Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

April 19th, 2016:

Why North Carolina and not Houston?

John Nova Lomax asks why Houston has not suffered the same backlash as North Carolina after the repeal of HERO last November.

HoustonUnites

In the aftermath of the repeal of Houston’s Equal Rights Ordinance in November, the bill’s proponents predicted dire economic consequences. Then-Mayor Annise Parker predicted a “direct, economic backlash” for the Bayou City. A #boycotthouston campaign erupted on Twitter. Greater Houston Partnership President Bob Harvey fretted about possible consequences for the city’s convention and tourism business, plus the future of corporate relocations. Some HERO supporters hoped that one or both of the organizers of the men’s 2016 Final Four and the 2017 Super Bowl would choose to move those events in retaliation.

None of that has happened. To be sure, by the time the polls closed, it was probably too late for the NCAA or Roger Goodell to take such a drastic step. Yanking a Final Four or a Super Bowl from one city and dropping it the lap of another on such short notice is a recipe for logistical chaos and red ink. But thus far, Houston has suffered no other consequences—nothing, nada, zilch—thus emboldening the Houston anti-HERO leadership to lend both their support and their tactics to legislators in Mississippi and North Carolina.

Earlier this month, Dave Welch, president of the Texas Pastors Council, wrote an open letter to Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant claiming that threats of economic consequences stemming from anti-HERO-type legislation were hollow:

As you know, the Final Four of the NCAA was just held in Houston and the radical LGBT movement’s threat to get this event, the Super Bowl, conferences and corporate bases out of Houston was shown to be a paper tiger and the raw use of intimidation. The churches and concerned citizens by the thousands refused to bow to the god of political correctness, the terrible ordinance was defeated overwhelmingly by the people and Houston continues to grow.

In other words, “We got away with it, and you can too.”

Or maybe not. At least not in North Carolina, where last month the state legislature enacted a law banning cities and counties from establishing their own anti-discriminatory policies based on gender identity, thus nullifying a recently-approved HERO-type ordinance in Charlotte and others elsewhere in the state.

[…]

The fact that HERO was defeated in a referendum rather than the legislature is one reason Houston has not been subjected to the same ire as North Carolina, according to Jessica Shortall, managing director of Texas Competes, a group advocating LGBT equality on business grounds.

“In Georgia the business response was to prompt a veto from Nathan Deal,” she tells Texas Monthly. “There was a recourse. And in North Carolina there is pressure on the governor and the legislature to rethink and repeal, but in Houston, it wasn’t the decision of a governor, mayor or state legislature or city council. It was the voice of voters. And that’s a very different decision for businesses, having to punish voters.”

Southall believes that the Houston vote was an anomaly, one that took place in an odd “bubble in time” just a few months ago, when public awareness about transgender people—whose bathroom privileges formed the crux of the Houston vote—was still very low.

“We have all been going to the bathroom with transgender people this whole time and nothing has happened,” Southall says. “This is a solution in search of a problem. I think the calculation on their part was, ‘This is an easy wedge issue, because nobody’s gonna stand for transgender people. Nobody even knows a transgender person.’ And that’s turning out not to be true anymore.”

Netflix hit Transparent, Caitlyn Jenner, and Orange Is The New Black‘s Laverne Cox are all raising awareness about transgender issues, Southall believes, and the process is taking mere months rather than years. “People got to know gay people through popular culture,” she says. “Will & Grace mattered. Glee mattered. Maybe they didn’t know a gay person up to then, but then they start to know gay people in their lives and then that person is not the ‘other’ anymore, it’s my friend or my relative or whatever. And now that’s happening with transgender people too, and it’s happening so fast, I think people on both sides of the issue are surprised.”

Even so, the fact that Houston skated away from any kind of meaningful backlash is surprising. Residents of Charlotte are being punished because of the actions of their governor and state legislature, but the people of Houston are not being singled out for their own vote.

And where was the Houston business community on this score? Yes, pro-business groups like the Greater Houston Partnership (Houston’s chamber of commerce) spoke out in favor of HERO, but the actual components of Houston’s business community were silent in both the run-up to and the aftermath of HERO’s defeat.

Of the 26 Fortune 500 companies headquartered in the Bayou City, all but three are in oil and gas. That industry has thus far been content to maintain a stony silence on LGBT equality, at least in Texas. According to their web site, exactly none of the Houston-based O&G behemoths have signed on as Texas Competes supporters, though 34 Fortune 500 companies (and scores of smaller ones) have. Houston voters were neither advised how to vote by the CEOs of Phillips 66, Halliburton and Baker Hughes nor did those same captains of industry urge voters to reconsider or express regret after last year’s referendum.

Perhaps they feared a backlash from their customers or their employees. O&G is not known as the most socially liberal of fields. But neither is pro-sports, but that has not stood in the way of teams outside of Texas. Each of Atlanta’s four pro-sports teams urged Deal to veto the Georgia measure. That was not the case in Houston, where the Astros and Rockets made no statement on the vote, and Texans owner Bob McNair actually went the other way, for a time, at least, pledging (and then quickly rescinding) a $10,000 donation to opponents of HERO. Of the eight “Big Four” pro-sports teams in Texas, only the Dallas Mavericks are supporters of Texas Competes.

So there are two claims that Lomax examines, and two more that I can think of that I’ll discuss after those.

1. Lack of advocacy from the business community. Businesses have been heavily involved in the fight in North Carolina (and in Georgia, and in Mississippi), but were johnny-come-latelys in Houston. There’s been a lot of focus on the businesses that have canceled planned expansions or other future work, like the filming of a movie. Some of this, I think, is just fortunate timing: These projects had to be in the queue, but not so far along that canceling them would be logistically difficult or expensive. If there was anything like this in Houston similar to the PayPal and Deutsche Bank projects, I don’t know what they were. People here fixated mostly on the Super Bowl and Final Four, but these were never likely to be in doubt – they would have been prohibitively costly to relocate, and there was a serious risk that any substitute city could not provide the same level of experience. You will note that despite the calls to the NBA to take next year’s All Star Game out of Charlotte, they have declined to do so. Maybe if there had been a PayPal or a Deutsche Bank for Houston at the time, and a credible threat to not go through with it, things would be different.

2. The “bubble in time” theory, which says that Houston’s repeal occurred at a time when people hadn’t yet given much thought about transgender people or issues. There may be something to that, but remember that Houston was not the first city to repeal a civil rights ordinance, and like Houston those cities suffered no blowback. Again, something to this, and something to #1, but I think there are other reasons why Houston was different.

3. I believe a basic difference between North Carolina (and other states that have taken or come close to taking similar action) and Houston is that NC represents a step backwards, while Houston was a return to a previously existing status quo. It’s not a good status quo, of course – it’s one that absolutely needed changing, a long time ago – but it’s how things were as recently as 2014. North Carolina didn’t just undo Charlotte’s version of HERO. They took away the right of any other city to pass their own HERO, and they took away the remedy of suing in state court for any LGBT person who wanted to pursue a claim of discrimination, among other things. It was these extra, punitive steps, as well as the clear singling out of the LGBT community, that made what North Carolina did worse, at least in the public eye.

4. Elections matter. The biggest difference between Houston and North Carolina, in my opinion, was briefly touched on but not explored in Lomax’s article. HERO was repealed by a vote of the people. HERO’s supporters deplored this vote and the lies and hatred that led to it, but we accepted it as legitimate and moved on with a vow to try again, learn from our mistakes, and win the next fight. (Having the pro-HERO Mayoral candidate win the December runoff against his anti-HERO opponent probably helped mitigate things a little, too.) By contrast, North Carolina’s law was passed in a one-day special session of their legislature, called hastily after Charlotte passed its non-discrimination ordinance. There were no hearings or testimony on the bill – most legislators never even had a chance to see it before they voted on it – and in the end Democrats in North Carolina’s State Senate walked out on the vote to protest its non-legitimacy. The game was rigged from the beginning, and a part of the protest has been about the scurrilous way the law was passed, with the process being entirely about haste and avoiding scrutiny. The surprise of what happened in North Carolina, especially when no one had a chance to put up a fight about it, has magnified the pernicious and discriminatory effect of the law, and thus produced a louder and more visible outcry.

So yes, I do believe there were substantial differences between Houston’s HERO repeal and North Carolina’s broadside on LGBT equality, and that these differences contribute to why Houston escaped any significant loss of business post-HERO. I suspect that a part of Lomax’s point in this article is to suggest that Houston should have suffered more for repealing HERO, and on that I agree. I believe it’s clear that the lack of consequences to that vote have emboldened the bad guys and led to laws like those that were passed in North Carolina and Mississippi and vetoed in Georgia. Perhaps that will change now that we have seen what NC and MS have gone through, but don’t be too optimistic about that. I’m afraid the fight is once again just beginning.

The DAPA arguments at SCOTUS

Hard to say how this will go.

A shorthanded Supreme Court heard a Texas-led challenge against President Barack Obama’s 2014 immigration plan Monday with sharp questions about whether the state could bring the case to begin with and if the president had overstepped.

The eight justices appeared largely divided with the four liberal justices asking questions that seemed to indicate it supported the president’s plan while the four conservative justices questioned the limits of his executive authority.

[…]

Chief Justice John Roberts is considered a contender to side with the four liberal judges in deciding that Texas isn’t able to bring the suit in the first place because it can’t prove it will suffer as a result of the program, necessary for it to sue in federal court.

Texas said it would lose money if it is required to provide driver’s licenses to the nearly 600,000 immigrants who would be eligible for a provisional work permit through the president’s plan. The state subsidizes the document by about $130.

But U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli argued Monday that Texas could simply change its policy and not offer these immigrants licenses or choose not to offset the cost of the documents.

Roberts, who has taken a narrow position on so-called standing in the past, noted that not granting licenses to certain immigrants with work authorization when others with a similar status have them could be considered discriminatory, putting Texas in a tough spot.

He asked Verrilli whether the injury Texas argues it might suffer is similar to a 2007 environmental case in which Massachusetts sued the Environmental Protection Agency about its refusal to regulate vehicle emissions linked to climate change.

“There wasn’t a way for Massachusetts to avoid the effects of climate change but there is a way here,” Verrilli said, because Texas isn’t required to discount the license.

Massachusetts had argued that rising seawater, a result of global warming, would erode its coastline and hurt the state, giving it sufficient claim to sue the federal government. The state prevailed but Roberts led the court’s conservative dissent, arguing Massachusetts could not prove it was hurt by the government’s policy.

Monday Justice Stephen Breyer noted that the state’s main argument that it would be harmed is that it would lose money.

“We can’t just let you sue on the basis that you as a taxpayer would pay more money,” he said. “Because if we do, taxpayers from all over the country would sue” about their unhappiness with any number of federal programs.

See here for more. TPM‘s report on the oral arguments sounded a pessimistic note for the feds, while Daily Kos and Think Progress were more buoyant. The key question seems to be whether the states have standing to sue. If SCOTUS rules that they don’t, then this is over and the program can be implemented immediately, though at this point it’s unclear how much effect it may have, given its uncertainty past November. If they do have standing, then the case goes back to the district court for a hearing on the merits (which won’t go well for the feds, given the original judge and his ruling to suspend the program), and nothing will get resolved for several years. That may also open the floodgates for other litigation like this. A 4-4 tie is a win for the plaintiffs, since the lower courts ruled in their favor. The Obama administration needs at least one conservative judge to buy into its arguments about standing. The Trib, SCOTUSBlog, Daily Kos, Think Progress, and Trail Blazers have more.

Ghosts of Allison

I sure hope everyone made it through yesterday’s ferocious rain all right.

The storm that flooded the greater Houston area on Monday – drenching the region with the most rain since Tropical Storm Allison dumped more than 24 inches in June 2001 – packed a mighty punch in mere hours.

Some areas saw as much as 4 inches of rain fall in an hour Monday morning. Unfortunately for some motorists, the heaviest downpours occurred between 6 and 7 a.m., just as they had started their commute to work.

Parts of Harris and Waller counties to the west of Houston were swamped with as much as 18 inches. For that section of Harris County, and much of central Waller County, the rainfall totals matched those expected during a one-in-200-year rain event, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Totals were much lower for eastern Harris County, where fewer than 4 inches of rain fell in some locations.

Jeff Lindner, a meteorologist with the Harris County Flood Control District, said between Sunday night and mid-afternoon on Monday, an average of 7.75 inches of rain fell in neighborhoods across the county. That’s the equivalent of 240 billion gallons of water.

“The big problem with this storm was the volume of rain it produced in such a short amount of time,” said Don Oettinger, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service’s Houston/Galveston office.

[…]

As the heavy rainfall moved out of the Houston region on Monday afternoon the question became: what comes next? Fortunately, drier air contributed to a quiet Monday evening, in terms of rain showers.

Unfortunately, the greater Houston region is not done with the potential for heavy rainfall this week, as moisture will continue flowing in from the Gulf of Mexico to recharge the atmosphere, and the atmospheric instability that led to Sunday night’s and Monday’s downpours isn’t going away entirely. However, another gargantuan, slow-moving system that Houston just experienced seems unlikely.

The National Weather Service forecast for the Houston region calls for additional showers and thunderstorms over the next three days, with accumulations of perhaps 1 to 4 inches more rain between Monday night and early Friday.

It is possible there will be higher levels in certain areas. Meteorologists say Wednesday is the day when the region could see the most organized rain showers.

HISD schools are closed again today. Some parts of town experienced terrible flooding yesterday, and they are in danger of further damage today and tomorrow. I haven’t seen any information about what to do to help those who have been affected. If and when I do, I’ll post something about it. In the meantime, stay safe, and for God’s sake heed all warnings about high water on the roads. The Press has more.

Get Me goes to Galveston

Swooping in to fill the gap left by Uber’s departure.

Galveston is close to getting app-based transportation back.

Get Me, a Dallas-based company that started serving Houston in October, has submitted an application with Galveston to provide ride services on the island, city spokeswoman Kala McCain said Monday.

Galveston has not had any competition to cabs since Uber – the most popular ride-hailing service – left the city over its decision in February to regulate the company exactly as it does taxi firms. The loss of Uber was predicted to mostly hit tourists, especially the cruise lines.

Get Me, which provides both ride and delivery services via smartphone app, has started Galveston’s application process, McCain said. Licensing is a multi-step process that includes providing detailed insurance and licensing information.

“It is my understanding everything is going well,” McCain said, saying the company could be operating in a matter of a few weeks.

Get Me is a new entrant on the scene, operating in a handful of places so far. Galveston was recently dumped by Uber, so this is an opportunity for them to come in and have this market to themselves. They have said that they will comply with municipal ordinances that mandate fingerprinting as part of the background check process for drivers, so that opportunity for them is potentially lucrative, especially if Austin rejects that referendum to repeal its ordinance. Has anyone used Get Me? I’m curious what you think, in particular how the experience compares with Uber and Lyft.