float into the city. It was not clear what would need to do with a large cooler when they reach the city limits at Gruene.

On a side note:

Also Monday night, the council moved to make it easier for tourists to get around town, directing staff to come up with options for funding a "Way Finding Program."

The proposal has an estimated cost of $660,000 for about 200 new blue and white signs directing people around New Braunfels to various attractions and city facilities.

"It's a great study, beautiful work, but how to we pay for it?" asked Councilman Ken Valentine, who noted people wait years to get their streets fixed.

But resident Travis Wuest said the program is "a necessary tool to continue to drive the tourism industry."

UPDATE: San Antonio Street does indeed go into the historic part of town (it's a straight shot there from the Schlitterbahn), but it's not Business 35. Thanks to article author Roger Croteau for the correction, as noted in the comments.

Houston is going to be the center of some lightning research.

With its proximity to a nearly endless supply of warm, humid coastal air that breeds thunderstorms, Houston attracts more lightning than any part of Texas, with an average of more than 15 bolts striking every square mile of the city each year.

It's not a boast-worthy title. Reaching temperatures several times hotter than the surface of the sun, lightning kills about four people in Texas a year, second only to Florida, which juts like -- what else? -- a lightning rod into the warm Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico waters.

Scientists now believe they can improve their predictions of which thunderstorms will produce lightning by studying the meteorological seeds within clouds that lead to ground strikes.

To accomplish this, a team of researchers, led by Texas A&M University's Dick Orville, have finished installing a network of 12 sensors across the greater Houston area to detect electromagnetic energy within storm clouds.

The effort is not just academic as more people are killed by lightning, on average, than any other type of severe weather, and lightning causes about $2 billion a year in U.S. damage.

Foremost, Orville said, is feeding early warning information to Houston residents about cloud lightning, which can occur as much as 20 minutes before a storm produces ground strikes.

"The bottom line is that we'd like to save lives," he said.

I've got some bloggage and reactions to the Mayor's State of the City speech (which you can find here) over at Kuff's World. Anybody here attend the GHP lunch, or just otherwise have a reaction to the speech? Leave a comment if you do.

UPDATE: Some interesting behind-the-scenes stuff from Miya Shay.

They may be down in Farmer's Branch, but they're not out.

The five-member City Council voted unanimously to rescind an earlier measure and replace it with a modified version that must be approved by voters in May before it goes into effect.

"We aren't getting any support from the federal government or the state on this," said Councilman Bill Moses. He said other cities "are waiting to see what happens in Farmers Branch. They are waiting for us to break ground."

Councilman Ben Robinson said, "If we permit this invasion to continue we will be no different than Iraq with various factions giving allegiance to their group. If you forecast illegal immigration into the future you will be a bankrupt nation."

"I also think there is a perception by Texans on the border, where almost 90 percent of the population is Hispanic, that border control advocates are anti-Hispanic and want to kick out 12 million people or build a wall from Brownsville to El Paso."

Back to our story:

The council voted unanimously in November to ban rentals to illegal immigrants effective Jan. 12, but the ban was blocked Jan. 11 when state District Judge Bruce Priddy granted a temporary restraining ordinance in one of the four lawsuits filed against the measure.

Last week, the council ordered the city attorney to draft a new ordinance. The revised ordinance lets voters decide in a May 12 referendum whether landlords should be prevented from renting to illegal immigrants.

Opponents already had forced the issue onto the ballot when they submitted a petition in December signed by 1,200 residents, well over the 721 needed to put the question to the citywide vote.

The revised measure exempts minor children and those over 62 from providing proof of legal status and allows "mixed" families comprising legal and illegal immigrants to renew their leases if the head of the household has legal status.

But it maintains the basic aim of barring apartment landlords from renting to those who cannot show proof of citizenship or legal immigration status, and it continues to set out penalties of $500 per violation per day.

As far as that vote goes:

Although Farmers Branch, the city of 27,000 on Dallas' northern edge, is nearly 40 percent Hispanic, white voters will be key because they make up more than 90 percent of registered voters in the city.

Chris McGuire, spokesman for Uniting Farmers Branch, which opposes the ban, said 90 percent of those who signed the referendum petition were white. "It isn't Mexican or Hispanic against white people, it's all of us," he said.

Tom Bohmier, a leader of Support Farmers Branch, which supports the illegal immigrant measure, said his group has organized a legal defense fund. Other cities in Texas are likely to follow Farmers Branch if its rental ban is allowed to go into force, he said.

Last week, The Stables was torn down. Remember what it used to look like? Well, this is what it looks like now:

One more picture:

UPDATE: Drove past it this morning, and the sign was gone. If that's not Houston in a nutshell, I don't know what is.

While Olivia and I were in Portland, one of the things I learned was that my 7-year-old niece Vanessa loves the show "Deal or No Deal". She even has the home version of it, which she played with my sister, my dad, and Olivia a couple of times. (Olivia didn't actually play, she just helped sort and distribute the cards that say what value is in what briefcase. For a two-year-old, that's loads of amusement.) With all due respect to my niece, who is a bright little girl, any game show that can be mastered by a second-grader can't be that challenging. I confess I came away from that wondering what the fuss is all about.

I'm telling you this because this new game show sounds far more interesting to me.

Fox announced Saturday that it is making a new game show, Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader? that will air sometime later this year, perhaps as early as the spring.

Adults will compete in a quiz based on questions from elementary school textbooks. Actual elementary school students will be on hand as "experts" for the adults to consult with.

"While most game shows measure how smart you are, this is a show that will measure how dumb you are," said Peter Liguori, Fox entertainment president.

Having said that, I don't doubt that Ligouri's assessment is correct, and that should I ever watch this show I'll spend a fair amount of time wincing at the sheer ignorance of some of the contestants. I daresay this show's producers did not dip from the same contestant pool that contains Jeopardy! hopefuls, since where would the fun in that be? I can't say that this sounds like the sort of show that's worth watching regularly, but I think I'll tune in once or twice, to see if it winds up being what I think it will be. It's just a matter of how dirty I'll feel afterwards for having done so.

Given a choice, kids will eat healthy foods. Who knew?

The cafeteria lunch line at Columbus Elementary School moves quickly as students grab portions of carrots, celery, apples and oranges. French fries and hamburgers, once cafeteria staples, aren't even offered.

"I eat carrots or apples every day," said 10-year-old Alan Espino. He said he didn't notice that the bun holding his all-beef hot dog was whole wheat. Even the pizza available in the cafeteria has whole wheat crust.

The school cafeteria looks radically different from those of his parents' generation, and it appears many kids aren't turning their noses up at the new offerings. In fact, according to a survey of food service directors, french fries are decreasing in popularity and interest in carrots is skyrocketing.

As choices on the lunch line change, many children are accepting them, said Martha Conklin, an associate professor at Penn State University who conducts research about school nutrition programs and school food service.

"If you present these healthy offerings to children, they may turn them down the first time, but you can't give up," she said. "Children will adapt. Choice is important, but they can make those selections from healthy offerings."

On the other hand, as noted in the story sidebar:

[Texas] was set to phase in rules that include no sports drinks in elementary schools next year and no deep frying or sodas in any schools by 2009. But Todd Staples, the new state agriculture commissioner, is putting those changes under review.

This sort of thing alternately amuses and horrifies me.

Birthdays Without Pressure is taking aim at the oneupsmanship that drives moms and dads to throw parties that will really, really impress the kids and the other parents, too.

"We feel there's a kind of cultural runaway going on right now around the birthday parties of kids," said William Doherty, a University of Minnesota professor of family social science who had a hand in organizing the group, launched publicly earlier this month.

Birthdays Without Pressure has started a Web site and launched a media campaign.

Among its suggestions for more modest, stress-free party planning: Hold gift-free parties, with a note on the invitation that says any presents will be donated to charity; eliminate theme parties and gift bags for the guests; instead of organizing elaborate activities, let kids play outside or hold a treasure hunt; and invite children only, not their parents as well.

The organization has also started collecting horror stories from other parents to argue its case. Among them:

_ A birthday party for a 1-year-old featured a gift-opening that lasted two hours. The child slept through most of it.

_ Seven-year-olds were picked up in stretch limos to attend the birthday party of a classmate.

_ A 6-year-old guest at a St. Paul birthday party didn't like the contents of the gift bag and declared: "This is a rip-off."

To the parents among my readers, how have you handled the birthday party issue? What would you do differently if you had to do it all over again?

This sounds interesting.

Texas could become a world leader in cancer research if state lawmakers succeed in a plan to bring $3 billion to the state.

The plan, which several lawmakers discussed today in a meeting with Gov. Rick Perry, Lance Armstrong and leaders of the state's top research institutions, would provide $300 million a year for 10 years to fund a statewide research collaborative on a disease that kills about 35,000 Texans a year.

"I can't think of anything that I think is more worthwhile, anything that will make Texas more the epicenter of an extraordinary focus worldwide in this effort," Perry said to the group over lunch at the Four Seasons in Austin. "This is a powerful moment in Texas history."

Perry compared the potential economic impact of the cancer research with that of the space program. He added that cancer research could be used to conquer other diseases.

[...]

Funding details haven't been worked out, but one possibility is for Texans to vote on a constitutional amendment that would authorize general obligation bonds that would be financed over 10 years.

"The vision's there, no doubt about it, but we have to come up with a structure long-term that's good for the state of Texas policy-wise," Rep. Jim Keffer, R-Eastland, said.

There is one point to raise from the weekend story that was a prelude to this meeting.

Federal restrictions on embryonic stem cell research also have contributed to the increased state role. Voters in California in 2004 approved spending $3 billion over ten years on embryonic stem cell research, which many Republicans -- and their conservative constituents -- consider immoral.

Efforts to expand cancer research funding in Texas, where Republicans control every statewide office and both houses of the Legislature, haven't included discussions about embryonic stem cell research, said state Rep. Jim Keffer, R-Eastland.

Keffer said the goal is to mount a "full frontal attack on the disease."

Well, there I go being a wet blanket again. I'll just go away now and point you to Vince for further info. Check it out.

Remember the new President-themed dollar coin? According to Houstonist, we'll start seeing them in Houston this week.

The eyes of third- and fourth-graders may grow as wide as silver dollars next week when a bewigged and costumed "living biographer" of George Washington strides into Poe Elementary to tout the U.S. Mint's new dollar coin, the first in a series honoring the nation's presidents.

The Houston children will be among the first Americans to view the coin, which is set to begin circulating Feb. 15. The coin, featuring the likeness of Washington on one side and the Statue of Liberty on the back, also will be unveiled in Chicago.

In approving the Presidential $1 Coin Act of 2005, Congress lauded the program as an educational aid for the American public, many of whom, leaders contended, are unfamiliar with presidential history. The program is modeled loosely after the series of 25-cent pieces that featured the nation's states.

One more thing:

Gloria Eskridge, the mint's associate director for sales and marketing, said millions of the coins, which will be the same size and gold color of the Sacagawea dollars now in circulation, will be produced in mints in Philadelphia and Denver. Additional coins honoring presidents, in order of their incumbency, will be issued quarterly.

Mint spokesman Michael White said only presidents who have been dead at least two years will be honored in the series. At this point, the series will stop with President Ford, who died in December. If the next president in line, Jimmy Carter, still is living after Ford's dollar is minted, the series will "pause," White said.

Today at the Greater Houston Partnership lunch, Mayor White will outline his agenda for 2007. Should be happening right about now, in fact.

White will use the speech to call for the region to reduce energy consumption. He plans to urge business leaders to improve their energy efficiency, and to push state leaders to adopt stricter vehicle emission standards. He also plans new incentives for green construction regulations, and to discuss an expansion of a program to "weatherize" more homes in older Houston neighborhoods.

[...]

He has staked out a bold plan for the development of affordable housing in some of Houston's neglected neighborhoods. This year will be a crucial year for that signature initiative, Project Houston Hope. The city intends to select contractors soon to start construction on about 160 new houses on tax-delinquent land the city acquired in six poor neighborhoods just outside Loop 610.

The homes will sell for about $100,000 each, and the city is offering subsidies of up to $40,000 per house to entice police officers, firefighters, emergency medical workers and teachers to invest in these neighborhoods.

"Houston Hope is probably the most difficult, but will have the most long-term impact on our city," White said of his agenda.

Also on tap for 2007, the mayor said, will be continued focus on stabilizing violent crime rates citywide. After initial spikes in late 2005 and early 2006, rates have begun to decline, though the number of murders last year was the highest in a decade.

White has other ideas for 2007, including new incentives for historical preservation, the early stages of construction on a citywide wireless Internet initiative and deploying a new mobile response team to address traffic hotspots.

"There are major permanent changes that will occur in the direction of the city."

Good news for Sen. Gallegos.

State Sen. Mario Gallegos underwent liver transplant surgery late Friday night and is recovering at the Texas Medical Center, according to his family.

Gallegos, a Houston Democrat, had cirrhosis of the liver, which necessitated the transplant.

Gallegos had said earlier that his doctors estimated he will need 18 days of recovery time after his surgery before he can return to work.

The following is a statement from Dr. Joseph Galati, Gallegos' physician, regarding Senator Gallegos' surgery and subsequent condition:

"After Senator Gallegos' liver transplant was completed late Friday evening, he was making the progress we would have anticipated over the weekend, and this morning is resting comfortably in stable condition. As we had expected, the surgery went well, without complications.

"Given that Senator Gallegos was just subjected to a major surgical procedure 48 hours ago, I am pleased with his progress so far.

"Senator Gallegos has not received special treatment, nor did he need any; organs are allocated on rigid criteria based on medical need. He is fortunate that a compatible organ became available.

"Assuming unanticipated complications do not arise, I would project that Senator Gallegos can expect a smooth recovery, and that this procedure will be a very good next step in his recovery."

The Chron's Nancy Sarnoff has an update on the site where Astroworld used to be and the development group that bought it out.

Angel/McIver Interests is seeking the creation of a municipal management district for the site.

The special district would help finance infrastructure, such as roads and drainage systems, as well as parking facilities, landscaping and security, according to Robert Randolph, an attorney working with the Conroe-based company that bought the acreage last summer.

The investment group is planning a mixed-use transit-oriented development for the former theme park land. It would include high-density residential units, offices, shops and a hotel.

The management district would sell bonds to build the facilities, as well as collect taxes, user fees, parking revenues and potentially levy special assessments on property owners to pay for the bonds.

Part of the plan includes a proposal to reroute the light rail line through the property.

A Metro spokeswoman said the Metropolitan Transit Authority has requested a proposal from Angel/McIver, but it has not yet received it.

Regardless, I note that the existence of the light rail line has previously been cited as a catalyst for residential development south of Loop 610. Looks like this is further evidence of that.

UPDATE: I received a reply from Nancy Sarnoff this morning, and she said the light rail proposal is an extension, not a move. She's looking into the details and says she will write an update when she has them.

Whatever else I may think of the gambling industry, I have to admire their ability to get stories in the paper about their efforts to expand in Texas, even if there's really nothing new to report.

Battle lines already are being drawn in the 2007 Legislature as gambling interests make a renewed push for casinos. The opposition is as ardent as ever and this time has the advantage of Texas' $14.3 billion budget surplus, making it tough to argue for creating a new revenue source, especially one so controversial.

"I think it is a difficult proposition," Republican Gov. Rick Perry said in a recent interview with The Associated Press. In 2004, he suggested legalizing video slot machines at race tracks to help pay for public schools, only to see his proposal shot down by social conservatives in the Legislature.

"I'm not telling you it's not possible, by any sense of the imagination," Perry said. "And I have had enough conversations with enough proponents to know that they're going to continue to work towards it."

Just one comment to make here:

The Texas Gaming Association, made up of prominent gambling industry figures, argues that there's already gambling in Texas in the form of the state lottery and race tracks and that most Texans live within an hour and a half of a neighboring state or country, meaning casinos are within easy reach.

"Texans are already doing it. It's already happening. It's already here," said Chris Shields, the gaming association's lobbyist.

When you hear that most vehicles in the parking lots of neighboring states' casinos display Texas license plates, that's no joke, Shields said, adding, "Texans are already paying for the public schools and the highways in Louisiana."

Besides, the gambling industry hasn't poured millions of dollars into its efforts to expand gambling here because it cares about Texas' public school system. It's because they stand to make billions if and when they finally get their way. Whether you consider that a factor or not, it's what this is all about. Put everything the gambling industry says about the benefits of Texas casinos and whatnot through that filter, and go from there.

Believe it or not, Bud Selig will eventually step down as Commissioner of Major League Baseball. He says he'll retire when his current contract expires in 2009. True or not (we've heard this before), sooner or later he'll be a former Commish. Who will succeed him? ESPN's Jerry Crasnick has a list of possibilities. None of them are particularly compelling to me - given how much water Bob duPuy was willing to carry for the owners during the 2002 CBA negotiations, I'd have to rank him as my least favorite, but beyond that I can't say I care much - but I suppose if baseball can survive Selig, it can survive anything. Link via David Pinto.

Good.

Farmers Branch City Council on Monday is expected to repeal the city's litigation-inducing ban on renting apartments to illegal immigrants and will consider a revised ordinance that will put the matter to a vote in May.

The council in this north Dallas suburb ordered the city attorney to draft the new ordinance, which was expected to be posted on the city Web site later today.

Council members voted in November to require apartment landlords to check the citizenship or legal status of all occupants and spelled out fines of up to $500 per day. Since then, four lawsuits have been filed and residents submitted a petition forcing a referendum on the ban in May.

Last week, state District Judge Bruce Priddy issued a temporary injunction that blocked the ordinance from taking effect as scheduled on Jan. 12.

In a letter submitted in that case Thursday, Farmers Branch City Secretary Cindee Peters said the City Council agreed to repeal the rental ban and adopt "revised apartment complex licensing standards regarding citizenship and/or immigration certification requirements."

The new ordinance, if adopted Monday, would call for a voluntary referendum May 12 and would not go into effect until May 22 if approved by voters, the letter states.

"They're waving the white flag," said Bill Brewer, a Dallas attorney who filed suit on behalf of a Farmers Branch resident alleging the City Council violated several provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act when it passed the rental ban.

"They didn't get it wrong by a little. They got it wrong by a lot," Brewer said.

He said it appears the city concluded the judge would have enjoined the city from enforcing the rental ban at an upcoming hearing.

"They were in the same hearings I was and it was going very badly for them. They decided to back off and put it to the voters," Brewer said.

Microsoft will buld a big honking data center in San Antonio, in return for a little civic largesse.

The San Antonio City Council on Thursday approved a 10-year, 100 percent tax abatement worth $20.7 million and voted to provide $5.2 million from the CPS Energy economic development fund. That money will pay for electrical infrastructure for a 470,000-square-foot structure that will be nearly as big as the Alamodome.

Microsoft's data center, housing tens of thousands of computers, will be a place "where the Internet lives," said Mike Manos, senior director of Microsoft Data Center Services.

[...]

The 44-acre site in Westover Hills will bring 75 high-tech jobs. But when it's fully operating in a few years, it will become the biggest customer of CPS Energy, which supplies more than 25 percent of the city budget, said the utility's chief executive, Milton Lee.

The project still must go before the Bexar County Commissioners Court, which is expected to approve a similar package of incentives.

San Antonio Mayor Phil Hardberger defended the use of incentives to entice a world-class company that could act as a catalyst to attract more information technology jobs.

"This is not a gift to Microsoft," Hardberger said. "This is a gift to ourselves."

The city of Houston's expanded smoking ban from last year was part of an overall nationwide trend in such legislation.

Thirty years after it began as just another quirky movement in Berkeley, Calif., the push to ban smoking in restaurants, bars and other public places has reached a national milestone.

For the first time in the nation's history, more than half of Americans live in a city or state with laws mandating that workplaces, restaurants or bars be smoke-free, according to Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights.

"The movement for smoke-free air has gone from being a California oddity to the nationwide norm," said Bronson Frick, the group's associate director. "We think 100 percent of Americans will live in smoke-free jurisdictions within a few years."

Seven states and 116 communities enacted tough smoke-free laws last year, bringing the total number to 22 states and 577 municipalities, according to the group. Nevada's ban, which went into effect Dec. 8, increased the total U.S. population covered by any type of smokefree law to 50.2 percent.

It was the most successful year for anti-smoking advocates in the U.S., said Frick, and advocates are now working with local and state officials from across the nation on how to bring the other half of the country around.

Generally speaking, I think this is all to the good. There will come a point where I think the line between the health of nonsmokers and the rights of smokers will be crossed - it's not quite where banning smoking in cars when minors are present is, but I can see it from there. Maybe smoking will become sufficiently unfashionable that it'll all be moot before that line is reached. I doubt it, but you never know.

So, Hillary Clinton is running for President. Quelle surprise, eh? I'm going to spend as much time as possible this year not blogging about the 2008 Presidential primaries, so let me say this now and get it out of the way: I'll be happy to support Hillary Clinton for President if she's the nominee. I'll be happy to support someone else if she's not. Like the other main contenders, she has her pros and cons - I pretty much agree with Kos' assessment of the top tier candidates (as does PDiddie), and Kevin Drum sums up the Hillster succinctly. Unlike 2004, I don't think anyone will spend too much time fretting about "electability". I think this one is the Dems' to lose (and I'm not the only one who sees it that way), so I say pick your favorite and make no apologies for it. And feel free not to be in a rush about it.

Some day I will have a preference, and I'll state it when I do. If I'm really lucky, I'll even get to cast a meaningful vote in March. But it will be several months before I begin to worry about that. Meanwhile, enjoy the spectacle as much or as little as you want. There's plenty of time to get serious about it later.

Via BOR, the state's contract with Jack Abramoff-associated lobby contract with Cassidy & Associates has been terminated.

Gov. Rick Perry had hired Cassidy & Associates and The Federalist Group a rate of $15,000 a month each to push Texas priorities in Congress, even though the state already has its own taxpayer-funded Office of State-Federal Relations.

The contracts would have run through August and totaled $1.3 million dollars. But the contacts came under fire last year when Texas' Democratic members of Congress questioned the close ties of some of the firms' associates to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who was convicted on charges of fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to bribe public officials.

The Democratic members said the firms had sidestepped them when meeting about Texas policy. Also, two controversial staffers in each firm had donated to Republican campaigns to assist DeLay's 2004 effort to redistrict and defeat five Texas incumbent Democrats.

With the power switch in Congress, the surviving Democratic members had questioned how effective the firms could now be.

In related news, Governor Perry had a sit-down with the state's Democratic Congressional delegation, as they are now the majority party in Congress and he kinda has no choice.

Perry's meeting with the Democrats was the first he's had with them since he took office, several of the members said.

Members described the meeting as frank and candid, at times testy, though never hostile. They said they reminded Perry, a Republican, that a redistricting plan he helped push through the Texas Legislature had cost their state possible chairmanships of the Agriculture, Homeland Security and Rules committees.

"We told him now that we are in majority ... we control a lot of money," said Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi.

[...]

The Democrats invited Perry to meet with them after Rep. Ciro Rodriguez of San Antonio brought Ed Perez, director of the Office of State-Federal Relations, to their weekly luncheon.

The meeting turned into angry complaints about what members see as the partisanship of Perez's office, which reports to Perry, and cooperation from the governor's office. The lobbying firms were contracted through Perez's office.

Perry called three special sessions to help push through a plan orchestrated by DeLay to redraw the state's congressional districts so Republicans could be more easily elected. As a result, two Democrats who were in line for House committee chairmanships lost re-election, and another retired.

In the Democratic-controlled Congress, El Paso Rep. Silvestre Reyes of the Intelligence Committee is the only chairman from Texas, which now has 19 Republicans and 13 Democrats in the U.S. House.

"He didn't dispute it, but I can't say he said, 'Yes, you're right,'" said Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Dallas.

[...]

Members said Perry told them he would meet with them again and invited the Democrats to Austin.

"The beauty of it is we met," Rodriguez said. "We've got to get it together. We've got to help everybody."

Capitol Letters has more. Click on for a press release on the matter from the State House Democratic leadership.

The following is a statement by House Democratic Leaders in response to reports that the taxpayer funded lobby contracts with two Washington D.C. lobbyists (Jack Abramoff crony, Todd Boulanger, and former Tom DeLay Chief of Staff, Drew Maloney) were cancelled. Since 2003, House Democrats have repeatedly called on Republican elected officials in Texas to cancel the exorbitant and unnecessary lobby contracts.

Rep. Jim Dunnam, House Democratic Leader:

"Well, it's about time.

House Democrats have been calling on Governor Perry, Speaker Craddick and Lt. Governor Dewhurst to cancel these exorbitant and unnecessary lobby contracts since 2003, when we first offered legislation to stop wasting more than $1.1 million state taxpayer dollars on two Abramoff/DeLay cronies. For four year, House Republicans voted to protect these corrupt lobbyists. I am happy to see that our efforts have finally paid off."

Rep. Pete P. Gallego:

"I am glad we are cleaning up the mess in Washington; but unfortunately, here in Texas these same lobbyists will still have special access to the back halls of the Capitol where everyday Texans cannot go. Texas House Democrats have a lot more to do in the continuing fight for more open and honest government."

Rep. Garnet Coleman, Chair of the Legislative Study Group:

"The incestuous nature of the money game through the use of policy initiatives has got to stop, and this is a good first step. We still must cut out the rest of the cancer that has grown in our state and federal government."

This was mentioned in an earlier Chron story, but the news about Sen. Mario Gallegos's need for a liver transplant means that the partisan dynamic in the Senate has changed.

The 11 Senate Democrats now number 10, and find themselves one vote short of blocking legislation under the so-called two-thirds rule. The longstanding and often controversial rule has been in place at least since the 1950s and allows 11 of the 31 senators to block debate on any bill. The rule was designed to boost consensus on legislation by requiring that two-thirds of the senators want to take action -- usually an indication that a bill could pass.

But in recent years, the rule has come under increasing criticism for thwarting majority rule -- most recently a week ago when freshman state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, moved to abolish the rule when the Senate adopted its operating policies for the legislative session. He failed 30-1.

Gallegos, in a prepared statement Jan. 12, said that Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst has assured him he would not take action on any major legislation until Gallegos returns. But several senators said this week that is contingent upon how soon Gallegos comes back.

"Unless my surgery occurs later rather than earlier, the speed with which major legislation emerges from committee makes me hopeful that I will not have to make such a request on a specific piece of legislation," said Gallegos, who announced last March he was undergoing treatment for alcoholism.

As the Senate's presiding officer, Dewhurst can delay action on any bill -- at least for a time.

But if Gallegos has not returned by March, when major bills are expected to be ready for floor debate, the 20 Republicans could vote to go ahead and consider bills -- if they vote together.

"We'll just have to wait and see how soon Mario comes back," said state Sen. John Whitmire, a Houston Democrat who is the longest-serving senator and a close Gallegos friend. "It could change things, yes."

Other senators suggested it might not. The reason: On any given issue, Democrats might be able to find one Republican who would vote to block debate, because he or she would join the Democrats in opposing a bill.

[...]

Patrick echoed the wait-and-see sentiments of Whitmire and others on what Gallegos' absence could mean.

"We'll have to see how his health develops," he said. "If he's not back at some point, we won't need 20 votes."

And what will Gallegos' absence mean to Patrick's announced campaign to continue trying to do away with the two-thirds rule?

"We'll wait and see on that, too," he said.

I have a bad feeling about this. I'm willing to extend some benefit of the doubt to David Dewhurst, because other than the redistricting saga, he has generally not pushed partisan interests ahead of other things. The problem is that he's now sharing the Senate with someone who like him wants to be Governor some day, and would (I believe) have no qualms about making any concessions to Gallegos and the Dems regarding the 2/3 rule a major issue in a primary fight. By that same token, I'm not sure about the Dems' ability to find that one Republican Senator when they need one on a key vote. One some things, maybe, and if there's more than one who's willing to break from the pack that too would work. I just don't want to be in the position of having to count on this for defense against something really awful, like the abortion trigger bill.

The question is what can be done about this. You can get whatever promises you want from Dewhurst and the Republican caucus, but I'd consider them as binding as a Speaker pledge card, for the simple reason that the Dems just don't have any leverage here. As I see it, either we hope that Gallegos will be able to travel to Austin at least on occasion, or he needs to consider resigning so that an emergency special election can be held (I do believe Governor Perry would be accomodating on this). Even then, given the high likelihood of a runoff, that seat would be empty until at least late March, and it would likely also mean an empty seat in the State House, which probably wouldn't be filled till at least May 12.

I hate to be so crass about this, but I guarantee that such crass calculations can and will be made by all interested parties, so it's best to think about them now. Vince has more faith in Dewhurst et al. I hope he's right. Maybe I'm overestimating the effect that Dan Patrick will have on Dewhurst. He's kind of like a hotshot bonus baby who's torn up the winter leagues but hasn't faced a major league curveball yet. He could turn out to be Dave Winfield, or he could turn out to be David Clyde. Perhaps by the time legislation is being voted on, Dewhurst will know that he has nothing to fear from Danno. Maybe, maybe, maybe. I just hate having to depend on maybe, that's all I'm saying.

I heard about this last week through a bridge e-newsletter, but didn't think to go looking for a link at the time: The Arabia Shrine Center on Braeswood near Kirby may soon be history.

The Arabia Shrine Center -- the venerable showcase for everything from social galas to flat-track roller derby events -- will likely be sold in February to make way for a high-density residential development, an officer with the organization told the Examiner.

Jerry Gantt said the membership of the local Shriners temple that owns the land voted in November to clear the way for the sale because of property taxes that "will eventually get to be more than the Shrine can pay."

While not wanting to quote a price, Gantt said each of the three unnamed, prospective buyers are interested in similar developments.

No deal could be made final until Feb. 1, he said, because an affiliated group -- the Scottish Rite -- owns its building on the same property and has a 90-day right of first refusal.

The tracts of land, listed by the Harris County Appraisal District as 2900 N. Braeswood Blvd., cover 252,300 square feet and are valued at more than $2.5 million. Another almost $1 million is added to the Shrine's taxable value for buildings and improvements.

For 2006, the fraternal organization paid $100,175 in property taxes, Harris County tax assessor-collector records show.

Here's a nice reminiscence about the place, with some wistfulness about the decline of the Shriners in general. Apparently, when the place was dedicated in 1975, the local chapter thought it'd last 100 years. I guess for Houston, 32 is close enough.

(My thanks to Charlotte Aguilar of the Examiner for helping me unearth the story links.)

According to Houstonist, the anticipated demolition of The Stables has taken place. I haven't managed to drive past it this week, but I'll be sure to take some pics at my next opportunity. I'm just glad that I got these snaps before it was too late.

Next question: Given the track record of the speculators who bought the land, what's the over/under on when construction begins?

Here's a good laugh for you: Kinky Friedman says he might run for Senate in 2008, as either a Republican or a Democrat, he's not sure yet.

There's a fresh round of rumors today that Kinky Friedman may be mulling a run against U.S. Sen. John Cornyn.

People of both parties have been in touch with him, said Laura Stromberg, who was Friedman's spokeswoman during his independent bid for governor.

"He's not calling them. They're coming to him," she said.

Friedman, who is finishing up his book on his race for governor, has said if he ran again, it likely would be under a major-party label given the obstacles facing an independent candidate.

Today, he said, "I think all options are on the table, but I certainly haven't given a lot of thought to running for anything. I've talked with some Republicans and some Democrats about various possibilities."

Tell ya what. If Kinky Friedman is on the ballot for Senate next November as either a Republican or a Democrat, I'll not only buy ten copies of his stupid book about his 2006 campaign, I'll tattoo "Why the hell not?" and "How hard can it be?" on my butt, one slogan per cheek. If he runs as both parties' nominees, I'll found a new religion devoted to worshipping him as a god. That would be only slightly less delusional than what Laura Stromberg is saying here.

Man. I guess silly season didn't wait for the filing deadline this cycle. Where do they come up with this stuff?

Good-bye, Todd Graham; hello, David Bailiff.

Texas State coach David Bailiff will be introduced as the Owls' 18th football coach at 11 a.m. today.

Bailiff, 48, compiled a 21-15 record over three seasons (2004-06) at his alma mater, and he led the Bobcats to the Division I-AA semifinals in '05.

He spent the previous three seasons at TCU, serving as the Horned Frogs' defensive coordinator in 2002-03. TCU ranked first nationally in total defense in '02.

In the wake of Graham's unexpected departure to Tulsa on Jan. 11, Rice officials sought a coach who could be all things to all people.

They desired someone with strong ties to the state, a stellar reputation as a recruiter and one with unquestioned character.

By all accounts, Bailiff, a San Antonio native, fits the mold.

UPDATE: There's a whole lot more love for Coach Bailiff now on the fan board. See here, here, and here for examples. And consider this, from down at the end of this thread:

There is one thought that I can't totally dismiss. Consider the following:

1. One would reasonably expect that there were two jobs that, if they came open, [former coach Todd Graham] would probably be on the short list--West Virginia and Tulsa.
2. WV almost came open early, with Bama chasing Rodriguez.
3. Petrino to Atlanta was a well-circulated rumor before the NFL season ended.
4. It was pretty close to a given that if Petrino moved on, Kragthorpe was going to be the guy in Louisville.
5. [Rice Athletic Director Chris Del Conte] is an astute guy who had to be reading the above tea leaves, not to mention being close enough to pick up on any additional hints from scenes like PTH reported in New Orleans.
6. TG's act would reasonably be expected to wear thin in places, the AD office being one of them.
7. When TG reported the Tulsa offer, CDC declined to match on the spot, with little or no hesitation.
8. When TG left, CDC immediately proclaimed that this was a great day to be a Rice Owl.
9. The coach selection process has proceeded at near warp speed.
10. The coach applicant pool was definitely higher quality than we attracted over a much longer time frame last year.

What I'm angling at is that, given the whole body of work, does it make sense that maybe CDC wasn't taken by surprise, but in fact had already started getting some ducks lined up? I'd like to think he was thinking ahead enough to be doing that, and the available evidence suggests a fairly high probablilty that he was.

Last but not least, but this is also nice to hear.

Via email from Burt Levine:

I went by the City Secretary's office at the close of business Thursday and found out that retired US Air Force Col. Roy Morales was the last to file Thursday.

Morales, a seventh generation Houstonian, grew up in the Houston area investing in east end communities where his great grandmother and grandparents settled. Morales, a husband and father and businessman that nearly forced Peter Brown into a run-off two years put on his filing sheet Martha Wong, the former three term Houston Council Member as his campaign treasurer.

There was no evidence anywhere, even when I asked those I know in the city secretary office that Tom Reiser had filed.

In other Council race news, Isiah Carey breaks the story that Gerald Womack will not run for the District D seat that will be open when Ada Edwards is term-limited out at the end of this year.

When reached by phone Womack would only say he's focusing more on his businesses. He went on to say he believes he could do more for the community from the private sector rather than seeking public office.

It's ABC13's Miya Shay versus KTRH talker Chris Baker in a storm coverage smackdown! Place your bets, place your bets...

Bummed out about that new cigarette tax that's burning a hole in your pockets, smokers? If you want to save a few bucks, why not try rolling your own?

Two weeks into the new tax, retailers have made a curious observation, smokers are rolling their own cigarettes to save money.

Smokers, it seems, have discovered it's cheaper to smoke 'em, if you roll 'em.

"Something they pay $4.70 or $5 a pack, they can roll their own for about $2.25 to $2.50," said Stacy Rumbo, the manager at The Humidor.

More and more of her customers are asking for cigarette making machines, she said.

"We're finding a lot of people are ready to learn the art of it before paying the higher price at supermarket," Rumbo said.

Not just no, but "Hell, no!"

Texas border mayors carried a clear message Wednesday to federal policymakers: Walling off the United States from Mexico is a costly, foolish idea that will harm commerce, travel and foreign relations.

The seven mayors, representing cities that stretch from El Paso to Brownsville, raced from meeting to meeting on Capitol Hill, urging Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and lawmakers to abandon Congress' mandate to build 700 miles of fence and instead rely on other border security measures.

"It's a united front: No to the wall," said Laredo Mayor Raul Salinas. "It's just money misspent."

Instead of fencing off more than 300 miles of the Texas-Mexico border, the mayors recommended that Chertoff and Congress improve border security by using technology such as motion detection sensors and lighting as a "virtual" fence, or by adding more Border Patrol manpower.

The Texans offered "very practical, very realistic views about what has to happen with border security," Chertoff said after a closed-door meeting with the mayors, organized by Texas Republican Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn. The senators support a fence as a part of an overall border security plan, but insist that local community concerns must be taken into account.

"Everyone wants border security -- they just want to do it effectively," Hutchison said.

With Democrats newly in control of Congress, the fence's prospects may be waning. Although President Bush last October signed into law legislation mandating 700 miles of fence, Congress hasn't fully appropriated money to build it.

A $1.2 billion appropriation for "strategic fencing" permits the Department of Homeland Security to use the money for other things, and department officials have not committed to using all the money for fencing.

"You might have a law, but if there is no appropriation to fund it, it doesn't really exist," said Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo.

Am I the only person who's relieved to hear that the creators of Lost have an exit plan?

Producers of ABC's hugely successful sci-fi thriller serial announced Sunday that they had begun talks with the network on how much longer to keep the Oceanic Flight 815 castaways stuck on Mystery Island.

Speaking during a panel session at the Television Critics Association in Pasadena, show runners Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof admitted that they were upset by dwindling ratings (while still a hit show, viewership is down by 14 percent so far this third season), fielded the usual questions about the Others, the Numbers, the Losties and the show's other unsolved puzzles, and then dropped the bombshell: They were discussing with their network bosses a timeline to wrap up those loose ends.

But the exact end date remains as mysterious as the smoke monster.

"Once we figure out when that will be, a lot of the questions will go away," said Cuse, adding that he didn't want Lost to burn viewers' goodwill and fail to adequately resolve the storylines, à la The X-Files.

"That was a great show that probably ran two seasons too long," Cuse said. "That is a cautionary tale for us."

[...]

While Cuse said it would be "disrespectful" right now to announce when and how the show might end, Lindelof said he initially conceived it to run about 100 episodes, or about five season, but now "the most honest answer we can give [is] as long as it's good."

I just have two questions regarding this story:

1. Weren't there any less controversial washed up headbangers to perform at the inaugural? I mean, c'mon, how busy to you think Don Dokken and Greg Giuffria are these days?

2. Did he perform Cat Scratch Fever, and if so, did any of the partygoers require an explanation of the lyrics?

That's all I got. For more, I refer you to Stace, PinkDome, HouStoned, Eye on Williamson, and TPRS.

UPDATE: And In the Pink.

It's not on the Chronicle's website yet (I daresay the weather news might have overshadowed it), but I am told that the May 12 special election to replace Shelley Sekula Gibbs on City Council has been officially declared by Council. It was on yesterday's Council agenda and was addressed late in the session - there had been speculation that it'd get tagged and thus delayed for a week, but apparently that didn't happen. What this means is that now all prospective candidates can file a Treasurer's report, and thus can begin raising and spending money on their campaigns. I don't know exactly when the filing period the declare one's candidacy will run, but I'd expect it to go into March. We should know more soon, and we should start to see some real activity as well. Stay tuned.

UPDATE: Here it is on the City Council agenda from yesterday:

24. ORDINANCE ordering and giving notice of a Special Election to be held on May 12, 2007, for the purpose of filling a vacancy in the Office of Council Member, At-Large Position 3 on the Houston City Council - PASS

(Cross posted from Kuff's World.)

UPDATE: From candidate David Goldberg, via email:

I actually managed to attend the City Council Meeting yesturday and witness the vote. I also went ahead and filed my Campaign Treasurer Appointment and Ethics Commitment with the City Secretary. So I am now able to accept donations. While there, I was able to go through the other candidate's filings. I only found filings for Melissa Noriega, Noel Freeman, and Tom Reiser.

I also talked with the Legal Department. Apparently the City Attorney will release a revised Filing schedule and other election information changes in the coming days. I was also warned that since the State Legislaturer is in session right now, all election laws are subject to change. That really makes things interesting.

Oh, and May 12 is also the day of the Art Car Parade. That sound you just heard was turnout for this election dropping by another ten percent. Make sure you vote early for this one, y'all. Thanks to 'stina for the tip.

Finally, here's a statement about her entry into the race from Melissa Noriega:

Former State Representative Melissa Noriega announced today that she is a candidate for the at-large council seat vacated by Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. In yesterday's meeting, City Council officially called for a special election to be held on May 12, 2007.

"I am encouraged and honored by the support I am receiving from all around the city. I look forward to the campaign, and to serving my neighbors in a whole new way," said Noriega. "I have always believed that this city can do anything, and together we can turn our ideas for a better Houston into reality."

With a long history of service in public education and a stint in the Texas Legislature while her husband Rick, served our country in Afghanistan, Noriega brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to the race and the council table.

"We face a lot of challenges, but working together, we can have that "city on a hill" that provides the best public protection and the most opportunity for our families, while holding the line on taxes and spending those dollars wisely.

I couldn't be more excited about our future."

UPDATE: Another challenger, Andy Neill, emails me to say that he has also filed today.

No, not here. In Portland, where this was the view outside my parents' condo Tuesday morning:

I received the following statement from Shane Sklar on the recent news that Ron Paul is exploring a run for the Presidency:

"Since Rep. Paul announced his plans to run for president last week, I have received numerous calls from around District 14, Texas and Washington, D.C. inquiring about my plans for the 2008 election. The outpouring of support has been overwhelming. My wife and I plan to make the important decision about running again for Congress in the coming months," said Sklar.

Sklar, the former executive director of the Independent Cattlemen's Association of Texas, was the Democratic nominee for Congress in the 14th District in 2006. Sklar now co-owns and operates Sklar & Son Cattle in Jackson County.

"It's unfortunate that Paul has chosen to pursue the presidency instead of representing his district - especially during this time of dramatic change in Washington. It reinforces what I've said all along: the 14th District deserves someone who wants to make a difference," Sklar continued.

Catching up a bit from my trip: Republican blog Wilco Wise prints a list of House committee chairs that it says it got from a tipster. Maybe it's accurate, maybe it's not - Vince is skeptical - but it's some interesting reading. For what it's worth, I'd heard a rumor about Aaron Pena getting the Criminal Jurisprudence chair during the Speaker's race, so either that one has some credibility, or we all ultimately have the same sources (a distinct possibility). Either way, it's worth your time to look. On a related note, Eye on Williamson has an observation about allegedly soon-to-be-former chair Buddy West.

Meanwhile, the Senate announced its committee memberships (PDF) late last week. As noted by the Chron, Senator Danno got the kind of assignments he'd been hoping for:

Houston's new state senator, talk show host Dan Patrick, will serve as vice chair of the Senate International Relations and Trade Committee, giving him a key voice in the state's role on immigration and border issues.

Border security and illegal immigration were central themes in Patrick's campaign to succeed former Sen. Jon Lindsay, who retired.

Besides that position, Patrick will serve on the Intergovernmental Relations and Health and Human Services committees, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst has announced. He also will serve on the Higher Education and the newly formed Flooding & Evacuations subcommittees.

[...]

There was talk before the legislative session that Patrick, R-Houston, would get sidelined when it came to choice committee assignments because of his on-air criticism of lawmakers from both parties, who he says fall short of his conservative standards.

"The joke was, let's see what committee assignments the lieutenant governor gives him," Patrick said. "Some people were expecting me to be on all small committees. They were surprised with the quality committee assignments I received."

Patrick said he is pleased with his appointments.

"I will have a front-row seat and voice on two issues that make up almost 90 percent of the state's budget," Patrick said, referring to heavy state expenditures on education and health and human services.

He also noted that the property tax cap bill -- a touchstone for him and other conservatives -- was sent to the Intergovernmental Relations Committee during the last session, and he hopes it is sent there again.

"The truth is, after 10 years of talk radio, I am well-versed in these issues," Patrick said. "If you look at the committees I was assigned to, they all have a strong link between issues I'm interested in or issues important to Harris County."

I received the following email from Helwig Van Der Grinten, who left a comment on this post. I thought it was worth sharing and commenting on.

In the discussions about red light cameras I've read in your blog and elsewhere, it seems that everyone is ignoring the fact that all drivers must make a snap decision when a light changes from green to amber. Cameras do nothing to help a driver make a correct one. They merely penalize an incorrect guess.

According to a report of the Virginia Transportation Research Council published in January 2005 (http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/05-vdot.pdf), of 33,547 citations (I added them up from Table 8) issued for red light violations a very large majority (85%) were issued for vehicles that entered the intersection within the first two seconds after the light turned red. This indicates that a vast majority of red light violations were not deliberate. Most violators are just poor at judging the how much time they have before the light turns red. The report also indicates that the number of citations decreases after the cameras have been in place for a few months obviously because the risk associated with a driver's bad guess has increased by the threat of a ticket. Unfortunately, the incidence of rear-end collisions also increased because inexperienced drivers are more likely to jam on the brakes in a panicked effort to avoid getting a ticket. What is lacking is a clear way for drivers to make a correct decision to either stop or go when seeing a green light turn amber.

Here is a simple solution to this problem. This will enable a driver to accurately judge both time and distance so that there will be no doubt about whether he or she should continue at the speed limit or come to a stop when seeing a green light turn amber.

It's in two parts. First, the amber time must set be in accordance with the formula agreed upon by traffic engineers that pegs amber time to the speed limit and the slope of the road at the intersection. The higher the speed limit and the greater the down hill slope is, the longer the amber time should be. The formula even allows one second reaction time for a driver to realize he or she should stop. Secondly, taking this standard amber time into account, it is simple arithmetic to calculate where a yellow stopping distance line should be painted across the road. This line would indicate to a driver who sees both an amber light and the yellow stopping distance line ahead that he or she should use a normal braking rate to stop at the intersection. If the driver sees that he or she is beyond the yellow stopping distance line when the light changes form green to amber, it is safe to proceed through the intersection at the speed limit and not run the risk of violating the red light.

I propose to found "The Houston Coalition Against Red Light Cameras" to promote this solution and to oppose the unfair entrapment of innocent drivers that is now being perpetrated by all of the proponents of red light cameras.

Lets put an end to the time and distance game that all drivers are forced to play with all the odds stacked against them. STOP THE PHOTO-RED SCAM! What do you think?

I don't think it's a surprise that most red light runners do so within the first two seconds of the light turning red. I mean, when else would it happen? This is like saying that most speeders are caught doing less than 15 MPH above the limit. I don't buy the argument that these are not deliberate. Have you never hit the gas to make it through the light before you lose the yellow? I'd bet that's what a lot of these folks are doing.

That said, I've no quarrel with the suggestions Helwig makes. By all means, optimize the yellow light times, and paint yellow stopping distance lines (I'm more skeptical of these, as stopping distance is a function of speed, which is not going to be a constant at these intersections). I'd go farther and say let's make sure every camera-enabled intersection has Walk/Don't Walk indicators as well, since they provide an extra measure of how much time you have till the light turns on you. Heck, I've even seen them with timers, counting down the seconds in the cycle. You can even add signs warning people about the presence of the cameras, which some people are oddly enamored with, if you think they'll do any good. If all that will help, I say go for it. Use the revenue from the tickets generated to pay for any extra hardware needed.

If we do all that - if we make it as easy as possible for people to determine when they need to stop for the light and what will happen to them if they don't - can we then agree that the argument about red light cameras being nothing but revenue generators are no longer valid? I mean, at some point, we have to agree that it's illegal to run a red light, and that there may be consequences for doing illegal things like that. Right? Look at it this way: if all these enhancements really do cut down on red light running, then the cameras won't be such a gold mine after all. It's a win-win.

Believe it or not, I still haven't made up my mind about these things. I'm still not impressed by the revenue arguments about the cameras, and that seems to be the main point being brought up by their opponents. My concern is still about how the image data is stored and used, and what benefit (i.e., reduction in fatalities and serious injuries) we're getting out of all this. I'm still waiting to see some data from Houston's implementation. I'm perfectly willing to tinker with that implementation to address other concerns, but I see all that as a sideshow. This is what I want to know, and I hope we'll know it soon.

The city of Bellaire has decided to not follow Houston's lead in expanding its no-smoking ordinance for restaurants.

Mayor Cindy Siegel, who voted in favor of the ordinance along with council member Pat McLaughlan, read several statistics about the harmful impacts of second-hand smoke and said that the ordinance would help protect the health and safety of residents.

"A person's decision to smoke impacts my heath and my family's health," Siegel said. "It is the same concept as regulating refrigerator temperatures in restaurants so that food is at a safe temperature."

Houston passed a similar no smoking ordinance in 2005 and Siegel said the National Restaurant Association requested the council consider the measure to unify the stance on smoking in bars and restaurants in the Houston area.

Council's vote against the smoking ban was 5-2.

And the 2006 election season finally comes to a close.

Pearland Republican Mike O'Day won a runoff election Tuesday to replace deceased state Rep. Glenda Dawson.

In complete but unofficial returns, O'Day had 3,555 votes to beat another Pearland Republican, Randy Weber, who had 2,657 votes.

[...]

The Texas House went into session a week ago, but it may take another week for O'Day to be sworn in. Election returns will first have to be officially canvassed by Brazoria and Matagorda county commissioners court and by state officials.

The softer side of Rick Perry made another appearance at his inauguration.

"Texas is better off when Republicans and Democrats work together," the Republican governor told several hundred legislators, guests and spectators in the House chamber, where the inaugural ceremony, traditionally held outside, had been chased by freezing temperatures and ice on the Capitol grounds.

One more thing:

Perry, 56, who was re-elected with 39 percent of the vote over four opponents in November, is on track to become the longest-serving governor in Texas history. But already there is speculation that he may welcome an invitation to be the vice presidential nominee on the 2008 GOP ticket.

The governor has tried to downplay that speculation, but it was renewed Tuesday when he made brief references to international problems, including the situation in Iraq, the war on terrorism and the "anti-American appeals" of some European and Latin American leaders.

UPDATE: For a full analysis of Perry's speech plus some fashion commentary, see Muse.

I admit I stayed off the highways as I drove to work this morning, but I didn't find the roads to be particularly icy; if anything, they were just wet. Not everyone has the option of avoiding the freeways, of course, and that's probably part of the reason why I can count the coworkers on my floor with one hand (normally there'd be about 40 or so). HISD's closing likely helped convince some people to work from home as well.

So. Anybody else bother going to work today? At least I won't have to worry about interruptions.

I'll be getting back into my usual swing of things later today, but until then here's a story from my hometown paper that caught my interest. I'll highlight the relevant bits:

The convicted murderer, a Staten Islander, was eager to die rather than rot behind bars. But the governor, a Catholic, adamantly opposed capital punishment.

So Mario Cuomo pulled every string in his political cabinet to keep 32-year-old Thomas Grasso of St. George alive to serve a sentence of 20 years to life for the 1991 strangling of an elderly St. George man, rather than see him extradited to Oklahoma, where he faced certain execution for murdering an 87-year-old Tulsa woman.

But then Republican George Pataki turned the capital case into an election promise and upset Cuomo in New York's tightly contested 1994 gubernatorial race.

In one of his first acts after being sworn in, Pataki signed Grasso's extradition papers, and on March 20, 1995, Grasso got his fondest wish in the form of an injection of lethal drugs at Oklahoma State Penitentiary.

He was the last Staten Islander executed for murder.

I don't agree with your conclusion that Thomas Grasso was a "Staten Islander". I don't have access to the records ( Ind. #240/91) but I remember that this Oklahoma killer was a transient living in a SRO on Central Avenue.

A reasonable definition of a "Staten Islander" should include, at the least, some recognizable contact with the Island. Mr. Grasso didn't appear to have any real contact with the Island except being physically there when arrested for the horrible murder.

As to Gov. Mario Cuomo's "Catholic" motivated resistance to the sending Mr. Grasso back to Oklahoma to face the death penalty, I question your definition of the then Governor's religious beliefs. Certainly, his opposition was his political stance on the death penalty but to equate that opposition to his religious beliefs is too much a stretch for me. If his opposition to the death penalty was solely "Catholic" than he should have been opposed to abortion. We know he did not oppose abortion and that appeared to be also a political decision.

I still hold to my position about Mr. Grasso; he should have served his 20 years in New York and then have been sent back to Oklahoma. He got the mercy that his victim didn't get, and he got that mercy for political reasons. Clearly Mr. Grasso out smarted both Cuomo and Pataki.

So much for my opinion,

Charles A. Kuffner, Jr.

Meet Summer Williams: Aerospace engineer by day, Houston Texans cheerleader by weekend.

Williams is a 25-year old aerospace engineer for the Jacobs Engineering Group, which is NASA's main scientific support contractor. Williams, a small-town Kansan, is an assistant project manager on the group that figures out how to keep the international space station habitable.

[...]

"There was a girl I knew who went to a top state university and whose aspiration was always to be a Dallas Cowboy cheerleader," she said. "I remember thinking, 'How can that be your lifelong dream?' "

[...]

"I just always wanted to be smart," Williams said. She definitely was that. Her dad's a mortician, and her first dream job was to be a forensic pathologist. Then her ninth grade science teacher had her class watch Apollo 13 and she became "very, very curious about the brains on the ground."

Every math and science elective her high school offered, Williams took. Her senior year, she wrote gobs of essays, underwent a two-day observation at problem-solving and group work, and won a $10,000 scholarship from Cessna. She went to Wichita State, got that aerospace engineering degree and didn't watch much football. "I studied a lot," she said.

[...]

That first year Williams was in Houston, Jacobs had a family day at AstroWorld, a now torn-down amusement park. She went with some co-workers and when they saw an advertisement at Reliant Stadium trumpeting cheerleader tryouts, Williams joked about trying out so she could finally see an NFL field.

"That was it," she said. "No one ever talked about it again."

Until a year later, when one of her colleagues sent her a link to the 2005 tryouts. He and another co-worker had decided the best way to meet girls was for Williams to become a cheerleader. They'd buy her lunch, once a week for a year, if she'd try out.

"I stood on that line with 1,000 gorgeous women and I called them and said, 'You're going to owe me sushi every week," she said. But then she somehow got whittled into the half-cut group. Then the 75 that got the two-week rehearsal audition. She went to the personality interview in a suit, carrying her rocket scientist resume. She got picked.

And she was totally mortified, this woman with a pilot's license, to tell her colleagues. "I didn't want people to lose any respect for me," Williams said. "There is this perception about what a cheerleader is."

The good news is that Houston is dry, so the airports ought to be open today. The bad news is that snow is falling in Portland as I type this. The good news is that area schools are open, and at last report my flight was showing as on time. All in all, I'm hoping we'll make it back as scheduled today. Keep your fingers crossed.

UPDATE: Portland schools are now closed, but the airport is open and my flight is still showing as on time. Here's hoping.

UPDATE: We're back, and I'm worn out. The trip to the airport was long, and the plane took off a bit late, but we had a less than full flight, and that makes up for a lot. See you all tomorrow.

You know you're paying more for your cellphone service than you need to, right?

Cellular subscribers are paying hundreds of millions of dollars each year to subsidize landline telephone service, enriching big telecommunications companies while providing little or no benefit to cellphone users.
The subsidies are intended to reimburse the companies for providing traditional phone service in rough terrain and rural areas where stringing lines can be costly. But rampant development has transformed some of these backwaters into booming subdivisions, with no real adjustment to the distribution formula; others, like the oceanfront celebrity playground of Malibu, are receiving subsidies simply because of their difficult topography.

Outdated formulas for tabulating the surcharges -- coupled with feeble government oversight -- have meant a windfall for phone companies, which are fighting to preserve them.

"It's egregious," said Kimberly Kuo, executive director of MyWireless.org, a national non-profit advocacy group for cellular users. "By nature, these fees are highly discriminatory because cell users pay in far more than they get out of it."

Nineteen states charge customers a fee to defray the costs to phone companies of providing service in high-cost areas. Of these, 12 do not exempt cellphones -- Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Kansas, Maine, Nebraska, Nevada, Texas, Utah and Wyoming.

Since 2003, these states have together collected more than $4 billion, an Associated Press investigation found. The burden is shared by cellular and regular phone customers alike. In some states, cell users appear to be footing more than half the bill.

"There's an enormous inequity with wireless contributions," said Joe Farren of CTIA-The Wireless Association, a trade group representing the nation's cellular providers and wireless equipment manufacturers. "We think these funds should be no larger than necessary and not favor one technology over another. It's a major issue for us."

[...]

Some states' subsidy programs are managed by private companies that receive little oversight from regulators.

In Texas, which contracts with a private administrator, the state's 15.6 million cellphone users were substantial contributors to the $1.9 billion collected for universal services since 2003, of which $1.3 billion was distributed in high-cost subsidies. Although carriers aren't required to pass along the costs to customers, they almost always do. Last year, nearly 80% of these subsidies were paid to AT&T, Verizon and two smaller carriers.

"The fund keeps growing in a way that's disturbing because it takes more and more consumer funding," says Roger Stewart, a telecommunications attorney for the Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel. "There should be a detailed accounting of how the money is being used. There's no reporting by companies as to how they are using the pots of money."

Two points of interest in this Clay Robison column on the impending committee chair shakeup in the Lege:

Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, who openly campaigned for Pitts in the speaker's race, likely will be replaced as chairman of the Urban Affairs Committee, which will handle a mountain of local legislation important to Houston, San Antonio and other cities.

Rep. Kevin Bailey, D-Houston, a Craddick loyalist who has served on the panel since 1991, may ask for the chairman's post and may get it.

As for Bailey, maybe this will give him a chance to create an actual legislative record in time for next March's primary. He'll need one, that's all I know.

Only 27 Democrats and no Republicans voted against Speaker Craddick's re-election. But the key procedural vote on whether to conduct the election by secret ballot was much closer. It was tabled, or killed, 80-68, per Craddick's demand.

Had there been a secret ballot, with legislators free from potential retaliation for voting against Craddick, the speaker's election may have turned out differently. Or so the theory goes.

Harris County representatives who voted for the secret ballot were Republicans Gary Elkins and Talton and Democrats Alma Allen, Ellen Cohen, Garnet Coleman, Jessica Farrar, Ana Hernandez, Scott Hochberg, Borris Miles, Rick Noriega, Senfronia Thompson and Hubert Vo.

Sure, I could call Elkins' office and ask him myself. I may do that once I'm back in Houston - who knows, he may even give me an answer. I'm just a little surprised that his actions haven't raised more of an eyebrow among the journalists.

Balcones Heights, which is a small incorporated city within San Antonio, is the latest place to install red light cameras.

Engineers started installing camera-ready traffic signals in Balcones Heights on Thursday.

The devices include a camera designed to capture the license plates of drivers who run red lights. Crews in Balcones Heights will spend the next two weeks installing the red light cameras.

Balcones Heights is the first city in Bexar County to install red light cameras.

The City of Balcones Heights will be the first city in Bexar County to install the controversial red light cameras. Construction begins Thursday, January 11th at the corner of Hillcrest and Babcock.

Three other red light cameras will be installed on Fredericksburg Road to include: the intersections at Hillcrest & Fredericksburg Road, Crossroads Boulevard at Fredericksburg Road & Balcones Heights Boulevard & Fredericksburg Road.

Balcones Heights is the smallest suburb in Bexar County. A city of 3-thousand residents to include 250 homes & 17 apartment complexes, the suburb is 8/10ths of a square mile extending from Crossroads Mall down Fredericksburg Road to Balcones Heights Boulevard.

Seventy percent of the residents are Hispanic.

The four red light cameras will take approximately 25 days to install and put into working order. The City Council in a 4-1 approved the installation in September.

According to the agreement with American Traffic Solutions (ATS) who will oversee the project, there will be a thirty day grace period from the time the red light cameras are functional where violators will only be issued warning tickets. At the end of the grace period, citations will be issued and fines levied.

A Red Light Camera violation will cost the violator $148 per citation.
Consequences for failure to pay the ticket will include an unfavorable mark against the violators credit report, and collection agencies will be notified and other possible legal action will be taken. The violations are a civil matter and the citation does not affect insurance rates or suspension of driver's license.

Here we are in Portland having fun. Olivia wanted to ride on the carousel (in particular, the ponies on the carousel) at the Jantzen Beach Mall as soon as she laid eyes on it. She was wearing one of the biggest smiles I'd ever seen on her face by the time it stopped spinning. Life is good.

This story about the use of "tags" by City Council members, which is a one-week delay on any Council agenda item, is interesting if not really revealing. I mean, raise your hand if you're surprised that Addie Wiseman leads the pack here. What else is she going to do?

The question is how effective this is as a tactic for actually stopping things you don't like. Far as I can tell from reading the article, at least as far as Wiseman v. White goes, the answer is not very. Wiseman scored a victory in the Houston Media Source affair, but not to put too fine a point on it, who cares? It was embarrassing for a few days, Mayor White lost the initial vote, but it wasn't exactly a cornerstone of his administration. It was a political win, sure, but what did it accomplish from a policy perspective, and how big an impact did it have? Would anyone claim the HMS saga caused Mayor White to scale back his agenda or adjust his approach? I wouldn't. If that's the prime example of a tagging achievement, I can't say I'm terribly impressed.

Nope, that's not a misprint, but an inspired-by-the-original diner not too far from my neighborhood. Based on the Chron review, it sounds like someplace worth checking out. At the prices listed, it'd be hard to go too far wrong.

Olivia and I are in Portland for a couple of days to help my dad celebrate his 70th birthday. One of the things I learned upon our arrival yesterday (from my Aunt Kathy) is that Portland now also known as Beer Town.

Friday afternoon, Mayor Tom Potter [officially declared] Portland "Beertown," where he will serve as honorary mayor. To kick off the city's new title, the mayor will pour the first ceremonial pint of Beertown Brown, the new seasonal debut from BridgePort Brewing Co.

Portland is known all over the world as "Beervana," largely due to the 28 breweries operating within city limits, more than any other city in the world. This title does not include the eight breweries that operate in the surrounding metro area.

There are three more breweries scheduled to open in 2007, making Portland the largest craft brewing market in the country.

First he channels Chris Bell on the subject of the border fence, then he stands by the law that allows the children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition at public universities. Rick Perry 2007 sure is different from Rick Perry 2006, isn't he?

Gov. Rick Perry said Thursday he will oppose efforts to repeal a law, which he signed six years ago, giving tuition breaks to illegal immigrants attending state universities.

"I'm for leaving the law like it is because I think it serves a good purpose," he said.

[...]

State legislators have filed at least four bills to repeal the measure, which grants lower, in-state tuition to the children of immigrants who have lived in Texas at least three years, have graduated from a Texas high school and plan to become citizens.

Opponents say it is unfair to give the financial break to illegal immigrants when many U.S. citizens who are non-Texas residents have to pay more to attend college here.

"The only way that you can be eligible for that in-state tuition is if you are in the process of getting your citizenship," Perry said.

"I think that's been highly overlooked in this debate."

However, under the law, students only have to promise that they will apply for citizenship.

State Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, sponsor of one of the bills to repeal the law, said she disagrees with Perry.

"What we are doing is grossly unfair to people who are here legally," Riddle said. "It gets down to the question: Are we going to continue rewarding people who cut to the front of the line and are not here legally."

This is par for the course for ol' Pit Of Hell Riddle, but it's both nice and more than a little strange to see Rick Perry acting all enlightened. Greg has a similar reaction. All I can say is that it's too bad Perry didn't see fit to campaign in such a fashion. I'd say "maybe next time", but if he keeps this up I don't see how he makes it through a Republican primary, so I doubt there will be a next time.

One curious omission from this story is a reaction from the legislator who authored the bill in question. That was Rep. Rick Noriega, and I asked him to send me a statement about this. Here it is:

Thanks for the opportunity to respond to the Chron article concerning HB 1403. I met with the Governor [Friday], and I thanked him for his support and his remarks.

Clearly the Governor recognizes that HB 1403 is good public policy for Texas. Since its passage in 2001, at least nine other states have followed Texas' lead on this issue and adopted similar statutes.

Congress will certainly have a version of the "Dream Act," (originally introduced by Republican Senator Orrin Hatch from Utah), as a component to any immigration reform. This means that the over 8,000 Texas students who have used this opportunity will be able to begin work immediately and offer their talents to this state.

Texans do not eat their seed corn. It is not a Texas value to deny children an opportunity for an education, a future to achieve their dreams. I am proud of the Governor's position, and the over 140 House Members, Republican and Democrat, who voted for HB 1403.

For Texas,

Rick Noriega

I don't normally expect to see anything remotely political in Ken Hoffman's column, but this time is an exception.

There's a proposal floating around Austin that would expand legalized gambling in Texas.

[...]

Now I say to the Legislature the same thing I was screaming at the Houston Texans all season:

Pass it!

I could list all the potential benefits of legalizing casino gambling, like $3.2 billion in tax revenues for the state, with $1.6 billion helping send kids to college. Cities and counties would get $800 million. Thousands of people, including Wayne Newton, would find work in Texas.

Danke Shoen. You're welcome.

But the main reason the Legislature should pass casino gambling is ... people want it. Gambling is fun. It's exciting. It's a way to increase tax dollars without people squawking about it.

State Rep. Juan Garcia moves to deliver on a promise.

Corpus Christi first-term Rep. Juan Garcia scored a coup this afternoon as colleagues agreed to his proposal that the House hold record votes on all legislation and that member-by-member results be promptly posted online so constituents can more easily monitor their representatives.

Garcia, a Democrat who had campaigned vowing to seek recorded votes on all measures, noted that commercial services already make vote results ready instantly to customers.

Critics of more public votes have said they would allow political opponents to create a record against legislators and slow down the legislative process.

The House just adopted, without objection, a provision to require recorded votes on all second readings - unless they suspend the rules. That's a huge step from what they were originally going to do, which was requiring them on final passage (meaning that the bills that die don't get a record vote).

It seemed awfully easy. Too easy. Turns out, it was.

Reps didn't realize, after amendment and discussion, what they were voting on. They thought Rep. Juan Garcia, D-Corpus Christi, had whittled his original proposal down to just the final passage, with votes available on the internet within the hour. Everybody thought he'd cut out the second-passage provision.

So it's being reconsidered.

So they're going to actually read the amendment and vote again.

After I did my post on kids' music, I got an email from Mark Yzaguirre, who is the President of the Board of the Aurora Picture Show, which is based here in the Heights. They've got a production this weekend of Pancake Mountain this weekend. Houstonist says the following about it:

Based in Washington D.C. and created by filmmaker Scott Stuckey, the show is headed by Rufus Leaking, a goat puppet, and other characters. Many indie-rock bands perform regularly on the show (including Arcade Fire, Guster, Bright Eyes), along with special guests like Juliette Lewis and Henry Rollins - not your usual guest stars. The Washington Post called it "A sort of slapstick Sesame Street that combines Pee-wee's Playhouse silliness with the inspired lunacy of Monty Python's Flying Circus, the program also boasts an ultra-hip and ever-expanding musical guest list." Sounds like our kind of show!

Pancake Mountain
Aurora Picture Show
800 Aurora Street
Saturday, Jan. 13 @ 10 a.m.
Sunday, Jan. 14 @ 3 p.m.

Today is the day that the House sets its rules for the session. One rule being proposed by State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez would allow for bloggers to get press credentials in the Capitol. From the press release:

"With the rise of citizen journalism, it no longer makes sense to limit access to House business solely to the traditional press outlets," said Representative Rodriguez.

Political blogs are some of the limited media that focus solely on reporting the happenings at the Capital and many of these Bloggers regularly break stories that show up in the traditional media.

Bloggers, as defined by this revised rule, produce original reporting and informed comment worthy of credentials. This amendment will allow increasingly popular non-traditional media, the privileges necessary to more effectively inform citizens on governmental issues.

"This kind of measure would encourage citizen participation in government and help demystify the system for the general public," said Rodriguez.

Now if they could also get WiFi in the House, we'd really be getting somewhere. We'll see.

State Sen. Mario Gallegos has revealed that he needs a liver transplant.

"I haven't been given a green light for anything," the Houston Democrat said this week. "Whatever I do will be between my family, my doctor and me."

Gallegos, a recovering alcoholic, was lauded Tuesday when he was sworn in as the Senate's new president pro tempore -- making him third in line of succession to the governorship.

Work with the body politic, though, could have to wait for work on his.

He's been under close medical supervision for the past year, receiving blood transfusions every other week as part of the monitoring process.

[...]

During the Senate caucus meeting Tuesday, moments before senators stepped on the floor to anoint Gallegos president pro tempore, he revealed his health problems to his colleagues.

The ceremonial position rotates among senators based on seniority. Whoever holds it traditionally serves as "Governor for a Day" sometime during the session when the governor and lieutenant governor make a point of being out of state at the same time.

Granted, the Senate is full of formality and niceties, but a majority of the 31 senators praised Gallegos Tuesday, and it went on for longer than usual.

"If you weren't familiar with what happened in caucus, you didn't understand the emotional outpouring of support," said Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, who made the first speech seconding Gallegos' nomination.

[...]

There are political ramifications of acknowledging illness, which some mistake for weakness.

From the floor of the Senate, Whitmire cautioned anyone interested in running for Gallegos' seat against challenging him while he is in recovery.

"There is plenty of time for him to worry about political recovery," Whitmire said. "If he improves his health, it enhances his political strength."

Gallegos' statement on his medical status is here.

Well, the Legislative Budget Board has done its thing, and the spending cap is set at a little more than $7 billion above was was allocated in the last biennium. As that's barely half of what's needed to pay for the property tax reductions, something has to give. The Lege is now considering whether it should be up to them, or up to the voters via a constitutional amendment.

Legislative leaders adopted a constitutionally required spending cap Thursday and immediately entertained a new idea for getting around it so they can provide local property tax relief without slashing key services.

The idea: Let the voters decide whether to exempt property tax relief from the spending cap through a constitutional amendment. Voter approval could take some heat off of GOP lawmakers who might be reluctant to directly vote to break the cap even for tax relief.

The idea of an amendment met with approval from Republican Gov. Rick Perry.

"I think that's probably the way to do it," he said.

Rep. Jim Keffer, an Eastland Republican who heads the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said he expects lawmakers to take the amendment route. If legislators approve a ballot proposal quickly, the election could occur while they are still in session.

But Sen. Steve Ogden, a Bryan Republican who heads the budget-and-tax Senate Finance Committee, said a direct vote by lawmakers would be simpler because it only would require majority support. A constitutional amendment would require a two-thirds vote.

The spending problem facing lawmakers is that they have promised school property tax relief that -- according to the latest estimate -- will cost the state $14.2 billion to provide over the next two years, since the state must replace dollars that otherwise would come from local taxes.

But spending for property tax relief counts against the spending cap, just as any other expenditure does, a fact that Perry called "counter to common sense."

As for what course the Lege should take to avoid the spending cap, I say they should take the responsibility for it rather than pass it on to the voters, even if it might be easier for them to muster 76 votes than 100. What kind of turnout do you think this emergency election might get? Not enough to be worth the effort and expense, I think. I for one don't want to see a kludge like this enshrined into the Constitution - that poor document is already groaning under the weight of too much superfluous junk. I say we shouldn't let any future legislatures off the hook for when this situation arises. Issues like this should call for tough decisions.

If lawmakers choose to go around the cap with a proposed constitutional amendment, [Lt. Gov. David] Dewhurst raised the possibility that the proposal also could ensure that those over age 65 would get the full benefit of property tax relief. Because people's school taxes are frozen at age 65, whether they get relief depends on the level at which their taxes were frozen.

Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, said the senior-citizen proposal "obviously needs to be done." He expressed concern, however, that tying the effort to break the cap to tax relief would elevate that issue over other priorities of some lawmakers, such as health coverage for lower-income children and lowering tuition rates.

I'm not sure how Dems are going to play this. I think they'd have enough support to block the consitutional amendment, which frankly would be good enough for me. I'm not too worried about the specter of spending cuts across the board because that would conflict with some things like teacher pay that even the Republicans campaigned on. I also think there's going to be some strange bedfellows on this one, as the Dan Patrick wing of the GOP may refuse to support raising the cap under any circumstance. This has all kinds of potential, so stay tuned.

UPDATE: Governor Perry has declared an emergency on the spending cap, so a bill/resolution could be passed and signed immediately, with an election if needed to follow.

Holy crap.

Twelve months ago, Todd Graham stood before a roomful of players, administrators and supporters, and spoke of initiating a Rice renaissance. He presented a plan to revitalize the football program and then steadfastly set out to put that plan in motion.

And after spearheading fundraising efforts that produced massive renovations to Rice Stadium and its adjoining facilities, Graham led the Owls on a magic-carpet ride that concluded with them earning a bowl berth for the first time in 45 seasons.

On Thursday, that renaissance came to an abrupt end when Graham decided to return to the University of Tulsa, where he will succeed Steve Kragthorpe, his former boss, as head coach.

Several NCAA officials confirmed that Graham will leave after only one season -- a campaign in which he led Rice to a 7-6 record and the New Orleans Bowl.

Graham, 42, was named Conference USA Coach of the Year by the media, but his success at Rice proved to be little more than a springboard for his return to Tulsa, where he spent three seasons (2003-05) serving as defensive coordinator under Kragthorpe, who on Tuesday left Tulsa after four seasons and replaced Bobby Petrino at Louisville.

"I'm kind of upset personally," Owls sophomore cornerback Ja'Corey Shepherd said. "We just got adjusted to these coaches, and it's going to be hard to get adjusted to a whole new set of coaches. For coach Graham to leave is a disappointment to me."

Back in the 80s and early 90s when the coaching situation was a bit more fluid around here, the MOB used to do an Annual Salute To The New Coach as its first show whenever the revolving door had taken another spin. We didn't do that this year, since it wasn't really appropriate given Ken Hatfield's long tenure. I guess we can dust it off for the 2007 season opener. Right now, at least, it doesn't seem as funny as it did back then.

Oh, and Major Applewhite is going to Alabama as well. Hardly seems like a big deal now.

Looks like we might have an open seat race in CD14 in 2008.

Ron Paul, the iconoclastic nine-term congressman from southeast Texas, took the first step Thursday toward launching a second presidential bid in 2008, this time as a Republican.

Paul filed incorporation papers in Texas on Thursday to create a presidential exploratory committee that allows him and his supporters to collect money on behalf of his bid. This will be Paul's second try for the White House; he was the Libertarian nominee for president in 1988.

Kent Snyder, the chairman of Paul's exploratory committee and a former staffer on Paul's Libertarian campaign, said the congressman knows he's a long shot.

"There's no question that it's an uphill battle, and that Dr. Paul is an underdog," Snyder said. "But we think it's well worth doing and we'll let the voters decide."

BOR has more. Will this give the CD14 race a higher priority by the national parties next year? I think both of them would be wise to pay attention to it. I don't have full precinct data for CD14, but I can do a comparison on the seven counties that are entirely within that district: Aransas, Calhoun, Chambers, Jackson, Matagorda, Victoria, and Wharton. About a third of the total vote resided in those counties. It looks like this:

Candidate     Votes    Pct

==========================

Ron Paul     31,523  55.69

Shane Sklar  25,079  44.31


Don Willett  28,859  56.17

Bill Moody   22,523  43.83

Avg GOP      33,686  63.35

Avg Dem      19,487  36.65

(Spreadsheet with comparison data is here. All data was taken from the Secretary of State's election returns page.)

Astroworld is gone, and now Six Flags is dumping Splashtown, though its fate is new ownership rather than the wrecking ball.

The company said the sale, which is expected to bring $312 million, is a part of its strategy to cut $2.2 billion of debt and enhance its operational and financial flexibility.

PARC 7F-Operations Corp. of Florida will buy the parks.

Richard Jett, vice president of the PARC Management, said his company is planning to continue operating SplashTown.

"There will be no visible changes this year," at the park that will just be called Splashtown, said Jett.

Under the terms of the deal, PARC plans to resell the properties to another company, CNL Income Properties, a real estate investment trust. PARC will then lease them back from CNL.

The surgery to remove a brain tumor went well for former Yankee Bobby Murcer, but his prognosis is still grim.

The tumor that was removed from Bobby Murcer's brain during surgery last month was malignant.

"As we begin a new year, I find myself facing a new challenge -- the biggest of my life so far. Pathology reports have revealed that the brain tumor removed was malignant," the former New York Yankees star said Wednesday in a statement.

"I'm not having to battle this alone but am fortified with the most loving family, an abundance of wonderful friends and fans and the very best class of physicians. I'm gaining confidence that with God and my faith leading the way, we will as a team put up an incredible fight. Please continue to send up prayers. That's all I can really ask of you at this time," he said.

Well, Senator Danno is making good on one of his campaign promises, for what it's worth.

Freshman Sen. Dan Patrick, the Republican talk-radio host from Houston, made the abortion ban the subject of his first bill, SB186, which he filed Wednesday.

Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, filed an identical bill, HB175, in the Texas House on Nov. 13, the first day to pre-file.

The bills would ban abortion except to "prevent the death" of the mother -- if Roe is overturned. They contain no exemptions for rape, incest or to protect the health of the mother.

"Frankly, it's not going to be my priority," said Joe Pojman, executive director of the anti-abortion group Texas Alliance for Life.

"I don't see Roe as being overturned anytime soon, and I want to put our resources behind things I think will save lives right now," Pojman added.

He's more concerned about funding for adult stem cell research and tightening a so-called "women's right to know" law meant to discourage abortion.

Sarah Wheat, director of public affairs at Planned Parenthood of the Texas Capitol Region, said she isn't placing the future ban high on the radar screen either.

"What do you know?" she said, laughing. "We've found some common ground."

She said polls have consistently shown that Texans oppose politicians banning abortion, especially without an exception for the health of the mother, incest or rape.

"Most Texans think this should be a private decision," she said.

Fran Hagerty, chief executive officer of Women's Health and Family Planning Association of Texas, said she's not surprised by the bills, but neither is she alarmed.

"We do not expect the U.S. Supreme Court will rule in this manner to trigger this bill," she said.

"Obviously our position is it is absolutely essential that women continue to have the right to make reproductive choices for themselves," she added. "Our primary focus this session is going to be on the family-planning budget."

Patrick, however, said the trigger bill is needed because he thinks it "is only a matter of time" before Roe v. Wade is reversed.

Side issue: Assuming Danno's bill actually gets off the ground, what are the chances that it will be derailed by the two-thirds rule? Call me crazy, but I suspect there's a Republican Senator or two who'd rather not have a recorded vote on this puppy. Will they be able to get protection in this fashion? We'll see.

I remain skeptical that anything much will be done to eliminate the office of Harris County Treasurer now that it is inhabited by Orlando Sanchez instead of Richard Garcia, but County Commissioner Steve Radack is still giving it the old college try.

Commissioner Steve Radack, who wants to abolish the county Treasurer's Office, said Harris County should withdraw from the Texas Association of Counties if it doesn't reverse its opposition to abolishing constitutionally mandated elective offices.

Radack told the Commissioners Court Tuesday that the decision on abolishing the office should be left up to voters and the association has no business meddling in the county's affairs.

"The association should support any effort by the county to reduce the size of county government," Radack said.

The board of the association, a nonprofit organization that lobbies on issues affecting counties and runs seminars on ethics and open records laws, passed a resolution last month opposing abolishing treasurer posts and other elected county offices mandated by the state constitution.

"Abolishing any of these offices would create gaps in county government and be an impediment to effective local government," the resolution said.

But Marc Hamlin, the association's president and Brazos County district clerk, said the association wasn't taking a specific position on the Harris County treasurer's post.

County Treasurer Orlando Sanchez, who assumed the office this month, opposes abolishing it, saying that it can act as a watchdog on county spending.

Credit where credit is due.

A $100,000 donation from Houston home builder Bob Perry on Wednesday raised boosters' hopes that they can preserve all 20 acres of the West 11th Street Park.

City Councilwoman Toni Lawrence, whose district includes the park in northwest Houston, said she is continuing to seek major donations to avoid the need to sell part of the property.

"I don't have the attitude that we're not going to make it and we have to take out this loan," Lawrence said, referring to a loan that the Houston Parks Board has arranged to help the city buy the park. Under that plan, up to five acres could be sold to pay off the loan.

Perry's check was delivered to her office Wednesday afternoon, Lawrence said. About $5.7 million of the $9.2 million purchase price has been raised.

[...]

Lawrence said several prominent Houstonians, including car dealer and Metropolitan Transit Authority board member George DeMontrond, have agreed to organize a fundraising event. DeMontrond could not be reached for comment.

The councilwoman said she asked for Perry's help, reminding him that his company has built a number of housing developments in the area and that the people buying those houses would appreciate the park.

"As density increases inside the Loop, we're going to have a lot of development, and every bit of green space is going to matter," Lawrence said.

The park is a cherished part of the daily lives of many residents of the surrounding Timbergrove Manor neighborhood. Some say the loss of even a part of the property, which has been used as a park since the 1950s, would be hard to accept.

The noise and traffic generated by development on the site would diminish the park's value, said Jere Luck, whose house faces the park.

"If they develop those five acres, it's going to terribly, negatively impact the remaining 15 acres," Luck said. "That's the scary part."

I noted this on Kuff's World yesterday, and today there's a fuller story in the Chron.

Giving up on efforts to delay the vote until November, Mayor Bill White on Thursday called a May 12 special election to fill the City Council seat that Shelley Sekula-Gibbs vacated for a brief stint in Congress.

White had hoped for a change in state law to let the city wait until November's regular election to fill the seat, avoiding a special election that he estimated could cost as much as $4 million.

As the legislative session opened this week, however, White realized that he did not have the support of Harris County legislators to push the change through.

White said at a City Council meeting Wednesday that Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, said he would block the city's request.

"I disagree, and I'm disappointed," White said. "I think it's ridiculous that these dates should be set so firmly in state law. I think there ought to be more decisions made at the local level. At the same time, the law is the law."

Whitmire said elections are important, and he would not play a role in postponing one.

"The city should not arbitrarily call off an election," he said. "Sometimes democracy costs. I'm sorry about all the circumstances, but I didn't create them."

Several other Democratic elected officials and the Harris County Republican Party also supported a May election.

Just to recap some things, I expected the Mayor's effort to change the law to fall short. I'm not surprised that Whitmire had a big effect on the outcome. And I'd be very interested to know who else favored the May election. All I know for sure is who said they hadn't been approached by the Mayor to assist him.

Prospective candidates include Melissa Noriega, wife of state Rep. Rick Noriega; retired Air Force officer Roy Morales, who ran for an at-large position in 2005; Andy Neill, a business consultant; Noel Freeman, a city employee; and Tom Reiser, a businessman who used almost $1.2 million from his own pocket in a losing 2002 congressional race.

The filing deadline probably will be in early March, according to the city attorney's office, which is calculating the timeline.

The City Council has to pass an ordinance formally calling the election before candidates can begin raising money.

I'll say again, I support Melissa Noriega in this election. I'll certainly be blogging about it, and I hope to do an interview with all of the candidates. I expect there will be a huge flurry of activity once City Council does its thing, so stay tuned.

OK, I've got the iPod. I've started ripping CDs and synching them to it. And I'm going to exercise my God-given right as a blogger to tell you all the things about it that I like and dislike.

1. The rip and synch process is faster and easier than I thought it would be. Honestly, I wasn't sure what to expect, but I must have thought it'd be more laborious and time-consuming than it's been, because I've been very pleasantly surprised by that part of it.

2. While the synch process is easy, it's not as useful as it should be. When I ripped the first batch of CDs, I went through each one inside iTunes, and unchecked the songs I didn't want to copy to the iPod. I've got more music than I can put on the iPod (since it's only a Nano), so why clutter it with stuff I don't love? Unfortunately, unchecking the boxes had no effect, as I discovered when I started listening to the results. As far as I can tell, the answer was to have not imported the tuned I didn't want to synch in the first place.

But that's ridiculous. I've got plenty of hard drive space, just not enough iPod space. I want to be able to cycle some music off and on the iPod periodically. I seem to have the choice of removing songs from the music library when I want them off the iPod, or just not importing them in the first place. Either way, should I ever want to add something back, I'll have to re-import it. Why can't it be as simple as checking or unchecking a box? Am I missing something?

3. I've decided I hate the ear buds. Maybe my ear canals are small, but after wearing these suckers for a little while, my ears hurt, and not from the volume of the music. A simple set of headphones is on my to-get list.

4. At some point, I'm going to want to hunt around for new music, stuff I can download and try out. I'm looking for recommendations of MP3 sources that are a) free; b) legal; and c) organized in a way that I can find stuff I'm more likely to enjoy. Any suggestions?

5. If I were a jogger, I'd probably wear my iPod while jogging. Boredom is a real problem for me when I (try to) exercise, so distraction is a must. I can see the case against, but I'd be wearing the iPod and daring anyone to stop me.

Overall, I give the experience an A-. I can see why these things are popular, and I daresay that at some point I'll want a bigger iPod so I can avoid the problem mentioned in #2. But for now, I'm happy with what I've got.

When last we looked at the Robinson Warehouse, it was pretty much gone, with little more than one short wall and some debris remaining. I'd have thought by now that the little wall would quickly follow into oblivion, but not quite yet.

I'll check again next week to see if the wall is still there.

I drove past the now-defunct Stables restuarant the other day and saw that one of their last acts while still in business was to change their marquee:

While the news story at the time of the sale made it clear that the property was going to be flipped as part of a larger parcel of real estate, all to happen at some point down the road, I think the Stables building will be bulldozed in the near future. Click on for more.

We'll see when the bulldozers come. I just think it's sooner rather than later.

At the end of this story about Sen. Dan Patrick's solo performance is a bit about Sen. Mario Gallegos, who was named President Pro Tem of the Senate.

Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, lauded the ailing Gallegos for undergoing rehabilitation for alcoholism last spring.

Whitmire told senators he's confident that his "best friend" in the Senate has stopped drinking.

"I've been here long enough to see the human side of state representatives and state senators," Whitmire said. "We're not perfect. Mario's got some issues, but he's the first senator I've been familiar with that recognized his problem, sought help, went public and has been successful with his sobriety."

Whitmire then issued a warning at-large to anyone thinking of challenging Gallegos for his Senate seat: "You mess with Mario Gallegos while he's in recovery, while he's doing well and representing his district, you mess with Mario, and you're messing with me and the rest of this Senate."

Several Houston-area elected officials have been mentioned as possible contenders for Gallegos' seat, among them Houston City Councilwoman Carol Alvarado and state Reps. Jessica Farrar and Rick Noriega. They have all said they are not interested in running for the seat if Gallegos seeks re-election.

He is up for re-election in 2008.

He was most recently re-elected in 2004, overcoming a write-in candidacy by a woman he acknowledged was a former mistress.

Gallegos acknowledged a 17-year affair with ex-stripper Susan Delgado after she filed a lawsuit in which she alleged he had stolen from her and been abusive. The senator, who is married and has children, denied the charges but publicly apologized for what he called a "shameful mistake."

Greg wonders if all this is a sign of Gallegos taking a last bow, or if it's the first step of his political rehab. Gallegos is my State Senator, so I'm certainly rooting for him to do well (or to make a graceful exit if that's what he has in mind). I've never had any quarrel with how Gallegos votes, but his effectiveness is a valid question. It's embarrassing to see him on the Texas Monthly Ten Worst list for an inability to get stuff done. I want him to succeed, but if he doesn't I don't see how Sen. Whitmire is doing anyone any favors with his rhetoric. I wish Sen. Gallegos the very best with his continued recovery, but let's not lose sight of constituents. We deserve the best, too.

We may still have Speaker Craddick, but as of noon yesterday, we no longer have this:

I'll be curious to see how long the signs stay up (that one's on Richmond at Eastside; there's another on Kirby at Richmond), and to see when the signs directing you to Rep. Ellen Cohen's office will go up. That office will be at 3355 West Alabama, Suite 1230, near the intersection of Buffalo Speedway and West Alabama, by the way. If you see the sign before I do, send me a note.

So the Speaker's race is over, and it didn't go the way I hoped. These things happen, and I can't really say that this was an unexpected result. I had hope, but it was always going to be tough. Now it's time to move on and make the best of it.

First order of business is to acknowledge and thank the 27 Democrats who stuck it out till the end and cast a No vote on Craddick. That vote was largely symbolic, and I have no quibble with the Dems who chose not to make that statement; one can certainly question what good it would do them and their constituents at that point. Nonetheless, those 27 deserve extra credit for their courage, and I salute them for it.

The vote that really mattered was the vote to table the Geren Amendment, which would have allowed the vote for Speaker to remain secret until after committee assignments were made.

The 80-68 vote to kill Rep. Charlie Geren's amendment -- concealing how House members vote on the speaker's race for several weeks -- can be seen as the real vote on keeping Tom Craddick as speaker. If so, a change in six votes would have deadlocked the House. Change seven, and Jim Pitts might have won.

Only 14 Republicans voted against tabling the Geren amendment: Gary Elkins, Mr. Geren, Pat Haggerty, Bryan Hughes, Delwin Jones, Ed Kuempel, Thomas Latham, Brian McCall, Tommy Merritt, Mr. Pitts, Todd Smith, Joe Straus, Robert Talton and Buddy West.

The 15 Democrats who sided with Craddick forces in killing the Geren amendment?

They were: Kevin Bailey, Norma Chavez, Joe Deshotel, Dawnna Dukes, Harold Dutton, Kino Flores, Helen Giddings, Ryan Guillen, Tracy King, Eddie Lucio III, Ruth Jones McClendon, Aaron Pena, Robert Puente, Patrick Rose and Sylvester Turner.

None of the Democratic names surprise me, though one in particular certainly disappoints me. Some of those Republican names are interesting - Gary Elkins? Really? What's his beef with Craddick? I can explain most of the others, with Buddy West being an exception. And a tip of the hat here to freshman rep and ParentPAC candidate Thomas Latham. That took guts.

What to do with the Craddick-crat 15? While I have no problem with this reaction, I think it'll be impractical. I'm willing to wait and see how some of these folks perform this session before making up my mind. I don't think just this vote is going to be enough to build a successful primary campaign against anyone. Their argument is going to be that since they have power and influence in Craddick's circle, their constituents benefit. It's the ones with the undistinguished records to begin with who will have the hardest time backing up that claim with anything tangible who will be truly vulnerable.

Basically, I see this as the difference between a Sylvester Turner and an Al Edwards. Edwards had a million years' seniority, he was a Craddick lieutenant, he gave Craddick a key vote on the tax swap bill from the 2005 regular session that was a cornerstone of the Republicans' plan to meet the requirements of the Supreme Court order (it never got through the Senate and eventually died at the hands of the Hochberg Fourteen), and what did he do with all that goodwill and influence? He got the Sexy Cheerleading bill to a floor vote. It's members like that - and here I'm looking at Kevin Bailey and Dawnna Dukes, though that list is by no means exhaustive - for whom supporting Craddick, and thus enabling every atrocity that this Lege and the two before it will commit, will be a beacon and a rallying point. It's their record that makes them vulnerable, and it's their support of Craddick that will serve as the galvanizing factor for whoever runs against them.

(And bear in mind that it took a lot of money and a runoff to oust Edwards. Even with a strong case against an incumbent, this is a tall order and by no means a given.)

Two more things to discuss. One is the Burka situation.

During the debate on the Geren amendment, to my total surprise and consternation, [Will] Hartnett cited my observation in the blog that his propsal was fair. All of a sudden heads were swiveling around to look at me--I was sitting in the gallery--and I felt like I was having one of those dreams when you're running down the street naked. But, as they say, I stand by my story. The original proposal, to have a roll call vote in which members voted from their desks, was a clear effort at intimidation, and I thought it might cost Craddick the race. But a process that calls for secret ballots with the individual votes to be announced immediately afterward is fair. The House has used it many times in the past, though not recently. It eliminates the seamier aspects of electronic or roll call voting--"machine malfunctions" that allow members to change their votes to the winning side, and delaying tactics that provide an opportunity for armtwisting and motions to reconsider the vote. The Geren proposal would have changed the nature of the speakership. Part of the inherent power of the office is the speaker's ability to appoint committee chairs and committee members who are loyal to him. Take away that power and you weaken the office. The office is more important than Tom Craddick. To put it another way, reward and punishment are part of politics--too much a part, in the case of Craddick, but a necessary part nevertheless.

And finally, there's the issue of what happens in 2009 if the Democrats manage to regain a majority in the House next year. (Maybe that's not terribly likely, but it needs to be considered anyway.) What will the returning members of the Craddick 15 do if their choice is between a Democrat and Tom Craddick, instead of a choice between two Republicans? Whatever the merits of a primary challenge against any of them may be, I want to know each of their answers to that question.

So we go from here. Only 139 more days until sine die. Stay tuned.

I'd been kicking around a post on kids' music in my mind for a couple of days now, since by necessity I hear a lot of it these days. The good news, as noted in this Chron article, is that there's actually a decent amount of kids' music out there that I can actually listen to. The story is about Olivia's very favorite program, Jack's Big Music Show, and the main artist it showcases, Laurie Berkner.

"We can see how Jack's Big Music Show is doing by how well Laurie Berkner's doing," said Brown Johnson, the executive in charge of preschool programming at Nickelodeon networks, of which Noggin is a part.

"Since Laurie's premiere on Noggin in 2004, she's been at the top of the hit parade for little kids," Johnson said. "Fifteen years ago most kids music on TV was nursery-rhymey stuff that was unpalatable to adults. It ain't happening on my watch."

Witness Jack's Big Music Show, which spawned a successful soundtrack CD in 2006.

Jack's is the second-highest-rated original program on Noggin, a commercial-free cable station available in 54 million households. It features the cheerful exploits of a tuneful trio of huggable puppets: the ebullient guitarist Jack; his accordion-squeezing best friend Mary; and his purple pal Mel, a dog of uncertain pedigree who does great things with a pair of drumsticks.

Anything can happen in Jack's backyard playhouse. On this season's debut, titled Snow Day, a Hawaiian beach party at the clubhouse goes dreadfully wrong when Mel's well-intentioned plan to pump sand onto the premises results in a blizzard. Between shivers the viewers are introduced to the ukulele and one rumbling member of the percussion section.

The boisterous Brooklyn band AudraRox, with its sassy bluegrass number I Hope My Mama Says Yes, is also featured in a video on Jack's new season. The hip-hop-collides-with-classical violin duo Nuttin' but Stringz, from Queens, will get national exposure on the show, too.

On Feb. 2 Jon Stewart, host of The Daily Show, is to appear on the show. Also scheduled for that episode is a raging rock video from Steven Drozd of the Flaming Lips, paired with indie singer-songwriter Steve Burns, the original host of Blue's Clues.

Children's music on television has never been cooler.

I've read before about services like this, mostly in the context of storing one's various account passwords in a single place that will be convenient for family members to access after one's demise. I think I know how to get to most of Tiffany's stuff, but I'm fairly sure she doesn't know how to get to most of mine - this blog, to provide one moderately silly example. I've given something like this some thought, because if nothing else just enumerating all of the things one accesses online or on one's computer has value.

The service, called Deathswitch, ensures that critical personal information will survive, even when a person dies unexpectedly, company founder David Eagleman said.

After Deathswitch subscribers pass on, the company sends e-mail to intended recipients -- anything from computer passwords or a love note to "the last word in an argument," he said.

The service is $19.95 per year -- only while the subscriber is alive, of course.

[...]

Deathswitch.com is an automated system that prompts subscribers for their password on a regular schedule to make sure they're still alive. Subscribers typically ask to be prompted every two weeks.

When a subscriber doesn't respond, the system goes into "worry mode," sending more frequent prompts. A subscriber has the option of providing Deathswitch with a secondary e-mail address and leaving a friend's e-mail address for backup.

If a subscriber fails to respond for a predetermined period of time, Deathswitch assumes that he or she has died and begins sending out e-mail messages, which can contain documents, images and videos.

If a subscriber will be without e-mail access for a long time, he or she can activate the "vacation mode" for any length of time, Eagleman said.

[...]

An advantage of Deathswitch over, say, keeping stored information on a CD in a vault, is that subscribers can easily update information, Eagleman said.

All information on Deathswitch is encrypted for security.

Eagleman sees his service as a way of "bridging mortality."

While some might find the idea creepy, he doesn't.

"It would be so interesting to receive e-mail from someone who passed away," he said, adding. "I don't think there's any honor in being silent in death."

With time, people began to push death switches further. Instead of confessing their death in the e-mails, they pretended they were not dead. Using auto-responder algorithms that cleverly analysed incoming messages, a death switch could generate apologetic excuses to turn down invitations, to send congratulations on a life event, and to claim to be looking forward to a chance to see them again sometime soon.

HouStoned has some fun with this. It's pretty easy to do.

EarthLink is it in San Francisco.

EarthLink Municipal Networks, one of the finalists to provide citywide wireless Internet in Houston, has reached an agreement with the city of San Francisco to build a network there and offer free access to residents, businesses and visitors.

The contract includes a partnership with Google, which will subsidize the free access by selling advertisements on the network. The companies were chosen last year for the project but did not conclude a contract until late Friday, the city said in a news release.

Houston officials are negotiating with Atlanta-based EarthLink and another finalist, a local consortium headed by former Reliant Energy CEO Don Jordan, to determine which company will build a network to blanket the city's 600 square miles.

Mayor Bill White said months ago he hoped to select a vendor by the end of last year. White's spokesman Frank Michel said Monday that he wasn't sure when negotiations would be completed.

Great news.

The city of Houston formally agreed Monday to purchase and preserve the West 11th Street Park, a 20-acre wooded enclave in northwest Houston coveted by developers, but the park may lose as much as a fourth of its area as part of the deal.

The city will buy the site for $9.2 million from the Houston Independent School District, which declared the property surplus in 2004. Residents of the surrounding Timbergove Manor subdivision have used the site as a park since the 1950s, and it has become an important habitat for birds, butterflies and other wildlife.

[...]

"It's a big step," said Roksan Okan-Vick, director of the nonprofit Houston Parks Board, which helps the city acquire land for parks.

The city donated $4 million, and the parks board and other groups raised an additional $1.7 million, leaving the board $3.5 million short of its goal.

Amegy Bank has agreed to lend the board up to this amount, secured by five acres on the southwest part of the site that would be sold, if necessary, to repay the loan, Okan-Vick said. It's the first time in its 30-year history that the board has sought a loan to obtain park land.

"It's a creative way to get around what could have been a great loss," Okan-Vick said.

The portion designated as collateral for the loan has fewer trees than the rest of the property, she said, and development there would have less impact on wildlife.

On the one hand, I'm glad that both my children will be girls, because I won't have to worry about stuff like this. On the other hand, I'm not happy that both my children will be girls, because I will have to worry about stuff like this. Oy vey.

I'm going to spend the next 30 minutes in a fetal position under my desk. Leave me a message and I'll get back to you when I emerge.

I'm taking a little break from all things Speaker's race to get myself coherent again and to post some other stuff that's built up. I'll have things to say later, and if you just can't wait then click on some of my colleague's links, as they're already going at it. For now, I've got this letter from Rep. Jim Dunnam (PDF) to his fellow Dems as a decent approximation of my own feelings. It's copied beneath the fold as well. As I said, more from me on this later.

Letter from Rep. Jim Dunnam to his Democratic colleagues:

Dear Colleague,
When Tom Craddick stepped onto the House floor today, he honestly did not know if he would be elected Speaker. That alone is something that would have been deemed unbelievable four years ago, and indeed even four months ago. If only six members had voted differently, we would have different leadership in the House. Unfortunately, that 45-minute delay on Rep. King's Point of Order probably resulted in at least that many votes being flipped.

I am proud that House Democrats stood together today, committed to changing the direction of Texas - something voters in 2006 stated quite loudly that they wanted. House Democrats said enough to the four years of dictatorial rule and policy that threw hundreds of thousands of children off CHIP, increased tuition for all Texans, cut funding for public schools and put the special interests of the wealthiest Texans above Texas families.

The decision of whether or not the House would have a new Speaker has always been a Republican decision. There are 81 Republicans in the Texas House and, not surprisingly, a Republican Speaker. House Republicans had an opportunity to choose a new direction for the State of Texas, but they chose the status quo.

Tom Craddick obtained the Speaker's gavel in 2002 through illegal corporate money from TRMPAC and a redistricting map that was designed to elect 100 Republicans. Since that time, House Democrats have gained seven net seats, and we are poised to play a strong constructive role in the shaping of good policy this session.

My goal is for House Democrats play a positive role in shaping policy this session. I hope Mr. Craddick does become more inclusive and allow members to just vote their conscience and district. But that decision is solely in his hands.

Today was just the first round this session in our fight for our constituents and the people of the State of Texas. Once again we proved that we will stand up for our convictions and principles, regardless of threats or promised rewards.

Thank you for your courage, your trust and your friendship. We will never win every vote on the floor, but when House Democrats stand up and fight together, Texas can never lose.

Sincerely,

Jim Dunnam

I wonder what the record is for longest Speaker's vote in the House is...

The story so far: Basically, the Geren compromise, which would have involved written votes for Speaker that were kept under wraps until after committee assignments were made, went down to defeat by an 80-68 margin. This vote, more than the one that followed, which required the votes to be made public immediately following the tally, has Craddick lieutenants feeling optimistic. And now it looks like it's all over. Jim Pitts has withdrawn and stated that he will vote for Craddick, to "begin the healing" and presumably to spare any further retribution for his supporters. Rats.

Depressing thought of the day: Was Paul Burka really a kingmaker? I don't even want to contemplate it.

Bleah. Enough of that. I'm taking a break.

We interrupt the news of the Speaker's race to bring you this.

No surprise, but Republican freshman Sen. Dan Patrick of Houston lost his first battle on his first day. You could say it was rather decisive.

Patrick was the only vote recorded in opposition to a longstanding senate tradition requiring a two-thirds vote to bring a bill to the floor for debate.

The other senators -- all 30 of them -- voted to keep the rule.

It's been nearly two hours and we don't have a Speaker yet. If you want to follow the action but don't want to stream the video, let me point you to the following:

BOR
Chron blog
Statesman blog
The Texas Blue
Greg Wythe
Capitol Annex
Brains and Eggs
Pink Dome
In the Pink Texas, which is unfortunately a bit overloaded right now.

Here's how the nominating process will work. Does the slowness in getting everything done signal worry on Team Craddick's part? Some people say yes. More later, so stay tuned.

The other high-profile public election in which trying to understand the way some of the voters think is enough to drive you to crystal meth happens today as well. I'm talking about the baseball Hall of Fame ballot, and in particular I'm talking about crap like this.

Paul Ladewski of the Daily Southtown in suburban Chicago wrote in a column Monday that he submitted a blank ballot because of doubts he had over performance-enhancing drugs in baseball.

"At this point, I don't have nearly enough information to make a value judgment of this magnitude. In particular, that concerns any player in the Steroids Era, which I consider to be the 1993-2004 period, give or a take a season," Ladewski wrote.

Even if handing off the ballot to someone with critical thinking abilities was too great a step, there was always this option:

Sporting News senior vice president John Rawlings said he considered sending in a blank ballot to protest McGwire, who, during a congressional hearing in 2005, refused to discuss his speculated use of performing-enhancing drugs. Instead, Rawlings decided not to submit his ballot at all.

"If I send in a blank ballot ... that penalizes two players for whom I have great admiration, Ripken and Gwynn," said Rawlings, who characterized the current Hall of Fame voting procedure as creating a conflict of interest. "Then the mental tug of war gets framed as, 'Why punish Ripken and Gwynn because of McGwire's bad behavior?' So, it all nets out that not voting is probably the best course after all."

Getting back to paul Ladewski, if he's satisfied with his justification for screwing the likes of Cal Ripken (because Lord knows anyone could see with their own eyes that he was juicing), then what about Bert Blyleven, who threw all but 267 of his nearly 5000 innings in the 1970s and 1980s? Is he tainted by appearing on the same ballot as the players from his accursed steroid era, or was Ladewski just too stupid to realize that Blyleven didn't play during that time? (I read your whole column, Paul, so I know that the name "Blyleven" never appeared.) Blyleven is nearing the end of his 15-year term of eligibility. Maybe you think he's not a Hall of Famer; I disagree, but that's why we vote on these things. What I can't abide is the blitheness with which Ladewski treats Blyleven's candidacy, since he has nothing to do with his grievance. For shame.

Oh, and remember my prediction?

At least one of the Chron sports columnists will pen a prissy and self-righteous piece explaining why he'll never (never!) vote for McGwire's induction.

After polling my advisers and debating with them the merits of every player on the ballot, I am proud to say that I denied a vote for Jose Canseco and Mark McGwire. Under oath before Congress, McGwire said he didn't want to talk about the past after he was given a chance to say he didn't use steroids. Well, I don't want to discuss his past - ever. I may not have proof, but I have too many doubts about McGwire to ever vote for him on my Hall of Fame ballot.

If anything, I might vote for Canseco before McGwire in the future just because Canseco at least helped baseball by bringing the steroids discussion deep into America's consciousness.

UPDATE: To no one's surprise, and despite the best efforts of idiots like Paul Ladewski, Ripken and Gwynn are in, while McGwire got about 25%. And may I just say good for Tony Gwynn. With Rich Gossage falling short, Bert Blyleven falling back below 50%, and Jim freaking Rice getting 67%, this was overall one of the worst votes I can recall. Yecch.

The initial round of nominations for the 2006 Koufax Awards has begun. If you need a review of what the Koufax Awards are all about, go here. And as always, if you want to help the fine folks at Wampum cover the costs of this undertaking, you can make a donation here or here. Happy nominating!

One way or the other, today we'll know who the Speaker is.

A bitter fight is expected on the Texas House floor today as two conservative Republicans battle for last-minute votes to become the next speaker.

Incumbent Tom Craddick and his opponent, Rep. Jim Pitts, R-Waxahachie, each maintained he had secured the necessary votes to win. But Pitts evidently was struggling to find more backers; on the eve of the election, he did not appear at a reception his camp organized for supporters and friends from his district.

Pitts loyalists said everyone was still working the phones "like crazy."

"He's shoring up members and picking up where he can, so that's where he's focusing," one member said.

Between 10 and 12 House members, including Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso, had apparently not committed to either candidate.

Pickett expects a floor fight that will last several rounds.

"It's going to be an interesting, historic day," Pickett said.

I've bounced from elation to despair and back again more times than I can count. I feel somewhat resigned today, and I confess that this doesn't help my mood.

Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, who last month dropped her candidacy for speaker in favor of McCall, said Monday that she remained uncertain of Pitts.

"I'm interested in hearing from both sides," Thompson said, reserving the option of voting "present, not voting."

Elsewhere, Burka says that Pitts has claimed to flip a Republican committee chair. Capitol Letters reminds us again of the stakes in this battle. And Smarty Pants calls out the Craddick Dems.

It'll all be over soon. Assuming that the battle doesn't get re-fought at some point later on, of course. Stay tuned.

UPDATE: What Phillip says.

This is very clever.

Leaders of one of Houston's oldest neighborhoods, developed long before cars, paved roads or utility poles became part of the urban landscape, are using 21st century technology in their struggle to preserve a dwindling number of Victorian-era houses.

A series of YouTube.com videos features homeowner testimonials about the need to preserve the character of the area just west of downtown, which is listed on federal and local historic registries.

Posting the videos was an act of "creative desperation" after activists waited almost a year for city officials to help them create land-use regulations through the neighborhood's Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone, or TIRZ, said Larissa Lindsay, president of the Old Sixth Ward Neighborhood Association.

"We keep having hurdles to jump, yet even when we met them, it was never enough," Lindsay wrote in an e-mail. "I thought that having our history and voices on the Internet was one more way of talking about our neighborhood, along with documenting our history."

Her campaign is meeting resistance from the Sixth Ward Property Owners Association, which says it supports preservation but fears that restrictions on development would cause builders to shun the neighborhood and allow blight to creep in.

"They're taking away our private property rights without even talking to us," said Janice Jamail-Garvis, a Realtor who heads the property owners group.

[...]

In 2003, when Old Sixth Ward leaders first tried to develop rules to encourage preservation, then-city planning director Bob Litke advised them to wait because a stronger preservation ordinance that would apply to the whole city was in the offing, Lindsay recalled.

But that effort died in a City Council committee in the face of opposition from developers and others. And while some homes in the neighborhood qualify for protection through an ordinance passed in 2005 to protect city landmarks, Lindsay said, landmark designation is not a practical way to protect the entire neighborhood.

City officials say they support protection of the historic homes. But the proposed land-use controls raise questions of citywide concern, said Robert Fiederlein, a special assistant to Mayor Bill White who works on TIRZ-related issues.

If such a measure were adopted, it technically would be a zoning ordinance, making the Old Sixth Ward the second of Houston's 22 reinvestment zones to adopt zoning. The first was in St. George Place, formerly known as Lamar Terrace, a neighborhood west of the Galleria where Houston's first TIRZ was created.

State law gives any TIRZ created by petition authority to enact a zoning ordinance, subject to City Council approval. Seven TIRZ's were created by petition, and White is concerned about the implications of having zoning in scattered pockets of the city, Fiederlein said.

"We're looking very hard at their request," he said. "We have not said no, and we have not said yes."

More than 60 percent of Old Sixth Ward property owners signed a petition supporting the land use controls, Lindsay said. But Jamail-Garvis said most property owners in the TIRZ, which is larger than the city-designated historic district, oppose what Lindsay wants to do.

Reinvestment zones use funds generated by increased property values to support neighborhood improvements. Using TIRZ funds to enhance the Old Sixth Ward would provide incentives to preserve the old houses, a better approach than land use regulations, Jamail-Garvis said.

I don't know enough about this issue to have an opinion on which approach is best to help keep the Old Sixth Ward true to its heritage. I just hope that between the two sides they succeed, because there ain't a whole lot else like the Old Sixth anywhere else in Houston.

You've probably noticed the temporary open spaces on Kirby between Alabama and Westheimer, where a number of buildings including the old Page Parkes building, the Fire and Ice restaurant that was once the Hard Rock Cafe, and Jalapeno's Restaurant, have all been torn down pending new high-rise construction. In order the keep things presentable in the interim, a group of artistic entrepreneurs have painted a mural in front of the construction site on the east side of Kirby, where the Parkes used to be.

As many Houstonians will attest, the city always seems to be under construction. And while buildings are going up - or coming down - passersby often are left with unsightly views of cranes, piles of dirt and barricades.

But that won't be the case for the River Oaks condominiums going up at 2727 Kirby. Located at the former spot of the Page Parkes Center of Modeling and Acting, the 30-story high rise is slated to be complete by the fourth quarter of 2008.

Until then, a painted mural, the Kirbyscape Art Wall, will hide the construction site.

"I just thought it would be nice to do something that is aesthetically pleasing," said Mike Atlas, developer and a founding principal of MDA Holdings.

"It gives a taste of what's to come."

[...]

Artists from Artist Boat, a Galveston nonprofit, painted the 8 foot by 80 foot wall.

The mural depicts a seasonal landscape with migratory birds that are typical to Houston.

Cara Moore, who designed the mural, said the purpose of Artist Boat is to raise awareness about costal conservation and preservation through the arts and science.

"We are not based in Houston, but we come here a lot," she said. "We have a lot of programs to teach people in Houston how they are related to what happens to the bay and the coast."

Landry said the mural will be an ongoing project that will change from season to season to reflect Houston's natural environment.

If you want to get a rough idea of who's currently on Team Craddick, watch the videos, whose origin were the subject of so much speculation. How many people were there is subject to some dispute.

It looks like the ballot procedure will be on paper as previously proposed. Whether you think this means momentum for Craddick or not, I think it's the right way to do it.

Elsewhere, Anna puts the Craddick Dems on notice. Vince and South Texas Chisme report from the Valley. Hal and In the Pink comment on the ballot procedure. And finally, SuperWow reaches for the Photoshop to sum it all up.

Anybody else think this is a metaphor of sorts for the Speaker's race?

Police shut down 10 blocks of businesses in the heart of downtown Austin early today after dozens of birds were found dead.

Emergency workers donned yellow hazardous-material suits, and dozens of fire trucks and ambulances were parked nearby, as they began testing for any sort of environmental contaminant or gas or chlorine leaks that might have cause the bird deaths.

Elsewhere in Speaker news, Karen Brooks, who had a little grackle flashback moment in regards to the bird story, is hearing there may be a compromise on how the vote for Speaker is conducted.

Fort Worth GOP Rep. Charlie Geren, who is supporting Rep. Jim Pitts for House Speaker, is calling for a process that would make public who voted for whom - but couldn't be used against members in committee assignments.

He suggests that members write their votes on paper ballots, sign them, and then the Secretary of State Roger Williams tallies them and announces the winner.

Here's the twist: The names on the ballots wouldn't be released until after committee assignments are made.

"The vote process that I have presented today not only protects House members, it protects the integrity of open government," Geren said in a press release. "The process is the best of both worlds. It allows every member to vote his or her conscience for Speaker without the fear of retribution. It also maintains our commitment to open government by providing a mechanism for the ballots to be released to the public."

[...]

Craddick lieutenant Warren Chisum, a GOP rep from Pampa, said last night that Team Craddick was willing to negotiate with the other side on how to vote.

Rep. Joe Straus tonight sent out a press release blasting the idea. "I believe we must protect the institutions of good government against even the apperance of coersion. We must ensure that no single member stands in a hotter spotlight than any other when he or she casts a vote on Tuesday."

Straus goes on to say that he's still pledged to Craddick BUT "My support for any candidate for Speaker," Straus writes in his release, "is predicated on his or her support of a fair process. I believe this outweighs any member's personal ambitions."

In other news, former Speaker Billy Clayton passed away over the weekend. One of his former rivals for the Speakership, Carl Parker, who once championed secret balloting in that race, now supports a public vote. And finally, the whole Speaker's race saga has moved Miya Shay to poetry.

Susan Combs will take her first meaningful action as State Comptroller today when she releases the revenue forecast for the next biennium later today.

"The numbers we put out on Monday will be the dollar numbers the Legislature can spend on behalf of and for every single man, woman and child in the state," Combs said. "Though it doesn't feel personal, always, it is very, very personally important to them how the numbers look and how the economy is."

Work on the budget already has started, as lawmakers anticipate extra revenue to spend and a list of needs and wishes that could eat up every bit.

Before a free hand with spending is a possibility, lawmakers must grapple with a constitutional spending cap.

Unless the cap is bypassed (lawmakers can vote to waive it), it limits their ability to spend billions of dollars and could keep them from fulfilling their promise to cut local school property tax rates.

State spending to lower local taxes counts against the cap just as spending on programs does.

Combs' estimate will be the formal successor to an estimate that Texas has $15.5 billion in extra general revenue, made by Craddick, R-Midland.

His informal projection included $7.9 billion left from the current two-year budget period and $7.6 billion in projected revenue above current spending. That is in addition to $8.7 billion expected to come from expanded state taxes, mostly levied on businesses and cigarettes, which is dedicated to property tax relief.

[...]

Bill Allaway, president of the business-based Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, said the revenue figures his group has come up with aren't dramatically different from those of the speaker and that he anticipates Combs' figures will show "the revenue system has produced significant sums."

"It looks to us like there ought to be enough money available for the Legislature to meet all the commitments that they have already made, both in terms of the property tax relief and the new spending for schools and the other visible estimates of spending demand and have money left over," he said.

That would allow them to carry money over for the next two-year budget period, when they will face a continuing need to pay for local property tax relief. State taxes dedicated to that effort aren't projected to be enough to cover the whole tab.

By spending all the money and effectively making big, new spending commitments for the future, Allaway said, "They can dig themselves a hole if they choose to do it, but they don't have to."

On the plus side, at least no one is arguing about whether or not we have a surplus, as was the case the last time. We just don't know what we're doing with it yet. Stay tuned.

UPDATE: It's $14.3 billion for the surplus. Not as much as originally projected, but still more than the spending cap would allow.

We all knew this was a matter of time, though I think we all hoped it would be a matter of a little bit more time than this: Rice offensive coordinator Major Applewhite has been contacted by Alabama about a similar position there.

After helping steer Rice to its first bowl berth in 45 years, Owls offensive coordinator Major Applewhite was contacted by Alabama on Saturday to gauge his interest in joining the staff of new Crimson Tide coach Nick Saban.

"I have been contacted, and I do have some interest, but I have not been offered the job," Applewhite said. "I'll sit down with my wife, Julie, and we'll make a decision this week.

"Right now, I'm still committed to Rice and the recruiting class we have coming here."

[...]

Applewhite does not have coaching ties to Saban or anyone on his staff, but Applewhite's father, Larry, is a past president of the Alabama Alumni Association. Applewhite was named after Crimson Tide tailback Major Ogilvie (1977-80) and, as a youth in Baton Rouge, La., idolized Alabama quarterback Jay Barker (1991-94), who led the Crimson Tide to a national championship in 1992.

There are reports that Applewhite would share offensive coordinator duties with former Texans offensive line coach Steve Marshall.

With Saban signing a reported eight-year, $32 million deal to coach at Alabama, Applewhite, if offered the job, likely would receive an offer more lucrative than his undisclosed salary at Rice, even with an increase that likely will follow once Graham signs a multiyear extension that was agreed upon last month.

Have you ever had your door knocked by a kid selling magazine subscriptions as part of a contest? I have, and I'd never given it much thought beyond the vague guilt I felt for sending them away empty-handed. After reading this story on Angry Bear, what I feel now for them is pity. Read it for yourself and see why.

UPDATE: Much more from Easter Lemming.

Another step on the CD death march: New cars are starting to come with stereos that don't have CD players.

CD players in automobiles could be sent the way of eight-track tapes by in-dash systems such as one Ford and Microsoft are jointly producing.

The "Sync" system being unveiled today at the North American International Auto Show connects popular iPods and all other digital music players to in-dash software through a USB port.

Drivers will be able to pick songs, artists or genres using voice activation or controls on the steering wheel.

[...]

Sync ratchets up the car electronics war as struggling Ford tries to compete with General Motors's OnStar system, DaimlerChrysler's MyGIG in-dash hard drive storage system and similar devices offered by other manufacturers.

It gives Ford leadership, at least for now, in what is becoming an increasingly competitive race in cabin electronics, said Kevin Reale, an AMR Research Inc. automotive analyst who has been briefed by Microsoft on the Sync system.

"It's going to give them some competitive differentiation," said Reale, who predicted that other manufacturers will catch up quickly with other electronics suppliers.

[...]

The whole race places the venerable CD in danger of extinction. Sync can even take music off a small USB thumb drive, ending the need to fumble with multiple CDs.

In fact, Ford already is discussing whether it needs to offer CD players in future models, said Gary Jablonski, the company's manager of infotainment systems.

"Is there a day when the CD player disappears from the vehicle? It seems likely," Jablonski said.

I first heard about on the Walker Report before Christmas, and now here's the Chron story of the official announcement: Mary Alice Cisneros is running for San Antonio City Council.

Mary Alice Cisneros, wife of former mayor and HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros, will launch her campaign for a City Council seat today, aides said on Friday.

Cisneros, 57, [announced] with her husband at her side in front of their modest home. She is entering the race for a seat being vacated because of term limits. The district includes an area just west of downtown and parts of north San Antonio.

Although she served on a school board, Cisneros had shunned city politics, where her husband rose to power.

This ought to be an interesting campaign. I don't know who else is running for this seat, or even if there is someone as yet. I do know that anyone who does run is going to have to decide whether or not to dredge up the past as part or all of their strategy. We all know the basic plotline of the Henry Cisneros saga, but I daresay a lot of the details have mostly slipped out of people's minds; some people won't be aware of them at all. Will the potential gain of going that route be worth it, or will the backlash be worse? I don't envy the political consultant who has to pick an answer to that.

And yes, I'm aware that this means Mary Alice Cisneros would be getting attacked for the sins of her husband. That's unfortunate, and I wish it weren't the case, but that's often the reality for a woman who follows her husband into politics. The question, strictly from the viewpoint of someone who runs against her, is whether this is likely to be a fruitful strategy. It'd be nice to think that this race will be run solely on issues, but I wouldn't count on it.

Nice job by the Chron.

Far more is at stake in the race for Texas House speaker than just whose hand will wield the oversized pecan gavel used to bring the unruly chamber to order.

There also is influence. And there is the ability to implement laws that could affect billions of dollars in business profits or state spending.

Lobby firms whose members vacation with incumbent Speaker Tom Craddick or help him get an appointment with the pope stand to lose influence if he is ousted. So do tort reformers and businessmen Bob Perry of Houston and James Leininger of San Antonio.

[...]

Aligned with Craddick is a pair of powerful lobby firms -- Hillco Partners and the Texas Capitol Group -- which collect more than $1 million a year each in fees to represent a who's-who of business clients before the Legislature.

Texas Capitol Group lobbyist Bill Messer vacations with Craddick and his family. Messer's brother, Joe Cox, is a key researcher on Craddick's speaker staff. Mike Toomey, another lobbyist at the firm, helped Craddick win the speakership in 2003.

Hillco partner Bill Miller often serves as Craddick's political spokesman. He also arranged for the Catholic politician to have an audience with the pope at the Vatican.

Democratic political consultant Glenn Smith said the biggest loser in a Craddick defeat would be Gov. Rick Perry. Smith said Perry has been dependent in the past on Craddick to push his agenda through the Legislature.

William Lutz, managing editor of the conservative Lone Star Report, said the governor also could find opposition from Pitts to the centerpiece of his administration: expanding the state highways and building the Trans-Texas Corridor.

"Jim Pitts is not a friend of TxDOT (the Texas Department of Transportation)," Lutz said. "If Jim Pitts is speaker, the governor might get a few bills sent to his desk that he doesn't like."

Elsewhere, Burka thinks that Craddick's "re-re-pledge card" a mistake and a sign of weakness. He also thinks we're in for a rough session, with more than one Speaker vote a possibility. More from Karen Brooks, RG Ratcliffe, Vince Leibowitz, and South Texas Chisme.

UPDATE: That sound you just heard is another Democrat dropping his pledge for Craddick. From a press release I just got:

In a direct and strongly worded letter delivered today, Representative Richard Raymond (D-Laredo) informed Tom Craddick that he is withdrawing his support for a third term as Speaker due to his belief that the Craddick is unwilling to return ethical and even-handed leadership to the House. Raymond wrote, "Having thoughtfully discussed this race with over two dozen of my Republican colleagues, I now know you would lose a secret ballot race by an overwhelming margin, and, frankly, I now expect you to lose regardless of how we cast our votes."

UPDATE: Two more defectors, both Republicans. I don't think either were ever likely Craddick backers, but if perception is everything in this race, then what does it look like when five people publicly abandon Tom Craddick over the weekend?

Yesterday's Chron brought up the issue of the Harris County Treasurer's office and its existential future.

If the Legislature agrees, voters statewide and within Harris County would have to approve a constitutional amendment. That vote could come late this year, but there's some debate over whether the amendment would take effect in 2008 or after the current term ends in 2010.

[...]

Commissioners Court began open discussion of abolishing the treasurer's office after incumbent Jack Cato died in May. Several Texas counties, and the state itself, have eliminated the post.

Cato, a popular former television newsman, was well-liked by top county officials. None sought to eliminate the office while he was alive. He had beaten back a challenge in the March Republican primary by Sanchez, a former Houston city councilman. After Cato died, the GOP picked Sanchez as its nominee, and in November he beat Democrat Richard Garcia.

Sanchez, who made two failed bids for Houston mayor, enjoys none of Cato's popularity with the county commissioners. They say they believe he will use what they consider a meaningless office to attack them as big spenders opposed to cutting the property tax rate.

Of the five Commissioners Court members, only County Judge Robert Eckels opposes abolishing the office.

Commissioner Steve Radack said the office duplicates the functions of the county auditor and budget office, and that abolishing the office would save taxpayers $200,000 a year.

"It should be put to a vote," Radack said. "Of course, Orlando doesn't want people to vote ... because he's certain they will vote to abolish it."

Sanchez counters that the office provides additional oversight. "The office exists for the purpose of safeguarding the county's money," he said.

So, on the assumption that we'll still have a Treasurer to kick around for the foreseeable future, I'm going to take Orlando Sanchez at his word. Go ahead, Orlando. Show me just what useful function the County Treasurer can perform. And I don't mean the employees of the office, all of whom would still be employed elsewhere if you were to vanish in a puff of smoke. Show me what you, as the elected official who can make news and (so you say) influence policy, can do. I'll stipulate that Jack Cato was not about making waves or nipping at the County Commissioners' heels. You say that's what this job is about and that that's what you'll do, and I say go for it. I'm going to do an archive search of the Chronicle in a year's time, and we'll see just what you've been up to. If it's nothing but stories about staving off abolishment, or stuff that's irrelevant to the office (and which you pinky-swore to the Chron that you'd stay away from) like immigrant-bashing, that won't count. One year to show me what you can do. I can't wait.

The other day, I lamented the lack of data on housing prices in Houston. As it happens, yesterday's Chron provided some.

Overall, single-family homes in Houston appreciated more than 6 percent last year, the best home appreciation rate since 2001, [Mike Inselmann, president of consulting firm Metrostudy,] said.

To vote in secret for Speaker or not to vote in secret for Speaker, that is the question.

According to conventional wisdom, a record vote next week means Craddick stays put; a secret vote means he packs up the contents of his remodeled Capitol apartment and prepares himself for a non-leadership appointment on the "Irrelevant Committee."

"It'll be the test of the speaker's race," said Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, a Craddick ally.

"I think the secret ballot is the ballgame," said Royal Masset, a GOP strategist. "Craddick loses with a secret ballot. It's the wooden stake in the vampire."

So keen is Craddick on a record vote that on Friday, his top lieutenants filed a proposal to conduct the election by a random roll call.

Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, said he hadn't seen the proposal but said it didn't sound very well thought out. "If you do it one at a time instead of everybody voting at once, the people at the end of the vote will decide who wins, or will throw their vote to whoever the leader is," he said.

[...]

Suzy Woodford, of Common Cause, said leadership elections should be the one exception to the rule of open ballots -- secret votes are the only way to get a vote untainted by fear of retribution, she said.

"We absolutely are for open government. However, we are also for the sanctity of being able to ... vote your conscience without fear of retribution. If I want to be a chairman and I vote for the 'wrong one,' my chances of being a chair are zilch, or I will be assigned to a committee that oversees a broom closet.

"If we had a secret-ballot election for speaker everyone would be free to vote their conscience," she said.

Tom "Smitty" Smith, of Public Citizen, said: "We think that the statements of members are proof positive that unless they can pass the ballot in secret that their vote will be determined by their fear that they might get sent to the Committee of no Importance and their bills sent to the Calendar of No Return."

[...]

Many Capitol observers say the selection of the next speaker will be decided at the start of the legislative session, when members adopt the election rules.

Craddick, who has been accused of retaliating against members who don't vote his way, can assume he'll be the next speaker if members vote to hold the election by record vote, these observers say. If a secret ballot prevails, Craddick's pledge list will melt away, they say.

"There is the presumption that a vote for a secret ballot is a vote against Craddick," said Rep. Scott Hochberg, D-Houston, who said he hasn't yet considered whether he'll support a secret or record vote.

Bear in mind, as former State Rep. Glen Maxey points out, the members of the House decide what the rules are, not the Speaker. Traditionally, they vote to adopt whatever the rules were in the last session until they sort it all out for the current one. I think the fact that Craddick is pushing hard for a resolution to do the Speaker vote in this unusual fashion belies the current conventional wisdom - or perception, if you prefer - that Craddick is in a strong position to win. If he's so damn confident in his pledge list, why should he care how the ballot is conducted?

Maybe Craddick has a reason to fear the strength of his pledges. According to the Quorum Report, two people on his latest pledge list have just abandoned him. Chuck Hopson, whom I'd heard over a week ago would oppose Craddick, makes it official today:

Today State Representative Chuck Hopson announced he is removing his name from Speaker Craddick's list and backing Jim Pitts for Speaker of the House.

Hopson said his continued concerns over Craddick's leadership style were confirmed when the proposed roll call vote was released yesterday. "We have been told that Speaker Craddick would be more open and balanced next session, but his actions clearly speak louder than his words.

"I want to vote for the best person for the job for the Speaker of the House and Jim Pitts is the obvious choice.

"I am glad that Jim is in this race to give the members a choice for the future direction of the Texas House."

"After a brief phone conversation with Speaker Craddick 'I have withheld my pledge until January 9th . This decision was made after receiving numerous phone calls from his supporters. I have always believed that there should never be a question of one's pledge, but when you are continuously questioned about that pledge, it has led me to believe that my pledge was not good enough, therefore I have decided to make my decision on the house floor.

"I have been asked about supporting Representative Jim Pitts for speaker. In the past I have worked in both the House and in Mr. Pitts' committee. Based on my positive experiences with Jim Pitts, I believe he is a good candidate for speaker.

"I also believe that the Texas House deserves a fair leader who will put doing what is right for every part of the state - including south Texas - above doing what is best for special interests. The Texas House must be led in the right way. That means every Member will be protected, and every Member will be encouraged to vote his or her conscience and district.

"I look forward to joining my colleagues in casting my vote for the Speaker of the House on January 9th 2007."

Apparently a new, refreshed pledge for the incumbent is insufficient.

The new, improved Craddick pledge card sent to members yesterday reads, "I am committed to voting for Speaker Tom Craddick for Speaker, and I am also committed to supporting public, recorded vote for the Speaker-Elections".

UPDATE: From the Chron Texas Politics blog:

Martinez gave indications he is leaning toward Pitts, calling him "a good candidate for speaker." Martinez said he also believes the House needs a "fair leader."

That has been part of the code words for calling Craddick an autocratic master of the House by his opponents.

Craddick nose counter Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, shrugged off the loss of a couple of votes.

"This has never been about a one-vote margin," Chisum said.

But he admitted he didn't know Hopson was off the reservation. "I guess I'll have to call him.

UPDATE: Karen Brooks of the DMN weighs in (link via South Texas Chisme).

Last month, I posted some links from a traffic safety expert named Reed Berry, with whom I'd corresponded after he left a comment on this post about red light cameras. Berry mentioned that he had been involved in a radio debate with Michael Kubosh, and I asked about a recording of it. I have that recording now, which you can get as an MP3 file here. It's at the beginning of the show and lasts about 35 minutes total. A couple of observations:

1. I was not impressed at all by Kubosh, not that I expected to be. He kept insisting that the cameras are nothing but a money grab, but never really cited any evidence to back that up; Berry brought up the studies that show a reduction in fatalities and injuries, but Kubosh just denied them. A question I wish someone would ask Kubosh, since he also repeatedly stated that traffic light laws should be enforced by the police, is whether he'd categorize a concerted effort by HPD to crack down on red light runners (via stings at high-volume intersections) as a revenue enhancement scheme as well. The impression I get from him is that he thinks it should be a matter of bad luck to get nailed for running a light.

The silliest thing Kubosh said was that the selection of the intersections by Houston was essentially random - I don't recall his exact words, but he said something like "there was no study done" in determining where the cameras would go. Well, it seems to me that if the city's motive is raking in the fines, then they'd be strongly incentivized to put the cameras where they'd nab the most offenders - in other words, they'd do a study to figure out which intersections have the worst problems. (Me, I'd say they made some wise choices, but what do I know?) As such, he's saying the city wants to shake us down, but they're too stupid to do it properly.

2. The one study Kubosh did cite was a Texas Transportation Institute study that claimed adding one second to the yellow light time at an intersection cuts down red light running by 40%. I don't trust him enough to accept that without seeing the study myself, but it's not relevant anyway. I support optimizing yellow light times, but doing that doesn't have any bearing on whether red light cameras would cut down on accidents or not. He also mentioned displaying the time till the light changes at intersections, something I've seen in places like Washington, DC, which again I'd support but again doesn't have any bearing on the debate. Maybe these two things together would have enough impact on red light running that the cameras would be superfluous (Kubosh never explicitly made that claim, let alone cited any evidence for it), but I seem to recall that DC has cameras as well. The point I'm making is that this isn't an either-or choice - you could very easily have optimized yellow lights, time-till-change displays, and red light cameras. One might argue that this is the real way to go to have the biggest impact, in fact.

3. I was more impressed by Berry than I was by Kubosh, but that's not saying terribly much. It's a shame that Berry knew nothing about the specifics of Houston's cameras - he might have challenged Kubosh regarding the camera placement, for one, and he might have noted that the fine in Houston is $75, not $400 or $500 as it apparently is in some places in California (Kubosh, who flogged the revenue horse throughout, had no reason to point out the lower fine that he faces for his deliberate infraction). The issue of you getting a ticket for someone else running a light with your car came up, and Berry suggested pushing to change the law so that the cameras record the drivers' faces. Needless to say, that doesn't help assuage my main issue with the cameras, which is privacy and usage of and access to the cameras' data.

4. Similarly, the host brought up a reasonable slippery slope argument, by asking Berry "why don't they just install a device in every car that would automatically generate a ticket for you if it recorded that you were speeding?" Berry dodged this question by saying that he himself would never get such a ticket because he didn't speed (he said the same thing about his never running red lights). The privacy issue simply never came up, which was a disappointment to me.

5. The radio show on which all this took place was the Rusty Humphries show. I'd never heard of the guy, but from the intros and outros it was clear he was your standard aggrieved and put upon right winger; the theme song and show promos were hilariously egotistical. Thankfully, there was a guest host, who was even-keeled and non-confrontational. I'd have liked him to challenge both Kubosh and Berry more, but I'll give him props for letting everyone have their say and not favoring one side over the other, even in selection of callers. The show was done on December 22, so some of the intro/outro clips were in full War On Christmas mode. Amusingly, every time he came back on the air, the guest host said that Rusty was "spending the holidays with his family"; which holiday was never specified. Apparently, the anti-Christmas forces are even more insidious than even Rusty Humphries could imagine.

Last month, the developer that's building a controversial WalMart in Austin said it would suspend activity on the site for 60 days so it could gather more input from the neighborhood, presumably including the vocal opponents of their project. On Thursday those opponents alleged that the developer reneged on its promise.

Neighbors of Northcross Mall say the company that owns the mall, Lincoln Properties, has violated the spirit of an agreement reached by the company and the City of Austin. Members of Responsible Growth for Northcross say they believed the company had promised to stop all development activities associated with plans for a new Wal Mart at the mall for at least 60 days. Jason Meeker with the neighborhood group says they learned this week that there has been communication between the city's permits office and Lincloln Properties about the building permit for the site.

"Why is there development activity continuing? There were apparently some legal qualifiers that allowed for some activity to continue," said Meeker.

The document announcing the agreement on December 14th shows that Lincoln Properties actually did not pledge to stop all development activities. Instead, the company agreed not to apply for a structural demolition permit, and so far has apparently kept that pledge.

Nonetheless, Meeker says, the company has not lived up to its commitment to meet with neighbors to discuss the project. "We've had no contact, as a group, with Lincoln Properties," he said, noting that more than 20 days have passed since the December 14th notice. "Our hope was that this entire time frame would be used to gather input. We're talking about not just our organization, but thousands of residents around the Northcross development area."

In a letter to City Council Member Mike Martinez, Wal-Mart committed to a 60-day self-imposed moratorium on development of the site and filing permit applications with the city.

Press release from Responsible Growth for Northcross:

AUSTIN, Texas, Jan. 4, 2007 ‹ Lincoln Property Company is actively moving forward with its plans to build a 220,000 sq. ft. Wal-Mart Supercenter at Northcross Mall, despite making an agreement with the City of Austin on December 14, 2006 to suspend activities at the Wal-Mart site for 60 days.

Although the agreement was publicly announced by the City of Austin to have Lincoln stop development in order to gather input from neighborhood residents, Responsible Growth for Northcross has learned that the City and Lincoln Property Company have continued the building permit process.

A City Council statement on Dec. 14, 2006 states: "In an email to Council Member Leffingwell today, Lincoln ­ Northcross Ltd. has committed to a 60 day self-imposed suspension on the filing of the structural demolition permit with the City that would be necessary to move the project forward. The suspension will allow for greater input from neighborhood residents."

³On Dec. 19, 2006, Lincoln filed an update on its original building permit. On approximately Dec. 28, the City of Austin responded with comments to the permit application. The process is still underway despite commitments from Lincoln and the City Council that the project would be put on hold to allow for neighborhood concerns to be addressed,² says Hope Morrison, vice president of Responsible Growth for Northcross.

Responsible Growth for Northcross calls upon Lincoln Property Company to honor its commitment to the citizens of Austin to stop development for 60 days. Furthermore, Responsible Growth for Northcross asks Lincoln Property Company to publicly explain why it broke its word. Responsible Growth for Northcross also calls upon the City of Austin to reset the clock and require a true 60 days suspension of development activity.

Breaking the 60 day suspension pledge shows that Lincoln's so-called commitment to the City Council is nothing more than a charade intended to cool the political heat and divert public attention. In addition, continuing the development process before Austin city staff could even begin the negotiations between Lincoln and the representatives of the thousands of stakeholders in the neighborhoods is a slap in the face to the City Council, city staff, the citizens of Austin, and all the neighborhoods surrounding Northcross Mall. This shows Lincoln Property Company is not operating in good faith with the city or the public.

On Jan. 3, 2007, Austin city staff convened a meeting with Responsible Growth for Northcross and other representatives from neighborhoods surrounding Northcross Mall to begin the process of facilitating negotiations between neighborhood stakeholders and Lincoln Property Company.
Responsible Growth for Northcross publicly thanks the City of Austin for its attempt to foster negotiation, but asks for Lincoln Property Company to be held to its commitments immediately.

About Responsible Growth for Northcross: Responsible Growth for Northcross is a group of citizens from the Allandale, Brentwood, Crestview, North Shoal Creek, Rosedale and Wooten neighborhoods that are fighting to stop development of the 220,000 sq. ft. 24-Hour Wal-Mart Supercenter at Northcross Mall. Responsible Growth for Northcross is working to develop a mutually beneficial, growth-oriented solution for Northcross Mall that serves the character and needs of the surrounding neighborhoods while also ensuring a successful endeavor for Lincoln Property Company and all concerned.

It's good to see Nick Lampson back where he belongs.

Though Lampson proudly claimed membership in an unusually large freshman class of 55 lawmakers, he is anything but a new guy on campus.

As he made his way through the Capitol, he was frequently stopped as House members and other Capitol regulars greeted him with handshakes and bear hugs.

"Nobody knew me when I came up here 10 years ago, and I've been welcomed back like a long-lost brother," he said.

After a private swearing-in by new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., with his family at his side, Lampson, 61, headed to the House floor for his maiden speech: He urged a tightening of House rules on congressional travel, gifts and "earmarks," or pet projects.

"We cannot afford to wait one more day to restore the trust and hope to those who send us here to represent them," Lampson said.

[...]

One of only two freshmen in the 34-member Texas delegation, Lampson also praised the importance of the House vote installing Pelosi as the first female speaker in the chamber's history.

He cast that vote with granddaughter Olivia, who turns 2 next month, in his arms.

Congressman Nick Lampson will join with Board Members of the Research Partnership to Secure Energy for America (RPSEA), a research management consortium headquartered in Sugar Land, to announce the finalization and signing of a 10-year, $375 million contract to manage research and development of new technology for natural gas and oil exploration and production. RPSEA has been negotiating this contract with the U.S. Department of Energy since it was selected as the program manager in May of 2006. Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace, Members of Sugar Land City Council, and Members of the Board of the Texas Energy Center will also be in attendance.

Add another element to the Speaker's race mix: a request for a criminal investigation on Tom Craddick.

Rep. Lon Burnam of Fort Worth, a vocal critic of Craddick, wrote in a letter to [Travis County DA Ronnie] Earle that an entity owned by Craddick is collecting rent from a contractor who has been paid millions of dollars for state projects.

"This type of financial arrangement -- where an elected official in a position of power is deriving income from a state contractor -- simply does not pass the smell test," Burnam wrote.

Earle said in a statement that his office is reviewing Burnam's letter and will "proceed appropriately according to the facts and the law."

Craddick spokeswoman Alexis DeLee questioned the timing of the complaint. In a statement, she said the allegations were "completely untrue and based on erroneous and irresponsible speculation."

Meanwhile, on another matter related to the Speaker's race, Glen Maxey and QR are reporting that there will be a proposal for a roll call vote on the Speakership on Tuesday. Here's QR:

Reliable sources tell us that the members will be notified at 5:30 that the Tuesday vote for speaker will be a roll call vote. That means that votes by Zedler and Zerwas are more important than votes by Anderson and Anchia. It also means that false impressions about the trends of the House can cause votes to switch as the vote is taking place.

The last time the House had a contested speaker vote on the floor was in 1975 pitting Carl Parker against Billy Clayton. The members submitted signed ballots in a box at the front of the hall as their name was read out during a roll call. After the ballots were cast, the results were tallied and announced and the votes were made public.

A roll call vote plays to all of the worst elements of the threats and intimidation that have been alleged in this contest.

If the leadership is interested in a clean vote and actually ascertaining the will of the House, they will follow a procedure that guarantees a clean result.

If that is not their desire, then a roll call vote is the way to go.

Fortunately, the press and the members have been assured and reassured that the incumbent has promised that next session, "things will be different," if he is re-elected.

If they do a roll call rather than a signed ballot that is tallied after everyone has voted, we know how different things will be.

And of course, the members will be informed after most press has put their weekend papers to bed.

UPDATE: Got the letter to Earle from another source. It's here (PDF), and reprinted beneath the fold. Texas Politics has more, and more on the roll call vote.

Rep. Burnam's letter to Ronnie Earle:

January 5, 2007

The Honorable Ronnie Earle
Travis County District Attorney
509 W. 11th St.
Austin, TX 78701

District Attorney Earle:

I am writing to request that you immediately open an investigation into the business practices of the current Speaker of the Texas House, Tom Craddick. I believe he is using his public office for his own personal monetary gain.

Specifically, an entity owned by Mr. Craddick is collecting rent from a state contractor who has been paid tens of millions of taxpayer dollars for various projects in the state. This type of financial arrangement--where an elected official in a position of power is deriving income from a state contractor--simply does not pass the smell test.

To aid with your investigation, I am providing you with the following set of facts and preliminary research.

According to Mr. Craddick's most recent personal financial disclosure, he has a "beneficial interest" in an entity called "2000 Rollingwood, LTD." Mr. Craddick's disclosure form states that this entity owns 4.871 acres of land in Travis County.i

According to a form filed on September 20, 2005, with the Texas Secretary of State, "The 2000 Rollingwood, LTD partnership should be cancelled as a result of the assets being transferred to Rollingwood Mira Vista, LTD." Thus, Mr. Craddick has a "beneficial interest" in Rollingwood Mira Vista, LTD. (Daniel Herd, a general partner in Live Oak Development, Inc., was the signatory to this document.ii)

According to the Travis Central Appraisal District, "Rollingwood Mira Vista Ltd" owns a $20+ million commercial building located at 2705 Bee Caves Road in Austin, Texas (LOT 3 BLK A DELLANA ROLLINGWOOD COMMERIAL SUBD). The mailing address for Rollingwood Mira Vista is "c/o Live Oak Development Inc., 2630 Exposition Blvd., Suite 203, Austin, Texas, 8703-
1763".iii This paper trail proves that Mr. Craddick has a "beneficial interest" in the aforementioned commercial building located at 2705 Bee Caves.

What makes Mr. Craddick's "beneficial interest" in this particular commercial building corrupt at best--illegal at worst--is the fact that the entire top floor of the building is being rented by a state contractor to whom the State of Texas has paid tens of millions of dollars. In his current position as Speaker of the Texas House, Mr. Craddick has a unique ability to exert undue influence on state contracts. The income Mr. Craddick derives from a state contractor should immediately be stopped.

According to a press release available on the website of Carter and Burgess, "Carter & Burgess recently signed a seven-year lease agreement with Live Oak Development to be the lead tenant in its planned $22 million, 125,000-sq.-ft. office development at 2705 Bee Caves Rd. in Rollingwood. Upon completion in February 2002, the full-service, architectural/engineering/construction management firm will occupy 60,600 square feet of the facility, including the top floor, part of the second and one office on the first floor, which will accommodate its field survey department."iv

According to the Comptroller of Public Accounts, the State of Texas, mostly through the Texas Department of Transportation, paid Carter and Burgess more than $23,000,000 in 2006, while Mr. Craddick was Speaker of the Texas House. While Carter and Burgess has been putting tens of millions of state tax dollars in one pocket, they've been paying an entity owned by the Speaker of the House rent out of their other pocket. The Speaker of the Texas House simply cannot be allowed to continue lining his pockets with rental income from a state contractor.v

Of the millions of square feet of office space available in Austin, Texas, it is simply unreasonable to assume that a multi-million dollar state contractor coincidently chose to office in a building that just happened to be owned by an extremely powerful elected official--an elected official who unquestionably has the power to aid in obtaining state contracts.

This is the most recent example of a long and disturbing pattern of corrupt and unethical behavior by Mr. Craddick. I know your file on Mr. Craddick is extremely robust from your investigation (and subsequent indictments) of Tom DeLay, TAB and TRMPAC. However, using an elected office for your own personal gain is perhaps an even more egregious violation of the public trust.

I hope you will immediately open an investigation into these business dealings of Mr. Craddick. No public official in a position of power should be allowed to use their position of power to enrich their own business via a state contractor. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Lon Burnam

i See enclosed page from Tom Craddick's most recent personal financial disclosure form
ii See enclosed document from the Secretary of State's Office
iii Available at http://www.traviscad.org/travisdetail.php?theKey=494912
iv Available at http://www.c-b.com/news/story_news.asp?ArticleNum=277&v=5
v See enclosed document from the Comptroller of Public Accounts

Posted by Charles Kuffner

Here's the news from yesterday's press conference.

There was no cavalry, no list of supporters -- indeed, no promises of a list of supporters.

When Rep. Jim Pitts, R-Waxahachie, announced Thursday that he had locked up the votes in the race against his onetime ally Tom Craddick for speaker of the Texas House, only one House member appeared at the news conference with him: Rep. Brian McCall, the former candidate for speaker who threw his support to Pitts on Wednesday.

Pitts, the affable House Appropriations chairman and 14-year House veteran, said he is not going to play "the list game," referring to the list of 83 House members Craddick said last week were in his camp.

He said he appeared with only one House member not because he couldn't find anyone else to bring along but because he didn't want to subject his supporters to the intimidation that he said would certainly follow.

"I would not put a member in jeopardy. But I guarantee you," he added, "the race is over."

Pitts' decision not to name names was almost certain to have one effect on the high-stakes race for speaker: prolong the outcome until Tuesday, the opening day of the session.

Beyond that, there was little consensus on who was ahead in the battle between the conservative Republicans.

Two other Chron stories of interest - a profile of Pitts and a Rick Casey column on Senfronia Thompson. Read this and consider the possibilities:

Some Democrats think their brothers and sisters who support Craddick are doing so at the expense, not for the benefit, of their constituents and deserve opposition in the next election. After all, Houston Democrat Al Edwards was seen as losing in the primary partly because he was on Craddick's team.

One suggested the possibility of Senfronia Thompson's cutting a radio ad for opponents of, say, [Ruth Jones] McClendon or Austin's Dawnna Dukes (Appropriations Committee).

The possible script: "I was the first black woman to run for speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, and who did she support? She supported this Republican white guy who cut CHIP health insurance for poor children!"

Blogger reactions:

Aaron Pena predicts a Craddick victory. Muse hopes he's wrong, but Vince agrees. He also has video from the presser. BOR has a short recap.

Josh Berthune was not impressed.

Hal is cautiously optimistic.

Peggy Fikac notes the lack of names from Pitts and McCall. As it happens, Harvey Kronberg reports that Craddick's spokesperson Alexis DeLee will not be releasing any more of their supporters' names. You can make of that what you will, but the rumors I'm hearing suggest Craddick's support is way down, well under 75. Obviously, we'll know when they vote.

Jason Embry apparently likes doing image searches.

McBlogger cites an AusChron piece about an anti-Craddick PAC that will seek to take on the Craddick Dems in the event he gets re-elected. And he's not impressed with "eating our own" arguments.

In the Pink contributor Fled the Asylum relates a melancholy story about Pete Laney in the days following Craddick's ascension in 2003. We can only hope that someone will have a similar tale to tell about Craddick in the future.

And more or less on the timeline I envisioned, there she goes:

Here's a link for all of my warehouse photos to date. This is how it started, on November 19. I'll make at least one more run out there as they finish the cleanup, and who knows after that. Maybe I'll keep track of the Ismaeli Center construction, once it starts.

Yesterday was the first time I ran into another person with a camera. He pulled in behind my car as I was getting ready to leave. I gathered from talking to him that he hadn't seen the demolition prior to this. I told him I'd been documenting it from the beginning. That turned out to be a very interesting task. I hope you enjoyed it.

I read with some amusement this story about how waiters and customers can understand each other better. I have a simpler and more effective solution: Everybody should spend at least a summer doing a food service job, preferably actually as a waiter. You'll have a much more thorough appreciation for what it's like on the other end of the serving tray that way. If the waiters of America are really lucky, your experience will be a crappy one (as mine most definitely was), because that will make you a patient diner and good tipper for life. Trust me on this one, there's no substitute for the experience.

The task force appointed by Governor Perry to study property taxes and appraisal caps has issued its report, and going by news coverage it's a little hard to tell what they said. Depending on who you read, you might come away thinking that they somewhat surprisingly recommended against lowering the 10% cap on appraisal increases.

A draft copy of a report by the Task Force on Appraisal Reform had said the group would recommend lowering the current cap on appraisal increases from 10 percent a year to 5 percent a year.

But task force Chairman Tom Pauken said the committee, which was appointed by Gov. Rick Perry, will recommend leaving the appraisal cap at 10 percent a year.

[...]

Pauken said the committee's recommendations will focus on slowing the growth of government spending.

He said it will recommend that any local government spending of property tax revenues that exceeds 5 percent growth in a year would be automatically subject to voter approval.

At present, growth of 8 percent or more can be subject to a property tax rate rollback election, but the election is not automatic.

Those wishing to hold a rollback election must gather petition signatures to force the election.

"All this is is a change in the threshold, changing the threshold from 8 percent to 5 percent," Pauken said.

Local governments also would have the option of a half-cent sales tax increase that could be dedicated to property tax relief. He said the money could be used to buy down rising appraisals or to increase homestead exemptions.

But then you read the Statesman story, and it sounds a bit different.

A working draft of the report, obtained by the Austin American-Statesman, includes proposals designed to curb rapid increases in property taxes.

The average bill for an Austin homeowner rose by almost 43 percent between 2000 and 2004, and Houston homeowners saw a 50 percent increase in that period, the report said.

The proposals include capping the annual increase in a home's taxable value to 5 percent -- it's 10 percent now -- and increasing the local homestead exemption from $3,000 to $6,000.

The 5 percent cap would apply only in areas where voters or local officials pass a half-percent county sales tax that would be dedicated to reduce property taxes by an equal dollar amount.

Pauken said that proposal would ease some of the burden for property owners but not cost local governments any money.

At the same time, the recommendations would curb local spending by requiring governments to get voter approval for tax rate increases above 5 percent. The limit now is 8 percent.

Pauken said many local governments are spending all the money from "skyrocketing appraisals rather than give any of it back to the people in terms of lower property tax rates."

Appraisal district officials across the state have said their ability to value properties accurately, especially commercial properties and high-end homes, is hampered because sales prices are not public in Texas.

The panel proposed a hybrid approach: Within a certain time after buying a property, buyers would have to submit a valuation, with justification, to the appraisal district. If they failed to do that, they would have to disclose the sale price, but only to the appraisal district.

Task force members also called on the state to stop passing laws that require local governments to meet certain mandates, such as legal services for poor criminal defendants, without coming up with the money to pay for them.

One thing that does stand out from both stories is yet another attempt to substitute sales taxes for property taxes. That was tried in the first failed special session on school finance, and apparently the fact that it simply shifts the burden from a small minority of wealthy folks to the vast majority of not-as-wealthy folks didn't made much of an impression on the Task Forcers. Call me crazy, but I'd venture to guess that 100% of the people Rick Perry appointed to this commission would come out ahead under this formula. Funny how that works, isn't it?

Two points to add before I take a crack at wading through that report itself. One, for the free market case against appraisal caps, I refer you to Houston Strategies. Two, looking back at the statistics quoted in that Statesman piece, it sure would be nice to know what the average sales price for new homes was doing in the same time period that the appraisals were increasing. Houston's been a pretty good market for real estate lately - see here, here, and more generally here for some data - but finding anything about average (as opposed to median) price increases is beyond the ken of my Google monkeys. The point I'm making is that if the average sales price were increasing at a similar rate as the appraisals over the same time period, then as I've said before it's hard for me to understand what the fuss is about. Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

Now, I know, for some people the rate of increase in their appraisals outstrips their gains in personal income, and this puts a strain on their household budgets. It seems to me there's a pretty simple fix for that:

Dick Lavine, senior financial analyst with the nonpartisan Center for Public Policy Priorities, said the major problem with the appraisal system is the lack of public confidence in the accuracy of the valuations.

That can be cured, Lavine said, through sales price disclosure, among other measures.

Another underlying complaint is that property tax bills are rising faster than an owner's ability to pay them.

"The answer is to attack the problem directly, through a circuit-breaker program that links tax liability to income, used in most other states, or a state personal income tax, not by distorting the appraisal system," Lavine said.

We're about an hour out from the Pitts-McCall press conference, at which some unknown number of Republicans (hopefully at least 30) will stand with the consensus alternative to Tom Craddick and bring his reign as Speaker to an end. Or maybe we won't see such a show of strength, but we'll still be told it's there, keeping safely hidden from retaliation until next Tuesday. At least now we know that the Democratic leadership is on board with Pitts, which goes a long way towards addressing my own concerns. My head is still spinning, but there's light at the end of the tunnel. Stay tuned.

Oka, that's not an accurate headline. It should be Fort Bend GOP Sues Party Chairman. But my way is more fun.

The Republican Party of Fort Bend County filed a lawsuit Wednesday against its own leader, saying Chairman Gary Gillen abused his position by scheming to divert money from the party "for his own selfish purposes."

Filed in Fort Bend County's 240th District Court, the suit seeks a temporary restraining order preventing Gillen from "interfering" with what it says are the county Republican Party's contracts to host the Feb. 17 Lincoln-Reagan Dinner at Sugar Land's Marriott Town Square.

Gillen had not seen a copy of the suit when contacted Wednesday afternoon, but called it "certainly a sad way to use the money that people have donated to elect Republican candidates to office." He added he is "disappointed but not surprised" by the filing.

Filed by New Territory attorney Brent Carpenter and Houston attorney Michael Stanley on behalf of the party, the suit accuses Gillen of breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, conversion, interference with a contractual relationship and "tortious interference with prospective relations."

Also named as a defendant in the suit is the Fort Bend Republican P.A.C., which was formed by Gillen and Fort Bend County GOP precinct chairman A.D. Muller. Muller, who since resigned from the political action committee, was not named in the suit.

It seeks unspecified damages, attorneys fees and an accounting of the PAC's finances, among other forms of relief.

This comes as a surprise to me.

Houston Comets coach Van Chancellor has told FOX 26 sports that he has resigned after 10 years with the team.

Chancellor led the Comets to the first four WNBA championships and won the league's Coach of the Year award three straight times (1997-99). He had a 211-111 record with the Comets including 20-12 in the playoffs. He also coached Team USA to the Olympic Gold medal in 2004.

The 63-year-old Chancellor said the imminent salem of the team figured in his decision to step down. FOX 26 reported Tuesday that owner Les Alexander is close to an agreement to sell the team to furniture dealer Hilton Koch.

"With new ownership coming in, I want to step back and allow the new owners to take their own direction," Chancellor told FOX, "and this gives me a chance to spend time with my family and decide what I want to do in the future."

As for the sale of the franchise, which we first heard about in October:

WNBA sources tell FOX 26 Sports that Houston Comets owner Leslie Alexander has entered into an exclusive negotiating window to sell the team to Houston businessman Hilton Koch of Hilton Furniture.

League sources tell FOX the two sides are close to an agreement in principle but there are still some issues that must be resolved before the deal is consumated.

No purchase figures were available but the Los Angeles Sparks recently sold for $10 million.

On a related note, the WNBA is down to 13 teams as the Charlotte Sting close their doors. I really like this league, and I like taking Olivia to its games, but I sure wish I were seeing more positive trends for its business model. Alas.

Brock Wagner, the main man at Saint Arnold's, sends a letter to the Houston Press, as does one of his microbrewing colleagues.

Kill bill: I laughed when I read your article ["Beer Time in Austin," as told to Richard Connelly, December 21]. While I hope you are wrong, the betting man should be putting his money with you. I'm getting completely stonewalled by the big beer wholesaler lobbyist, which I do not view as a positive development. It is annoying when you start to part the curtains and view the process of law being made. Money does buy influence. Our success depends upon idealism winning out. Which gets back to whom I would bet with -- your horse looks more appealing right now!

Brock Wagner
Houston

Cheers: Thanks for the article. Hopefully we won't get beat up too bad, but you are not the first to predict that, so I'm sure the chances of it happening are pretty good. Hell, they let wineries do it.

Frank Mancuso
Austin

Meanwhile, the Austin Chronicle blog picks up on the microbrewers' legislative effort, and promises some coverage in their print edition preview of the 80th Lege. I'll check for that when it's available. Link via St. Arnold Goes To Austin.

Houston: Better than most in disaster preparedness.

"I'd give us probably a solid B if I was grading us, and we're working towards the ultimate A+," [Harris County Judge Robert] Eckels said.

So far, Harris County has achieved interoperability with most of the neighboring cities and counties, the Metro system and the airports but not yet with the city of Houston's police and fire departments, Eckels said. "The big hole is the city of Houston," he said. "That's our next goal."

The biggest issue is funds, he said. Eckels estimates it will cost the area "tens of millions of dollars, if not more" to reach full interoperability.

"We are far ahead of many other areas of the country, but because we are so big and so diverse, we're not all there yet," Eckels said. "In our area, it's going to cost well over $100 million in equipment alone. It's not something you can buy overnight."

Among Texas cities, Houston and surrounding areas got a better grade than Dallas and San Antonio in the study. Houston had well-developed operating procedures and well developed use of its communications systems. Its effectiveness in coordination among local governments was given an intermediate grade.

Joe Laud, a spokesman for Houston's Emergency Center, said the city is in the middle of efforts to make sure area authorities can work together and communicate in a disaster. He said the city is more than halfway along on a project to get new equipment distributed to improve communications.

"It's still in progress, but it's a progress that is happening much faster than it has been in many years," Laud said.

Jordy Tollett may not be dead, but the Chron has his obituary regardless.

Jordy Tollett and members of the executive committee of the Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau came to a "mutual agreement" that Tollett step down as president -- a position he fought to keep last year.

Tollett's resignation will help make the search for a new director cleaner and avoids a protracted showdown between him and Mayor Bill White. Tollett had lined up support from prominent civic and business leaders, including Lakewood Church pastor Joel Osteen and sports-franchise owners Drayton McLane and Bob McNair. He also had a majority of the Houston City Council and Harris County Commissioners Court backing him up.

"No one would have won a pitched battle," said Joe Householder of Public Strategies Inc., a longtime observer of local politics. "Had the mayor 'won,' he still would have been bloodied. Jordy has a lot of friends. The mayor didn't need that fight."

White, who insisted the board search for a replacement when Tollett's contract expires in February, will get what he wanted -- new blood at the bureau.

Tollett will remain as a consultant until 2008, receiving his full $206,000 annual salary.

White, who made it clear last year that it is time for Tollett to move on, offered words of praise for Tollett on Tuesday.

"He made a significant contribution to Houston, particularly as the right-hand man of mayors who built and helped build downtown facilities. That will be his most lasting contribution," White said.

As one might expect, HouStoned piles on. (My God, is that a soul patch he's sporting in the photo? The horror, the horror...) I think we've answered Marc Campos' question about the relative machismo of Tollett and White. Now that we have that burning issue behind us, we can move on with the rest of the year.

Back in August, former right-wing radio talker Jon Matthews was re-arrested for violating the terms of his probation after a guilty plea on charges of indecency with a child. The hearing to determine if he goes to jail or not has been rescheduled for next month.

Matthews, 61, appeared in a Fort Bend County court room [Wednesday] where prosecutors had planned to ask state District Judge Brady Elliott to revoke his probation and sentence him to prison.

However, Lee Cox, the attorney for Matthews, asked the judge to reschedule the hearing. Elliott reset the case for Feb. 9.

"There are some things I am investigating and I need more time to prepare," Cox said after the hearing which lasted only a few seconds.

[...]

Matthews, a fixture on Houston's radio scene for almost two decades, was jailed in August after prosecutors filed a motion to revoke the probation and send him to prison. He was later released on bail.

Court records show Matthews violated several probation conditions the court set in 2004 when he entered his plea on the charge that stemmed from the October 2003 incident.

The violations included testing positive for alcohol, being terminated from a sex offenders counseling program and engaging in sexual fantasy activity over the Internet, court records said.

It's not clear to me from this piece, but I presume that Matthews is currently in the pokey pending the outcome of this hearing. While there are some people in the local jails who don't belong there, Matthews is not among them. If he stays locked up for the duration of his original probation, that's fine by me.

Here's what I think I know about the Speaker's race at this point:

1. I think Jim Pitts is going to have to do some work to make sure he really will get all of the people who have pledged to Brian McCall, in particular the Democrats. We've already seen from the early reports that this deal caught the Dems by surprise. I've since gotten confirmation of that. It's easy to say "well, where else will they go?", but this is about being able to vote your district and do the best you can for your constituents and your own political future. The Dems had a good idea of where they stood with McCall, and now the rug has been pulled out from underneath them. This is far from irreparable, but Pitts (who by all accounts is well liked and respected) is still going to have to talk to people and ask them for their support. You don't get anything in the House without asking for it.

2. I think Pitts needs the Dems because I don't think there are enough Republicans to carry him to victory, assuming that at least some of Craddick's lieutenants stay loyal. This shouldn't be that hard, but mind Senfronia Thompson's quotes. Everyone would go back to her in a heartbeat if it came to that.

3. One wonders who brokered this deal, and what he or she hopes to get out of it. One name that kept popping up in the earlier news stories where a deal was mentioned was Democrat Craig Eiland. Given that everything happened without any consultation with the Democratic leadership, if this is true I think he'll have some explaining to do to his colleagues.

4. There was talk about Pitts being a stalking horse for Craddick when his name first surfaced. It was largely dismissed for a variety of reasons, but I'm getting a nagging feeling about this. It's still a back-of-my-head feeling, but it's there now and it wasn't before. When I see which Republicans have lined up behind Pitts, I'll know if it was a false alarm or not.

I'll know more after I've read the stories in tomorrow's papers. In the meantime, there's more from DallasBlog and Burka, while Peggy Fikac notes that tomorrow's Legislative Budget Board meeting has been postponed. The LBB currently includes Speaker Craddick and Appropriations Chair Pitts, so it's easy to see why. As always, stay tuned.

UPDATE: More from Burka, who thinks maybe Pitts and McCall were in cahoots all along, and that it's looking more like Craddick is toast.

UPDATE: Right of Texas quotes an Austin source who says "many R's 'pledged to Craddick' will be supporting Pitts this upcoming week." RoT also thinks it will come down to whether the Dems will stick together or splinter. I have to agree with that.

If this turns out to be true, I believe it's deep trouble for Tom Craddick.

Word came filtering in late afternoon of what would be a stunning turn of events in the speaker's race.

Rather than Rep. Jim Pitts considering an endorsement of Rep. Brian McCall, the opposite is actually happening, say sources in a position to know.

McCall is set to endorse Pitts at a Capitol news conference tomorrow, says one lawmaker.

What does this mean for Craddick?

More from Quorum Report:

[M]ultiple independent sources tell us that speaker candidate Brian McCall has thrown his support behind Jim Pitts and that the two are calling members now bringing together the coalition. Our sources, including members, tell us that there may be a press conference as early as tomorrow.

What we cannot verify yet is whether or not the Democrats have been consulted or signed off on the proposed coalition. We know that those calls have begun.

UPDATE: It's in the papers now. Chron:

Two lawmakers today said House Speaker Tom Craddick's two GOP challengers are joining forces to topple the Republican incumbent, with Rep. Brian McCall set to endorse Rep. Jim Pitts at the Texas Capitol Thursday.

"Jim Pitts will be the next speaker of the House," said one lawmaker, who spoke on condition that he not be identified but is in a position to be familiar with the discussions going on in the speaker's race.

"I think you'll see a lot of Republican members standing next to Jim Pitts tomorrow when the announcement's made. A lot of Republican members," the lawmaker said.

Another lawmaker, a Republican who did not want to be identified, confirmed that McCall had decided to back Pitts.

"Today, Pitts met with Craddick but there was no real movement in their discussion," the lawmaker said. "Pitts met or spoke on the phone with McCall. By midday, Brian decided to pledge his support to Pitts."

A third lawmaker, a Democrat who is backing McCall, said a number of Democrats haven't decided what they will do. Many of McCall's supporters are Democrats.

Pitts, R-Waxahachie, and McCall, R-Plano, have scheduled a press conference at the Capitol for 4 p.m. Thursday. Sources close to McCall claim that Pitts has the votes to win. But Democratic lawmakers pledged to McCall expressed surprise -- and some doubt how they might vote.

"People ought to look at each candidate as to what they offer as speaker," said Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston. "If I am going to vote for somebody for speaker, I am going to talk to that person."

Speaker Tom Craddick, R-Midland, who is seeking his third term, insists that he still has the more than the 75 votes necessary to win.

Rep. Mike Krusee, R-Williamson County and a Craddick supporter, said McCall's switch is a victory for Craddick.

"Everyone who has been told that Tom Craddick was going to lose for a week was told the wrong thing," Krusee said. "I think this is a huge opportunity for Craddick" to pick up votes.

[...]

A lobbyist familiar with the negotiations said that Pitts had 20 votes and McCall had 70 but that they agreed Pitts could more easily put a winning list of names together.

"All of McCall's supporters would vote for Pitts," said the source, requesting anonymity. "All of Pitts' would not vote for McCall."

That immediately appeared in doubt as word spread about Pitts' press conference.

Coleman, a McCall backer, said at about 5:30 p.m. Wednesday that McCall had not released his House supporters to back anyone else.

"Therefore, I am certainly not looking over to Pitts," Coleman said.

Rep. Jim Dunnam, D-Waco and leader of the House Democratic Caucus, had not heard of McCall's endorsement of Pitts.

"I'm not prepared to comment," Dunnam said.

UPDATE: Morning News:

McCall spokesman Roy Fletcher said the goal of both men was to have a change at speaker.

"They met and decided they would join forces because they want to beat Craddick," Mr. Fletcher said. "They wanted it to look like far more of a bipartisan thing than it was appearing to be. They wanted to join forces, and Brian McCall actually offered to step out and let Pitts be speaker. And that's what transpired. They wanted to beat Craddick, that was the whole idea."

Democrats expressed surprise and annoyance that their votes were apparently being taken for granted, but Mr. Fletcher said that wasn't the case even though "they were probably caught by surprise a little bit."

The two men realized that Mr. McCall didn't have some Republican support that Mr. Pitts had - largely because the Dems had gotten behind Mr. McCall in such large numbers - and had to make a decision, Mr. Fletcher said.

"When it gets down to it, the choice will be Craddick or Pitts. Which one do you want?" Mr. Fletcher said. "I don't think they're going to want Craddick by any stretch."

Mr. Fletcher said he expects Mr. Pitts to have gotten 85 to 90 solid pledges by the end of Wednesday.

But the deal's success may hinge on whether House Democrats supporting Mr. McCall would follow him and back Mr. Pitts. Former Democratic candidate Senfronia Thompson, who had pledged her support to Mr. McCall, said she may "reclaim my votes" and call the Democratic House members back to her campaign.

"It looks like mine is the only legitimate candidacy," she said. "I went all over the state and campaigned for my vote, and all Pitts has done is come off vacation and decide he wants to be speaker."

The theme I'm seeing today is confidence being expressed by Craddick supporters. To wit:

Sylvester Turner:

Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, Craddick's appointed speaker pro tempore, said he has called at least 30 House members, both Democratic and Republican, in an effort to expand Craddick's support. Only two members declared their allegiance to another speaker candidate, Turner said.

Rep.-elect Borris Miles, D-Houston, said he welcomed Turner's New Year's greeting Monday before telling him that he favors McCall.

"I don't believe in leadership by fear," Miles said, adding that if Craddick backers are "calling me, a freshman legislator, that's a call of desperation."

Turner said he was just trying to be inclusive.

"The door is still very wide open for people to come and be a part -- and to join," Turner said.

As for Pitts being a kingmaker, Turner repeated that Craddick already has more than the 75 votes necessary to win.

"The votes are already there," Turner said. "I don't want to beat anybody over the head over it, but it is what it is."

"I have made more phone calls than I can even count and all are strong supporters of the speaker," Flynn said.

Rep. Brian McCall (R-Plano) said last week that he has enough pledges of support to unseat Craddick. Rep. Jim Pitts (R-Waxahachie) has also said he has enough commitments to make a challenge.

Both lawmakers' numbers are off, according to Flynn.

"Craddick has 109 signatures of commitment," Flynn said Saturday. "We got 84 we could verify pretty quickly and all he needs is 76."

While a signature of commitment is not legally binding, Flynn believes those who have said they support Craddick will stand by their pledge.

"I think if you make a commitment such as this, then it stands for something," he said.

It is the middle of the week and as expected the much sought after evidence in the speaker's race is becoming increasingly apparent to the members. Today I expect increased clarity. Look for public statements from leaders, news reports and listen for converts.

Every member has been measured and remeasured. With some reasonable degree of certainty the participants at the center know what the numbers are. Like good advocates each is putting their best foot forward. The question that remains is do the contestants, with the small remaining uncertainty, allow this to go to a final vote on January 9. I don't think so.

[...]

If left unresolved for opening day, I am confident that the candidate, I observed yesterday increasing his lead, will prevail. More likely than not his opponent will withdraw before the final vote.

I daresay that a lot of this is confidence in another sense - it's a confidence game, designed to counter the bad news cycles that Craddick has had and make him look as strong, and as beloved, as ever. The story line so far has been all about Craddick bleeding support - his ever-shrinking pledge list, his unfaithful committee chairs, the late bid by Jim Pitts that caught Alexis DeLee by surprise. These statements are designed to make it look like all that was overblown, just a handful of malcontents and gripers taking advantage of a slow news week. And hey, maybe they're right. We'll know in six more days, that's for sure.

Along the same lines is this tack by Cathie Adams of the Eagle Forum:

The head of the conservative Texas Eagle Forum warned Tuesday that the move to unseat Republican House Speaker Tom Craddick would effectively return power to the Democrats who had ruled the chamber for the 100 years before the GOP takeover in 2002.

"Our conservative agenda would be DOA," said Cathie Adams, who is trying to rally GOP base voters to pressure lawmakers to stick with Craddick as he battles two Republican colleagues for leadership. "We've worked too hard for too many years to win a Republican majority in the House just to hand it over to the Democrats."

Adams said the only way Republican state Reps. Brian McCall of Plano or Jim Pitts of Waxahachie could win would be by consolidating support among the outnumbered House Democrats and picking off enough dissident Republicans to deny Craddick the 75 votes he needs to secure a third term as speaker.

State Rep. Jim Dunnam of Waco, who leads the Democratic caucus, said Republicans will control the House regardless of who becomes speaker.

"The fact is, they have the majority and we're in the minority," Dunnam said.

Veteran state Rep. Pat Haggerty, R-El Paso, rejected any assertion that backing a consensus-builder for speaker would be an act of disloyalty to the Republican Party.

"Give me a break," said Haggerty, an 18-year House veteran who has had sharp differences with Craddick. "I'm going to vote for somebody who's going to allow me to represent my constituents and allow everyone to represent theirs."

Best bit of the story:

Another House Republican, Corbin Van Arsdale of Tomball, said the caricature of Craddick as an arm-twisting tyrant is overblown.

"There is a lot of misinformation out there that seems to be feeding on itself," said Van Arsdale, who was elected in 2002. "In private conversations, I'm hearing a lot of support for Craddick, even from some members you might think are with Brian. So I just don't see all this dissatisfaction that we're seeing in the media and on the blogs."

Outlier among the stories:

Rep. Jim Pitts, saying he would like to avoid a bloody speaker's race, said he met for two hours Tuesday with incumbent Speaker Tom Craddick and talked several times with fellow GOP challenger Rep. Brian McCall.

"My personality is to try to get something -- you know, see if we can spare the members and see what we can do and not make an ugly deal on Tuesday. But if we have to, we have to," Pitts, R-Waxahachie, said in a telephone interview, referring to the speaker election set for the opening day of the legislative session next Tuesday.

Pitts entered the speaker's race last week after McCall of Plano announced his bid against Craddick, R-Midland.

"I think that's the feeling of all three of us, is that we'd like to get something resolved. I don't think we're going to be able to do it," Pitts said. "I don't think we can today. But there's always a tomorrow."

[...]

McCall and Pitts met three times over the holiday weekend and discussed hatching a deal in which Pitts would throw his support to McCall, said someone close to the McCall campaign who said he was not authorized to speak publicly.

The discussions are ongoing, the source said, and a deal is "much more of a possibility than not a possibility," he said. "If it happened, it would be Katie, bar the door."

Pitts, who had lunch with McCall and Rep. Craig Eiland, D-Galveston, on Sunday in Dallas, left voice mail Monday night saying he hadn't endorsed McCall, although he said he was asked to do so in the meeting. "That subject was brought up, and I said, 'No,' " he said. "I told them, 'No' on endorsing McCall."

On Tuesday, Pitts said the subject hadn't come up.

[State Rep. Edmund Kuempel, R-Seguin,] did not say if he would back Craddick or his two challengers.

"I am sitting back and watching," Kuempel said.

Kuempel said he has a good working relationship with Craddick.

"We get along well," he said.

Whether Craddick comes back as speaker or if McCall or Pitts succeed him, Kuempel wants a positive tone for the Texas House..

"I don't want to see it [House] as partisan, but non-partisan and to do what's best for the people of the state of Texas," Kuempel said.

The last election of the 2006 cycle will be the first election of 2007.

Voters will decide Jan. 16 who represents northern Brazoria County and Matagorda County -- a week after the Legislature begins its new session.

The runoff election between two Republican businessmen from Pearland will be the fourth election for Texas House District 29.

"One thing about it, everyone will know who we are," said Mike O'Day, who is in the runoff with Randy Weber. "We'll be the only one being sworn in on that day. It'll be good publicity."

[...]

The runoff will cost Brazoria County about $16,000, said county elections director Janice Evans. Early voting begins Monday and extends through Friday from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

One popular early-voting site, Pearland's Westside Event Center, wasn't available for this election, Evans said.

The only early-voting site in Pearland will be a Justice of the Peace courtroom at 3801 E. Pear.

Other early-voting locations in Brazoria County will be at the Alvin Library, the Courthouse North Annex in Manvel and the Courthouse Annex in Angleton.

Voters who didn't cast ballots in the special election can still vote in the runoff.

UPDATE: Turns out that both Anthony DiNovo and his campaign manager are supporting Weber. So, I'll revert back to neutrality here.

Via Houstonist, the troubles with trash in Buffalo Bayou.

Pieces of plastic bags cling to tree branches, soda cans slosh against the banks and plastic water bottles move swiftly downstream. The garbage haunts the $15 million Sabine-to-Bagby Promenade that was completed last year.

While locals who walk, canoe or bike along the bayou often bemoan the trash, few realize it comes from their own backyards.

"People are under the misconception that the litter comes from people throwing it into the bayou," said Scott Barnes, conservation director of the Buffalo Bayou Partnership. "It comes out of our neighborhoods and our streets and flows through the storm drains directly into the waterway."

[...]

Barnes' organization and others have launched educational campaigns aimed at neighborhoods within the bayou's watershed, including Montrose, the Heights and Memorial. Several volunteers have made rounds at businesses in those areas, asking owners to free their parking lots of garbage so wrappers, cans and the like aren't swept into storm drains during rainstorms.

Not littering is the most obvious way to keep trash out of the bayou. Another easy way residents can help is by properly bagging trash to keep pieces from falling out of garbage cans or trucks, said Kevin Shanley, chairman of the board of the Bayou Preservation Association.

"If it rains hard, stuff will float off," he said. "Bag it, don't chuck it. It's that simple."

[...]

But the most effective method of cleanup is preventing trash from getting washed into the bayou to begin with, said Shanley, who designed the Sabine-to-Bagby project.

"It just is going to take education," he said. "People need to recognize how important it is."

I join with Houstonist in recommending the Buffalo Bayou Partnership and the Bayou Preservation Association to those who want to do more. But seriously: don't litter. Pick up the trash that you see on the street near your house. And just so we're all clear, don't litter. It's that simple.

Via Stace comes this article about Houston immigrants, especially business owners, learning Spanish. Stace covers the main points, to which I just have this to add:

Though there's often a push for immigrants to learn English, the growing Hispanic population is prompting many immigrants in Houston to focus equally, if not more, on their Spanish.

The changing demographics of their customers and employees make knowing Spanish a must for many immigrant business owners who often thought English would be the only new language they would have to learn.

"This is extremely common," said Betsy Gelb, a marketing professor at the University of Houston.

"What we teach is you need to be market-oriented to be successful, but how can you even find out what your customers want if you can't communicate with them? It's the first step to being market-oriented, and sometimes that means learning another language."

And if I had to do it all over again, I'd take Spanish classes instead. Back then, we were somehow convinced that French was the language that everyone needed to know. (Why? Don't ask me. I say it was a conspiracy dreamed up by the French teachers' cabal.) How silly that seems now. When the time comes for Olivia to pick a language to study in school, I plan to do everything in my power to convince her to take Spanish. It just makes sense.

I swear, I read an article very much like this one 25 years ago after getting a Walkman as a Christmas present: Your iPod may be damaging your hearing.

Experts say the problems are probably caused by the use of "ear buds" that sit inside the ear, coupled with the increased length of listening time available, compared to previous portable music players.

Most MP3 players come with stock ear buds, which unlike headphones that sit outside the ear, fit snugly in the ear canal and do not allow any sound to escape.

Because the sound is digital, listeners can crank it up louder without the distortion faced by previous technologies.

One of Apple's initial slogans for the iPod was "Play It Loud."

And, because MP3 players can store hours and hours of music, users can listen all day without stopping - producing an unending barrage of sound.

At least with older audio devices such as portable compact disc players, the listener had to stop and change the CD or restart it.

"If it were my kid, I would make sure they never have that iPod more than Level 6 volume," [hearing expert, Dr. Hamid] Djalilian said. "At Level 7, you can listen for four hours a day or so, after that there's a potential for hearing loss. At Level 8, no more than an hour and a half."

[...]

Sounds that are 85 decibels or louder - about one-quarter of the maximum volume on some MP3 players - can damage hearing, at least temporarily.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health sets a safe exposure limit for workplace noise of 85 decibels spread over eight hours a day.

The maximum volume on an iPod ranges from 115 to 125 decibels, depending on the model and who's doing the measuring.

Apple had to pull its iPods from the shelves in France temporarily, because their output exceeded that country's 100-decibel sound limit.

In results released this year of an American Speech-Language-Hearing Association lab test of several models, MP3 players' top volume ranged from 108 to 125 decibels.

By the time you feel pain in your ears from loud noises, your hearing has been permanently damaged.

Okay, this is cool.

A recent Sunday comes and Cherish Pageau (Internet handle: gifa) is so amped up with anticipation she hops out of bed early.

In only a few hours the 30-year-old redhaired Kansas City, Mo., production artist for Hallmark, will be the 12th relay driver in what began as a wacky winter-break college adventure but has since turned into, well, a sorta semi quasi half serious Internet experiment of national scope:

The trek of the "Human Baton."

The experiment:

Take one college student -- shy 22-year-old Luke Vaughn of the University of Oregon, who, while chatting on an Internet forum at zefrank.com, asks whether he should drive or fly home to California. Instead, a plan is hatched to pass him like a human baton, car by car, Internet stranger by Internet stranger, not only to California but also cross-country to New York and back to Oregon by the start of classes Jan. 8. It's the ultimate college road trip.

The serious part: For almost 300 Internet faithful who have signed on as relay drivers, it's to show that the Internet is not some spooky, dangerous place populated by lurking pedophiles, frauds, e-mail scammers and identity thieves -- OK, maybe it is sometimes -- but it's also a friendly "community," they say.

"This is kind of a proof of concept," Pageau says. "There's a lot of trust involved. I want it to be successful."

The house that Lee Harvey Oswald stayed in the night before he shot President Kennedy may be turned into a museum.

The tidy house with the large picture window on West Fifth Street looks like many other older homes in South Irving.

But this is the house Lee Harvey Oswald visited the night before John F. Kennedy's assassination in November 1963. This is the house where he picked up a rifle that he apparently used to kill the president. And this is the house where his wife, Marina, stayed in the months leading up to President Kennedy's death.

Irving officials are studying whether to commemorate the house of Ruth Paine, who took in Ms. Oswald, bonded with her and helped Mr. Oswald find a job at the Texas School Book Depository.

"We feel this is definitely a very historical, significant structure that needs to be preserved," said George Edwin, chairman of the Irving Museum Board. "A significant, historic event took place in that structure."

City staffers have had only informal discussions on the matter, said Keith Parkhurst, Irving's heritage and museum coordinator.

Transforming the house into a museum or placing a commemorative plaque at the site are possibilities, he said.

The Irving City Council would have to take action in order to do something with the house, Mayor Herbert Gears said.

"My idea is to first look at the property and see if there's an opportunity there," he said. "It seemed like it's a significant piece of [history] that we just don't want to let disappear."

Snark aside, the backstory is pretty interesting, and was not something I'd known about before. Check it out. Thanks to South Texas Chisme for the link.

Texas has a surplus in it. There are worse things to have.

After considering basic demands like school enrollment growth and making good on a highly touted promise to lower local school property tax rates, there are choices to be made. Loosen restrictions in public health care programs? Target high college tuition rates? Lower property taxes further? Or save for the future?

"It's never going to be easy to write a budget. There are many legitimate needs out there," Sen. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, Senate Finance Committee chairman, has said.

What's more, before leaders can have a free hand in deciding to spend, save or give tax breaks, they'll have to pry loose a constitutional spending cap that will otherwise put billions of dollars beyond their reach.

"There's a challenge in the pull on funds -- particularly the billions needed in state dollars to lower local school property taxes -- and the cap," said Rep. Jim Pitts, R-Waxahachie.

As chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Pitts' budget experience is among the pluses he touts as a House speaker candidate: "This is the 'budget session,' " he said.

"It will be extremely challenging, because it always is," agreed Sen. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo, who has been Senate Finance Committee vice chair through bone-thin and pleasantly plump budget times. "There's a challenge when there is money, and when there isn't."

This time, there appears to be money.

House Speaker Tom Craddick, R-Midland, has estimated lawmakers will have $15.5 billion in new state dollars available when they write the budget for the next two years. That's an unofficial tally; the state comptroller will make the official estimate.

[...]

Others have their eyes on restoring services they say still suffer from cutbacks made in 2003, when lawmakers faced a $10 billion revenue shortfall.

"I think we have seen some of those cuts were probably penny wise and pound foolish -- for example, the (Children's Health Insurance Program) cuts. We're seeing all of the millions and millions of dollars of unreimbursed care that our local hospitals are having to pick up, and that in the end the taxpayers pick up," said Rep. José Menéndez, D-San Antonio, House Appropriations Committee member.

It would take the entire $15.5 billion, plus $2.7 billion more, just to restore general spending to the 2002 level, according to the Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates for services for low-income Texans. That estimate takes into account inflation and population growth.

"Taking every dollar that the speaker thinks we're going to have and spending it somewhere still doesn't get us back up to where we used to be before we made some pretty horrible cuts for social services," said Eva DeLuna Castro, senior budget analyst for the center.

Looming over the debate is the constitutional spending cap, which limits growth in certain state spending to the rate of Texas' economic growth. The cap applies to state tax revenues not constitutionally dedicated to other purposes.

Unless lawmakers suspend the cap -- a vote some in the GOP-majority Legislature might find difficult even if it's tied to tax relief -- or leaders find an innovative way around it, much of the $15.5 billion surplus will remain off limits.

Unless they make reconciling cuts elsewhere, the Legislature would be unable to meet its promise to cut school property tax rates to $1 per $100 valuation without breaking the cap, which would allow no more than $9.5 billion in spending from affected revenues.

Legislative Budget Board director John O'Brien has said the estimated $13.5 billion needed to pay for the school property tax cut in the coming two years would alone put lawmakers over the cap, leaving no funding increases for anything else.

On a side note, the article quotes a certain freshman Senator from Houston at some length. I don't know any more than anybody else does how successful Dan Patrick is going to be as a Senator. (If you haven't read the Texas Monthly profile of him, in this month's issue, I highly recommend it.) I tend to think his temperament is more suitable to an executive role than it is to a legislative one, but I also think one underestimates him at one's peril. I'm just curious if the amount of media attention he's going to get once the session actually starts and he gets assigned to whatever committees David Dewhurst sees fit to place him on will be directly or inversely proportionate to his actual influence as a legislator. In other words, will he be quoted a lot because he's a mover and shaker and his position on an issue can affect the fate of a given piece of legislation, or will he be quoted a lot because he's unable to do anything else besides complain about all the things he couldn't stop? Given all that we know about Danno, I don't think there's any scenario under which he isn't quoted a lot, but as with some other of my predictions, this is one where I won't mind being proven wrong. We'll see.

UPDATE: From Peggy Fikac:

The Legislative Budget Board on Thursday is again scheduled to take up the constitutional spending cap.

The board put off a vote on the issue when it last met in late November.

[...]

Legislative leaders have discussed tying a legislative vote to exceed the cap directly to the tax relief measure. Officials including Gov. Rick Perry say tax relief shouldn't count against the spending cap.

The cap applies only to state tax revenue not constitutionally dedicated to other purposes. It doesn't apply to dedicated state tax funds, fees or federal funds.

A majority of the Legislature can vote to exceed the cap, but legislative leaders directed LBB staff to see if there are other options.

Has anyone heard what these options might be? Do you have a guess?

Paul Burka prints an email from Tom Craddick's spokesperson Alexis DeLee, which claims that Burka's Plan B post is all wrong and that it's Craddick who has the momentum and the pledges to win the Speakership. All I know is that this is the same Alexis DeLee who had no idea that Jim Pitts had jumped ship, so let's just say I don't take her word as the gospel truth. Which isn't to say Craddick can't or won't win - you just won't know who's going to get lily-livered until it happens - but he has no obvious reason to feel confident about his position right now. Read it for yourself and see what you think.

On a related note, Pitts says rumors of a deal between himself and Brian McCall are premature. Note that he didn't deny talking to McCall, just that he hasn't endorsed him.

UPDATE: Craddick fights back, and Phil King isn't a candidate.

The Chron reports that a deal is being talked about to combine the forces of Brian McCall and Jim Pitts against Tom Craddick.

"I don't think there is a deal. I know they have been talking and continue to talk," said Rep. Craig Eiland, D-Galveston, who met with the two insurgents -- Reps. Brian McCall, R-Plano, and Jim Pitts, R-Waxahachie -- for lunch in Dallas on Sunday.

[...]

Eiland said the two Craddick opponents have met "a couple of times" and talked frequently on the phone since the speaker's race became public over the holidays.

McCall confirmed his conversations with Pitts but wouldn't say whether he expected Pitts to endorse his candidacy. Pitts was unavailable for comment.

"Jim and I are friends, and we're running for very similar reasons," McCall said. "I have the votes I need. I don't have the votes I want."

One potential sticking point for some of Pitts' Republican backers may be McCall's strong support among the House's Democrats. McCall acknowledged Monday that he was seeking support from more Republicans but said he would welcome more Democratic votes as well.

McCall said he would support electing the speaker by secret ballot, a proposal supported by many anti-Craddick lawmakers because they believe it would offer them some protection from retaliation should the effort to unseat Craddick fail.

Eiland also said he expected House Ways and Means Chairman Jim Keffer, R-Eastland, a key member of Craddick's leadership team, to enter the speaker's race.

"If Keffer jumps in, that would be an admission of surrender by the Craddick crowd," he said.

The sands are falling through the hour glass on Tom Craddick's speakership. The Craddick chairs have started to worry about their own skins. I am told that Craddick has until the middle of this week to try to get the votes he needs, and then he will have to abdicate in favor of somebody else--most likely Jim Keffer, or possibly Phil King, who has been making calls. (I don't have any definitive information on the vote count, but, trying to piece together a lot of conversations, I'd put McCall at around 80 votes and Craddick in the low to middle sixties.) The scenario in that would play out in Plan B is that the Chosen One would install Warren Chisum as chair of Appropriations, Craddick as chair of Ways and Means, and another loyalist (for example, King, if Keffer turns out to be the candidate), as chair of Calendars, and things would go on as before, except that Keffer is a nice guy who, unlike King, is widely liked on both sides of the aisle.

This all sounds like good news to me. We'll see how it goes from here. Stay tuned.

Grits for Breakfast gives a rundown of the biggest news from the criminal justice system in Texas last year. Lots of familiar stuff there, many of which will play a starring role in 2007 as well, now that the Lege is about to be in session. Check it out.

Another thing that the new year will bring is the 2007 Hall of Fame balloting, and with it the conundrum about Mark McGwire. David Pinto has a sample of what the actual voters are thinking about McGwire, both pro and con. I have to say that I'm not particularly impressed with either person's case, even though I obviously agree with the pro-McGwire sentiment. If there's a less useful criterion for evaluating a player's Hall-worthiness than his parenting skills, I can't think of it. Frankly, I think such appeals to a player's warmth and fuzziness - or whines about lack of same - is an excellent argument for expanding the pool of Hall voters to include many, many people who did not interact with the players on a regular basis, so that they will consider their statistical merits and not their personalities. Someday, when I am tabbed to replace Bud Selig as Commissioner, I will see to that.

In the meantime, I'll make a prediction: At least one of the Chron sports columnists will pen a prissy and self-righteous piece explaining why he'll never (never!) vote for McGwire's induction. So far the only discussion I've seen on this topic has been in the Astros fanblog comments, and it's pretty decent. This is one of those predictions that I make in hopes of being proved wrong, but I have my doubts about that. We'll see.

UPDATE: Will Caroll notes the difference in perspective between baseball and football.

New year, same topic, at least for another week or so. Today's Chron story on the Speaker's race doesn't have much new in it - there isn't much out there right now that's new - but it does have some good quotes.

On Saturday, Craddick marshaled about 30 supporters behind closed doors at the Capitol. Both he and McCall claimed they had enough votes to win. Pitts, who entered the race nearly a week after McCall, said he was "getting there."

Things were quieter Sunday.

Republican strategist Royal Masset likened the speaker's derby to a divorce filing.

"You may stay married," he said, "but it ain't the same afterward."

[...]

In recent months, [Pitts] said, his relationship with Craddick has deteriorated to such a degree that had he not thrown his hat into the ring, Craddick would have stripped him of his Appropriations chair anyway.

Craddick indicated that he was surprised by Pitts' account. "He doesn't think the relationship was deteriorating," said spokeswoman Alexis DeLee. Of Pitts' travel allowance, she said he submitted spending requests higher than other chairmen.

Craddick's style -- whether reality or merely perception -- clearly has his camp worried.

"He wants happy members," Miller said. " ... If people are saying, 'We'd be better off doing things a different way,' he's listening."

[...]

As each side claimed a majority of votes, predicting a winner became virtually impossible.

"The big problem is everyone lies about their support," Masset said. "Legislators lie about who they pledge to, and the speaker candidates lie about the legislators who support them."

Vince has an interesting take on all this. Like Eye on Williamson, I'm not sure I agree with it, but it's worth reading and thinking about.

Congrats to Stephanie Stradley for winning the Ultimate Texans Fan contest for 2006. Her prize is a trip to the Super Bowl. (Aren't you glad you won this year and not lat year? I would be.) Be sure to bring a camera so those of us who'll never get closer than our TV sets can share in the excitement. And thanks to everyone who voted in the contest.

Today marks my fifth anniversary of blogging. Given that I got into this more or less on a lark, as an outlet to do some regular writing for the first time since college, that really amazes me. According to Movable Type, I've cranked out over 8500 entries. A few of those are drafts that I've never published, and a few were done by guest bloggers, but even taking that into account, that means I've averaged nearly five posts a day, every day, for those five years. That sure sounds like a lot, but it doesn't quite feel like it. It's still a lot more fun than it is work, which makes all the difference.

I tried some new things last year, with the recorded interviews. I'm proud of what I did with that, and I hope you found them useful. I plan to continue doing them, and perhaps broaden the focus a bit. I'd still love some feedback on this, so please let me know what you think about them.

This will be another interesting year, for me personally in particular. With the imminent arrival of daughter #2, I expect there will be a period of lessened activity on the blog, but how much and for how long I can't say. I'm contemplating bringing aboard some new guest writers to help me during that time. If you might be interested in that, please drop me a note.

Beyond that, I look forward to another fun year, and for many more to come. Happy New Year!

I didn't know Dave Barry was still writing since he stopped doing his regular column two years ago, but there he is with a year end review. Barry still has his blog, and he even occasionally contributes to it, but it's just not the same. Anyway, if you like this sort of thing, it's the sort of thing that you'll like. Link via Easter Lemming.

Happy New Year, everybody! The arrival of 2007 brings with it the 100th anniversary of the Blue Bell Creamery in Brenham. It started out making butter, but has been known for its ice cream for decades. And their marketing of that ice cream is almost as famous.

Blue Bell's success, in part, has been built on selling itself as an old-timey, country company.

That marketing strategy took hold in 1969 when Blue Bell hired Houston advertising agent Lyle Metzdorf. Metzdorf, who died in 2002, used Washington County settings and local residents to represent the down-home nature of the company and its ice cream.

From Jan. 1 to April 30, Blue Bell customers will get a chance to name their own flavors based on themes from states where the ice cream is sold. Blue Bell will then create flavors to fit each name, and winners will be honored at the Brenham headquarters.

Blue Bell already has developed a special flavor to mark 2007. Century Sundae is Homemade Vanilla ice cream with swirls of caramel, chocolate, whipped topping and maraschino cherries.